Tenth Triennial Toxicology Salary Survey

Abstract

This survey serves as the tenth in a series of toxicology salary surveys conducted at 3-year intervals and beginning in 1988. An electronic survey instrument was distributed to members of the Society of Toxicology, American College of Toxicology, and 8 additional professional organizations. Question items inquired about gender, age, degree, years of experience, certifications held, areas of specialization, society membership, employment and income. Overall, 1338 responses were received. The results of the toxicology salary survey provide insight into the job market and career path for current and future toxicologists.

This is the 10th in a series of salary surveys conducted at 3-year intervals for toxicologists that began in 1988. Previous salary surveys were conducted in 1988, ¹ 1991, ² 1995, ³ 1998, ⁴ 2001, ⁵ 2004, ⁶ 2007 (which was posted electronically but not published), 2012, ⁷ and 2016. ⁸ In addition to presenting the 2020 results, herein we are providing additional data and an analysis of the trends for employment and pay in toxicology over the last 30 years.

The 10th Triennial Toxicology Salary Survey was conducted as a joint project by the American College of Toxicology and the Society of Toxicology (SOT). In addition to the 2 parent organizations, 8 others (the Teratology Society, the Society of Toxicologic Pathology, the Safety Pharmacology Society, the American Board of Toxicology, the Academy of Toxicological Sciences, the Roundtable of Toxicology Consultants, the Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry, and the Environmental Mutagenesis and Genomics Society) supported the effort by distributing the Survey Monkey-based instrument to their memberships.

Survey instruments were distributed electronically, with responses going to Survey Monkey. A total of 1,338 responses were received, up slightly from the 1,293 responses received for the previous survey. Figure 1 provides a summary of the number of doctoral respondents across the 30 years of surveys.

Figure 1.

Number of doctoral-level respondents across surveys.

The demographics of responses are summarized in Tables 1A through 1H and include respondents’ gender, age, degree, years of experience, certifications held, and areas of specialization. The survey instrument was similar to the form of the 2016 survey, developed in conjunction with the SOT Career Resource and Development services, which included questions evaluating periods of unemployment. It should be noted that there continues to be a significant increase in the number of individuals reporting 6-figure incomes and in those receiving significant sums as bonuses, as is reflected particularly in Tables 2 and 3. In addition, about 25% of respondents received additional professional income outside their primary employer, as shown in Table 4. The survey methodology employed conformed to standard procedures, ⁹ though the response rate for this survey remains high for such endeavors.

Table 1A.

Distribution of Respondents by Gender.

Sex	Frequency	Percent
Male	699	55.6
Female	559	44.4

Table 1B.

Distribution of Respondents by Age.

Age	Frequency	Percent
<30	22	1.7
30-39	267	21.2
40-49	380	30.2
50-59	316	25.1
60-69	233	18.5
>70	40	3.2

Table 1C.

Highest Degree Obtained.

Degree	Frequency	Percent
No Response	1	<0.1
Bachelors	60	4.8
Masters	136	10.8
Doctoral	1061	84.3

Table 1D.

Years Since Completion of Highest Degree.

Years	Frequency	Percent
No response	5	0.4
0-1	11	0.9
1-3	60	4.8
3-5	60	4.8
5-9	116	9.2
9-19	443	35.2
19-29	308	24.5
29-39	190	15.1
>39	65	5.2

Table 1E.

Field of Highest Degree.

Field	Frequency	Percent
No response	11	0.87
Biochemistry	62	4.93
Biomedical systems	26	2.07
Chemistry	24	1.91
Genetics	14	1.11
Human health medical	11	0.87
Molecular engineering	5	0.40
Pathology	114	9.06
Pharmacology	116	9.22
Physiology/biology/zoology	99	7.87
Public health	27	2.15
Toxicology	552	43.88
Veterinary medicine	66	5.25
Other	131	10.41

Table 1F.

Years of Direct Experience in Toxicology.

Years	Frequency	Percent
No response	12	0.95
0-1	23	1.83
1-3	70	5.56
3-5	73	5.80
5-9	140	11.13
9-19	447	35.53
19-29	267	21.22
29-39	173	13.75
>39	53	4.21

Table 1G.

Certifications Held.

