As many others out there it is hard to find PLS staff, PLS Managers or a PLS in general. Nearly every firm has a slot open. Like the housing market, which is a seller's market right now. Finding help is really hard but it is great if you are looking to move. So how high do you need to go to make a solid offer?
The market appears to be a real mess right now.?ÿ Some places you cannot find people and others there are people looking.?ÿ Salary ranges are widely varied as well.
To be in demand is good, but will the local economy bear the billing rate to pay the wages??ÿ Also there are a lot of variables you need to consider; are you looking for a licensed professional to do surveying work or are you searching for a licensed professional to manage a department/group??ÿ In my opinion they are tow separate individuals and one will require a higher salary than the other.
I think you will find it difficult to get a good handle on salary asking a wide and diverse group.?ÿ It can vary greatly if your in a large populated city, or out in the sticks.?ÿ I know I don't make nearly as much as a surveyor in NYC while I'm up in the back woods of Upstate NY, and the difference in cost of living has a large impact on that.
@sreeserinpa In a way I agree and I also disagree. Managing crews requires no survey experience, same as business bottom line, invoicing, backlog and all the other stuff that kills souls. A Professional surveyor needs to be a surveyor first. If you are a small business owner I get it, but for a large company, many surveyors really have no business "running" departments. Anyone with management skills can schedule crews, create invoices and write proposals. All you need is about 15 mins of input from the PLS to know what it takes to complete a project. But a solid PLS who can do the research, understand the boundary, do the fieldwork, reduce and deliver the product is nearly impossible to find.
About the only way to hire quality employees now is to throw a sack of money at them.
@stlsurveyor
agreed, nearly impossible.
Ironically, from reading the numerous Help Wanted adds Most are looking for that one in million "surveyor".
granted, most of those adds are from Engineering firms wanting to make a killing in Land Surveying and somehow get legal by having a minimally (paid/qualified) PLS on staff "acting as responsible charge".
been there, done that. Ran Like Hell once I finally got a clue.
?ÿ
When I was first licensed in 1998 I was raised to what would be about $60,000 per annum now. Benefits were competitive.?ÿ
I recently took a job that pays in the $90k range, which is nice, but the benefits are spectacular, which is what really reeled me in. The bennies are probably worth $20k/yr.?ÿ
It is often said that:
- when you take vacation the work you leave will be waiting for you when you get back, and?ÿ
- work expands to fill the time allotted
So instead of more money, why not allow the employee more time off as a benefit. Seems like nearly cost free??ÿ And I know medical benefits cost a lot but it amounts to tax free income to the employee. So why skimp on that, especially when looking for an experienced professional who is apt to be a "mature" person.?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ?ÿ
Anyway, my point is to look at the bennies as much as the salary amount.?ÿ
It's always that balance between salary and quality of life.?ÿ I could make a little more, but then I'd have to live somewhere I wouldn't like.?ÿ And it would cost me 2-3 times as much.
@sreeserinpa In a way I agree and I also disagree. Managing crews requires no survey experience, same as business bottom line, invoicing, backlog and all the other stuff that kills souls. A Professional surveyor needs to be a surveyor first. If you are a small business owner I get it, but for a large company, many surveyors really have no business "running" departments. Anyone with management skills can schedule crews, create invoices and write proposals. All you need is about 15 mins of input from the PLS to know what it takes to complete a project. But a solid PLS who can do the research, understand the boundary, do the fieldwork, reduce and deliver the product is nearly impossible to find.
I wholeheartedly agree with this. It seems that most firms only want to shell out the big bucks for PMs, but complain that they can't attract top-shelf surveying talent.
?ÿ
I get pretty frustrated with supposed "production-level" team members that can only do one thing. When I get "help" on something from another office, I tend to get either:
-a PLS with good boundary skills, barely passable drafting skills, and zero data reduction skills, or
-an office tech with no boundary skills, decent drafting skills, and (again) zero data reduction skills
Either one will spend more time than allotted to get half the work done, and then I end up spending more time to finish (or fix) whatever part they didn't know how to do. The practice of surveying does not benefit from assembly-line thinking.
