Ieee Usa Salary Survey 2010 Final

IEEE-USA
Salary
& Fringe
Benefits
Survey
2010 Edition
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
IEEE-USA's Salary & Fringe Benefits Survey, 2010 Edition, is the 23rd in a series of studies of
the compensation of U.S. members of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc.
IEEE-USA coordinated the project. Readex Research in Stillwater, Minnesota prepared the
summary report. Raven Analytics in Seattle, Washington developed the regression models
described in Section 4 (and available through the Salary Service).
Copyright 2010 by IEEE
IEEE-USA Salary & Fringe Benefits Survey
ii
2010 Edition
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
IEEE-USA has conducted surveys of the compensation of the IEEE's U.S. members since 1972. Major
findings from the 2010 edition of this project are summarized below.
A move in 2001 to collect data solely via the Internet continues to return substantially large numbers
of responses and even more this year than before. This year, a total of 14,724 IEEE members
participated, including 11,766 employed full time in their primary areas of technical competence
(PATC) the most relevant group from both employee and employer standpoints.
The typical respondent is a male in his mid-forties, with an advanced degree and about 20 years of
experience in the profession. He is at the fifth or sixth of nine possible levels of professional
responsibility, supervising a handful of other people, both professionals and support staff.
Considering only those working full time in their PATC, the total median pre-tax income in the
calendar year of 2009 from all sources was $118,000. After excluding overtime pay, profit sharing,
and other supplemental earnings, median pre-tax income from all primary sources (salary,
commissions, bonuses, and net self-employment) was $113,500. That represents a slight loss of $440
in inflation-adjusted dollars compared to last years median reported primary income.
The general PATC of Communications Technology continues to yield the highest earnings, while this
year Energy and Power Engineering falls at the bottom.
Following a broader societal trend, the gap between those at entry level and those at the highest levels
of responsibility continues to be wide. Those working at Level 9 (greater than GS-15) earn almost
three times those at entry level in median primary income.
Median income varies by employment sector, as well. Those working in private industry (defense)
earned top primary incomes in calendar year 2009, while those working in state/local government or
educational institutions earned the least, on average.
A job in management still results in the highest median primary income, with an advantage in salary
of more than $39,000 for those in general management compared to the median for all respondents.
Technical managers and those in marketing and sales also do relatively well compared to the whole.
Lowest median wages belong to the job functions of manufacturing and production; engineering
support; operations, construction and maintenance; quality control, reliability, etc.; and education,
teaching, training.
Higher education can be a worthwhile investment, with those holding doctorates or MBAs boasting
far higher median primary incomes than those with other degrees.
Womens salaries continue to trail mens even considering experience levels. Overall, the
difference in median primary income between the genders among those working full time in their
PATC is $15,000, similar to last years gap.
Those employed full time continue to receive a broad array of health and insurance benefits, with
more than nine in ten offered basic health insurance. However, employer contributions in many of
these areas is down, dropping as much as 4 percentage points from last year for life insurance and
disability insurance, specifically.
The proportion offered paid attendance at professional conferences has dropped eleven points in the
past nine years, to 67%. The proportion offered paid maternity or paternity leave has jumped from
42% to 57%.
iii
2010 Edition
CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY..................................................................................................................................................................iii
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Institute and IEEE-USA ....................................................................................................................................................1-1
1.2 The Survey................................................................................................................................................................................1-1
1.3 The Analyses ............................................................................................................................................................................1-3
2 MEMBERSHIP PROFILE
2.1 Members in the Work Force .....................................................................................................................................................2-1
2.2 Academics.................................................................................................................................................................................2-7
2.3 Those Not in the Work Force or Involuntarily Unemployed ....................................................................................................2-7
3 INCOME STATISTICS
3.1 Sources and Amounts of 2009 Income .....................................................................................................................................3-1
3.2 Primary Income in 2009, for Those Working Full Time in Their PATC .................................................................................3-3
3.3 Detailed Income Tabulations ..................................................................................................................................................3-16
3.4 Academics...............................................................................................................................................................................3-28
4 REGRESSION MODELS FOR SALARY BENCHMARKING
4.1 Mathematical Salary Models ....................................................................................................................................................4-1
4.2 The 2010 Regression Models....................................................................................................................................................4-1
4.3 Accuracy of the Models ............................................................................................................................................................4-2
5 FRINGE BENEFITS, RETIREMENT, SELF-EMPLOYMENT, AND SATISFACTION WITH WORK
5.1 Fringe Benefits Offered ............................................................................................................................................................5-1
5.2 Leave ........................................................................................................................................................................................5-3
5.3 Older Engineers and Retirement ...............................................................................................................................................5-3
5.4 Self-Employment ......................................................................................................................................................................5-6
5.5 Satisfaction with Work .............................................................................................................................................................5-6
6 IEEE-USA SALARY TIME SERIES DATA, 1994-2009
6.1 Constant Dollar Data: Adjusting for Inflation ........................................................................................................................6-1
6.2 Trends in the Membership Profile ............................................................................................................................................6-3
7 METHODOLOGICAL NOTES
7.1 Sampling and Response ...........................................................................................................................................................7-1
APPENDIX
Facsimile of Web Questionnaire .............................................................................................................................................A-1
iv
2010 Edition
CONTENTS
EXHIBITS
1-1 The Survey Data Base...............................................................................................................................................................1-1
1-2 All Respondents: Income Profile by Employment Status, 2008-2010.....................................................................................1-2
2-1
2-2
2-3
2-4
2-5
2-6
2-7
2-8
2-9
2-10
2-11
2-12
2-13
Members in the Work Force: Age ...........................................................................................................................................2-1

Members in the Work Force: Years of Experience in the Profession ......................................................................................2-1
Members in the Work Force: Number of Different Full-Time Employers in the Past Ten Years ...........................................2-2
Employed Members in the Work Force: (Non-Consultants Only) Years with Current Employer .........................................2-2
Employed Members in the Work Force: (Non-Consultants Only) Supervisory Responsibilities...........................................2-2
Members in the Work Force: Highest Degree Held.................................................................................................................2-3
Employed Members in the Work Force: Level of Professional Engineering Responsibility ..................................................2-4
Members in the Work Force: Primary Area of Technical Competence (PATC) .....................................................................2-5
Employed Members in the Work Force: Primary Job Function ..............................................................................................2-5
Employed Members in the Work Force: (Non-Consultants Only) Size of Employer.............................................................2-6
Employed Members in the Work Force: Sector.......................................................................................................................2-6
Employed Members in the Work Force: Line of Business ......................................................................................................2-6
Employed Members in the Work Force: Job Function by Line of Business............................................................................2-7
3-1
3-2
3-3
3-4
3-5
3-6
3-7
3-8
3-9
3-10
3-11
3-12
3-13
3-14
3-15a
3-15b
3-16
3-17
3-18
3-19
3-20
All Respondents: Sources of 2009 Total Earned Income by Employment Status ...................................................................3-1
All Respondents: 2009 Total Earned Income from All Sources by Employment Status.........................................................3-2
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Primary Area of Technical Competence .....................3-4
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Level of Professional Responsibility ..........................3-5
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Years of Professional/Managerial Experience ............3-5
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Years with Current Employer .....................................3-6
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Size of Employer ........................................................3-6
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Sector ..........................................................................3-7
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Line of Business .........................................................3-7
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Primary Job Function..................................................3-8
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Age..............................................................................3-9
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Highest Degree Earned .............................................3-10
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Gender and Experience.............................................3-10
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Ethnic Background ...................................................3-10
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by IEEE Region .............................................................3-11
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by U.S. Census Region ..................................................3-11
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by State ..........................................................................3-12
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Metropolitan Area.....................................................3-13
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Non-Metropolitan Area.............................................3-15
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Sector and Level of Responsibility ...........................3-16
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Line of Business, Highest Degree,
and Experience........................................................................................................................................................................3-18
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by PATC, Highest Degree, and Experience...................3-23
Academics Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Academic Contract ...........................................3-28
Academics Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Academic Rank.................................................3-28
Academics Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Tenure Status ....................................................3-28
Academics Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Institution (Highest Degree Granted)................3-29
Academics Working Full Time in Their PATC: 2009 Primary Income by Institution (Auspices)........................................3-29
3-21
3-22
3-23
3-24
3-25
3-26
2010 Edition
CONTENTS
EXHIBITS
4-1 Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: Base Income and Base + Income from Other Sources ........................................4-2
4-2 Regression Model Validation Percent Deviation from Observed Value..............................................................................4-3
5-1
5-2
5-3
5-4
5-5
5-6
5-7
5-8
5-9
5-10
5-11
5-12
5-13
Full-Time Workers: Pension and Retirement Benefits ............................................................................................................5-1

Full-Time Workers: Health and Insurance Benefits ................................................................................................................5-2
Full-Time Workers: Miscellaneous Benefits ...........................................................................................................................5-2
Full-Time Workers: Paid Days Off..........................................................................................................................................5-3
Full-Time Workers: Distribution of Paid Leave ......................................................................................................................5-3
All Respondents: Mean Age, 1972-2010.................................................................................................................................5-3
Full-Time Workers: Age Distributions, 1991-2010.................................................................................................................5-3
Members in the Work Force: Median Primary Income by Age, 1991-2010............................................................................5-4
Full-Time Workers: Percent and Absolute Change in Median Base Salaries
by Age, 1997-2010 ...................................................................................................................................................................5-5
Members in the Work Force: 2009 Median Primary Income, Income from All Sources, and
Total Household Income by Age ..............................................................................................................................................5-5
All Respondents: Number of Retirement Plans in which Fully Vested ...................................................................................5-5
All Respondents: Percent Vested, Current Employer's Retirement Program...........................................................................5-5
All Respondents: Satisfaction with Aspects of Work ..............................................................................................................5-6
6-1 Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: Median Primary Income in Constant 2009 Dollars, 1994-2009..........................6-1
6-2 Those Working Full Time in Their PATC: Changes in Median Nominal Primary Income and the CPI, 1996-2009 .............6-2
6-3 All Respondents: Comparisons of Selected Measures, 1972-2010..........................................................................................6-3
7-1 All Higher-Grade IEEE U.S. Members and All Survey Respondents: IEEE Region by Membership Grade ........................7-1
7-2 All Higher-Grade IEEE U.S. Members and All Survey Respondents: Age ............................................................................7-1
vi
2010 Edition
1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 THE INSTITUTE AND IEEE-USA
Exhibit 1-1
The Survey Data Base
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers United States of America (IEEE-USA) promotes the career
and public policy interests of more than 210,000 U.S.
members of the IEEE, the world's largest technical
professional society, with a worldwide membership of more
than 395,000 electrical, electronics and computer engineers
and computer scientists in approximately 160 countries. The
IEEE's constitution defines its purpose as "scientific and
educational... [and] professional, directed toward the
advancement of the standing of the members of the
professions it serves; means to this end include, but are not
limited to, the conduct and publication of surveys and
reports on matters of professional concern to the members..."
Pursuant to these purposes, IEEE-USA has conducted,
analyzed, and distributed a salary and fringe benefit survey
of IEEE members in the United States since 1972.
Sampling Frame:
121,669
Survey Data:
14,724
Final number of responses for salary and consultant

reports combined (rate = 12.1%). Exhibit 1-2 provides
comparisons of results with the most recent prior
surveys. All data were collected through the use of an
online survey with routing for consultant and nonconsultant respondents.
Categories of Respondents:
537
14,187
12,825
Consultants (reported separately)

Non-consultants
Full-time non-consultant workers; of these:
11,766
1.2 THE SURVEY
1,059
1,362
The 2010 IEEE-USA Salary & Fringe Benefits Survey is

the 23rd compensation study IEEE-USA has published. The
aim of the project is to provide timely information on current
and long-term trends related to the income, salary and
benefits of IEEE members in the United States. This
information is critical for accurate understanding of
compensation practices in this profession, including how
those practices impact individual engineers. As has been the
case since 2001, data for the 2010 survey was collected
exclusively via the Internet, with access to the survey site
controlled by passwords and routing incorporated to separate
consultants from non-consultants.
Employed in their PATC; much of the data in

this report focuses on this group
Employed outside their PATC
Others not working full time, including:

318
Retired, not working
393
Part-time workers
537
Involuntarily unemployed
63
Voluntarily unemployed
51
Full-time students
Of the 14,187 usable non-consultant cases, 12,825 (90%)

were employed full time as of 1 January 2010, the survey's
date of record. 11,766 (83%) are engineers employed full
time in their primary area of technical competence (PATC);
most of the compensation data reported focuses on this group.
Two percent of respondents are retired and not employed, less
than 1% unemployed voluntarily, 4% unemployed
involuntarily, and less than 1% are full-time students.
Comparison of the survey respondents to the population of all
higher grade US IEEE members on key variables shows a
reasonably close correlation. (See Section 7)
A total of 14,724 usable cases are included in the 2010

data set. The 537 individuals who self-identified as
primarily fee-based consultants are excluded from the
current results and reported separately, leaving a total of
14,187 non-consultants for this years results. Most of the
profile information is based on the 13,755 non-consultants
"in the work force" that is, those currently employed or
involuntarily unemployed. Proportions for this subset
subject to a maximum sampling error of 0.8 percentage
points at the 95% confidence level. (An additional 305
respondents with extreme high or low values for the key
measure of total personal income earned were omitted from
both reports.)
IEEE U.S. members invited by email in the summer of

2010 to complete the salary survey. (The sample
consisted of all IEEE U.S. higher-grade members i.e.,
not including Student, Life and Affiliate grades who
consent to email communications from the IEEE.)
Note that the omission of consultants from all the current

analysis is unlike past surveys and should be considered when
comparing to previous results. However, given the small
number of consultant cases and their negligible effect on
overall results, comparability is likely of little concern.
1-1
2010 Edition
As has been the case in prior surveys, 2010 results show

those who are retired and employed full time benefit from
substantial non-primary income streams, and thus earn one
of the highest incomes overall.
Exhibit 1-2 recaps median income for survey years 2008 to

2010 from primary sources (salary, commissions, bonuses,
and net self-employment income) and from all sources (adding
overtime pay, profit sharing, supplemental earnings from other
work, retirement and Social Security benefits, and other
earned income). 2009 median income from primary sources
for those employed full time in their PATC dropped $2,500, to
$113,500 (or -2.2%). On an inflation-adjusted basis, however,
this represents a decline of only $440 real dollars. 2009 data
continue a recent trend of compensation failing to get ahead of
inflation. See Section 6 for a full discussion of time series
data.
This survey reports typical salary outcomes for groups of

people. In addition to differences in income between these
groups, there are also major differences in earnings within
each group, reflecting factors such as the circumstances and
policies of particular employers, and the skill, performance
and negotiating ability of particular engineers. Detailed data
on ranges of pay in Section 3 of the report provide a way to
account for such variations.
Exhibit 1-2
All Respondents (Current Data Excludes Consultants):
Income Profile by Employment Status, 2008-2010

2008 Survey
Number
of Cases
2009 Survey
Median 2007 Income

Primary
All
Sources
Sources
2010 Survey
Median 2008 Income

Number
Primary
All
of Cases
Sources
Sources
Number
of Cases
Median 2009 Income

Primary
All
Sources
Sources
ALL RESPONDENTS
11,907
$108,000
$113,200
12,119
112,000
118,000
14,187
110,000
115,000
FULL-TIME WORKERS
11,127
110,000
115,000
11,072
115,320
120,350
12,825
113,200
118,000
In PATC
Not in PATC
10,365
762
110,610
105,900
115,300
111,660
10,117
895
116,000
109,000
121,000
114,000
11,766
1,059
113,500
110,190
118,000
116,000
Employed
Self-employed
Retired and employed
10,760
289
78
110,000
122,110
106,500
115,000
130,500
151,510
10,519
485
68
115,000
129,000
119,000
120,000
141,000
160,000
12,612
101
112
113,310
111,000
105,000
117,670
125,000
137,710
780
24,000
60,000
1,047
30,000
67,000
1,362
21,800
66,390
Part-time workers
Employed
Self-employed
320
90
128
102
49,750
61,150
44,930
35,470
76,000
67,220
61,050
93,570
468
154
209
105
65,000
62,600
80,000
36,000
95,000
71,550
101,300
105,600
393
157
75
161
45,000
71,000
31,200
22,190
80,000
79,000
58,000
93,500
Retired, not unemployed

Unemployed, voluntarily
Unemployed, involuntarily
Full-time student
176
55
149
80
0
8,090
44,840
21,000
67,170
15,000
53,000
22,380
153
32
213
181
0
0
72,000
20,000
65,000
10,000
73,590
21,000
318
63
537
51
0
1,400
50,500
21,000
68,830
10,000
62,000
22,800
ALL OTHERS
NOTES: A minimum of 25 cases is required for all of the statistics in this report. Groups may have enough respondents to seem to meet this test, but
they will still fail to pass it if too many of their members have not responded to the particular item. The "All Sources" income class includes all primary
sources (salary, self-employment income and commissions or bonuses, as noted in the text), plus any supplemental earned income, and other income
directly related to employment such as profit sharing, pension benefits and Social Security.
1-2
2010 Edition
1.3 THE ANALYSES

Section 4, Regression Models for Salary Benchmarking, describes the development of mathematical models
for predicting salary based on a large number of survey
variables. The models themselves are available to IEEEs
U.S. members through the IEEE-USA Salary Calculator, the
chief component of the IEEE-USA Salary Service, Member
Version. Employers and others may also access the models
through use of the Individual Compensation Analyzer in the
IEEE-USA Salary Service, Subscriber Version. For more
information, see http://salary.ieee.org.
The remainder of this report is organized as follows:

Section 2, the Membership Profile, reports on the
characteristics of the respondents to the survey: how long
they have been with their present employers, their levels of
experience, how many people they supervise, etc. These
data are presented for all respondents in the work force:
those employed full or part time, or seeking work. Excluded
are members who are retired and not working, or who are
voluntarily unemployed. And, those who self-identified as
primarily fee-based consultants are excluded throughout the
current results.
Section 5, Fringe Benefits, Retirement, SelfEmployment, and Satisfaction With Work, summarizes data
on the fringe benefits and leave reported by respondents who
were working full time. The section also includes data on
issues relating to older EEs and information on the
subjective sense of satisfaction that IEEE's U.S. members
have with several aspects of their work.
Section 3, Income Statistics, presents the bulk of the

earnings information collected by the survey, divided into
three parts. In Section 3.1, variations in the magnitude and
sources of total income earned in 2009 are examined for
each type of respondent (full-time employed, part-time
employed, self-employed, etc.). In Section 3.2, income
variations are assessed by characteristics of the respondents:
their PATC; degree level; levels of professional
responsibility; length of service, both overall and with
current employers; employer size, sector, and line of
business; job function; location, including regions, states,
and major metropolitan areas; gender; and ethnicity. Section
3.3 provides similar tabulations at still more detailed levels,
with data on combinations of such variables as sector,
degree, and level of experience.
Section 6, IEEE-USA Salary Time Series Data,

1994-2009, documents trends in engineering pay over time,
using the Consumer Price Index to examine compensation
trends in constant dollars. Other membership trends are also
reviewed.
Section 7, Methodological Notes, reviews the survey's
sample and response. Data are provided comparing the
respondent database to IEEE's U.S. membership by region
and grade, and by age. An Appendix follows with a
facsimile reproduction of the survey's Web-based
questionnaire.
In both Sections 3.2 and 3.3, statistics deal only with

income from primary sources for those working full time in
their PATC; these data are for people employed in
appropriate jobs. Income data include 10th, 25th, 50th
(median), 75th and 90th percentiles. Such measures are the
preferred statistics for income analysis, as they are
unaffected by extreme values (see Section 7.1 for more
information). Statistics are not computed if the number of
cases is less than 25; instead, results are replaced with a dash
("-").
1-3
2010 Edition
2 MEMBERSHIP PROFILE
2.1 MEMBERS IN THE WORK FORCE
Exhibit 2-1
Members in the Work Force (Excluding Consultants):
Practically all (97%) 2010 Salary Survey respondents are

working or seeking work (status as of 1 January 2010).
Most (90%) were employed or self-employed full time. An
additional 3% work part time and 2% are unemployed
involuntarily (assumed to be looking for jobs) up slightly
from 4% reported last year. Altogether, they are counted as
IEEE's U.S. members in the work force.
Age
Mean:
Note those who indicated half or more of their personal

earned income in the calendar year came from fee-based
consulting were not included in this analysis, but reported
separately as consultants.
1%
2%
8%
55-59
50-54
45-49
13%
17%
17%
40-44
35-39
30-34
13%
10%
10%
25-29
Under 25
Gender, Ethnicity, and Citizenship. Results for these

measures are similar to those in the recent past. Most of
these respondents 93% are men, and 79% describe
themselves as non-Hispanic whites. Since these surveys
began in 1972, IEEE's U.S. members have become
somewhat more diverse, but the change is slow. Asians and
Pacific Islanders are the largest minority group (14% of
members in the work force). Hispanics, non-Hispanic
African Americans, and American Indians/Alaskan Natives
account for 3%, 2%, and less than 0.5%, respectively.
Another 2% class themselves as "other."
8%
2%
Number of cases: 13,755
Exhibit 2-2
Years of Experience in the Profession

Mean:
45 or more
40-44
35-39
About four in five members in the work force (77%) are

U.S. citizens by birth. Another 12% are naturalized citizens,
while 7% are permanent resident aliens, 3% H-1 visa
holders, and 1% holders of some other type of visa.
Age and Experience. The average age of members in
the workforce is 45.7 and each has accumulated about 20
years of professional and/or managerial experience in
electrical, electronics, and computer engineering or related
technical fields (not including undergraduate or graduate
school experience, on average.
45.7
70 and up
65-69
60-64
20.0
1%
3%
7%
30-34
25-29
20-24
13%
15%
15%
15-29
10-14
5-9
Less than 5
12%
11%
11%
12%
2-1
2010 Edition
Compared to last year, slightly more members in the

work force have worked for only a single full-time employer
in the electrical, electronics, computer engineering or related
technical fields in the past 10 years (44% versus 40%). On
average, they have worked for 2.0 different employers in
that time.
Exhibit 2-4
Years with Current Employer

Mean:
9.4
40 or more
35-39
30-34
0%
1%
3%
25-29
20-24
15-19
5%
7%
6%
10-14
7-9
5-6
3-4
14%
11%
11%
16%
Exhibit 2-3
2
1
Less than 1
11%
10%
5%
Number of Different Full-Time Employers

in the Past Ten Years
Tenure with the current employer declined from a mean

of 10.3 years in 2001 to 8.7 years in 2008. But that figure is
on the rise, at 9.4 years in the current study. Five percent are
still in their first year on the job, while 16% have been in
their positions for 20 years or more.
Mean:
2.0
10 or more
9
8
0%
0%
0%
7
6
5
0%
1%
3%
4
3
2
7%
16%
27%
1
None
44%
2%
Length of the Work Week. The typical (median)

member in the work force reported working 45 hours per
week in 2009, a value which has remained essentially
constant all the way back to 1994. In this survey, 9%
reported working 60 hours per week or more.
Supervisory Responsibilities. The majority (59%) of
members in the work force supervised directly or indirectly
at least one technical and/or non-technical employee in the
primary position held on 1 January 2010. Typically, they
supervised five other employees.
Exhibit 2-5
Supervisory Responsibilities
Total
Non-Technical
Technical
Median # supervised, if any:
500 or more
50-499
0%
3%
0%
1%
0%
2%
20-49
5-19
1-4
5%
24%
27%
1%
4%
18%
4%
22%
28%
None
41%
76%
44%
2-2
2010 Edition
Exhibit 2-6
Highest Degree Held
BSC S = 2%
BET/BSET = 2%
BA = 2%
1%
Two-Year Degree
o ther Bachelor's = 3%
BSEE/BSC E = 28%
Bachelor's Level
Master's Level
MBA = 6%
PhDs and JDs
PhD = 27%
0%
5%
O ther = 8%
MSEE/MSC E = 21%
JD (law) <0.5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%

NOTE: Within levels, degrees were ranked as they appear in the chart, left to right. For example, if a member had both an MSEE and an MBA, the
MBA was counted as the higher degree. Distinctions within broad degree levels, e.g., among different kinds of Master's degrees, are necessarily
somewhat arbitrary; the important differences are between the Bachelor's, Master's, and PhD levels.
Although professional registration is a prerequisite for

practice as an engineer in most countries in the world,
registration has not been essential for most EEs in the United
States. Many engineering employment sectors, including
some of direct interest to IEEE's U.S. members (such as
consulting and power engineering), do place more
importance on these credentials. Currently only 15% of
members in the work force are registered professional
engineers (PEs).
Education and Certification. As the chart in Exhibit 2-6

shows, slightly more than one-fourth of members in the
work force (27%) hold a PhD or equivalent as their highest
degree, and fewer than 0.5% achieved a Law Degree (JD).
For 35%, a Master's degree is their highest: an MSEE or
MSCE for 21%, an MBA for 6%, and other Master's degrees
for 8%. About a third (36%) report the Bachelor's level as
their highest attainment, most holding a BSEE or BSCE.
2-3
2010 Edition
Exhibit 2-7
Employed Members in the Work Force (Excluding Consultants):
Level of Professional Engineering Responsibility

30%
25%
25%
19%
20%
16%
15%
13%
10%
8%
8%
5%
5%
4%
2%
0%
Level 1
(GS-5)
Level 2
(GS-7)
Level 3
(GS-9)
Level 4
(GS-11)
Level 5
(GS-12)
Level 6
(GS-13)
Level 7
(GS-14)
Level 8
Level 9
(GS-15) (>GS-15)
Number of cases: 11,964 (excludes 1,791 not employed as engineers)
Exhibit 2-8 shows that, many (10%) are competent in the

non-Internet software development category within
Computers.
Levels of Professional Responsibility. Respondents

were asked to indicate their levels of professional
engineering responsibility, using detailed definitions
provided with the questionnaire. These data resemble those
from surveys dating back to the 1990s: 73% of these
engineers are in Levels 4 through 7, equivalent to the tenuretrack academic ranks of assistant, associate, full, and
distinguished professors, or the GS-11 through GS-14 grades
in government. However, the proportion working at the
highest levels (i.e., Levels 8 and 9, equivalent to GS-15 or
higher) has dropped five points since 2001, to 12%.
Energy and Power Engineering is the next most

frequently mentioned PATC, at 18%, followed by Circuits
and Devices (16%), Communications Technology (9%),
Systems and Control (9%), and Signals and Applications
(7%). The proportion reporting a specialty of Engineering
and Human Environment has dropped five points since
2001, to 2%. Eighty-eight percent of those in the work force
report they are employed in their primary area of technical
competence, down two points from 2009. Compensation
variation is examined extensively for this group with respect
to PATC in Section 3.
Specialty. In its compensation studies, the IEEE

measures the specialties of its members by asking them to
choose a "primary area of technical competence" (PATC).
Nine broad areas of competence were listed in the survey
form, with 41 more detailed subcategories within these
types, plus an "other" field for areas not otherwise listed. As
has been true in recent surveys, a specialty in Computers
accounts for the largest share of members in the work force
(24%).
2-4
2010 Edition
Job Functions. Exhibit 2-9 shows that design and

development engineering and technical management are the
most frequently named primary job functions, at 24% and
18%, respectively. The other functions indicated by the
most are computer programming/systems software
engineering (11% up 2 points from last year) and systems
engineering (8%).
Exhibit 2-8
Primary Area of Technical Competence (PATC)

Circuits and Devices
Circuits and Systems
Components, Packaging and Manufacturing Technology
Electronic Devices
Lasers and Electro-Optics
Solid-State Circuits
Communications Technology
Broadcast Technology
Communications
Consumer Electronics
Vehicular Technology
Computers
Hardware
Non-Internet Software Development
Non-Internet Systems Analysis/Integration
Non-Internet Software Applications
Including Database Admin.
Internet/Web Development/Applications
Other
Electromagnetics and Radiation
Antennas and Propagation
Electromagnetic Compatibility
Magnetics
Microwave Theory and Techniques
Nuclear and Plasma Sciences
Energy and Power Engineering
16%
6%
1%
3%
1%
4%
9%
<0.5%
7%
1%
<0.5%
Administration/personnel services
Basic research
Computer programming, systems software engineering
1%
3%
4%
5%
1%
1%
<0.5%
1%
1%
18%
2%
<0.5%
1%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
Industrial Applications
Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation
Industry Applications
Instrumentation and Measurement
Power Electronics
4%
<0.5%
2%
1%
1%
Signals and Applications

Aerospace and Electronic Systems
Geoscience and Remote Sensing
Oceanic Engineering
Signal Processing
Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control
7%
2%
<0.5%
<0.5%
3%
<0.5%
Other
Primary Job Function
24%
4%
10%
3%
Engineering and Human Environment

Education
Engineering Management
Professional Communication
Reliability
Social Implications of Technology
Systems and Control

Control Systems
Engineering in Medicine and Biology
Industrial Electronics
Information Theory
Robotics and Automation
Systems, Man and Cybernetics
Exhibit 2-9
Members in the Work Force:
<0.5%
6%
11%
Consulting
Design and development engineering
Education, teaching, training
6%
24%
6%
Engineering support
Management, general
Management, technical
6%
3%
18%
Manufacturing and production

Marketing, sales
Operations, construction and maintenance
1%
2%
2%
Quality control, reliability, etc.

Systems engineering
Other job function
1%
8%
5%
9%
4%
2%
1%
0%
1%
1%
6%
2-5
2010 Edition
Exhibit 2-10
Employer characteristics. Exhibits 2-10, 2-11, and 2-12

summarize data about employers of members in the work
force.
Size of Employer
Members tend to work for large organizations: 29% are

employed by places with more than 10,000 employees in the
United States, and another 38% work for organizations with
501 to 10,000 employees results similar to 2009.
More than 10,000 employees

501 to 10,000 employees
29%
38%
51 to 500 employees
11 to 50 employees
1 to 10 employees
20%
9%
5%
More than half of members in the work force (52%) are

employed by private non-defense companies; when defenserelated firms are added in, the private industry share rises to
two-thirds of the members in the work force (65%). Other
sectors employing significant fractions of IEEE's U.S.
members include utilities (11%), educational institutions
(10%), and the federal government (4% defense, 2% nondefense).
Number of cases: 13,441 with knowledge to answer
Members are employed in a variety of lines of business,

with no more than 14%, in any single category.
Private Industry: Defense

Private Industry: Other than Defense or Utilities
Utilities
As shown in Exhibit 2-13, job functions vary markedly

by line of business, with some associations predictable
e.g., educators with educational institutions and others
perhaps less so.
Federal Government: Defense

Federal Government: Other than Defense
State or Local Government
NOTE: U.S. employment at all locations.
Exhibit 2-11
Sector
13%
52%
11%
4%
2%
1%
Educational Institution
Non-Profit Institution: Except Education
Other sector
For more information about working electrical engineers,

including additional data on variations by geographic
regions, see the income data in Section 3.
10%
2%
4%
Exhibit 2-12
Line of Business
Aerospace
Automotive
Communications
8%
2%
10%
Computers
Consulting
Defense (except Aerospace)
11%
5%
9%
Education
Electrical/Electronic Manufacturing
Electrical/Electronic Services
8%
14%
3%
Medical
Metals
Petroleum/Chemical
Transportation
Utilities
Other Line of Business
5%
<0.5%
2%
1%
11%
11%
2-6
2010 Edition
Exhibit 2-13
Job Function by Line of Business
Number of cases:
Total
Aerospace
13,218
1,003
Auto- Communi- Commotive cations puters

213
1,330
1,393
EE
Consul- Defense EduManuEE
ting (no Aero) cation facturing Services
702
1,254
1,034
1,791
414
TransMediPetroporcal chemicals tation

628
276
154
Utilities
Other
1,519
1,507
Administration/personnel
services
0.3%
0.2%
0.5%
0.2%
0.1%
0.3%
0.2%
1.8%
0.1%
0.2%
0.5%
0.0%
0.6%
0.0%
0.2%
Basic research
6.3%
5.0%
6.6%
5.0%
8.4%
1.4%
8.1%
19.8%
3.4%
4.6%
11.5%
5.1%
0.6%
0.4%
6.7%
10.3%
10.9%
10.8%
9.3%
31.5%
5.1%
12.1%
3.2%
4.8%
5.6%
10.8%
6.2%
11.0%
2.0%
13.5%
6.2%
2.3%
1.9%
3.4%
2.8%
53.7%
2.8%
0.9%
2.0%
8.5%
2.9%
9.1%
11.7%
6.6%
3.6%
20.3%
Computer programming,
systems software engineering
Consulting
Design and development
engineering
24.2%
30.8%
31.5%
29.8%
23.3%
14.0%
22.9%
2.7%
40.1%
30.7%
30.9%
19.6%
10.4%
17.9%
5.7%
1.0%
0.5%
0.9%
3.8%
0.3%
0.6%
60.1%
0.5%
1.2%
1.4%
0.0%
1.3%
0.3%
1.1%
Engineering support
6.3%
5.5%
4.2%
4.4%
1.9%
2.8%
4.9%
1.1%
5.4%
9.7%
3.2%
14.9%
8.4%
19.9%
5.0%
Management, general
3.4%
3.0%
1.9%
2.9%
2.0%
3.4%
3.4%
1.5%
2.8%
4.1%
3.7%
5.4%
5.2%
5.6%
4.9%
18.7%
16.3%
24.9%
23.4%
15.7%
10.8%
19.7%
4.4%
21.3%
18.1%
21.3%
18.8%
24.0%
24.0%
20.5%
0.8%
0.5%
2.8%
0.2%
0.4%
0.0%
0.6%
0.1%
2.4%
0.2%
1.1%
2.2%
0.0%
0.1%
1.2%
Marketing, sales
2.2%
0.9%
0.9%
3.1%
1.1%
0.6%
0.6%
0.1%
7.0%
5.3%
0.3%
1.4%
0.0%
1.1%
2.7%
Operations, construction
and maintenance
1.8%
0.2%
0.9%
0.8%
0.4%
0.9%
0.4%
0.6%
0.3%
2.7%
0.8%
8.7%
4.5%
8.2%
1.9%
1.4%
1.3%
2.8%
1.3%
1.7%
0.1%
1.5%
0.1%
2.2%
1.2%
2.4%
1.4%
1.3%
1.1%
1.6%
Systems engineering
7.8%
19.7%
7.5%
11.2%
3.6%
4.8%
18.0%
0.8%
4.3%
4.6%
4.8%
4.7%
14.3%
7.8%
5.0%
Other job function
4.5%
2.5%
2.3%
4.1%
3.2%
1.7%
4.2%
3.0%
3.3%
3.4%
4.5%
2.5%
6.5%
5.1%
11.9%
2.3 THOSE NOT IN THE WORK FORCE OR