Certifications	Frequency	Percent
None	507	40.3
ABAT	2	0.2
ABVT	2	0.2
ACLAM	3	0.2
ASCP	8	0.6
ATS	44	3.5
CEP	0	0
CHES	0	0
CBIOL	10	0.8
CHMM	1	0.1
CIH	11	0.9
DABT	475	37.8
DABVT	7	0.6
DACVP	130	10.3
DECVP	7	0.6
DJCVP	2	0.2
DJST	5	0.4
DKBT	0	0
DRC Path	1	0.1
DSP	16	1.3
ECVP	4	0.3
ERT	70	5.6
FAACT	4	0.3
FACFEI	1	0.1
FACMT	2	0.2
FAHA	0	0
FARVO	0	0
FCP	0	0
FIATP	11	0.9
FIBiol	3	0.2
FRC Path	5	0.4
JCVP	2	0.2
JSTP	4	0.3
IATP	3	0.2
LAT	18	1.4
LATG	9	0.7
MIBiol	6	0.5
MRC Path	3	0.2
MRCVS	6	0.5
MT (ASCP)	10	0.8
PMP	7	0.6
RAC	10	0.8
RPh	11	0.9
Other	79	6.3

Abbreviations: ABAT, American Board of Applied Toxicology; ABVT, American Board of Veterinary Toxicology; ACLAM, American College of Laboratory Animal Medicine; ASCP, American Society for Clinical Pathology; ATS, Academy of Toxicological Sciences; CEP, Certified Environmental Professional; CHES, Certified Health Education Specialist; CBIOL, Chartered Biologist; CHMM, Certified Hazardous Materials Manager; CIH, Certified Industrial Hygienist; DABT, Diplomate American Board of Toxicology; DABVT, Diplomate American Board of Veterinary Toxicologists; DACVP, Diplomate American College of Veterinary Pathologists; DECVP, Diplomate European College of Veterinary Pathologists; DJCVP, Diplomate Japanese College of Veterinary Pathologists; DJST, Diplomate Japanese Society of Toxicology; DSP, Diplomate in Safety Pharmacology; ECVP, European College of Veterinary Pathology; ERT, European Registered Toxicologist; FAACT, Fellow of the American Academy of Clinical Toxicology; FACFEI, Fellow American College of forensic Examiners International; FACMT, Fellow of the American College of Medical Toxicology; FARVO, Fellow of the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology; FCP, Fellow of the American College of Clinical Pharmacology; FIBiol, Fellow of the Institute of Biology; FRC Path, Fellow of the Royal College of Pathologists; JCVP, Japanese College of Veterinary Pathologists; JSTP, Japanese Society of Toxicologic Pathology; IATP, International Academy of Toxicologic Pathology; LAT, Laboratory Animal Technician; LATG, Laboratory Animal Technologist; MIBiol, Member of the Institute of Biology; MRC Path, Member Royal College of Pathologist; MRCVS, Member Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons; MT (ASCP), Medical Technologist Certified by the American Society for Clinical Pathology; PMP, Project Management Professional; RAC, Regulatory Affairs Certification; RPh, Registered Pharmacist.

Table 1H.

Current Area of Specialization.

Area	Frequency	Percent
No Response	22	1.75
General toxicology	159	12.64
Aquatic toxicology	2	0.16
Biotechnology	13	1.03
Carcinogenesis	17	1.35
Cardiovascular toxicology	10	0.79
Chemistry	2	0.16
Clinical and translational toxicology	7	0.56
Dermal toxicology	7	0.56
Drug development	113	8.98
Environmental/ecological toxicology	25	1.99
Food and ingredient toxicology	18	1.43
Forensics	4	0.32
Genomics	6	0.48
Immunotoxicology	28	2.23
Inhalation	25	1.99
Mechanistic toxicology	43	3.42
Medical devices	42	3.34
Molecular toxicology	22	1.75
Mutagenesis	2	0.16
Nanotoxicology	7	0.56
Neurotoxicology	32	2.54
Occupational safety and health	26	2.07
Ocular toxicology	9	0.72
Pathology	113	8.98
Regulatory toxicology	204	16.22
Reproductive/developmental toxicology	65	5.17
Risk assessment	121	9.62
Safety pharmacology	28	2.23
Stem cells	1	0.08
Veterinary toxicology	10	0.79
Other	59	4.69

Table 2.

Primary Job Base Salary.^a

Salary in USD	Frequency	Percent
No response	22
<19,999	13	0.51
20,000-29,999	8	0.34
30,000-39,999	10	0.42
40,000-49,999	7	0.59
50,000-59,999	25	1.69
60,000-69,999	26	2.37
70,000-79,999	48	3.47
80,000-89,999	66	5.17
90,000-99,999	71	6.77
100,000-109,999	82	6.94
110,000-119,999	106	6.18
120,000-149,999	206	19.31
150,000-199,999	292	25.49
200,000-249,999	171	14.23
>250,000	108	6.52

^a Excludes fees, overtime, bonuses, commission, and secondary employment.

Table 3.

Received Bonus, Commission, Stock Gift, or Profit Sharing.