Or I'll send a field crew to run in control, and they might run a weak network without sufficient redundancy, or not level through critical points, or blow off searching for a critical monument, or (my favorite) just begin topo work off two assumed points without setting the control network first. Then complain about "office pukes" not knowing "real surveying", as I attempt to make sense of their work and read indecipherable field notes lacking rod heights, prism constants, measure-up method, etc...
I mean, I guess it could technically be my fault for not teaching the tech or the field crew. But a lot of these folks have been surveying for as long or longer than I have...and are not particularly receptive to learning.
?ÿ
Working in AK was about the closest I got to the "ideal" scenario. PLS required to be crew chief on lots of projects, many technicians had a degree or LSIT (or were working on both), and because 70% of our projects were remote, crews had to know how to process all the data (static/conv/level/RTK/scans) and verify it all before going home, because travel/logistics were a massive portion of project cost and you did NOT want to screw up and have to shell out $10K to mobilize and go back out for a couple of shots. At least that was my experience with the multidiscipline firm I was at.
For 99% of remote jobs, I did all my own research, set up control files, did my own recon and set up my own field observation scheme. In the field, I could process the data every evening, and eventually compile CAD drawings, with 90% of the deliverables complete before I even got back to the office.
There is a massive efficiency boost when you are the one doing all the research, fieldwork, reduction and drafting. But try to pitch a firm around here on using that process today, and they'll look at you like you're insane.
I'm not convinced that firms really want that level of talent, because if they did, they would either train the folks they have up to a level of competency in all required areas, or boost the pay for the top-notch talent.
?ÿ
There is a massive efficiency boost when you are the one doing all the research, fieldwork, reduction and drafting. But try to pitch a firm around here on using that process today, and they'll look at you like you're insane.
I'm not convinced that firms really want that level of talent, because if they did, they would either train the folks they have up to a level of competency in all required areas, or boost the pay for the top-notch talent.
And there it is...You just stated the problem with 90% of firms out there. And the exact reason why solo operators love their job 100% more and can increase their income in only a matter of months.?ÿ
Why does nearly every firm not understand this concept.
Set up an office within 20 miles of my house and I can save you more money answering the phone than what most surveyors earn in a year.?ÿ Not everyone calling deserves five minutes of anyone's time just because they want a "bid" to survey their wretched tract with a trail of nightmares attached to it or stake out something for $50.?ÿ Those loser jobs cost a fortune in the long run.?ÿ Having someone who knows how to sift the wheat from the chaff taking the calls is worth a bundle.
There is value in each person being able to do the work of all other team members, but running it solo is dangerous. If you don't build in a chance for a second pair of eyes you better keep up your e&o.?ÿ
This is spot on. I have turned down every headhunter representing huge firms. The salaries are extraordinary, but the drastic reduction in quality of life isn't worth it.?ÿ
Salaries alone are a great draw for those just starting out, but once you are at a point in your career that you can comfortably meet your economic goals (i.e. have the experience neccisisary for the high salary jobs), a modest increase in salary wont be enough to intice new employees.?ÿ
When I was young, and working in the field exclusively, I also had kids to support. And I was at the lower end of the pay scale. So any raise or bonus I got went straight into the family fund where it paid for the kids shoes & clothing, etc. etc. Only the leftover went to field clothes for Dad, and there was almost always plenty of month left over at the end of the money.?ÿ I, like a lot of us, went to work in jeans with patches, jackets with holes, worn out boots, etc., etc, and generally made do.
If I had been given jackets, vests, boots, shirts, etc., etc. as a bonus, instead of cash, that would have been something my employer would have benefitted from as much as I did. It might have been a tax free benefit as well, enhancing the value further.?ÿ ?ÿ ?ÿ?ÿ