INVOLUNTARILY UNEMPLOYED
2.2 ACADEMICS
Because the nature of academic employment differs
substantially from employment in industry or other types of
organizations, new questions were added to the survey in
2005 to better profile this small but important segment of
IEEE's U.S. membership. Ten percent of members in the
work force indicated that an academic (degree-granting)
institution was their primary employer as of 1 January 2010.
Of this group, 48% are on a nine- or 10-month contract, 37%
on an 11- or 12-month contract, and 16% on some other
arrangement.
Last year, full-time student were the dominant group

among those not in the work force on the "anchor date" of 1
January 2010, but this year there are only 51 full-time
students compared to 318 retired and 32 voluntarily
unemployed.
Involuntarily Unemployed Engineers. The members in
the work force profiled in this report include the 537 (3.8%)
who indicated they are unemployed involuntarily,
presumably searching for work. This proportion is more than
double that reported in the last survey (1.8%).
The largest portion of this group (27%) are full

professors. About one in five (18%) are associate professors,
and another 15% are assistant professors. Fourteen percent
have a non-teaching research appointment. Forty percent are
tenured, with an additional 14% on a tenure track. The large
majority (76%) work at public or private institutions that
grant doctoral degrees.
2-7
2010 Edition
3 INCOME STATISTICS
3.1 SOURCES AND AMOUNTS OF 2008 INCOME
As in prior surveys, earned income was measured for the
year preceding the survey's date of record so the 2010
survey reports income earned in calendar year 2009.
Thirteen categories of income are measured, grouped
broadly into income from primary sources (salary,
commissions, bonuses, and net self-employment income)
and secondary sources (overtime pay, profit sharing,
supplemental earnings from other work, retirement and
Social Security benefits, and other earned income).
while those who have retired from a prior career and are still
working full time receive 73.9% of their total from
salary/self-employment income (with 17.7% coming from
retirement benefits plus Social Security). Those members
who are retired and not employed receive an average of
51.7% of their totals from retirement benefits plus Social
Security, with an additional 20.4% from profit sharing/other.
Compared with seven years ago (2001 survey), full-time
workers now depend significantly more on salary plus net
self-employment income (82.7% versus 90.0%), and earn
substantially less from commissions and bonuses (8.3%
versus 5.9%) and from profit sharing/other (5.2% versus
1.5%).
Exhibit 3-1 shows how 2009 earned income distributes

by category for each group of responding U.S. IEEE
members. For full-time workers who are employed or selfemployed, salary plus net self-employment income
constitutes the bulk of their earnings (over 90%, on average),
Exhibit 3-1
All Respondents (Excluding Consultants):
Sources of 2010 Total Earned Income by Employment Status

Percentage of 2010 Total Earned Income From ...
Primary Sources
Secondary Sources
Number
of Cases
Salary
+ Self
Employment
Commissions
+
Bonuses
Overtime
+
Supplemental
Retirement
+ Social
Security
Profit
Sharing
+ Other
ALL RESPONDENTS
(EXCLUDING CONSULTANTS)
14,187
88.3%
5.8%
1.5%
2.4%
2.0%
FULL-TIME WORKERS
12,825
90.0
5.9
1.4
1.2
1.5
11,766
1,059
90.1
89.3
5.8
6.1
1.4
1.2
1.2
1.7
1.5
1.8
12,612
101
112
90.3
81.2
73.9
5.9
6.5
2.8
1.4
3.1
2.4
1.0
4.0
17.7
1.5
5.2
3.2
1,362
61.5
4.1
2.9
21.1
10.4
Part-time workers
Employed
Self-employed
393
157
75
161
62.0
87.3
63.9
41.7
3.5
2.5
3.9
4.2
5.6
3.3
2.7
8.4
21.1
3.4
12.9
37.8
7.8
3.4
16.6
7.9
Retired, not employed

Full-time student
318
63
537
51
23.5
86.1
82.0
93.8
2.8
5.6
5.4
0.8
1.5
0.3
1.5
3.0
51.7
0.7
3.9
0.0
20.4
7.3
7.2
2.4
In PATC
Not in PATC
Employed
Self-employed
ALL OTHERS
3-1
2010 Edition
characteristics such as level of responsibility and supervision

requirements; employer characteristics such as organization
size and sector; and location. Considering members working
full time in their primary areas of technical competence
(PATC), we see typical (median) 2009 total earned income
of $118,000, while 10% earned less than $71,500 (lowest
decile) and 10% earned more than $187,640 (highest decile).
The middle half of engineers employed full time in their
PATC (upper minus lower quartile) ranges $58,000. Ranges
are even larger for those self-employed full time ($75,500).
Part-time workers also exhibit large variations, with an
interquartile range of more than $82,000.
Where sufficient responses were received (n 25), five

compensation statistics are presented:
lowest decile (10% earn less)
lower quartile (25% earn less)
median (50% earn less)
upper quartile (75% earn less)
highest decile (90% earn less)
Exhibit 3-2 shows that within a given group of members
the variance in earned income is large, influenced as it is by
a host of factors: personal characteristics such as education,
certification, specialty, and experience; position
Exhibit 3-2
2010 Total Earned Income from All Sources by Employment Status

Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
14,187
$62,500
$86,530
$115,000
$147,000
$186,500
12,825
70,290
91,690
118,000
150,000
189,000
In PATC
Not in PATC
11,766
1,059
71,500
60,000
92,000
84,890
118,000
116,000
150,000
150,000
187,640
201,000
Employed
Self-employed
12,612
101
112
70,420
48,400
80,670
91,600
87,000
107,330
117,670
125,000
137,710
149,280
162,500
179,000
188,000
223,600
223,370
1,362
3,450
25,000
66,390
109,350
156,400
Part-time workers
Employed
Self-employed
393
157
75
161
20,000
12,000
12,730
30,220
42,320
31,630
34,600
60,500
80,000
79,000
58,000
93,500
125,000
120,690
105,550
135,250
170,000
160,800
165,600
190,460

Full-time student
318
63
537
51
5,930
0
180
0
33,710
0
20,000
15,000
68,830
10,000
62,000
22,800
100,400
78,580
109,400
40,000
153,890
134,220
145,100
68,600
ALL RESPONDENTS
(EXCLUDING CONSULTANTS)
FULL-TIME WORKERS
ALL OTHERS
3-2
2010 Edition
3.2 PRIMARY INCOME IN 2009, FOR THOSE

WORKING FULL TIME IN THEIR
PRIMARY AREA OF TECHNICAL
COMPETENCE
Speculating about the value of stock options. Nearly

one in five (18%) of the IEEE's U.S. non-consultant
members in the work force reported they received stock
options in 2009 from their employers, a figure down 14
points from 2000 and down two from the last survey. The
value of these options can only be estimated; their final
worth cannot be known until they are exercised and the
stock is sold. For those who received them, the median
estimated present value of options was $5,000. Seventeen
percent of those granted options in 2009 say their options are
currently worthless. Thats an improvement over last year
when 25% reported worthless stock options.
The rest of Section 3 is devoted to a detailed look at the

largest group of people in the study, the 11,766 members
who were working full time in their PATC as of 1 January
2010 and did not indicate half or more of their personal
earned income in calendar year 2009 came from fee-based
consulting. These respondents account for more than nine in
ten (92%) of the full-time workers responding to the survey.
Moreover, as appropriately placed people, they are a useful
benchmarking population, from both employer and
employee perspectives. In examining these full-time, nonconsultant specialists, the income figures in this section of
the report reflect only compensation from primary sources
salary, commissions or bonuses, and net pre-tax income
from self-employment. Additional income from secondary
sources is excluded (such as overtime work, second jobs,
profit-sharing plans, Social Security, and retirement
benefits). This approach provides a consistent way to
compare basic pay for different employment situations.
Medians are the preferred measure for most analyses of

income because they are not affected by extreme cases. The
statistics for options represent a case in point. If one
computes arithmetic averages instead of medians, the
estimate of "typical" value for 2009 options shoots up to
nearly $26,000, because a few members estimated that the
present value of their awards was much higher than most
others. Eleven percent of those getting these incentives
reported estimated present option values of $50,000 or more.
Primary Areas of Technical Competence. Exhibit 3-3

provides statistics on income from primary sources for ten
broad areas of technical competence, as well as subgroups
within these broad areas. As in the prior year, median 2009
primary compensation is highest for those in the broad
Communications Technology specialty ($127,330) and
lowest for those in Industrial Applications ($104,000).
Specific subspecialties that are particularly lucrative
(based on median primary income) include Geoscience and
Remote Sensing, Engineering Management; Consumer
Electronics, and Solid-State Circuits (all over $130,000 per
year). The least remunerative subspecialties include
Education; Robotics and Automation; and Industrial
Electronics (all under $100,000).
3-3
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-3
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC (Excluding Consultants):
2009 Primary Income by Primary Area of Technical Competence

Number
of Cases
TOTAL
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
CIRCUITS AND DEVICES

Components, Packaging and and Manufacturing Technology
Electronic Devices
Other
1,816
661
153
308
135
468
91
72,090
66,000
72,800
64,900
70,600
88,900
74,650
94,600
85,800
95,000
93,630
100,000
105,000
90,000
120,000
112,100
119,000
120,000
128,000
131,520
117,000
150,000
143,480
141,000
149,680
151,000
161,750
146,500
185,000
178,500
193,060
187,660
180,000
193,050
192,180
COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY
Communications
Other
1,100
53
784
110
42
111
75,050
64,000
76,850
75,160
65,120
74,840
98,000
90,110
100,000
100,590
85,380
101,000
127,330
110,000
127,900
132,280
105,880
136,000
155,000
136,750
156,000
162,240
134,000
154,590
191,990
204,800
192,500
201,800
155,950
188,440
COMPUTERS
Hardware
Non-Internet Software Applications Including Database Admin.
Other
2,742
386
1,118
324
144
356
414
69,000
72,640
70,470
70,080
60,800
66,000
61,600
90,000
94,650
90,910
90,230
77,850
89,180
86,710
115,000
120,900
115,000
115,000
101,000
117,000
114,000
145,160
154,300
142,000
140,000
132,000
150,280
149,000
179,950
189,600
171,010
171,750
159,980
186,300
187,780
592
169
87
33
145
84
74
73,820
70,000
69,600
77,000
75,080
76,250
66,980
91,500
88,370
90,000
96,900
96,000
91,360
85,830
115,530
115,000
110,000
124,000
114,560
120,000
113,700
144,180
145,510
132,000
142,000
142,750
152,750
157,250
181,000
188,000
157,000
168,800
177,400
189,490
224,250
ELECTROMAGNETICS AND RADIATION

Magnetics
Other
ENERGY AND POWER ENGINEERING
2,268
65,000
82,000
104,710
127,490
160,000
ENGINEERING AND HUMAN ENVIRONMENT

Education
Reliability
Other
253
30
162
4
31
13
13
74,670
56,130
92,560
62,400
-
94,700
64,500
108,980
79,500
-
120,600
84,100
135,000
110,000
-
150,500
114,500
169,860
141,000
-
184,600
140,920
197,640
150,600
-
INDUSTRIAL APPLICATIONS
Dielectrics and Electronic Systems
Power Electronics
Other
462
17
183
133
91
38
71,400
73,800
68,520
74,200
59,970
85,750
90,000
84,750
82,500
77,750
104,000
105,000
103,000
104,000
92,470
128,250
132,000
124,400
134,000
117,750
155,810
159,520
151,800
160,320
136,220
SIGNALS AND APPLICATIONS

Oceanic Engineering
Signal Processing
Other
787
220
61
24
402
37
43
72,800
73,310
86,070
73,000
49,420
67,000
94,900
94,230
106,000
93,000
81,910
96,000
116,000
116,000
136,000
115,000
105,000
120,000
146,770
150,000
171,060
145,000
133,690
145,000
179,040
187,010
207,600
175,700
163,750
178,020
1,059
444
188
66
24
152
71
114
64,470
66,150
50,000
62,850
60,300
70,240
74,500
85,000
84,130
85,000
73,500
76,060
99,500
99,130
108,000
105,000
111,350
95,750
96,210
120,000
128,380
138,000
130,750
147,750
120,250
127,090
152,600
160,000
171,000
165,100
188,200
136,370
160,420
179,800
221,500
687
66,700
90,000
115,000
150,000
185,140
SYSTEMS AND CONTROL

Control Systems
Information Theory
Other
OTHER
3-4
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-4
2009 Primary Income by Level of Professional Responsibility

Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
225
525
814
48,000
52,000
56,050
54,700
60,110
66,000
Level 4 (GS-11/ Asst. Professor)

Level 5 (GS-12/Assoc. Professor)
Level 6 (GS-13/Full Professor)
1,717
2,047
2,627
66,860
80,000
90,000
Level 7 (GS-14/ Distinguished Professor / Academic Department Head

Level 8 (GS-15/ Academic Department Head / Dean
Level 9 (>GS-15/Dean)
1,327
847
359
805
TOTAL
Level 1 (GS-5, Entry Level )
Level 2 (GS-7)
Level 3 (GS-9/Instructor)
Not Employed as Engineer
Professional engineering responsibility. Primary

income reported for nine levels of professional engineering
responsibility are shown in Exhibit 3-4. The effect of
position responsibility is a powerful one, with a range of
about $112,000 separating those working at entry level
(Level 1) from those working at the highest level (Level 9).
But the gap has grown a bit smaller compared to last year
when Level 9 earned a median primary income more than
three times greater than entry level.
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
61,540
70,000
79,000
70,060
82,000
92,400
80,000
97,040
110,000
80,000
95,000
104,000
95,500
112,000
122,730
112,000
133,500
148,000
131,100
156,000
171,580
100,080
106,950
111,000
117,440
130,000
144,000
138,000
153,000
174,000
170,000
185,000
216,200
203,870
225,400
260,000
61,000
85,000
116,500
154,590
200,000
Overall experience and years with the current employer.

Exhibits 3-5 and 3-6 provide information on the effects of
experience. The data in Exhibit 3-5 are for overall years of
professional and managerial experience in electrical,
electronics, and computer engineering or related technical
fields, not counting time in school. As in the past, results
conform roughly to the classic maturity curves of engineering
compensation, in which values rise regularly from entry level
to roughly the 20-25 years level, but flatten thereafter.
Exhibit 3-5
2009 Primary Income by Years of Professional/Managerial Experience

Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
361
341
649
45,080
50,000
56,000
5-6
7-9
10 - 14
640
742
1,385
15 - 19
20 - 24
25 - 29
30
35
40
45
TOTAL
Less than 2
2
3-4
- 34
- 39
- 44
or more
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
55,000
59,380
64,000
66,500
70,000
76,510
83,500
92,450
94,740
105,000
114,140
115,200
60,000
67,520
75,000
70,000
79,000
90,000
82,000
94,000
109,000
100,190
115,360
134,390
120,900
138,000
159,540
1,428
1,762
1,810
80,000
86,550
90,000
97,000
103,630
107,000
119,760
125,000
129,640
146,000
153,280
160,000
178,510
189,670
198,450
1,461
781
332
47
89,330
89,000
84,300
62,280
105,580
104,000
104,670
90,760
129,020
127,000
128,900
116,000
156,000
162,000
157,740
157,000
199,000
200,000
185,000
198,400
NOTE: Undergraduate or graduate school not counted as experience.
3-5
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-6
2009 Primary Income by Years with Current Employer

Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
1,604
1,257
1,842
1,327
1,327
1,677
55,370
61,000
63,000
70,000
76,060
83,000
72,000
76,500
78,790
85,690
93,000
99,000
15 - 19
20 - 24
25 - 29
760
818
610
82,000
91,860
91,550
30
35
40
45
361
147
32
4
95,100
94,420
97,550
-
TOTAL
Less than 2
2
3-4
5-6
7-9
10 - 14
- 34
- 39
- 44
or more
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
96,860
102,000
104,450
109,000
115,500
119,560
125,880
135,000
137,000
140,000
145,000
149,000
160,000
169,000
167,850
174,010
178,800
181,900
101,630
106,670
109,540
123,890
128,290
128,500
150,000
156,000
160,050
185,000
194,590
198,000
109,000
107,300
114,060
-
130,730
133,000
137,750
-
163,700
165,000
164,110
-
198,920
210,080
186,890
-
Effects of the size of employing organizations. Differences

in primary income for various sizes of employers among
non-consultants are shown in Exhibit 3-7. The largest firms
tend to pay best for the bulk of earners $6,500 per year
more than the grand median. The data show that very small
firms (up to 10 employees) offer the least favorable median
incomes.
The tailing off of rates for the most experienced members is

a common characteristic of technical pay and is related to a
propensity for many of the best-paid people to either rise
into general management, leave engineering altogether, or
take early retirement. In any event, some of the most highly
paid persons are removed from the groups of very
experienced engineers. Time with the current employer,
shown in Exhibit 3-6, follows a similar, though less obvious
pattern.
Exhibit 3-7
2009 Primary Income by Size of Employer

Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
1 to 10 employees
11 to 50 employees
51 to 500 employees
468
1,043
2,244
54,360
63,000
65,000
501 to 10,000 employees

More than 10,000 employees
4,471
3,365
70,000
76,260
TOTAL
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
74,250
85,000
85,000
101,500
110,000
108,330
136,000
140,000
139,950
187,480
180,000
177,000
90,000
97,000
114,000
120,000
144,000
148,690
175,000
180,340
NOTE: Based on total number of U.S. employees at all locations.
3-6
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-8
2009 Primary Income by Sector

Number
of Cases
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
123,000
118,500
104,000
151,000
150,000
124,240
186,000
184,000
150,000
91,500
87,320
70,000
114,260
111,610
89,000
141,800
135,350
107,000
162,600
154,970
125,950
52,000
69,630
72,000
90,000
94,580
118,300
126,000
150,000
162,740
175,000
65,700
84,000
111,900
143,290
182,900
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
Aerospace
Automotive
Communications
865
185
1,226
70,680
71,800
81,280
95,000
83,500
104,380
119,600
102,000
128,000
150,000
123,590
155,540
175,140
141,400
192,000
Computers
Consulting
1,258
605
1,108
75,000
64,030
76,500
97,500
83,000
98,000
125,000
108,000
120,250
156,540
140,000
147,710
191,040
168,400
178,000
Education
890
1,648
375
57,000
72,000
56,680
74,940
92,530
75,000
96,000
116,000
100,000
126,060
145,000
129,240
167,640
180,000
170,000
548
33
242
63,950
69,260
77,460
86,050
81,610
95,300
109,380
95,600
123,050
140,000
105,060
152,180
185,000
145,200
182,000
Transportation
Utilities
138
1,427
61,930
67,080
73,980
83,000
99,970
103,110
130,500
124,000
163,960
150,000
Other
1,218
65,490
87,000
114,000
144,100
178,040
3-7
TOTAL
Utilities
Non-Profit Institution Except Education
Other
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
1,585
6,123
1,395
75,000
73,500
66,000
97,590
93,680
82,560
423
280
157
73,850
65,240
59,810
1,180
247
376
Exhibit 3-9
2009 Primary Income by Line of Business