Received	Frequency	Percent
No response	27	2.15
Yes	778	61.84
No	453	36.01

Table 4.

Additional Professional Income Outside Primary Employer.

Salary in USD	Frequency	Percent
No response	27	2.15
None	926	73.61
<499	68	5.41
500-4,999	118	9.38
5,000-9,999	40	3.18
10,000-14,999	19	1.51
15,000-19,999	21	1.67
>20,000	39	3.10

Salary estimates for purposes of calculation were taken to be the midpoint of the range, for example, for the salary range of US$90,000 to US$99,999, a mean value of US$95,000 was used in all calculations. In addition, there was a significant number of incomplete responses that required further estimation by statistical methods. The incomplete responses and the methods used to handle them were:

Nineteen respondents did not indicate a gender. These results were not included in the breakdowns.

Fourteen respondents indicated a salary >US$250,000 without writing the actual amount in the area provided. The salary used for calculation was US$250,000. This probably led to a bias toward lower average values.

Fifty-three respondents indicated they received bonuses, commission, stock options, or profit sharing without indicating the amount. These were excluded from consideration.

A total of 1,021 of the respondents (588 men and 433 women) were full-time employed holders of doctoral degrees in the United States. Table 5 presents the mean salaries (± 1 standard deviation [SD]) for these individuals, sorted by years of experience after receipt of their degrees, gender, and field of employment. Salaries are in thousands of US dollars per year, with necessary conversions having been made for other currencies. Figure 2 provides an across-survey analysis of doctoral salaries for respondents with 1 to 3 years of experience postterminal degree.

Table 5.

US Doctoral Annual Salaries.^a

		Years of experience postterminal degree
Employer	Sex	0-1	1-3	3-5	5-9	9-19	19-29	29-39	>39
Academic	F	–	105 ± 14 (2)	70 ± 21 (2)	58 ± 30 (8)	106 ± 63 (27)	133 ± 56 (20)	142 ± 60 (9)	178 ± 37 (4)
	M	–	–	56 ± 34 (6)	107 ± 69 (5)	128 ± 45 (36)	156 ± 85 (29)	196 ± 89 (28)	146 ± 51 (14)
Business development/sales	F	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
	M	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	225 ± NC (1)
Consulting (with a firm)	F	–	77 ± 13 (5)	98 ± 34 (6)	105 ± NC (1)	120 ± 291 (11)	188 ± 61 (6)	133 ± 78 (4)	260 ± NC (1)
	M	–	–	95 ± NC (1)	105 ± 42 (2)	141 ± 36 (7)	181 ± 49 (5)	163 ± 63 (4)	240 ± 58 (3)
Consulting (independent)	F	–	–	–	–	225 ± NC (1)	228 ± 97 (6)	173 ± 95 (9)	20 ± NC (1)
	M	–	–	–	–	244 ± 159 (5)	232 ± 146 (5)	229 ± 103 (17)	293 ± 326 (21)
Contract laboratory	F	–	98 ± 31 (9)	112 ± 45 (6)	128 ±42 (12)	163 ± 43 (22)	187 ± 57 (8)	155 ± 28 (2)	–
	M	60 ± 35 (2)	81 ± 18 (5)	88 ± 15 (3)	134 ± 38 (11)	136 ± 54 (17)	194 ± 76 (17)	216 ± 53 (10)	175 ± NC (1)
Federal government (including military)	F	–	85 ± NC (1)	85 ± NC (1)	111 ± 14 (7)	111 ± 18 (22)	140 ± 18 (11)	166 ± 31 (8)	203 ± 85 (3)
	M	–	–	115 ± NC (1)	133 ± 54 (5)	113 ± 37 (12)	150 ± 32 (14)	153 ± 40 (10)	195 ± 39 (4)
State or local government	F	–	–	75 ± NC (1)	85 ± 10 (3)	112 ± 55 (3)	95 ± 20 (3)	105 ± 12 (4)	–
	M	–	–	–	75 ± NC (1)	91 ± 17 (5)	122 ± 47 (3)	140 ± 49 (2)	–
Industry	F	145 ± 35 (4)	119 ± 42 (11)	111 ± 48 (15)	137 ± 37 (15)	174 ± 49 (88)	205 ± 57 (31)	215 ± 54 (16)	–
	M	112 ± 6 (3)	125 ± 54 (10)	127 ± 30 (5)	141 ± 41 (19)	177 ± 48 (107)	209 ± 56 (96)	215 ± 48 (32)	203 ± 60 (3)
Nonprofit research institution	F	–	–	115 ± NC (1)	65 ± NC (1)	155 ± 28 (2)	80 ± 35 (2)	–	–
	M	–	–	–	95 ± 14 (2)	–	175 ± NC (1)	158 ± 76 (3)	250 ± NC (1)
Other	F	–	–	–	–	128 ± 42 (3)	155 ± 23 (4)	20 ± NC (1)	–
	M	–	–	95 ± NC (1)	–	–	135 ± NC (1)	225 ± 0 (2)	225 ± NC (1)

Abbreviations: F, female; M, male; NC, not calculable.

