本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛BScPharm start from at least 45$/hr, or around 90k/yr (hospital pharmacists make way less, that's why there're so few clinical pharmacists). Phamacies in Ontario usually offer around high 40s-50$ for starting, or about 95-98k per annum. In the States, even cities like Buffalo are offering pharmacists with 52-55$+, and many are offering 60$+ for starting. Pharm.Ds are paid even more. The median Pharm.D income in the States is around 120k, which is still higher than Actuary V. According to the US Bureau of Labor Stats, actuaries made around 96k in 08 while pharmacists made around 105k. No matter what you say pharmacists still make more than actuaries, and these stats have already included all the age ranges in these industries. Pharmacists are paid very similar whether they work in big metropolitans or small towns, while actuaries are paid much much lower in small cities.
And for the consultant thing, how many actuaries are actually going to become a consultant? As far as I know there're thousands of pharmacies being operated by pharmacists in Ontario and there're only around 10k registered pharmacists in Ontario (the ratio of actuarial manager : actuaries is way less than the ratio of pharmacy managers/owners : pharmacists). Furthermore nurse legal consultants are also making several hundred bucks an hour and massage therapsits are also charging up to 100/hr as well. These don't prove much because most people are not going to have clients for every hour they spend in their office.
And for sign on bonus, pharmacies in the GTA are getting 10-50 grands for new grads hired, I wasn't talking about remote areas. In remote areas hospital ads for technicians are in the range of 70-80k+. Even US nurses are getting 2k-10k sign on bonus these days (I'm talking about cities). For every nurse you refer you can get a few thousand $s, this is just the way it is, you can go check out job ads and take a look yourself.
Another thing is you were just comparing with the public sector. Collective bargaining proves nothing because cops are getting paid with 80k in 3 years these days (I doubt the median income for actuarial students are anywhere near 80k 3 years following graduation, yet most cops are making this much in under 4 years). Here's the data from the US Labor Bureau which included both the public & the private sectors, and all the other factors that you were talking about:
Actuary median income 08: $84,810; mean income: $95,980 http://www.bls.gov/oes/2008/may/oes152011.htm
Pharmacist median income 08: $106,410; mean income: $104,260 http://www.bls.gov/oes/2008/may/oes291051.htm
Sure some actuaries may have the chance to make 150k+ in their 40s & 200k+ in their 50s but when they were before the age of 40 pharmacists probably made quite a bit more with much much better employment rates and probably better benefits as well. Not to mention that the pharmacists are free from all the stress from work & the worries about loosing their jobs like the financial industry. Many of the experienced pharmacists chose to open their own pharmacies in their later years and those who did are probably making 300k-more than half a million on average since the revenue from the drug market is huge. This is why pharmacists made 10,000$ more than actuaries in 2008. By the way that category didn't even include pharmacy managers and pharmacy owners.更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net