New engineers vs land surveyors and others

My best guess would be that that list coincides pretty well with average salaries for Kansas as well.  Not a lot of people are willing to work twice as hard, get four times the blame for half the salary of other people, just because they enjoy surveying.

My best guess would be that that list coincides pretty well with average salaries for Kansas as well.  Not a lot of people are willing to work twice as hard, get four times the blame for half the salary of other people, just because they enjoy surveying.

The solution will come, when there are not enough surveyors, and it becomes lucrative, more will join the ranks.

@dmyhill 

Things are lucrative now.  I have more than doubled rates in recent years.  Still more work than time to do it.  Turning away jobs multiple times per week.

So what are the qualifications to become an LS in Kansas, and what are the relative pay rates?

The pay rates will not compare with those in Portland, OR but then a shack I wouldn't expect my cattle to sleep in doesn't sell for $600,000, either.  A nice one-bedroom apartment runs around $400 per month.

Requirements for licensure have been basically the same as most other locations, except that a new opportunity came about in the past two years.  There is now a non-degree pathway with eight years of experience plus taking a specific 12 hours of college coursework.  I have not met anyone yet who has completed that pathway.

The pay rates will not compare with those in Portland, OR

Nevermind that. How do the rates for Kansas LS's compare with those of Kansas PE's?

BTW, the pay rates for Oklahoma LS's compared very well wit the rates for Oregon LS's. 

The solution will come, when there are not enough surveyors, and it becomes lucrative, more will join the ranks.

FWIW Salaries here have finally (over the last 2-4 years) responded to demand.  Not as extravagantly for staff PLS's who do mostly production work; but if you can lead a team and are a practice builder you can easily demand $30K to $50K more than before the pandemic.

I got approved to sit for my Kansas license in 2020 via the experience path after initially being rejected due to "failure to meet the education requirements".  I had to request a special hearing for the Board to honor their own application language, but eventually got approved to test, after a long wait.  After successfully passing the exam and getting licensed, circumstances have changed with one of our national clients which negates the need for a license in the State of Kansas.  I plan to maintain my non-resident license for the foreseeable future, but will hire a local consultant when/if we ever get contracted for work in the state. 

I had to request a special hearing for the Board to honor their own application language,

And I'll bet they hated that some renegade LS wannabe was pointing out their errors!  

@flga-2-2

I never had the hearing, but did get a letter informing me I was approved to test after I had sent my formal response and request for a hearing with the verbiage on the application quoted.

Why would anyone expect the average, run-of-the-mill, non-owner, new licensee land surveyor to pull down the same wages as an average, run-of-the-mill, non-owner new licensee engineer?  That is totally unrealistic.  Getting the engineering degree is ten times harder than being able to sit for the LS exams.  Wages for new engineers will consistently be far higher than for new land surveyors.

Wages for new engineers will consistently be far higher than for new land surveyors.

And therein lies the rub...

I'm the queen and you're the peasant

Why would anyone expect the average, run-of-the-mill, non-owner, new licensee land surveyor to pull down the same wages as an average, run-of-the-mill, non-owner new licensee engineer?  That is totally unrealistic.  Getting the engineering degree is ten times harder than being able to sit for the LS exams.  Wages for new engineers will consistently be far higher than for new land surveyors.

From my home state perspective - WHY:  There are 10 times more PE licenses as PLS licenses.  Even though it would apparently only take about 10% extra effort (I see no quantifying that claim) for them to also get a PLS, very few of the PEs do so.  So, numbers alone mean that a company looking to hire a PLS will need to make it worthwhile or that same PLS can be EXTREMELY busy working on surveying projects as their own company.

If neither are doing work beyond a technician level, neither should be paid more just for getting a license.  But if they are both performing professional services, then I understand why there has been this frequent idea of licensed surveyors leaving to start their own company once they are licensed.  If the companies they are working at don't want to value them as professionals, why would they want to stick around.

I would love to know how you arrived at your ten times harder claim even within a state that allows for a non-degree path to PLS licensure.

Your last sentence may hold true in Kansas, but I think that is slowly changing in other states.  I've been hearing of some FINALLY decent salaries for PLSs working for other companies of late.  There are still those companies that have this very mistaken idea that a surveying license is not as valuable as an engineering license.  But they seem to be fewer than in the past.

Keep in mind that only Civil Engineers and some Agricultural Engineers consider adding the PLS to the PE.  All of the others:  Electrical, Nuclear, Mechanical, Chemical, Petroleum, Industrial and others are counted in the numbers for average engineering incomes.  Of all categories of engineering graduates, Civil Engineers have traditionally been on the bottom end of the pay scale for some crazy reason.

When I came out of the engineering portal, the petroleum industry was actively recruiting all sorts of engineering graduates.  Ten years earlier it had been anything tied to the space race.  All sorts of engineering graduates in all sorts programs ended up in those two areas and never found their way back to where they thought they were headed.  They definitely were not looking to join the ranks of the machete swingers and stake pounders after their previous experience.

I largely fell into surveying because it was something that can be done anywhere.  I did not want to move my family and walked away from all sorts of opportunities elsewhere that offered much higher potential income.  It turned out to be a very workable plan for me, largely because of my interest in agricultural activities.

Today, I am basically unemployable.  If I had to submit a resume to some remote HR department, I would not apply.  The wages offered would not matter.

it would apparently only take about 10% extra effort ... for them to also get a PLS,

Probably 10% more classes, but then there's the experience that they won't get if they are busily employed as engineers.

That is totally unrealistic.  Getting the engineering degree is ten times harder than being able to sit for the LS exams.  Wages for new engineers will consistently be far higher than for new land surveyors.

Getting an engineering degree vs qualifying to sit for the PLS exam has, exactly, zero to do with wages.  Wages start with a basic equation of what you can bill the employee at, your company overhead, and your target profit.  Then are modified by the value the individual can bring to the company with their additional skill sets other that just stamping a plan or plat.  Management and/or leadership skills, ability to develop business, etc.  

Every multidisciplinary firm I’ve worked at billed staff and project manager PE’s and PLS’s at the same rate, surveyors only accept lower pay because previous generations have conditioned them to do so.  

Every multidisciplinary firm I’ve worked at billed staff and project manager PE’s and PLS’s at the same rate, surveyors only accept lower pay because previous generations have conditioned them to do so.  

Oof.  The truth.

Every multidisciplinary firm I’ve worked at billed staff and project manager PE’s and PLS’s at the same rate, surveyors only accept lower pay because previous generations have conditioned them to do so.  

I'm glad to say coming at this line of work from another direction I've never accepted nor supported this mind set.

Working for free is something you do when you're retired...or volunteer for a good cause.  Work is work and deserves to be compensated accordingly. Based on risk complexity and demand.

The race to eliminate surveyors has been invoking new software and new widely reaching policies by planning department flunkies and GIS departments (read IT i.e. computer scientist) to make the position all but only needing the field personnel to collect the manholes and dig out the occasional pin.

Lawyers and county clerk types freely do their own adjudication of and rubber stamping of legal descriptions, so it goes.

If the license changes or is eliminated before I die it won't surprise me.