^a All numbers are mean ± standard deviation (no. of respondents); values in thousands of US dollars. Highest mean salaries by years of experience are bolded.

Figure 2.

US doctoral annual salaries for respondents with 1 to 3 years of experience postterminal degree. Values are in thousands of US dollars.

The mean salaries (± 1SD) for the 113 master’s level respondents from the United States are presented in Table 6. Likewise, the results from the 61 bachelor’s level respondents are presented in Table 7. The remaining respondents were not employed full time during the reporting period and are characterized as follows:

• graduate and postdoctoral students (10),

• working part-time (42),

• retired (41), and

• other (9)

Table 6.

US Masters Annual Salaries.^a

		Years of experience postterminal degree
Employer	Sex	0-1	1-3	3-5	5-9	9-19	19-29	29-39	>39
Academic	F	45 ± NC (1)	–	–	65 ± 0 (2)	175 ± NC (1)	–	–	–
	M	–	–	–	20 ± NC (1)	–	–	–	–
Business development or sales	F	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
	M	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Consulting (with a firm)	F	–	70 ± 13 (4)	95 ± NC (1)	75 ± NC (1)	102 ± 12 (3)	80 ± 49 (1)	175 ± NC (1)	–
	M	–	105 ± NC (1)	–	–	105 ± NC (1)	115 ± 0 (2)	85 ± NC (1)	175 ± NC (1)
Consulting (independent)	F	–	–	–	–	105 ± NC (1)	–	–	–
	M	–	–	–	85 ± NC (1)	–	–	–	–
Contract laboratory	F	–	95 ± 14 (2)	55 ± NC (1)	–	104 ± 38 (7)	105 ± 42 (2)	115 ± NC (1)	–
	M	–	–	55 ± NC (1)	175 ± NC (1)	69 ± 38 (7)	65 ± 57 (2)	187 ± 108 (3)	–
Federal government (including military)	F	–	–	–	95 ± NC (1)	55 ± NC (1)	–	135 ± NC (1)	–
	M	–	–	–	–	–	115 ± NC (1)	–	–
State or local government	F	–	55 ± NC (1)	–	65 ± NC (1)	55 ± NC (1)	–	–	–
	M	–	–	–	–	95 ± NC (1)	–	105 ± NC (1)	–
Industry	F	95 ± NC (1)	105 ± 30 (2)	98 ± 26 (3)	122 ± 19 (3)	125 ± 43 (7)	120 ± 40 (6)	225 ± NC (1)	–
	M	75 ± NC (1)	75 ± NC (1)	135 ±40 (2)	90 ± 5 (2)	122 ± 54 (13)	177 ± 59 (3)	160 ± 36 (6)	–
Nonprofit research institution	F	–	–	–	85 ± NC (1)	85 ± NC (1)	–	–	–
	M	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Other	F	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
	M	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–

Abbreviations: F, female; M, male; NC, not calculable.

^a All numbers are mean ± standard deviation (no. of respondents); values in thousands of US dollars.

Table 7.

US Bachelors Annual Salaries.^a

		Years of experience postterminal degree
Employer	Sex	0-1	1-3	3-5	5-9	9-19	19-29	29-39	>39
Academic	F	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
	M	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Business development or sales	F	–	–	–	–	65 ± NC (1)	–	–	–
	M	–	–	–	–	65 ± NC (1)	–	–	–
Consulting (with a firm)	F	–	–	–	–	90 ± 15 (2)	95 ± 28 (2)	–	–
	M	–	–	–	–	65 ± NC (1)	–	175 ± NC (1)	–
Consulting (independent)	F	–	–	–	–	–	–	225 ± NC (1)	–
	M	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Contract laboratory	F	–	–	105 ± NC (1)	55 ± NC (1)	88 ± 41 (7)	–	125 ± 71 (2)	–
	M	–	–	–	–	102 ± 31 (3)	95 ± NC (1)	135 ± 0 (2)	105 ± 14 (2)
Federal government (including military)	F	–	–	–	–	–	–	105 ± NC (1)	–
	M	–	–	–	–	–	–	135 ± NC (1)	175 ± NC (1)
State or local government	F	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
	M	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Industry	F	–	–	–	20 ± NC (1)	115 ± 33 (8)	105 ± 30 (3)	135 ± 28 (4)	135 ± NC (1)
	M	–	–	–	–	115 ± 43 (4)	150 ± 30 (4)	175 ± 0 (2)	–
Nonprofit research institution	F	–	–	–	75 ± NC (1)	–	–	–	–
	M	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Other	F	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
	M	–	–	–	–	–	55 ± NC (1)	75 ± NC (1)	–

Abbreviations: F, female; M, male; NC, not calculable.