Number
of Cases
TOTAL
Medical
Metals
Petroleum/Chemical
2010 Edition
Primary job functions. Compensation fluctuations

among the various job functions of IEEE's U.S. members
working in their PATC are listed in Exhibit 3-10. As usual,
members whose roles emphasize management lead all others
in compensation: general managers earned a median of
$152,780 in income from primary sources, while technical
managers earned a median of $137,520. Those in
marketing/sales were right up there, too, earning $131,220.
Lowest median wages belong to the job functions of
manufacturing and production; engineering support;
operations, construction and maintenance; quality control,
reliability, etc.; and education, teaching, training all
below $100,000.
Employer sector and line of business. Exhibits 3-8 and

3-9 show income variations for some basic characteristics of
employers. Exhibit 3-8 provides data on several types of
private and public organizations, ranked according to median
primary incomes. Similar to last year, top 2009 primary
incomes were earned by those working in private industry
(defense or otherwise), the federal government (defense), and
non-profit institutions (other than education). As has been
true in recent surveys, those working in state or local
government or educational institutions typically earn the
least.
The most lucrative lines of business are currently
Communications, Computers, and Petroleum/Chemical.
Those working in Education, Metals, or Transportation
typically earn the least.
Exhibit 3-10
2009 Primary Income by Primary Job Function

Number
of Cases
TOTAL
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
Basic research
15
782
1,236
53,000
65,000
82,410
83,000
109,000
104,000
141,000
130,000
174,170
157,990
Consulting
666
3,007
627
64,040
67,150
62,380
86,000
86,560
77,000
109,350
110,000
95,330
140,000
135,000
126,000
173,000
161,680
162,160
Engineering support
Management, general
743
345
2,248
62,850
94,250
95,000
76,000
115,500
114,520
98,000
152,780
137,520
116,500
200,000
169,000
138,790
243,850
205,000

Marketing, sales
90
244
213
70,000
80,000
67,120
82,000
101,630
78,760
99,450
131,220
97,000
119,540
165,000
115,250
141,010
204,500
146,820

Systems engineering
153
946
61,600
72,700
77,500
92,000
96,000
113,140
113,500
138,740
140,600
165,890
Other
451
66,890
87,600
110,000
144,000
185,000
3-8
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-11
2009 Primary Income by Age

$180,000
upper quartile
$160,000
$140,000
median
$120,000
$100,000
lower quartile
$80,000
$60,000
$40,000
25 - 29
30 - 34
35 - 39
40 - 44
45 - 49
50 - 54
55 - 59
60 - 64
65+
Constituting only 7% of all members working full time

in their PATC, women continue to trail men in primary
income even when experience is controlled for.
Age, education, gender and ethnicity. Primary income

quartiles and medians by age for those working full time in
their PATC are shown in the bar chart (Exhibit
3-11). These data are similar to those for years of
professional and managerial experience (Exhibit 3-5), with
noteworthy growth in early years leading to the start of a
plateau in middle age. Also noteworthy is how the range of
compensation expands with age: from an interquartile range
of about $24,000 at ages 25-29 to a range of closer to
$55,000 for those 55 and older.
Exhibit 3-14 shows that median 2009 primary income is

highest among non-Hispanic Whites, followed most closely
by Asian/Pacific Islanders. In contrast, the relatively small
number of Hispanics and non-Hispanic African Americans
report median incomes roughly $10,000 below the grand
median.
2009 primary income statistics by the highest degree

held by U.S. IEEE members working in their PATC are
reported in Exhibit 3-12. At the top are those with law
degrees, with median primary incomes of $150,000 a year,
and MBAs, earning $124,900. PhDs are not far behind
MBAs, with median earnings of 122,500. Those holding an
MSEE or MSCE report a median of $117,500, which
represents a premium of more than $15,000 over the median
earned by those holding a BSEE or BSCE as their highest
degree.
3-9
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-12
2009 Primary Income by Highest Degree Earned

Number
of Cases
TOTAL
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
PhD
JD
3,214
31
75,000
69,180
96,000
100,000
122,500
150,000
153,660
185,000
191,000
233,600
MBA
MSEE or MSCE
Other Master's
614
2,457
964
84,000
75,650
72,000
100,030
95,000
92,000
124,900
117,500
115,240
154,010
146,000
144,390
200,780
179,680
171,320
BSEE or BSCE
BSCS
BET or BSET
3,198
249
213
63,000
62,000
58,000
79,650
83,500
73,680
102,020
110,000
92,500
128,370
132,500
110,680
160,810
164,500
138,340
373
178
119
65,780
61,900
55,000
85,000
81,880
72,000
108,000
109,350
93,500
140,000
140,000
125,000
171,200
178,400
160,000
Other Bachelor's
BA
Two-year
Exhibit 3-13
2009 Primary Income by Gender and Experience

Number of Cases
Men
Women
TOTAL
Less than 3 years
3-4
5-6
7-9
Lower Quartile
Men
Women
Men
Median
Women
Upper Quartile
Men
Women
10,970
796
$90,000
$77,000
$115,000
$100,000
$145,000
$125,380
610
580
567
664
92
69
73
78
57,770
64,000
70,000
79,000
60,190
62,500
70,750
76,880
67,000
76,660
82,000
95,000
72,250
75,000
82,320
89,100
86,780
94,450
101,000
115,740
89,500
97,050
96,050
112,360
10
15
20
25
- 14
- 19
- 24
- 29
1,258
1,337
1,659
1,702
127
91
103
108
90,820
97,600
104,750
107,000
85,000
89,450
95,000
105,720
110,000
120,000
125,000
129,750
103,000
105,000
111,000
127,250
135,000
147,900
155,000
160,000
127,000
128,550
138,100
157,750
30
35
40
45
- 34
- 39
- 44
years or more
1,419
775
326
46
42
6
6
1
105,650
104,000
104,890
90,570
105,000
-
129,310
127,000
129,350
116,000
124,500
-
156,110
162,000
158,030
149,610
155,000
-
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
Exhibit 3-14
2009 Primary Income by Ethnic Background

Number
of Cases
TOTAL
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
African American (not Hispanic origin)

American Indian or Alaskan Native
Asian or Pacific Islander
194
37
1,675
58,800
58,010
68,070
78,000
90,140
88,000
105,500
111,800
112,000
131,830
151,060
141,440
153,400
179,600
174,730
Hispanic
White (not Hispanic origin)
361
9,201
63,000
69,850
83,000
90,000
102,500
114,500
130,000
145,000
162,000
179,900
244
73,150
91,520
114,100
135,000
175,000
Other
3-10
2010 Edition
story, with those in the Pacific (AK, HI, WA, OR, CA) and
New England (CT, RI, MA, VT, NH, ME) states faring more
than $17,000 per year better than those in the East South
Central (KY, TN, MS, AL), East North Central (WI, IL, MI,
IN, OH), or West North Central (ND, SD, NE, KS, MN, IA,
MO) states. However, it is also the case that costs of living in
the West and Northeast are significantly higher than
elsewhere.
Regional variations in primary income. Exhibits 3-15a

and 3-15b report variations in primary income ranges by
region in terms of IEEE's six U.S. regions, and in terms of
the nine divisions defined by the Census Bureau. In terms of
IEEE regions, those in Region 6 (West) and Region 1
(Northeast) fare substantially better than those in Region 3
(Southeast) or Region 4 (Central), with gaps of over $19,000
in median primary income. Census divisions tell a similar
IEEE Regions
Exhibit 3-15a
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC
(Excluding Consultants):
2009 Primary Income by IEEE Region

Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
1 - Northeast
2 - East
3 - Southeast
1,795
1,675
1,953
72,000
68,070
63,680
4 - Central
5 - Southwest
6 - West
1,438
1,743
3,162
Number
of Cases
TOTAL
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
93,790
89,000
84,000
119,390
114,680
106,100
146,000
145,000
135,000
184,700
170,080
170,000
62,850
67,440
77,000
78,120
87,000
99,240
99,960
110,000
125,000
125,000
138,660
156,630
153,000
171,620
190,000
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
Exhibit 3-15b
2009 Primary Income by U.S. Census Division
TOTAL
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
New England
Middle Atlantic
East North Central
967
1,486
1,360
71,740
69,300
63,000
95,000
89,830
79,860
120,000
113,000
100,000
146,000
142,460
125,000
182,000
175,000
155,000
West North Central

South Atlantic
East South Central
717
2,108
415
61,880
68,200
62,060
77,000
89,000
80,970
98,000
114,330
102,600
123,790
144,000
125,000
150,140
176,000
154,620
West South Central

Mountain
Pacific
1,146
1,036
2,530
67,280
71,000
80,000
87,840
89,080
102,000
114,500
110,000
129,000
145,000
135,000
160,000
179,620
165,000
195,000
3-11
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-16
2009 Primary Income by State

Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
151
32
286
45
1,882
70,000
74,040
70,770
63,130
85,000
85,000
89,580
90,000
79,580
107,000
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
106,000
112,000
110,850
100,840
135,000
126,360
140,550
140,000
131,250
165,000
154,870
181,330
170,000
192,800
200,000
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
393
111
31
79
418
72,570
69,200
80,560
78,750
61,980
90,460
90,000
97,810
103,630
83,600
110,000
110,860
113,000
127,000
104,000
134,770
136,600
140,000
149,500
132,010
164,260
166,580
167,400
163,000
165,510
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
262
33
69
381
180
62,120
74,800
67,500
65,500
60,000
84,750
85,500
83,270
87,260
70,220
108,120
108,160
99,000
110,000
90,000
134,590
140,500
121,750
135,960
118,750
176,880
170,800
143,000
169,000
145,260
68
76
70
79
30
52,940
56,700
62,220
60,000
56,100
63,500
67,370
75,880
80,330
73,770
94,170
94,750
102,740
115,000
94,250
123,930
128,320
122,250
144,000
111,000
154,530
158,300
172,960
190,000
167,400
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
446
670
259
313
53
75,250
75,370
64,970
65,000
55,980
98,300
100,000
82,000
83,000
72,500
124,160
123,450
100,500
101,000
102,600
150,300
150,000
121,000
130,000
126,070
178,600
185,000
146,000
154,930
152,870
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
147
30
58
33
94
64,980
51,450
67,620
72,320
63,880
80,000
73,750
79,800
87,150
77,380
98,000
99,000
98,250
109,210
110,500
123,410
112,500
120,750
135,400
138,150
150,300
129,500
150,100
172,800
165,000
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
406
124
585
300
37
74,000
78,000
72,000
71,550
58,170
93,150
96,150
92,000
89,000
65,150
118,000
119,000
116,950
110,000
78,000
149,000
144,750
145,000
139,000
98,500
176,300
167,000
189,200
169,350
120,070
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
318
60
199
495
31
63,930
54,880
70,740
63,710
67,100
79,830
66,630
90,000
83,000
76,600
99,000
91,000
108,700
107,000
107,500
127,710
112,180
135,000
133,000
140,000
162,100
136,870
167,000
160,000
154,600
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
89
141
962
93
31
63,000
59,260
72,000
62,800
73,650
79,700
80,000
92,000
85,240
98,500
97,000
96,000
116,120
110,000
114,000
125,000
124,080
147,100
130,540
155,000
170,500
154,200
179,780
153,500
189,010
Virginia
Washington
Wisconsin
466
384
222
74,170
70,000
63,000
91,820
91,930
75,200
125,250
112,100
93,750
155,000
138,000
117,000
190,000
170,370
147,100
TOTAL
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
NOTE: Results suppressed where n<25.
3-12
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-16 shows primary income for those working

full time in their PATC by state (where at least 25 responses
were received). The top ten states for 2009 median income
are California, District of Columbia, Virginia, Maryland,
Massachusetts, New Mexico, New Jersey, New York, Texas,
and Louisiana ($115,000 or more each). The bottom ten are
Missouri, South Carolina, Tennessee, Kansas, Maine, Iowa,
Wisconsin, Oklahoma, Indiana, and North Dakota ($98,000
or less).
Sacramento, and Boston all reporting medians of

$125,000 or more. Cities where compensation is lowest
include Norfolk, Akron, Grand Rapids, Madison,
Milwaukee, Oklahoma City, Indianapolis, Charleston, Tulsa,
and Nashville, all less than $96,000.
Because of the high levels of participation (11,766

members working full time in their PATC), statistics on
primary compensation can be meaningfully calculated for 75
U.S. metropolitan areas (Exhibit 3-17). Using median
primary income as the measure, the best-paying U.S. cities
include San Jose, San Francisco, Santa Ana, Los Angeles,
Oakland, Washington DC, Oxnard (CA), Baltimore,
Note that these geographic analyses must be interpreted

cautiously. Differences in engineering pay from one area to
the next may be caused by variations in the industrial
makeup of each region; if the locals tend to be specialists in
communications technology, while you are in power
engineering, then reports about the pay of other IEEE
members in the area may be misleading.
Exhibit 3-18 examines primary compensation for

portions of states outside of reported metropolitan areas
(where n 25).
Exhibit 3-17
2009 Primary Income by Metropolitan Area

Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
Akron, OH
Albany, NY
Albuquerque, NM
Allentown, PA
Atlanta, GA
26
73
90
47
231
55,700
70,280
78,200
60,800
62,590
74,260
93,500
99,210
100,000
85,000
95,000
118,000
119,000
115,000
110,000
129,750
143,040
145,480
136,000
136,000
162,020
193,400
169,380
159,240
179,600
Atlantic City, NJ
Austin, TX
Baltimore, MD
Birmingham, AL
Boise, ID
55
240
179
33
34
59,700
74,890
78,000
76,200
71,000
85,620
98,180
102,000
86,600
83,340
110,000
122,000
126,700
105,000
100,000
145,800
149,730
155,000
116,280
118,320
169,600
178,810
184,000
148,110
140,930
Boston, MA
Cedar Rapids, IA
Charleston, SC
Charlotte, NC
Chicago, IL
466
27
25
48
274
82,000
57,390
55,040
75,770
65,750
103,380
61,780
68,920
91,630
87,750
125,000
108,970
90,000
101,520
111,940
152,000
126,000
110,380
126,750
141,000
191,450
145,420
155,200
167,300
170,800
Cincinnati, OH
Cleveland, OH
Colorado Springs, CO
Columbus, OH
Dallas, TX
52
80
64
65
307
76,100
65,000
80,500
62,440
75,180
92,880
79,500
93,550
77,300
96,000
110,000
99,000
107,770
97,000
117,000
157,500
119,700
132,160
130,750
146,000
171,450
139,600
153,930
165,280
172,160
Dayton, OH
Denver, CO
Detroit, MI
Ft. Worth, TX
Grand Rapids, MI
55
321
174
43
34
64,760
71,720
67,810
73,120
61,950
81,120
90,000
85,880
87,270
68,890
100,500
111,590
105,110
109,340
93,650
140,000
136,390
124,400
140,000
109,280
158,600
166,040
152,400
189,560
147,200
TOTAL
continued on next page ...
3-13
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-17
2009 Primary Income by Metropolitan Area

Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
25
27
36
33
238
76,290
70,890
68,800
74,800
74,580
93,100
88,000
92,950
85,500
92,210
112,500
96,000
120,100
108,160
122,500
125,000
130,000
136,130
140,500
157,730
178,800
202,190
190,600
170,800
187,150
78
61
87
46
31
70,000
60,290
58,150
66,400
65,200
91,500
72,250
65,050
89,740
87,500
115,500
92,000
97,500
109,750
101,500
137,900
116,000
125,000
135,030
118,000
176,300
139,600
152,360
171,900
153,490
Los Angeles, CA
Madison, WI
Manchester, NH
Miami, FL
Milwaukee, WI
312
45
52
44
122
79,440
60,000
69,300
63,650
61,320
100,780
75,000
82,000
86,930
75,000
130,000
93,000
110,500
107,750
92,850
162,000
123,500
140,250
124,550
112,340
204,200
146,600
167,000
213,500
146,800
Minneapolis, MN
Nashville, TN
New Brunswick, NJ
New York, NY (+ NJ/CT suburbs)
254
37
51
418
65,000
55,890
81,000
70,000
86,000
66,850
99,400
91,500
104,750
88,500
116,900
119,470
134,050
122,500
150,000
150,000
157,400
186,400
196,800
200,000
Norfolk, VA
Oakland, CA
Oklahoma City, OK
Omaha, NE
Orlando, FL
Oxnard, CA
50
129
32
39
86
56
62,010
82,000
43,980
71,500
66,050
76,330
76,250
108,500
61,320
85,500
80,400
99,760
95,080
130,000
92,520
100,000
109,500
127,000
122,000
157,370
111,680
119,000
139,250
144,950
166,580
182,500
145,500
151,000
166,600
164,000
Philadelphia, PA
Phoenix, AZ
Pittsburgh, PA
Portland, OR/WA
Raleigh, NC
166
207
168
217
194
65,940
70,660
60,000
71,630
70,750
85,960
94,000
79,250
90,000
90,150
110,000
114,000
99,880
107,500
115,000
140,210
145,000
129,500
134,500
148,250
170,820
173,400
156,380
167,240
174,350
Rochester, NY
Sacramento, CA
Salt Lake City, UT
San Antonio, TX
San Diego, CA
67
61
72
43
195
69,300
72,280
68,380
61,600
72,210
82,000
101,500
85,120
74,740
100,000
105,000
126,000
110,000
96,000
121,000
123,000
160,000
131,520
130,000
153,500
150,000
199,000
150,880
180,400
190,000
San Francisco, CA
San Jose, CA
Santa Ana, CA
Seattle, WA
Spokane, WA
416
453
141
284
25
94,350
100,000
80,000
70,960
47,800
113,630
125,000
100,500
96,000
81,000
141,000
150,000
135,000
115,220
107,790
170,000
179,600
162,000
143,000
120,240
205,000
219,600
195,800
172,500
211,320
73
29
69
55
72
75,630
72,000
59,050
63,400
68,420
91,970
90,030
82,500
92,500
85,000
105,000
108,000
100,300
115,000
108,550
129,000
129,000
119,750
150,000
129,880
168,300
168,380
160,000
180,750
169,940
26
638
34
28
37
57,480
78,600
71,250
80,180
63,000
73,000
103,380
91,750
98,360
88,000
89,640
130,000
106,080
113,750
112,000
115,450
156,000
140,630
139,890
125,750
147,800
189,940
193,440
171,200
157,600
... continued from previous page