^a All numbers are mean ± standard deviation (no. of respondents); values in thousands of US dollars.

There were no associates degree respondents.

Table 8 presents a summary of data on those 645 (62.0% of all employed) doctoral recipients who received bonuses in addition to salary. Tables 9 to 11 present summaries of the geographic distributions of the survey respondents by country, Canadian province, and American state, respectively. Table 12 summarizes the major professional society memberships of the respondents. Many respondents belong to more than one society. Table 13 provides a summary of the influence of certification on doctoral-level salaries.

Table 8.

US Doctoral Bonus Amounts.^a

		Years of experience postterminal degree
Employment category	Sex	0-1	1-3	3-5	5-9	9-19	19-29	29-39	>39
Academic	F	–	–	–	1 ± NC (1)	80 ± NC (1)	28 ± 32 (2)	–	–
	M	–	–	8 ± NC (1)	2 ± NC (1)	11 ± 14 (5)	20 ± 21 (4)	63 ± 53 (2)	–
Development or sales	F	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
	M	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Consulting (with a firm)	F	–	5 ± 4 (5)	5 ± 3 (5)	8 ± NC (1)	27 ± 51 (9)	25 ± 32 (5)	20 ± 19 (3)	600 ± NC (1)
	M	–	–	5 ± NC (1)	5 ± NC (1)	67 ± 59 (4)	37 ± 19 (3)	8 ± 8 (4)	110 ± 79 (3)
Consulting (independent)	F	–	–	–	–	–	–	30 ± NC (1)	–
	M	–	–	–	–	5 ± NC (1)	25 ± NC (1)	28 ± 19 (3)	10 ± NC (1)
Contract laboratory	F	–	3 ± 2 (6)	112 ± 45 (6)	8 ± 8 (3)	18 ± 18 (17)	43 ± 57 (6)	16 ± 19 (2)	–
	M	3 ± 2 (2)	5 ± 4 (2)	3 ± NC (1)	11 ± 7 (8)	29 ± 26 (11)	30 ± 40 (15)	31 ± 21 (7)	15 ± NC (1)
Federal government (including military)	F	–	–	–	10 ± NC (1)	9 ± 14 (7)	2 ± 1 (3)	3 ± 1 (2)	17 ± 2 (2)
	M	–	–	1 ± NC (1)	2 ± NC (1)	2 ± 0 (2)	6 ± 5 (6)	4 ± 4 (4)	4 ± 3 (2)
State or local government	F	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
	M	–	–	–	–	–	–	–	–
Industry	F	28 ± 29 (4)	17 ± 14 (6)	19 ± 27 (11)	19 ± 15 (14)	43 ± 30 (77)	67 ± 34 (28)	66 ± 41 (15)	–
	M	13 ± 14 (3)	33 ± 37 (6)	21 ± 15 (4)	26 ± 23 (15)	60 ± 77 (89)	70 ± 64 (87)	73 ± 59 (30)	107 ± 90 (3)
Nonprofit research institution	F	–	–	3 ± NC (1)	–	28 ± NC (1)	2 ± NC (1)	–	–
	M	–	–	–	5 ± NC (1)	–	10 ± NC (1)	40 ± NC (1)	15 ± NC (1)
Other	F	–	–	–	–	–	10 ± 13 (3)	–	–
	M	–	–	–	–	–	–	6 ± 0 (2)	30 ± NC (1)

Abbreviations: F, female; M, male; NC, not calculable.

^a All numbers are mean ± standard deviation (no. of respondents); values in 1000’s of US dollars.

Table 9.

Distribution of Respondents by Country.

Country	Frequency	Percent
Australia	5	0.37
Austria	1	0.07
Belgium	5	0.37
Canada	30	2.24
China	4	0.30
Czech Republic	1	0.07
Denmark	3	0.22
Egypt	1	0.07
Finland	1	0.07
France	11	0.82
Germany	11	0.82
India	7	0.52
Iran	1	0.07
Ireland	1	0.07
Italy	4	0.30
Japan	15	1.12
South Korea	1	0.07
Luxembourg	1	0.07
Malaysia	1	0.07
Mexico	1	0.07
The Netherlands	4	0.30
New Zealand	3	0.22
Nigeria	1	0.07
Panama	1	0.07
Serbia	1	0.07
Sweden	4	0.30
Switzerland	18	1.35
Taiwan	2	0.15
Thailand	1	0.07
Turkey	2	0.15
Ukraine	1	0.07
United Arab Emirates	1	0.07
United Kingdom	22	1.64
United States	1089	81.39
No response	83	6.20

Table 10.