Greensboro, NC
Greenville, SC
Hartford, CT
Honolulu, HI
Houston, TX
Huntsville, AL
Indianapolis, IN
Kansas City, MO/KS
Knoxville, TN
Lexington, KY
St. Louis, MO
Syracuse, NY
Tampa, FL
Trenton, NJ
Tucson, AZ
Tulsa, OK
Washington, DC (+ MD/VA suburbs)
West Palm Beach, FL
Wilmington, DE
Worcester, MA
3-14
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-18
2009 Primary Income by Non-Metropolitan Area

Number
of Cases
TOTAL
Alabama (other than Birmingham, Huntsville)
California (other than Los Angeles, Oakland, Oxnard, Sacramento,
San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, Santa Ana)
Connecticut (other than Hartford, NYC suburbs)
Florida (other than Miami, Orlando, Tampa, W Palm Beach)
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
40
60,530
75,130
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
86,760
119,610
144,270
119
70,000
49
69,000
85,000
112,500
138,600
167,000
89,500
116,000
140,500
167,500
162,700
185
57,600
78,060
103,500
132,520
Georgia (other than Atlanta)
31
58,400
68,200
99,350
117,000
138,780
Idaho (other than Boise)
35
61,000
83,000
95,000
129,000
156,100
Illinois (other than Chicago)
107
63,800
87,000
103,000
122,680
163,600
Indiana (other than Indianapolis)
119
60,000
69,000
89,000
119,500
154,000
Iowa (other than Cedar Rapids)
41
52,520
68,500
93,000
120,620
159,560
Kansas (other than Kansas City)
26
51,750
65,890
91,140
111,380
161,450
Kentucky (other than Lexington)
39
61,410
74,200
111,430
129,000
198,000
167
73,200
95,500
123,360
147,680
178,400
Michigan (other than Detroit, Grand Rapids)
51
65,180
73,000
94,500
111,830
140,800
Minnesota (other than Minneapolis)
59
65,000
73,000
95,550
121,000
142,790
Missouri (other than Kansas City, St Louis)
37
64,430
75,900
91,000
114,600
141,000
New Hampshire (other than Manchester)
42
62,000
73,130
107,940
136,280
170,460
138
82,430
108,000
130,000
155,100
185,480
34
74,680
87,500
118,540
145,230
167,750
131
74,040
85,500
108,340
130,000
166,200
North Carolina (other than Charlotte, Greensboro, Raleigh)
33
64,000
76,180
97,830
115,550
132,360
Ohio (other than Akron, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Dayton)
40
55,670
68,130
84,750
105,790
137,260
Massachusetts (other than Boston, Worcester)
New Jersey (other than Atlantic City, New Brunswick, Trenton,

NYC suburbs)
New Mexico (other than Albuquerque)
New York (other than other than Albany, NYC, Rochester, Syracuse)
Pennsylvania (other than Allentown, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh)
114
63,460
78,390
101,500
125,310
156,200
South Carolina (other than Charleston, Greenville)
37
63,840
82,790
100,000
128,070
168,640
Tennessee (other than Knoxville, Nashville)
58
60,950
78,300
95,650
117,630
139,550
155,160
Texas (other than Austin, Dallas, Ft Worth, Houston, San Antonio)
91
48,000
72,000
97,700
117,500
227
75,000
90,000
115,500
150,000
190,200
Washington (other than Seattle, Spokane, Portland area)
36
67,290
89,250
115,500
136,920
168,580
Wisconsin (other than Madison, Milwaukee)
55
66,180
76,000
98,000
125,000
150,800
Virginia (other than Norfolk, DC suburbs)
3-15
2010 Edition
3.3 DETAILED INCOME TABULATIONS

The tabulations in this section report income data for
combinations of variables in the survey. Exhibit 3-19
reports income for those with different levels of professional
engineering responsibility, for each of the major types of
employers.
Exhibit 3-20 provides details by experience, line of

business, and highest degree. Exhibit 3-21 is similar, except
that instead of sorting IEEE's U.S. members by line of
business, they are sorted by their technical specialties.
Exhibit 3-19
2009 Primary Income by Sector and Level of Responsibility

Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
11,766
1,564
1,717
2,047
2,627
1,327
1,206
$69,000
52,760
66,860
80,000
90,000
100,080
108,000
$90,000
61,560
80,000
95,000
104,000
117,440
132,000
PRIVATE INDUSTRY: DEFENSE

Levels 1, 2 & 3
Level 4
Level 5
Level 6
Level 7
Levels 8 & 9
1,585
220
214
285
345
215
224
75,000
57,500
75,000
88,640
103,000
104,400
126,550
PRIVATE INDUSTRY: OTHER THAN DEFENSE OR UTILITIES

Levels 1, 2 & 3
Level 4
Level 5
Level 6
Level 7
Levels 8 & 9
6,123
741
949
1,116
1,383
666
556
UTILITIES
Levels 1, 2 & 3
Level 4
Level 5
Level 6
Level 7
Levels 8 & 9
TOTAL
Levels 1, 2 & 3
Level 4
Level 5
Level 6
Level 7
Levels 8 & 9
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT: D++

Levels 1, 2 & 3
Level 4
Level 5
Level 6
Level 7
Levels 8 & 9
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
$113,500
72,500
95,500
112,000
122,730
138,000
157,000
$144,000
87,670
112,000
133,500
148,000
170,000
193,760
$177,860
103,750
131,100
156,000
171,580
203,870
240,000
97,590
64,600
86,680
100,500
115,000
123,000
147,550
123,000
73,470
100,150
117,870
130,000
147,750
170,480
151,000
86,930
112,270
135,190
150,000
174,000
209,380
186,000
99,350
128,280
153,630
166,600
211,760
258,000
73,500
54,000
73,000
85,850
91,500
100,000
107,850
93,680
62,050
86,450
100,000
107,100
120,000
130,000
118,500
75,000
100,500
119,000
129,000
145,170
160,300
150,000
92,000
120,000
139,940
154,500
178,000
200,000
184,000
110,000
140,000
165,000
178,620
205,300
242,000
1,395
305
152
183
320
144
115
66,000
58,000
71,330
79,700
89,030
98,310
104,350
82,560
62,500
78,040
90,000
99,160
107,000
120,000
104,000
72,540
90,120
104,700
112,000
120,000
140,000
124,240
83,270
103,750
117,490
126,410
138,000
187,000
150,000
98,480
115,850
131,480
143,980
159,160
242,000
423
37
44
64
110
53
99
73,850
44,800
67,000
70,090
86,030
102,060
128,000
91,500
60,130
77,100
84,000
96,310
118,290
144,280
114,260
67,500
96,670
92,070
108,000
128,420
155,000
141,800
82,300
112,400
113,160
120,000
138,000
164,500
162,600
94,520
130,000
135,140
142,900
158,000
185,000
3-16
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-19
2009 Primary Income by Sector and Level of Responsibility

Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT: O++
Levels 1, 2 & 3
Level 4
Level 5
Level 6
Level 7
Levels 8 & 9
280
35
25
31
66
58
48
65,240
46,200
56,380
72,400
89,190
105,710
124,970
87,320
56,500
64,610
76,500
94,900
118,170
137,760
111,610
67,000
79,800
90,000
107,030
124,500
150,000
135,350
80,000
108,000
110,000
126,270
134,910
166,730
154,970
90,650
128,760
131,080
154,620
146,820
183,020
STATE OR LOCAL GOVERNMENT

Levels 1, 2 & 3
Level 4
Level 5
Level 6
Level 7
Levels 8 & 9
157
26
22
24
25
16
14
59,810
50,730
78,020
-
70,000
58,750
89,210
-
89,000
65,260
103,000
-
107,000
77,830
112,800
-
125,950
104,400
139,730
-
1,180
123
245
250
255
110
82
52,000
41,560
50,000
68,960
80,000
97,510
84,300
72,000
48,000
63,450
80,000
98,540
120,270
99,750
94,580
55,700
77,000
96,220
118,000
149,100
141,000
126,000
68,900
90,000
117,640
149,200
190,930
182,290
162,740
83,640
105,400
135,000
173,400
219,920
218,500
NON-PROFIT INSTITUTION++
Levels 1, 2 & 3
Level 4
Level 5
Level 6
Level 7
Levels 8 & 9
247
26
26
44
59
33
28
69,630
55,400
56,780
90,000
90,000
111,760
119,400
90,000
65,000
80,560
101,250
112,000
126,500
143,110
118,300
70,000
90,750
117,970
128,000
150,600
162,500
150,000
81,180
106,210
131,610
151,120
172,500
189,980
175,000
89,190
111,500
151,250
175,000
191,540
215,800
OTHER
Levels 1, 2 & 3
Level 4
Level 5
Level 6
Level 7
Levels 8 & 9
376
51
40
50
64
32
40
65,700
52,000
55,300
77,650
79,500
115,800
89,420
84,000
65,000
70,500
97,880
97,250
126,250
121,420
111,900
79,200
86,740
108,200
114,500
145,000
151,150
143,290
95,000
105,050
133,360
146,760
167,500
178,750
182,900
129,300
116,000
149,300
189,600
229,300
200,000
EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION
Levels 1, 2 & 3
Level 4
Level 5
Level 6
Level 7
Levels 8 & 9
3-17
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-20
2009 Primary Income by Line of Business, Highest Degree, and Experience

Number
of Cases
TOTAL
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
BSEE/BSCE/BSCS/BET/BSET/BA
Experience 0-9 years
Experience 30+ years
4,211
981
880
1,308
1,034
62,700
54,000
72,000
83,690
86,000
80,000
60,400
85,000
98,810
100,650
103,000
69,160
100,000
117,000
120,000
130,000
80,000
123,000
141,940
150,000
162,000
93,000
150,000
172,000
184,000
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
3,421
672
826
1,138
776
75,000
60,060
81,120
94,360
92,290
94,000
70,000
95,000
110,000
109,500
116,950
82,000
113,100
130,000
135,000
145,000
98,300
136,810
157,720
158,490
176,320
115,000
162,300
190,090
190,000
MBA
614
45
152
227
189
84,000
58,700
84,720
87,960
96,000
100,030
72,710
99,600
106,000
108,150
124,900
82,050
115,720
130,070
130,000
154,010
101,190
141,570
168,000
160,500
200,780
118,800
179,400
218,880
220,000
PhD
3,214
1,000
901
815
492
75,000
55,000
83,070
94,300
90,230
96,000
78,060
103,250
118,000
111,250
122,500
98,000
129,800
144,000
144,000
153,660
117,000
156,000
172,000
174,750
191,000
138,360
186,000
210,000
222,700
AEROSPACE
865
70,680
95,000
119,600
150,000
175,140
259
70
34
98
57
60,800
54,000
72,000
83,380
92,000
71,000
58,930
79,870
99,750
101,080
100,000
63,500
94,480
115,500
117,000
124,000
70,580
107,300
147,630
147,070
153,640
82,890
123,300
163,230
190,200
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
336
67
48
132
89
78,000
62,710
85,480
99,150
107,000
98,250
71,000
94,000
114,130
119,500
121,900
81,500
110,250
132,350
142,000
146,930
95,000
130,000
160,500
157,000
176,070
112,000
138,570
197,400
181,000
43
89,150
108,000
133,000
167,000
190,500
217
50
56
62
49
89,800
67,300
96,050
109,920
115,000
110,700
81,060
116,750
126,270
140,000
136,000
101,450
135,240
151,000
159,000
162,000
117,630
160,500
167,720
188,250
191,360
134,530
180,350
209,400
240,000
185
71,800
83,500
102,000
123,590
141,400
57
62,000
78,230
89,590
110,000
137,480
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
61
73,430
88,350
105,000
124,040
140,150
PhD
49
82,000
98,190
113,000
125,500
150,000
MBA
PhD
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
AUTOMOTIVE
3-18
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-20

Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile

COMMUNICATIONS
1,226
81,280
104,380
128,000
155,540
192,000
358
63
86
126
82
69,290
48,260
76,190
90,630
91,200
90,000
60,300
92,950
108,140
108,750
117,000
70,000
111,060
123,560
127,140
143,250
80,340
134,630
154,000
160,750
182,600
104,600
166,500
192,840
218,800
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
460
55
142
182
79
90,100
68,040
93,090
101,520
93,000
107,200
80,000
107,750
115,420
109,530
127,500
94,000
122,500
138,160
133,000
155,000
113,000
143,990
164,140
163,000
193,000
131,300
177,620
202,000
206,000
69
91,000
119,250
135,000
157,500
209,000
295
88
101
71
33
94,300
68,000
115,000
120,000
124,420
120,000
93,250
130,000
133,000
150,000
143,000
111,500
145,600
156,200
165,000
166,000
138,000
165,000
177,000
194,500
195,000
160,500
190,000
215,490
231,270
MBA
PhD
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
COMPUTERS
1,258
75,000
97,500
125,000
156,540
191,040
385
71
104
125
84
71,850
59,880
78,560
100,560
90,000
94,460
66,000
93,880
111,400
114,250
120,000
77,970
109,210
130,000
140,000
150,000
94,600
138,650
160,000
186,750
187,000
130,600
163,000
187,720
221,000
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
392
82
112
129
68
80,090
68,090
84,300
101,000
99,400
100,100
76,740
105,000
119,500
120,000
125,000
90,000
125,000
140,000
149,470
155,000
104,810
148,660
167,500
168,120
180,000
122,700
173,420
200,000
189,240
42
79,170
105,750
134,490
172,250
211,650
409
154
124
86
43
71,000
60,000
84,000
99,050
78,800
100,600
84,000
116,230
127,500
107,660
130,000
107,500
140,000
161,000
150,000
165,500
125,500
170,750
207,920
206,000
210,000
144,040
197,040
242,900
246,200
MBA
PhD
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
3-19
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-20

Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile

CONSULTING
605
64,030
83,000
108,000
140,000
168,400
322
84
70
81
87
60,000
51,800
73,290
72,200
87,860
76,000
58,550
82,250
91,760
103,000
100,000
66,010
105,750
106,000
123,500
126,860
79,750
135,000
135,500
150,000
161,400
92,500
169,750
165,600
175,200
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
155
37
52
44
68,100
51,520
90,300
85,210
89,500
65,500
103,880
111,190
113,000
78,000
124,000
141,330
143,620
97,630
153,750
174,750
182,600
109,520
186,090
197,000
MBA
40
65,550
90,500
120,000
146,500
210,800
PhD
65
73,800
92,250
125,000
150,000
199,400
DEFENSE (EXCEPT AEROSPACE)
1,108
76,500
98,000
120,250
147,710
178,000
288
82
44
80
82
63,180
55,190
84,500
95,060
91,510
80,880
61,590
93,690
106,260
101,500
106,550
69,430
106,930
118,990
123,430
129,350
80,000
125,580
137,380
143,770
150,000
93,050
168,500
150,900
155,660
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
443
113
80
145
104
80,000
69,020
92,100
100,540
110,750
98,000
75,000
100,030
112,050
126,240
120,000
85,000
110,250
130,000
147,500
149,000
101,100
131,750
154,690
164,440
175,000
116,600
158,600
198,290
199,150
44
101,000
116,620
131,000
167,860
218,890
317
74
97
92
54
96,000
75,500
93,640
117,500
119,000
112,750
95,750
113,500
130,130
144,600
135,000
109,000
134,000
146,510
163,900
160,750
120,000
149,750
168,850
216,250
196,400
135,250
181,210
210,510
300,500
890
57,000
74,940
96,000
126,060
167,640
55
46,720
62,190
80,000
91,220
107,160
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
95
27
33
50,300
55,400
45,000
60,630
62,500
50,350
73,500
74,750
76,000
100,000
88,500
104,000
122,800
130,000
119,200
721
188
158
230
145
62,400
45,000
65,420
78,100
83,480
80,000
59,250
79,500
98,880
96,000
100,000
76,500
96,320
123,750
118,000
134,400
90,750
121,050
162,000
159,000
179,000
111,000
149,280
200,000
201,400
MBA
PhD
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
EDUCATION
PhD
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
3-20
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-20

Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile

ELECTRICAL/ELECTRONIC MANUFACTURING
1,648
72,000
92,530
116,000
145,000
180,000
582
92
163
176
151
62,490
49,550
63,060
85,580
81,300
81,090
56,850
80,000
95,300
95,000
104,930
65,780
95,000
115,450
124,000
132,590
76,030
125,000
145,000
155,000
167,730
100,000
157,940
176,050
194,640
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
494
90
145
152
105
75,000
55,750
87,450
94,250
95,420
95,000
67,000
95,750
109,180
106,500
114,000
76,720
114,000
124,000
135,000
141,850
97,930
134,750
153,750
160,560
173,500
110,000
167,000
180,000
190,800
MBA
83
36
91,140
98,800
104,000
112,230
128,000
145,000
160,000
171,500
209,840
212,720
440
146
141
110
42
91,630
84,700
96,680
100,500
99,000
106,630
95,000
112,000
126,760
122,160
127,750
110,000
128,550
149,780
141,000
155,840
128,130
157,000
185,270
160,740
195,000
152,330
194,700
215,900
198,390
ELECTRICAL/ELECTRONIC SERVICES
375
56,680
75,000
100,000
129,240
170,000
163
63
26
41
31
53,400
49,360
53,700
71,780
94,170
65,000
56,200
82,680
83,380
102,000
88,000
65,000
99,740
114,000
115,000
115,000
76,080
111,880
149,500
150,000
155,000
84,200
133,050
198,410
184,000
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
91
32
26
61,920
51,500
77,260
80,080
62,400
95,070
103,000
80,000
121,700
135,000
95,500
131,250
170,760
109,400
145,600
PhD
79
38
79,200
67,200
90,000
85,000
115,000
100,000
150,000
115,500
211,000
131,020
548
63,950
86,050
109,380
140,000
185,000
148
32
33
44
38
65,000
44,850
72,400
83,000
81,700
80,050
60,250
81,000
99,230
91,750
100,600
72,250
105,000
121,440
110,000
134,500
85,520
128,150
157,690
149,050
177,430
97,750
160,000
203,500
181,400
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
146
25
42
50
29
75,210
56,800
76,530
96,180
77,800
91,880
68,310
89,430
110,170
92,000
114,000
83,000
104,950
138,140
126,000
144,250
95,100
126,630
179,500
151,750
181,000
119,100
143,500
201,800
180,770
PhD
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
229
92
75
37
25
50,000
42,230
79,680
93,400
75,000
86,050
54,000
100,500
117,250
120,000
110,000
88,750
124,000
140,000
133,000
141,500
107,750
159,500
169,000
171,370
187,000
118,700
207,600
226,000
218,400
PhD
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
MEDICAL
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
3-21
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-20

Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile

PETROLEUM/CHEMICAL
242
77,460
95,300
123,050
152,180
182,000
141
35
42
43
74,120
60,920
88,800
91,000
91,500
72,300
114,500
110,000
119,000
86,100
131,500
138,230
150,000
92,400
171,250
177,000
181,580
111,210
181,370
228,160
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
48
74,290
100,750
124,000
153,500
191,500
PhD
30
92,790
104,500
143,100
169,900
187,960
138
69
61,930
60,570
73,980
67,930
99,970
99,900
130,500
115,500
163,960
153,670
47
67,700
80,100
108,000
143,000
170,290
1,427
67,080
83,000
103,110
124,000
150,000
877
255
139
272
209
64,460
57,200
79,500
85,530
89,310
79,330
62,250
90,920
96,000
100,890
100,000
72,000
101,500
113,650
114,000
120,000
80,000
113,000
131,420
130,340
143,400
88,880
131,000
156,390
159,200
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
307
72
69
77
88
70,000
60,150
80,400
89,800
96,800
87,500
66,630
92,560
100,830
106,130
106,000
76,250
103,800
117,000
121,110
129,000
87,500
122,980
132,450
145,000
150,200
96,500
151,000
181,000
190,000
MBA
156
34
44
57
82,670
91,720
86,730
97,600
97,670
99,040
93,390
105,900
111,890
110,050
113,570
119,500
138,570
129,750
146,500
165,500
185,600
165,000
202,280
232,800
59
78,000
92,170
110,000
130,000
160,000
1,251
65,500
86,030
112,700
143,030
178,000
507
97
119
162
128
61,980
49,600
66,300
79,330
77,400
78,100
58,750
82,630
95,450
96,130
100,100
67,200
95,000
110,630
115,550
128,000
78,550
115,350
140,000
153,510
164,600
92,120
143,000
174,290
179,550
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
346
56
80
124
85
72,040
56,390
70,200
88,800
92,200
92,310
63,000
91,820
104,080
114,000
118,000
79,100
111,500
124,690
137,040
147,000
93,000
140,000
154,380
158,700
185,000
131,800
174,680
184,000
227,000
MBA
57
26
82,540
82,040
102,500
96,750
130,070
124,500
154,250
171,250
197,600
220,300
297
104
71
71
51
75,400
45,000
86,000
113,340
105,480
95,500
80,000
105,000
121,680
121,690
121,680
92,450
127,000
142,090
143,800
152,000
113,680
151,000
164,000
168,900
185,000
142,750
199,000
207,400
195,400
TRANSPORTATION
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
UTILITIES
PhD
OTHER
PhD
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
3-22
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-21
2009 Primary Income by Primary Area of Technical Competence, Highest Degree, and Experience
Number
of Cases
TOTAL
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
11,766
$69,000
$90,000
$113,500
$144,000
$177,860
4,211
981
880
1,308
1,034
62,700
54,000
72,000
83,690
86,000
80,000
60,400
85,000
98,810
100,650
103,000
69,160
100,000
117,000
120,000
130,000
80,000
123,000
141,940
150,000
162,000
93,000
150,000
172,000
184,000
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
3,421
672
826
1,138
776
75,000
60,060
81,120
94,360
92,290
94,000
70,000
95,000
110,000
109,500
116,950
82,000
113,100
130,000
135,000
145,000
98,300
136,810
157,720
158,490
176,320
115,000
162,300
190,090
190,000
MBA
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
614
45
152
227
189
84,000
58,700
84,720
87,960
96,000
100,030
72,710
99,600
106,000
108,150
124,900
82,050
115,720
130,070
130,000
154,010
101,190
141,570
168,000
160,500
200,780
118,800
179,400
218,880
220,000
PhD
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
3,214
1,000
901
815
492
75,000
55,000
83,070
94,300
90,230
96,000
78,060
103,250
118,000
111,250
122,500
98,000
129,800
144,000
144,000
153,660
117,000
156,000
172,000
174,750
191,000
138,360
186,000
210,000
222,700
CIRCUITS AND DEVICES
1,816
72,090
94,600
120,000
150,000
185,000
505
114
120
155
115
60,940
49,950
75,000
79,280
83,200
78,110
57,960
88,250
96,260
99,400
103,200
65,660
105,360
119,600
127,000
137,000
77,250
135,580
147,000
160,000
178,000
87,390
169,600
195,000
196,720
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
604
124
184
187
109
77,750
64,000
87,990
99,470
87,320
96,000
73,530
100,330
114,000
104,220
120,000
88,990
120,000
136,000
135,000
149,510
99,000
141,760
157,680
157,950
175,000
116,500
176,040
180,000
195,000
45
86,600
108,630
140,000
163,800
202,000
635
201
197
166
71
87,330
77,370
91,980
104,870
82,000
108,000
94,000
117,110
125,000
118,000
130,000
110,000
139,000
145,000
140,000
160,000
131,050
163,830
185,270
166,000
199,880
159,050
193,600
216,230
211,100
MBA
PhD
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
3-23
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-21
Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile

COMMUNICATIONS TECHNOLOGY
1,100
75,050
98,000
127,330
155,000
191,990
313
48
60
117
88
63,400
46,960
62,830
79,890
84,300
83,000
57,250
81,820
94,550
105,310
115,000
67,200
108,900
122,500
135,000
145,750
76,640
132,000
147,150
159,250
173,600
94,000
164,920
170,800
220,200
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
415
61
110
157
85
81,460
62,360
86,860
96,080
90,610
102,800
72,930
102,230
111,800
114,500
127,000
88,000
122,000
139,000
136,940
153,500
110,000
142,700
170,000
166,250
190,800
126,380
166,350
202,600
218,800
MBA
63
28
81,350
118,450
115,000
131,250
142,000
148,750
160,000
184,650
208,600
232,100
273
78
80
71
43
86,500
64,360
100,740
110,640
96,200
111,000
85,230
120,880
142,000
124,030
140,000
107,500
143,170
162,000
153,500
166,680
125,520
165,000
188,000
175,000
197,560
144,280
191,800
243,060
223,400
2,742
69,000
90,000
115,000
145,160
179,950
922
207
233
310
169
62,490
52,400
70,460
81,200
86,260
80,530
60,800
88,170
102,000
102,000
108,120
72,000
107,000
122,000
125,000
135,630
87,000
134,750
149,390
155,250
165,000
100,200
154,680
176,920
193,000
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
912
161
236
330
182
73,000
60,160
75,000
91,190
85,290
93,000
70,000
93,000
109,930
105,860
118,750
81,500
113,810
128,250
133,500
145,000
100,200
134,100
158,910
157,000
175,000
121,750
156,000
188,990
186,240
MBA
113
34
44
27
75,200
66,000
75,750
92,680
94,250
89,330
95,500
102,000
118,000
121,220
117,940
125,000
154,500
173,380
154,690
152,000
191,300
207,000
187,500
191,200
PhD
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
706
212
206
182
102
75,000
63,350
80,000
87,360
83,300
96,500
79,460
99,920
105,000
103,800
120,870
101,500
134,150
141,000
131,500
PhD
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
COMPUTERS
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
3-24
155,000
197,600
122,880
141,400
165,000
197,900
178,130
224,850
171,420
223,900
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-21
Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile

ELECTROMAGNETICS AND RADITION
592
73,820
91,500
115,530
144,180
181,000
119
41
31
63,600
88,050
67,000
82,000
96,500
99,500
104,500
110,000
125,000
129,000
133,000
141,000
145,000
144,000
192,700
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
169
43
38
53
35
76,250
61,880
89,350
101,510
100,000
93,730
74,000
99,000
109,250
110,000
112,000
82,500
109,600
133,990
143,000
140,000
94,500
126,610
162,460
168,190
174,770
110,480
140,100
204,800
191,600
PhD
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
268
81
66
65
56
75,950
51,000
74,240
108,520
100,200
95,570
76,500
100,930
130,000
120,420
125,000
91,930
128,750
150,000
158,850
157,000
110,170
140,750
177,000
199,400
200,100
120,800
166,000
228,200
256,000
ENERGY AND POWER ENGINEERING
2,268
65,000
82,000
104,710
127,490
160,000
1,365
394
249
367
352
62,830
56,000
74,000
85,000
88,170
78,000
62,000
85,970
98,000
102,000
100,000
69,550
100,500
114,790
115,000
122,000
79,900
116,000
135,000
142,000
150,490
90,050
138,600
163,110
173,490
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
468
123
92
121
132
68,000
59,700
79,420
86,000
97,670
85,000
65,850
92,330
103,700
107,650
107,680
75,000
105,000
119,930
128,500
132,000
87,500
128,000
133,000
153,750
165,000
100,000
158,500
168,200
190,090
MBA
203
45
55
82
88,020
91,760
87,500
99,400
100,000
100,000
100,000
107,200
116,290
113,500
116,290
132,500
147,000
129,840
150,000
165,250
195,740
163,700
202,140
237,300
PhD
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
176
60
45
35
35
71,280
56,000
84,240
91,590
89,140
90,000
75,650
98,600
103,000
100,000
110,000
90,000
118,500
130,000
125,000
136,500
105,900
142,000
178,000
159,570
179,180
126,000
158,800
211,000
225,200
ENGINEERING AND HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
253
74,670
94,700
120,600
150,500
184,600
75
31
22
78,450
100,000
-
98,000
109,620
-
120,000
133,400
-
152,700
177,340
-
192,360
197,760
-
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
68
70,540
90,680
120,100
149,430
180,100
MBA
44
94,700
111,480
133,500
158,510
187,640
PhD
62
60,450
80,500
114,500
150,000
187,640
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
3-25
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-21
Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile

INDUSTRIAL APPLICATIONS
462
71,400
85,750
104,000
128,250
155,810
249
39
46
81
82
68,000
52,120
70,030
75,810
81,300
82,000
57,000
79,500
89,780
94,740
102,000
75,000
95,500
107,000
118,660
123,400
86,100
110,000
125,750
149,630
154,000
110,770
117,510
153,800
178,500
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
102
26
38
73,800
87,690
77,800
89,560
96,150
104,130
105,000
108,460
120,500
132,000
132,000
148,250
161,340
192,600
172,750
MBA
32
80,500
92,500
118,170
146,750
203,700
PhD
62
82,150
92,880
115,000
140,000
155,340
787
72,800
94,900
116,000
146,770
179,040
126
33
36
34
63,160
56,080
88,500
90,080
78,630
60,500
101,390
100,860
100,670
67,000
120,500
116,000
125,900
74,660
150,000
149,870
160,300
90,480
177,920
195,500
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
236
55
52
74
54
80,850
65,960
86,550
107,720
114,500
100,060
78,000
95,750
117,830
125,250
124,700
93,000
113,600
143,250
144,950
151,410
105,000
134,360
170,520
166,880
188,110
120,130
156,880
208,900
223,000
PhD
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
403
125
114
100
64
72,000
48,940
83,390
100,080
89,280
95,500
72,500
100,000
118,920
111,250
117,500
95,000
120,000
140,000
146,390
148,000
108,050
143,160
166,880
170,550
179,120
125,800
166,500
191,260
217,630
SIGNALS AND APPLICATIONS
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
SYSTEMS AND CONTROL
1,059
64,470
85,000
108,000
138,000
171,000
325
76
66
103
80
62,000
52,700
64,700
83,400
72,200
75,400
59,990
79,500
98,900
92,130
98,000
66,750
92,250
114,000
109,360
125,000
79,410
108,500
140,000
142,540
162,530
94,320
137,300
201,600
177,480
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
269
63
37
98
70
70,000
58,200
77,400
94,800
98,000
91,300
65,000
89,800
104,480
120,000
112,000
78,200
100,000
120,000
144,000
146,950
93,950
116,870
159,250
157,550
181,000
105,000
160,000
202,800
194,490
45
69,120
95,900
122,950
147,500
194,900
395
140
106
94
55
64,200
47,100
80,100
84,000
90,960
89,000
67,750
95,850
106,000
102,000
113,500
89,500
124,500
133,500
129,000
144,000
107,750
150,000
159,240
163,000
172,400
120,900
202,700
184,970
249,480
MBA
PhD
Experience
Experience
Experience
Experience
0-9 years
10-19 years
20-29 years
30+ years
3-26
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-21
Number
of Cases
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile

OTHER
MSEE/MSCE/MS/MA
MBA
PhD
687
66,700
90,000
115,000
150,000
185,140
212
39
45
67
61
178
39
69
49
34
234
70
62
64
38
63,000
47,500
67,910
83,290
90,260
78,340
78,380
97,400
77,600
84,000
60,000
45,000
65,000
90,990
116,120
82,000
59,000
80,100
98,800
104,640
100,000
99,020
109,040
102,500
101,130
91,840
59,500
93,600
117,770
149,050
104,000
64,600
90,000
111,000
124,000
120,000
117,000
130,000
122,000
125,000
120,550
84,000
119,000
135,000
161,870
130,230
75,000
110,050
145,800
150,000
150,000
140,000
155,000
163,000
188,750
161,800
110,520
140,000
178,380
189,430
164,700
101,000
154,000
164,530
189,140
181,410
163,000
198,000
184,000
234,000
195,000
129,890
170,600
220,700
207,100
3-27
2010 Edition
3.4 ACADEMICS
for academics working full time in their PATCs by the nature
of the academic contract, academic rank, tenure status, and
the type of institution (highest degree granted and public
versus private).
Questions were first added in the 2005 survey that

explored in more depth the small portion of U.S. IEEE
members who characterize their primary employer as an
academic (degree-granting) institution. Exhibits 3-22
through 3-26 break out 2010 results (2009 primary income)
Exhibit 3-22
Academics Working Full Time in Their PATC:
2009 Primary Income by Academic Contract

Number
of Cases
TOTAL
11 or 12 month contract
Other
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
1,200
$53,060
$73,000
$95,000
$128,510
$164,450
448
598
154
46,660
66,900
50,000
60,000
79,610
67,010
90,630
98,900
89,500
134,180
127,390
120,000
164,250
168,200
150,160
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
Exhibit 3-23
2009 Primary Income by Academic Rank

Number
of Cases
TOTAL
1,200
$53,060
$73,000
$95,000
$128,510
$164,450
Full Professor
Associate Professor
Assistant Professor
344
227
181
90,000
68,170
54,660
105,000
82,000
70,000
133,000
97,000
80,000
168,000
118,680
92,000
208,360
140,000
109,940
Non-teaching research appointment

Other
176
272
43,000
46,790
52,250
58,250
75,500
76,670
107,800
107,300
144,300
145,470
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
1,200
$53,060
$73,000
$95,000
$128,510
$164,450
503
171
187
334
80,000
60,130
45,720
45,000
95,000
71,700
57,000
56,000
118,000
81,000
79,000
79,750
151,000
94,870
109,000
109,000
197,610
114,800
144,200
146,000
Exhibit 3-24
2009 Primary Income by Tenure Status

Number
of Cases
TOTAL
Tenured
On tenure track
Not on tenure track
Not applicable
3-28
2010 Edition
Exhibit 3-25
2009 Primary Income by Institution (Highest Degree Granted)

Number
of Cases
TOTAL
PhD or comparable
Public
Private
Master's
Bachelor's
Other
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
1,200
948
650
298
$53,060
51,000
50,730
54,560
$73,000
76,000
75,000
79,750
$95,000
100,850
100,000
105,000
$128,510
136,750
135,000
139,250
$164,450
177,100
176,800
180,300
122
78
52
56,510
55,600
48,000
71,050
64,590
64,030
84,100
75,500
77,500
95,630
97,480
105,590
117,700
130,000
138,500
Lowest
Decile
Lower
Quartile
Median
Upper
Quartile
Highest
Decile
Exhibit 3-26
2009 Primary Income by Institution (Auspices)