Distribution of Employed Canadian Respondents by Province.

Province	Frequency	Percent
Alberta	0	0
British Columbia	1	3.70
Manitoba	0	0
Ontario	7	25.93
Prince Edward Island	0	0
Quebec	19	70.37
Saskatchewan	0	0

Table 11.

Distribution of Employed US Respondents by State.

State	Frequency	Percent	State	Frequency	Percent
Alabama	8	0.73	Montana	3	0.28
Alaska	0	0.00	Nebraska	0	0.00
Arizona	8	0.73	Nevada	9	0.83
Arkansas	14	1.29	New Hampshire	1	0.09
California	147	13.50	New Jersey	76	6.98
Colorado	9	0.83	New Mexico	3	0.28
Connecticut	24	2.20	New York	30	2.75
Delaware	9	0.83	North Carolina	90	8.26
District of Columbia	28	2.57	North Dakota	0	0.00
Florida	11	1.01	Ohio	68	6.24
Georgia	13	1.19	Oklahoma	1	0.09
Hawaii	1	0.09	Oregon	7	0.64
Idaho	0	0.00	Pennsylvania	41	3.76
Illinois	30	2.75	Rhode Island	1	0.09
Indiana	36	3.31	South Carolina	3	0.28
Iowa	6	0.55	Tennessee	5	0.46
Kansas	8	0.73	Texas	41	3.76
Kentucky	8	0.73	Utah	8	0.73
Louisiana	10	0.92	Vermont	0	0.00
Maine	1	0.09	Virginia	21	1.93
Maryland	61	5.60	Washington	36	3.31
Massachusetts	80	7.35	West Virginia	6	0.55
Michigan	38	3.49	Wisconsin	25	2.30
Minnesota	29	2.66	Wyoming	0	0.00
Mississippi	5	0.46	No response	24	2.20
Missouri	6	0.55

Table 12.

2017 Society Membership of Respondents.

Society	Doctoral	Masters	Bachelors	No degree
AACR	39	0	1	0
ACS	62	2	1	0
ACT	269	30	14	0
ASPET	52	0	0	0
EMS	17	0	0	0
ISSX	20	1	0	0
SPS	40	10	4	0
SRA	32	8	1	0
SOT (national)	794	74	36	0
SOT (regional but not national)	33	2	3	0
SETAC	48	3	0	0
STP	146	6	1	0
Teratology	71	11	5	0
Other	77	5	1	0

Abbreviations: AACR, American Association for Cancer Research; ACS, American Chemical Society; ACT, American College of Toxicology; ASPE, American Society for Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics; EMS, Environmental Mutagen Society; ISSX, International Society for Study of Xenobiotics; SPS, Safety Pharmacology Society; SRA, Society for Risk Analysis; SOT, Society of Toxicology; SETAC, Society of Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry; STP, Society of Toxicologic Pathologists.

Table 13.

Board Certification and Doctoral Salaries.^a

		Years of experience postterminal degree
Certification status	Sex	0-1	1-3	3-5	5-9	9-19	19-29	29-39	>39
Certified	F	175 ± 0 (2)	153 ± 59 (4)	139 ± 44 (11)	133 ± 33 (22)	172 ± 50 (96)	208 ± 68 (44)	187 ± 67 (30)	172 ± 84 (8)
	M	105 ± NC (1)	185 ± 69 (3)	128 ± 38 (4)	141 ± 46 (25)	169 ± 51 (109)	211 ± 62 (88)	218 ± 77 (67)	262 ± 266 (30)
Not certified	F	115 ± 0 (2)	100 ± 18 (20)	97 ± 24 (15)	99 ± 41 (21)	122 ± 36 (65)	144 ± 57 (35)	154 ± 66 (19)	225 ± NC (1)
	M	105 ±17 (3)	86 ± 28 (10)	91 ± 26 (10)	123 ± 46 (16)	154 ± 67 (56)	179 ± 66 (55)	186 ± 56 (32)	194 ± 110 (17)

Abbreviations; F, female; M, male; NC, not calculable.

^a All numbers are mean ± standard deviation (no. of respondents); values in thousands of US dollars.