Number
of Cases
TOTAL
1,200
$53,060
$73,000
$95,000
$128,510
$164,450
Public
Private
782
399
52,650
53,600
75,000
71,070
94,940
96,430
129,250
127,300
164,350
165,300
3-29
2010 Edition
4 REGRESSION MODELS FOR

SALARY BENCHMARKING
4.1 MATHEMATICAL SALARY MODELS
The regression approach solves this problem. Instead of
producing a multitude of tables for various combinations of
factors (many of which cannot be estimated in any event, due
to the problem described above), the survey data are utilized
to construct predictive equations that allow for many
simultaneous influences on salaries. The original technical
approach used by IEEE-USA was linear. In 1993, a log
transform of the response variable was substituted, to provide
a better fit to the curvilinear distribution of salary statistics. A
consequence of the logarithmic methods is that the predictive
equations become multiplicative instead of additive, as is the
case with linear regressions.
The tables and charts provided in Section 3 of this report

describe broad compensation trends for IEEEs U.S.
members, but more detailed information is usually needed to
assess the situations of individuals. In response to this need,
IEEE-USA has for a number of years produced mathematical
salary models using regression analysis. Use of these models
to benchmark individual compensation is available to IEEEs
U.S. members through the IEEE-USA Salary Calculator, the
chief component of the IEEE-USA Salary Service, Member
Version. Employers and others may also access the models
through use of the Individual Compensation Analyzer in the
IEEE-USA Salary Service, Subscriber Version. For more
information, see http://salary.ieee.org.
The value computed by the regression model is the mean

income from primary sources. Another new feature of the
model, introduced in 1999, is the ability to generate deciles as
well as means, providing information on salary ranges. Range
data help users to put an employment situation in context,
allowing for such factors as differences in the performance of
individuals.
These models allow users to calculate results from the

survey for thousands of possible employment situations. Two
alternative approaches are provided, for estimates with or
without consideration of levels of professional responsibility.
Results include both base salary estimates and income from
primary sources (bonuses, commissions, and net selfemployment income). The approach also supports the
generation of range data like low and high deciles.
4.2 THE 2009 REGRESSION MODELS

Data. 10,761 survey response cases were used in the
statistical models. These cases were obtained after removing
cases with invalid data, removing cases where the primary
occupation was consulting, and filtering for base salaries
above $45,000 and base salaries plus other income under
$280,000, and for cases in which the respondent was
employed full-time in PATC. An analysis of the models on
various subsets of the data showed that using the $45,000
cutoff would provide the best fits to the model after a log
transform of the dependent variables. The charts below show
the distribution of the untransformed dependent variables,
base income, and base + income from other sources, for the
cases in the modeling data.
How these models were generated. Since 1991, IEEEUSAs salary studies have included the use of regression
models to derive estimates of salaries that draw on many
predictive variables at once. The advantage of such an
approach is obvious when one considers the limitations of the
more familiar tabular presentations of data. For example,
earlier sections of this report use tables to provide
information on the effects of factors like areas of competence,
sector, degree level, and other determinants of engineering
compensation.
The tabular methods have the drawback of rapidly
exhausting large data bases. As added variables are
considered, the number of cases available for computing
salary statistics diminishes, and it is not feasible to generate
conventional tables that allow for all of the factors discussed
in the illustration above (and even if such tables could be
generated, it would take a report the size of a telephone book
to reprint them).
4-1
2010 Edition
Exhibit 4-1
Those Working Full-Time in Their PATC:
Base Income and Base + Income from Other Sources
Decile factors. Although the models strictly predict the

mean rather than the median, examination of the observed
and predicted values showed that the median was within 2%
of the mean. Therefore the mean prediction was taken to be
the 50th percentile, and the decile factors were calculated
around this value.
Modeling. The dependent variables were base salary, and

base salary + primary sources (signing, performance, end-of
year and other bonuses, commissions, and net income from
self-employment). The natural logs of these two variables
were used as dependent variables. For the categorical
predictor variables, the reference level was chosen by
determining the level with the median base income within the
category. For example, for the variable Line of Business,
Design and Development Engineering had the median
income, so it became the level to which all other lines of
business were compared.
Decile factors were computed by first taking the

predictions for all cases from a model. These predictions
were transformed to dollars by taking the exponent, and then
ordered by value. The deciles of the resulting data were
computed by taking the value at each succeeding 10% of the
data. The decile factors were obtained by dividing each decile
by the median.
The coefficients of the predictor variables were estimated

using ordinary least squares. Adjustment factors were
obtained by taking the natural exponent of the coefficients. 4
models were created. 2(base salary, base + primary) x 2(with
and without engineering levels).
4.3 ACCURACY OF THE MODELS

Goodness of fit was obtained by looking at the proportion
of variance explained by the model, commonly known as R2,
and this year it ranged from 0.55 to 0.61 across all the
models. R2 is a customary measure of how well the models
fit the data, and is mathematically equivalent to the
proportion of total variance in a dependent variable (in this
case, income from primary sources) that can be attributed to
The models were developed on a random 80% sample of

the modeling data, and validated on the remaining 20%. The
validation showed no significant shifts in most coefficients,
therefore the full data was used to obtain the coefficients and
model fits.
4-2
2010 Edition
model and observed income from the surveys. This measure

is shown in the graphs below. The base model was able to
predict 45% of cases within 10% accuracy and 74% of cases
within 20% accuracy: so if someones actual salary was
$60,000, the base model would have made a prediction of
between $54,000 and $66,000 for the median, in about 45%
of similar cases. The $12,000 range in possible predictions is
again caused by the same two reasons discussed above measurement error, and factors not considered in the model.
The graph shows that models with engineering levels slightly
outperform the models without levels. The models with
income from other sources have higher variability in the data,
and predict slightly worse than the base income models.
changes in the values of one or more predictors (here, the

continuous and indicator or adjustment variables). In informal
terms, R2 measures the ability of the predictors to account for
changes in compensation. For this year's models R2 ranged as
high as 0.61, meaning that as much as 61% of all variance in
the income of IEEEs U.S. members can be associated with
the specific predictors used here.
What accounts for the remaining, unexplained, variance?
In general, remaining differences in pay can be ascribed to
two sources. One is error, including measurement error. The
other consists of all those factors not explicitly considered in
the models. There are many such factors, including such
critical matters as the performance of individual engineers,
the financial health and compensation policies of particular
employers, negotiating skill, and sheer luck, both good and
bad. These are some of the reasons why there are such large
ranges of income between high and low deciles for otherwise
matched individuals in the tabulations in Section 3.
This year, an additional comparison between the

distribution of data in 2009 and 2010 was done, using the
2010 salary models. Using the same base model without
engineering levels on both sets of data, the 2010 data showed
an average of 3.6% decrease in median salary. The base
model with engineering levels showed an average of 4.8%
decrease this year from last year.
A related measure of accuracy was determined by

calculating the difference between predicted income from the
Exhibit 4-2
Regression Model Validation

Percent Deviation from Observed Value
4-3
2010 Edition
5 FRINGE BENEFITS, RETIREMENT, SELFEMPLOYMENT, AND SATISFACTION WITH WORK

5.1 FRINGE BENEFITS OFFERED
Health and Insurance. As has been the case in recent
surveys, virtually all full-time workers are offered extensive
health benefits. More than nine in ten are offered basic
health insurance, major medical, and dental insurance, both
for themselves and their dependents. Ninety percent are
offered prescription/drug coverage, and 88% coverage for
eyeglasses, lenses, and exams (up ten points since 2001).
Exhibits 5-1, 5-2, and 5-3 provide information on the

fringe benefits offered to IEEE's U.S. members who work
full time. Benefits are examined in three broad categories:
pension and retirement benefits; health and insurance
benefits; and miscellaneous benefits.
Pension and Retirement. In the 2001 survey, more than
half of full-time workers (55%) were offered "defined
benefit" (pension) retirement plans, in which an employee is
promised a certain amount if they meet the terms of the plan
(which may include a minimum number of years of service).
In step with the broader societal trend, that proportion has
dropped to 37% as of 2009.
Nine in ten are offered life insurance and/or disability

insurance coverage. Health/insurance benefits less
frequently offered include long-term care insurance (61%),
well baby care (48%), elder care referral services (28%), and
day care service or subsidy (26%).
Employer contributions in many of these areas is down,
dropping as much as 4 percentage points from last year for
life insurance and disability insurance, specifically.
Even while pensions are disappearing, the proportion

offered 401(k), 403(b) or 457 salary reduction plans so
called "defined contribution" plans has remained
essentially flat since 2001, at 88% in the current survey.
Miscellaneous Benefits. In results similar to those seen

in the past, 80% of full-time workers are offered flexible
working hours, and 50% are offered professional association
membership fees. The proportion offered paid attendance at
professional conferences, however, has dropped eleven
points in nine years, to 67%. The proportion offered paid
maternity or paternity leave has jumped from 42% to 57%,
and offers of unpaid leave have stayed about the same (from
74% to 76%).
Profit sharing plans are now offered by 23% of

employers, down from 37% eight years ago. Offers of stock
options have diminished even more, from 49% in 2001 to
29% in 2009. Offerings of employee stock ownership plans
(ESOPs) are similarly reduced, from 40% then to 22% now.
Other retirement benefits affect relatively small proportions
of members working full time.
Exhibit 5-1
Full-Time Workers (Excluding Consultants):
Pension and Retirement Benefits

Employer Offers
and Contributes
Employer Offers
but Does Not
Contribute
Employer
Does Not
Offer
Defined Benefit Pension Plan

Profit Sharing Plan
Stock Options
33%
20%
20%
4%
3%
9%
63%
76%
71%
401(k), 403(b), or 457 Salary Reduction Plan

Other Defined Contribution Pension Plan
SEP (Simplified Employee Pension Plan)
73%
6%
2%
15%
3%
2%
12%
91%
96%
ESOP (Employee Stock Ownership Plan)

TIAA/CREF
IRA (Individual Retirement Account)
13%
8%
4%
9%
3%
7%
78%
90%
89%
4%
3%
3%
6%
92%
91%
Cash Balance Plan

Other Salary Reduction Savings Plan
5-1
2010 Edition
Exhibit 5-2
Health and Insurance Benefits

Employer Offers
and Contributes
Employer Offers
but Does Not
Contribute
Employer
Does Not
Offer
Basic Health Insurance

Basic Health Insurance for Dependents
93%
86%
4%
10%
3%
4%
Major Medical Insurance

Major Medical for Dependents
86%
80%
5%
11%
8%
9%
Dental Insurance
Dental for Dependents
83%
77%
12%
17%
5%
6%
Eyeglasses, Lenses, Exams
70%
18%
13%
Life Insurance Coverage

Disability Insurance
76%
69%
15%
20%
9%
11%
Well Baby Care

Long-Term Care Insurance
Prescription/Drug Coverage
33%
31%
77%
15%
30%
12%
52%
38%
11%
9%
9%
17%
19%
74%
73%
Day Care (Service or Subsidy)

Elder Care Referral Services
Exhibit 5-3
Miscellaneous Benefits
Employer
Offers
Employer
Does Not
Offer
Professional Association Membership Fees

Paid Attendance at Professional Conferences
50%
67%
50%
33%
Paid Maternity or Paternity Leave

Unpaid Personal Leave
57%
76%
43%
24%
Flexible Working Hours

Other Services/Benefits
80%
8%
20%
92%
5-2
2010 Edition
5.2 LEAVE
5.3 OLDER ENGINEERS AND RETIREMENT
Exhibit 5-4 summarizes the numbers of days off that fulltime working respondents were eligible to receive on 1
January 2010; the median figures resemble those in recent
surveys. Exhibit 5-5 shows how the different types of leave
were distributed: Two-thirds (66%) are entitled to at least
20 days of vacation and holidays combined, including 28%
who get 30 or more days.
After remaining remarkably stable throughout most of

the 1980s, the average age of IEEE's U.S. members
increased rapidly during the 1990s (see Exhibits 5-6 and
5-7). The 2001 survey, the first to be conducted solely via
the Internet, saw a drop of nearly six years in respondents'
average age; 2010 results are lower still, at 45.7 years.
Exhibit 5-6
Exhibit 5-4
Mean Age, 1972-2009
Paid Days Off

Lower
Quartile
Vacation days
Holidays
PTO (sick days)
Median
Upper
Quartile
15
10
2
20
10
12
0
7
0
Exhibit 5-5
Distribution of Paid Leave

Vacation
30 or more days
26-29
25
Holidays
PTO
Vacation
+ Holidays
4%
3%
6%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
3%
1%
3%
28%
13%
8%
21-24
20
16-19
5%
15%
3%
<0.5%
<0.5%
<0.5%
3%
5%
2%
12%
5%
5%
15
11-14
10
Less than 10
20%
6%
10%
27%
1%
22%
29%
47%
5%
4%
5%
68%
2%
5%
6%
17%
1972
1975
42.2
41.9
1977
1979
42.6
43.1
1981
1983
1985
42.7
40.6
40.0
1987
1989
40.9
40.6
1991
1993
1995
44.0
45.1
48.0
1997
1999
47.6
52.6
2001
2005
46.9
44.8
2006
2007
45.3
45.6
2008
2009
44.6
45.8
2010
45.7
Exhibit 5-7
Age Distributions, 1991-2010

1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
65+
60-64
50-59
11%
7%
15%
13%
6%
16%
17%
7%
18%
16%
6%
19%
4%
7%
25%
2%
5%
24%
1%
5%
23%
2%
5%
23%
3%
5%
24%
1%
6%
25%
1%
8%
29%
1%
7%
29%
40-49
30-39
<30
23%
29%
16%
24%
28%
14%
24%
27%
8%
24%
26%
9%
29%
29%
6%
36%
29%
4%
38%
26%
6%
35%
26%
8%
35%
24%
10%
34%
23%
10%
32%
21%
9%
30%
22%
10%
5-3
2010 Edition
household income was from their personal primary income.

The proportion of total household income represented by
primary income drops from 96% in the 20-24 age bracket to
73% among those 65-69. Those members still in the work
force at age 70 or above contribute only 62% of total
household income from primary sources, though their
contribution from all sources is still high (85% of household
total).
Exhibit 5-8 lists median incomes from primary sources

for respondents in the work force from 1991 to the present.
These data are broken out by eleven age categories. The
earnings are lower than those reported in Exhibit 3-11,
because these data include all of the engineers in the work
force, not just those working full time in their areas of
competence.
Exhibit 5-9 presents changes in base salaries for full-time
workers (non-consultants). These figures come from an item
in each survey that asks respondents to report their base
salaries for the current year, the previous year, and the year
before that. These data are direct measures of changes over
time in an individual engineers pay, and reflect the effects
of annual salary increases for added experience, as well as
changes in the value of engineering skills. Between 2008
and 2010, the average increase in base salary was about 8%,
with younger respondents reporting higher increases than
those 35 and older.
Seven percent of all non-consultant respondents

indicated they have been offered incentives to retire early.
Most of them were given the offers in years prior to 2009.
Seventy-seven percent indicated they are fully vested in
at least one retirement plan, down from 84% in 2001.
However, 25% are vested in two or more (Exhibit 5-11).
Seventy-four percent of those answering indicated they are
100% vested in the retirement program of their current
primary employer (Exhibit 5-12), while 8% are not vested at
all (0%). These results quite different from last years, with
a 10-point increase in the proportion full vested and a
decrease of 9 points in the proportion not vested at all.
Exhibit 5-10 compares, by age group, median primary

income, income from all sources, and total household
income for 2009. Overall, 81% of their 2009 total
Exhibit 5-8
Median Primary Income by Age, 1991-2010

Survey Year
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2005
2006
20-24
25-29
$33,000
40,050
$35,000
42,600
$35,676
44,000
$38,000
46,700
$55,000
$68,000
$52,000
67,400
$52,300
67,000
30-34
35-39
50,000
57,000
52,711
60,939
56,400
65,000
60,000
69,000
68,000
77,000
80,000
89,650
85,050
99,000
40-44
45-49
64,000
68,000
65,650
72,000
69,200
77,240
75,000
78,000
84,000
86,080
96,000
98,915
50-54
55-59
70,000
71,000
76,000
77,875
80,000
79,900
82,000
85,000
89,300
90,000
60-64
65-69
70,000
69,000
73,200
80,000
82,000
78,000
80,000
56,000
70+
60,000
71,000
75,900
6,000
2007
2008
2009
2010
$54,000
69,630
$58,900
72,300
$60,000
71,500
$61,000
72,850
88,580
100,000
90,000
103,000
92,550
106,190
94,680
110,000
90,890
108,500
106,810
110,000
108,950
113,000
112,220
118,000
119,000
121,000
120,160
125,310
118,500
123,860
97,500
101,000
108,060
109,440
111,280
110,000
117,000
115,000
121,000
118,500
128,460
125,000
125,000
123,470
88,000
67,500
100,000
91,857
106,020
99,000
111,290
104,000
116,940
101,200
117,000
112,000
122,750
118,000
118,000
110,000
12,275
100,000
58,610
50,000
71,000
81,750
85,000
90,000
5-4
2010 Edition
Exhibit 5-9
Percentage and Absolute Change in Median Base Salaries by Age, 1997-2010