Table 14 presents a summary of base salaries for doctoral degrees. Table 15 provides an overview of employment with the 2 largest categories, industry and academia, broken down into Tables 16 and 17, respectively. Doctoral-level salaries for industrial and academic subcategories are reported in Tables 18 and 19, respectively. Table 20 summarizes academic employee status. Table 21 presents an overview of the number of years respondents have worked for their current employer. Table 22 provides a summary of unemployment and unemployment intervals during 2017. Finally, Table 23 summarizes employer-provided benefits, including health insurance and retirement plans.

Table 14.

US Doctoral Degree Primary Job Base Salary.

Salary in USD	Male (%total), n = 526	Female (%total), n = 395	Total (%total), n = 921
<19,999	0 (0.00)	1 (0.25)	1 (0.11)
20,000-29,999	1 (0.19)	0 (0.00)	1 (0.11)
30,000-39,999	3 (0.57)	2 (0.51)	5 (0.54)
40,000-49,999	0 (0.00)	1 (0.25)	1 (0.11)
50,000-59,999	2 (0.38)	6 (1.52)	8 (0.87)
60,000-69,999	5 (0.95)	7 (1.77)	12 (1.30)
70,000-79,999	8 (1.52)	12 (3.04)	20 (2.17)
80,000-89,999	18 (3.42)	15 (3.80)	33 (3.58)
90,000-99,999	16 (3.04)	31 (7.85)	47 (5.10)
100,000-109,999	29 (5.51)	27 (6.84)	59 (6.08)
110,000-119,999	29 (5.51)	47 (11.90)	76 (8.25)
120,000-149,999	83 (15.78)	78 (19.75)	161 (17.48)
150,000-199,999	157 (29.85)	87 (22.03)	244 (26.49)
200,000-249,999	98 (18.63)	55 (13.92)	153 (16.61)
>250,000	77 (14.64)	26 (6.58)	103 (11.18)

Table 15.

Description of Employment.

Employer	Frequency	Percent
Academic	203	15.83
Business development and/or sales of equipment or services	4	0.31
Consulting—as an employee of a consulting firm	81	6.32
Consulting—independent	71	5.54
Contract laboratory	174	13.57
Government—federal (including military)	114	8.89
Government—state or local	33	2.57
Industry	566	44.15
Nonprofit research institution	17	1.33
Other	19	1.48

Table 16.

Industry Employment Breakdown.

Employer	Frequency	Percent
Pharmaceutical	372	66.07
Chemical	62	11.01
Consumer product	45	7.99
Food/food ingredients	19	3.37
Petroleum	8	1.42
Medical devices	34	6.04
Other	23	4.09

Table 17.

Academic Employment Breakdown.

Employer	Frequency	Percent
Private doctoral granting institution/medical center	35	17.33
Private master’s granting university	3	1.49
Private primarily undergraduate institution	5	2.48
Public doctoral granting institution/medical center	139	68.81
Public master’s granting university	7	3.47
Public primarily undergraduate institution	9	4.46
Other	4	1.98

Table 18.

Industry Salaries for Doctoral Respondents.^a

		Years of experience postterminal degree
Employer	Sex	0-1	1-3	3-5	5-9	9-19	19-29	29-39	>39
Pharmaceutical	F	145 ± 35 (4)	135 ± 41 (7)	149 ± 44 (7)	139 ± 22 (5)	184 ± 44 (58)	217 ± 48 (24)	232 ± 54 (11)	-
	M	115 ± 0 (2)	145 ± 63 (6)	135 ± 35 (3)	165 ± 46 (9)	188 ± 53 (62)	210 ± 63 (71)	222 ± 48 (24)	250 ± NC (1)
Chemical	F	-	-	82 ± 23 (3)	115 ± 28 (2)	147 ± 41 (11)	175 ± NC (1)	200 ± 35 (2)	-
	M	-	-	115 ± 28 (2)	120 ± 10 (4)	142 ± 27 (15)	189 ± 49 (5)	175 ± 0 (2)	-
Consumer product	F	-	105 ± 14 (2)	85 ± 0 (3)	225 ± NC (1)	156 ± 52 (7)	175 ± NC (1)	155 ± 28 (2)	-
	M	-	105 ± NC (1)	-	128 ± 40 (3)	154 ± 35 (7)	207 ± 40 (5)	223 ± 67 (2)	-
Food/food ingredients	F	-	95 ± NC (1)	-	145 ± 42 (2)	161 ± 23 (3)	175 ± NC (1)	155 ± 28 (2)	-
	M	-	-	-	110 ± 7 (2)	161 ± 25 (7)	-	-	-
Petroleum	F	-	-	-	-	95 ± NC (1)	-	-	-
	M	-	-	-	175 ± NC (1)	155 ± 28 (2)	175 ± 0 (2)	175 ± NC (1)	-
Medical devices	F	-	55 ± NC (1)	60 ± 7 (2)	102 ± 12 (3)	135 ± 33 (4)	400 ± NC (1)	-	-
	M	105 ± NC (1)	-	-	-	163 ± 36 (6)	195 ± 27 (5)	225 ± NC (1)	225 ± NC (1)
Other	F	-	-	-	155 ± 28 (2)	135 ± 0 (2)	112 ± 60 (3)	175 ± NC (1)	-
	M	-	-	-	115 ± NC (1)	155 ± 22 (6)	162 ± 23 (3)	180 ± 64 (2)	135 ± NC (1)

Abbreviations: F, female; M, male; NC, not calculable.

^a All numbers are mean ± standard deviation (no. of respondents); values in thousands of US dollars.

Table 19.

Academic Salaries for Doctoral Respondents.^a

		Years of experience postterminal degree
Employer	Sex	0-1	1-3	3-5	5-9	9-19	19-29	29-39	>39
Public doctoral granting institution/medical center	F	-	105 ± 14 (2)	85 ± NC (1)	70 ± 25 (4)	109 ± 62 (19)	138 ± 52 (15)	155 ± 54 (5)	178 ± 37 (4)
	M	-	-	82 ± 29 (3)	122 ± 91 (3)	123 ± 44 (24)	172 ± 70 (19)	200 ± 93 (22)	142 ± 45 (9)
Public master’s granting university	F	-	-	55 ± NC (1)	38 ± 25 (2)	-	-	105 ± 14 (2)	-
	M	-	-	-	-	-	65 ± NC (1)	85 ± NC (1)	-
Public primarily undergraduate institute	F	-	-	-	53 ± 46 (2)	80 ± 35 (2)	-	-	-
	M	-	-	20 ± NC (1)	105 ± NC (1)	135 ± NC (1)	-	-	135 ± NC (1)
Private doctoral granting institution/medical center	F	-	-	-	-	108 ± 31 (3)	140 ± 60 (4)	225 ± NC (1)	-
	M	-	-	35 ± NC (1)	65 ± NC (1)	143 ± 51 (9)	155 ± 134 (6)	221 ± 29 (5)	177 ± 83 (3)
Private master’s granting university	F	-	-	-	-	65 ± NC (1)	-	-	-
	M	-	-	-	-	-	75 ± NC (1)	-	105 ± NC (1)
Private primarily undergraduate institute	F	-	-	-	-	105 ± NC (1)	-	65 ± NC (1)	-
	M	-	-	-	-	-	85 ± NC (1)	75 ± NC (1)	-

Abbreviations: F, female; M, male; NC, not calculable.

^a All numbers are mean ± standard deviation (no. of respondents); values in thousands of US dollars.

Table 20.

Academic Status.

Status	Frequency	Percent
Full professor	100	49.50
Associate professor	48	23.76
Assistant professor	29	14.36
Research scientist/associate	17	8.42
Other	8	3.96

Table 21.

Years Worked for Current Employer.

Years	Frequency	Percent
0-1	97	7.74
1-3	243	19.38
3-5	158	12.60
5-9	239	19.06
9-19	348	27.75
19-29	107	8.53
>29	62	4.94

Table 22.

2017 Unemployment.

Interval unemployed in 2017	Doctoral	Masters	Bachelors
<3 months	3	2	0
3 to 6 months	5	0	1
>6 to 9 months	2	1	0
>9 months	1	0	0

Table 23.

Employer-Provided Benefits.

Benefit	Doctoral		Masters		Bachelors		Total
	Frequency	Percent	Frequency	Percent	Frequency	Percent	Frequency	Percent
Health insurance	960	91.60	115	92.00	56	94.92	1131	91.80
Retirement plana	957	91.32	117	91.41	55	91.67	1129	91.34

^a At least partially funded by employer.

Discussion and Conclusions

The current survey results point to a number of different trends that deserve attention by major professional societies and add some insights into the job market, career path, and the conduct of future toxicology salary surveys. First, although the situation continues to improve for most entry-level and early career positions, women continue to be compensated at a lower level than their male counterparts. Second, salaries as a whole have increased in the field, but the most impressive differences are not by geographic location of place of employment but rather by type of employer. Additionally, certification continues to play a significant positive role in compensation. Periods of unemployment remained low in 2017, with most unemployment lasting 6 months or less. Most employers (over 91%) provided health insurance and retirement plans for employees.

Finally, the lag between survey responses being provided by participants, the availability of data for analysis, and the publication of these data were excessive. Furthermore, the inclusion of those who were not holders of doctorates was insufficient. The data collection for the next survey should be revised to improve the coverage of potential respondents as well as decrease the timing from survey distribution to publication.