1997-1999
(1999 Survey)
1999-2001
(2001 Survey)
2003-2005
(2005 Survey)
2005-2007
(2007 Survey)
2006-2008
(2008 Survey)
%
$
Change Change
%
$
Change Change
20-24
25-29
24% $11,000
30-34
35-39
17%
15%
40-44
45-49
%
$
Change Change
%
$
Change Change
%
$
Change Change
34% $17,250
16% $7,750
19% 11,000
49% $18,920
25% 14,000
9,700
9,898
22% 14,200
17% 12,950
13%
9%
9,650
8,080
12%
9%
9,080
7,000
14% 11,550
12% 10,000
9%
7%
50-54
55-59
11%
6%
8,800
5,000
11%
9%
9,600
8,000
60-64
65-69
6%
10%
5,000
8,500
10%
8%
5%
4,000
70+
2007-2009
(2009 Survey)
2008-2010
(2010 Survey)
%
$
Change Change
%
$
Change Change
26% $12,320
24% 14,000
16% $8,820
18% 11,000
13% $7,250
15%
9,650
20% 15,000
14% 12,600
20% 15,250
15% 13,000
16% 13,000
10% 10,000
13% 10,000
9%
8,500
9,000
7,000
12% 11,700
12% 12,000
12% 12,000
13% 13,400
10% 10,710
9% 10,000
6%
8%
5,550
8,000
10% 10,390
11% 11,000
12% 12,000
10% 10,570
6%
7%
9,134
6,613
10%
6%
9,630
5,800
11% 12,000
9%
8,730
13% 13,780
12% 13,000
14% 12,000
8%
10,000
8%
6%
8,320
7,200
7,000
8,000
4%
4%
5,000
5,000
9%
4%
10,000
5,320
4%
3%
5,000
3,500
10% 10,000
Exhibit 5-10
Exhibit 5-11
2009 Median Primary Income, Income from All

Sources, and Total Household Income by Age
Number of Retirement Plans in which Fully Vested
Primary
Income
Total
Income from
All Sources
111,000
115,710
136,800
20 - 24
25 - 29
61,000
72,850
63,000
74,850
63,460
84,000
30 - 34
35 - 39
90,890
108,500
93,500
110,000
108,750
130,000
40 - 44
45 - 49
118,500
123,860
121,490
128,000
140,000
150,000
50 - 54
55 - 59
125,000
123,470
129,000
127,500
150,000
150,680
60 - 64
65 - 69
118,000
110,000
126,000
128,000
150,000
150,000
90,000
122,630
145,090
70+
4 or more
3
2
1
None
Total
Household
Income
1%
5%
19%
50%
23%
Exhibit 5-12
Percent Vested, Current Employer's Retirement

Program
NOTE: Primary Income and Income from All Sources earned by

individual respondent; Total Household Income includes other
breadwinners (if any). Results suppressed where n<25.
100%
76%-99%
51%-75%
74%
2%
3%
26%-50%
1%-25%
0%
3%
9%
8%
Number of cases: 9,618 (4,569 unknown/not applicable)
5-5
2010 Edition
5.4 SELF-EMPLOYMENT
the proportion in the work force reported earning some gross
income from self-employment in the prior year would drop
from 15% to 9%.
Considering the new basing for the results this year

which excludes those earning half or more of their personal
income from fee-based consulting in 2009, its logical that
5.5 SATISFACTION WITH WORK

dimension, favorable responses continue to outweigh
unfavorable responses. Members are most satisfied with the
technical challenges of their jobs (+.87) and overall (+.84).
They are least satisfied with advancement opportunities
(+.22): about one quarter rate themselves either dissatisfied
or very dissatisfied in this area. A slightly smaller proportion
(about one in five) are dissatisfied with their current
compensation. The trend on this measure was modestly
favorable from 2005 up to last year, with another dip (though
not as bad as 2005) this year.
A series of questions asked since 1997 measure members'

general sense of satisfaction with their work, using a common
satisfaction scale (very satisfied / satisfied / neutral /
dissatisfied / very dissatisfied). By scoring these scale points
from +2 to -2, the mean rating provides a useful shorthand for
satisfaction levels.
Exhibit 5-13 shows that, after peaking in the 2001 survey,
satisfaction levels took a big step backwards in 2005, and
have remained roughly at those levels since. Still, on every
Exhibit 5-13
Satisfaction with Aspects of Work, 1999-2010

2010 Ratings
Very
Satisfied Satisfied Neutral
Mean Satisfaction Ratings
Overall satisfaction with your job

Satisfaction with ...
The technical challenges
of your job
Employer's support for
your technical vitality
Your current compensation
Advancement opportunities
1999
2001
2005
2007
2008
2009
2010
+2
+1
.98
1.04
.87
.86
.84
.88
.84
25%
50%
.94
1.03
.93
.92
.91
.92
.87
30%
.47
.60
.36
.63
.65
.50
.43
.35
.24
.46
.42
.27
.45
.43
.27
.43
.49
.26
.40
.41
.22
19%
14%
13%
DisVery Dissatisfied satisfied

-1
-2
14%
8%
3%
43%
17%
8%
3%
35%
39%
31%
23%
25%
28%
14%
15%
18%
9%
6%
9%
NOTE: Satisfaction with current compensation not asked in 1997.
5-6
2010 Edition
6 IEEE-USA SALARY TIME SERIES DATA, 1994-2009

6.1 CONSTANT DOLLAR DATA: ADJUSTING FOR INFLATION
As seen previously, members employed full time in their
PATC saw a slight decrease in median primary income from
2008 to 2009: from $116,000 to $113,500, or -2.1%.
However, a more meaningful measure of economic progress
looks at changes in real (inflation-adjusted) dollars, which
these surveys have done (using median income) since 1994.
Using the Consumer Price Index for All Urban

Consumers as the deflator, we see that real primary income
rose steadily from $97,430 in 1994 to $120,920 in 2002.
2003 saw a big step backwards, to $116,660. Slippage
continues through to this survey, with 2009 real primary
income losing $440 in inflation-adjusted dollars.
Exhibit 6-1
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC (Current Data Excludes Consultants):
Median Primary Income in Constant 2009 Dollars, 1994-2009

$120,000

$110,000
$100,000

$90,000
$80,000
$70,000
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Survey
Conducted
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
Surveyed
Period
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
Nominal
Income
Real
Income
67,000
97,430
72,000
98,920
82,000
108,340
93,100
116,240
101,000
99,500
103,000
104,700
108,000
110,610
116,000
113,500
120,920
116,660
117,100
115,740
114,540
114,420
113,940
113,500
NOTE: Real Income expressed in current dollars, based on an average June-July 2009 CPI of 215.5 (Consumer Price Index, All Urban Consumers;
1982-1984 = 100).
6-1
2010 Edition
median income outpaced inflation handily in the 1990s and

early 2000s, but that 2003 begins a stretch where inflation
appears to have the upper hand, a trend not reversed
significantly with 2009 data.
Exhibit 6-2 presents related data. The bars show periodto-period changes in the CPI; the line shows changes in
median nominal primary income reported by engineers
working full time in their PATC. Combined, these show that
Exhibit 6-2
Those Working Full Time in Their PATC (Current Data Excludes Consultants):
Changes in Median Nominal Primary Income and the CPI, 1996-2009

20.0%
% change:
income
CPI
15.0%
10.0%

5.0%

0.0%
-5.0%
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Survey
Conducted
Surveyed
Period
CPI
1995
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
148.2
152.5
156.9
160.4
163.1
166.5
172.6
177.8
180.0
183.8
189.6
195.0
203.2
208.3
219.4
215.5
1997
1999
2001
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
% Change
Nominal Income
% Change
CPI
% Change
Real Income
+7.5%
+5.8%
+1.5%
+13.9%
+4.0%
+9.5%
+13.5%
+5.8%
+7.3%
+8.5%
-1.5%
+3.5%
+1.7%
+3.2%
+2.4%
+4.9%
-2.2%
+4.3%
+2.1%
+3.1%
+2.8%
+4.2%
+2.5%
+5.3%
-1.8%
+4.0%
-3.5%
+0.4%
-1.2%
-1.0%
-0.1%
-0.4%
-0.4%
NOTE: Percentage change calculated from measure to measure, not year to year in years with no survey. CPI for year calculated as average for
June-July (Consumer Price Index, All Urban Consumers; 1982-1984 = 100).
6-2
2010 Edition
6.2 TRENDS IN THE MEMBERSHIP PROFILE

one third, well below the 50% levels seen in the 1970s and
1980s. The proportion holding Master's or Doctoral degrees
has plateaued at just under two-thirds.
Selected characteristics of IEEE's U.S. members are

compared for all surveys conducted since 1972 in Exhibit 63. As previously noted, mean years of experience, mean
years with current employer, and mean age are down
somewhat compared with data from 2001, which probably
exerts a dampening effect on compensation measures. The
involuntary unemployment percentage is twice that of last
year, reflecting the down economy. The proportion holding
a Bachelor's as their highest degree has stabilized at around
After modest gains in the 1970s and 1980s, the

proportion of female EEs remains at 6-7%. The profession
continues to slowly grow more diverse racially/ethnically,
however 79% of 2010 respondents are non-Hispanic
Whites, sixteen points lower than in the inaugural 1972
survey.
Exhibit 6-3
All Respondents (Current Data Excludes Consultants):
Comparisons of Selected Measures, 1972-2010

Mean
Age
Mean Years
with Current
Employer
Highest Degree:
Master's or
Bachelor's
PhD
Survey
Conducted
Mean Years
of Experience
Unemployed
Involuntarily
1972
1975
17.6
17.8
1.7%
42.2
41.9
6.5
10.6
50%
50%
1977
1979
17.3
17.7
0.8%
0.4%
42.6
43.1
10.9
11.9
1981
1983
1985
17.7
17.0
15.9
0.5%
0.1%
0.4%
42.7
40.6
40.0
1987
1989
16.1
15.4
0.7%
0.9%
1991
1993
1995
18.4
19.0
21.3
1997
1999
Male
White
99%
99%
95%
96%
50%
51%
99%
99%
95%
94%
11.2
9.9
9.5
51%
48%
50%
98%
96%
94%
93%
40.9
40.6
9.9
9.3
45%
46%
50%
96%
95%
92%
90%
1.5%
2.7%
2.3%
44.0
45.1
48.0
9.9
10.4
11.2
48%
45%
37%
46%
51%
54%
95%
95%
96%
90%
89%
90%
20.9
24.9
1.2%
1.3%
47.6
52.6
10.4
11.9
40%
40%
55%
58%
94%
97%
87%
90%
2001
2003
2004
2005
21.2
19.4
0.6%
4.0%
3.4%
2.1%
46.9
44.8
14.2
9.2
34%
33%
65%
66%
95%
95%
87%
83%
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
19.7
20.0
19.1
20.2
20.2
1.7%
1.2%
1.3%
1.7%
3.8%
45.3
45.6
44.6
45.8
46.1
9.0
9.1
8.7
9.5
9.5
34%
35%
36%
36%
36%
65%
65%
64%
62%
62%
95%
94%
94%
94%
93%
82%
83%
82%
83%
79%
NOTE: - indicates item not reported.
6-3
2010 Edition
7 METHODOLOGICAL NOTES
7.1 SAMPLING AND RESPONSE
Invitations to the Web-based 2010 Salary & Fringe
Benefits Survey were emailed in June 2010 to 121,669 IEEE
U.S. members. To create the sample, all records of highergrade members Associate Members, Members, Senior
Members, and Fellows who consent to receive email
communications from IEEE were drawn from the member
database. As noted in Exhibit 1-1, 12.1% of those invited
responded, a total of 14,724 usable returns.
responding sample is a reasonably close match with the

invited sample (membership as a whole); Associate
Members are slightly under-represented, while Senior
Members are slightly over-represented. IEEE's six Regions
are more or less proportionately represented.
Focusing on Exhibit 7-2, survey results tend (as in prior
surveys) to over-represent younger members, while underrepresenting older members not surprising, given the
proportion of that group that is at or near retirement and thus
has little interest in current compensation data. Those for
whom no age data is on file with IEEE were quite
unresponsive.
Exhibit 7-1 compares the responding sample with the

invited sample with respect to the joint distribution of
Membership Grade and Region (as recorded in IEEE
Member Data). In terms of these two variables, the
Exhibit 7-1
All Invited Higher-Grade IEEE U.S. Members and All Survey Respondents:
IEEE Region by Membership Grade (IEEE Member Data)

Associate Member
Member
Senior Member
Members
Survey
Cases
Members
Survey
Cases
Survey
Members Cases
1 Northeast
2 East
3 Southeast
1.0%
0.9%
0.7%
0.6%
0.5%
0.5%
13.9%
12.8%
11.1%
13.2%
12.1%
11.0%
1.7%
1.6%
1.6%
4 Central
5 Southwest
6 West
0.6%
0.7%
1.4%
0.4%
0.5%
1.1%
9.2%
11.9%
23.5%
10.5%
12.6%
22.8%
TOTAL
5.2%
3.6%
82.4%
82.1%
Fellow
TOTAL
Members
Survey
Cases
Members
Survey
Cases
2.0%
1.9%
2.1%
0.4%
0.3%
0.2%
0.4%
0.2%
0.2%
17.0%
15.6%
13.7%
16.1%
14.8%
13.8%
1.0%
1.7%
2.9%
1.5%
2.0%
3.4%
0.2%
0.2%
0.5%
0.2%
0.1%
0.4%
11.0%
14.5%
28.3%
12.5%
15.1%
27.7%
10.6%
12.8%
1.7%
1.5%
100.0%
100.0%
NOTE: Based only on invited U.S. higher-grade members; Student, Life, and Affiliate grades not invited.
Exhibit 7-2
All Invited Higher-Grade IEEE U.S. Members and All Survey
Respondents:
Age (IEEE Member Data)

Members
20-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
60+
blank
4.1%
13.4%
26.3%
30.2%
16.9%
9.1%
Survey
Cases
9.2%
19.5%
28.7%
29.5%
12.8%
0.3%
NOTE: Based only on invited U.S. higher-grade members; Student,

Life, and Affiliate grades not invited.
7-1
2010 Edition
The descriptive statistics reported include percentages,

measures of central tendency such as means and medians,
and measures of dispersion such as ranges and percentiles.
Percentages in most tabulations are rounded to the ones
place, in recognition of the larger-magnitude effects of
sampling error. Means arithmetic averages appear
only occasionally, as they are not a preferred measure for
analysis of income; they tend to be biased high because of
the undue influence of very large values at the top of a
distribution.
Statistical precision. With 14,187 usable non-consultant

cases in the 2010 data set, full sample estimates of
proportions are subject to a maximum sampling error of 0.8
of a percentage point at the 95% confidence level. Most of
the profile information is based on the 13,755 non-consultant
respondents "in the work force" that is, those currently
employed or involuntarily unemployed. Proportions for this
subset are also subject to a margin of error of 0.8. (305
responses with extreme high or low values for the key
measure of total personal income were omitted from the data
set.)
Medians and other percentiles are points that divide a

ranked distribution into equal-sized groups. The median
divides a distribution in half; quartiles divide it into quarters;
deciles divide it into tenths; percentiles divide it into
hundredths. The median is also the second quartile, the fifth
decile, and the 50th percentile. Interpolated values are used
if necessary; for example, if the number of cases in a
distribution is even, the median is the value half-way
between the two cases in the middle. People tend to report
values such as income in round numbers, which is why
many percentiles in this report are multiples of $1,000.
Compensation results (for the 11,766 non-consultant

respondents working full time in their Primary Areas of
Technical Competence) are reported in terms of percentiles,
rather than proportions or means. Sampling error is not
readily quantified for such statistics calculated from nonnormal distributions.
As in any survey, results are somewhat less precise when
the database is carved up into subgroups such as the
combinations of specialties and experience reported in
Section 3. Results based on rather small numbers of cases
may still be of interest to IEEE's U.S. members, and are
provided in this report along with suitable cautions for care
in their use. The minimal reportable group is fixed at 25
cases, a threshold selected as a common and reasonable
lower limit for large-sample statistical procedures.
7-2
2010 Edition
APPENDIX
FACSIMILE OF WEB QUESTIONNAIRE
2010 COMPENSATION SURVEY

Thank you for choosing to participate in the 2010 IEEE-USA Salary Survey!
The survey will take a few minutes to complete and you may wish to have available a copy of your 2009 federal tax return for the
questions about specific income amounts. If you need to leave the survey before completing it, you may return to the form by
clicking on the link in the email invitation you received to participate in the survey.
Please be assured that your personal information is confidential and secure. Your data is encrypted using 128-bit SSL (secure
socket layer) protection. None of your individual data or contact information will be shared with any third party, nor used by IEEEUSA except in connection with its Salary Survey services. For more information about Readex Researchs or IEEEs privacy
policies, please see the following web sites:
http://www.readexresearch.com/privacy-policy.cfm
http://www.ieee.org/security_privacy.html
If you have any questions about or problems with the survey, please contact Readex Research at ieeehelp@readexresearch.com.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[Q1-Q14 = ALL RESPONDENTS; Q15-Q34A = CONSULTANTS ONLY; Q35-END = NON-CONSULTANTS ONLY]
1.
How many years of professional and/or managerial experience did you have in electrical, electronics, and computer
engineering or related technical fields as of January 1, 2010? Do not include undergraduate or graduate school as
years of experience. (Please round to the nearest whole number; enter 0 if you have six months or less experience.)
_______ years
2.
Check the one response that best describes the sector of your primary employer as of January 1, 2010, or, if you were
not then employed (or self-employed), on the last date that you are/were employed. If you worked primarily as a
consultant, please indicate the option that best describes your primary client(s).

3.

Utilities
Non-Profit Institution: Except Education
Other sector (please specify):____________
Check the one response that best describes the line of business of your primary employer as of January 1, 2010, or, if
you were not then employed (or self-employed), on the last date that you are/were employed. If you worked primarily
as a consultant, please indicate the option that best describes your primary client(s).

Aerospace
Automotive
Communications
Computers
Consulting
Education
Medical
Metals
Petroleum/Chemical
Transportation
Utilities
Other (please specify):____________
4
4.
What was your IEEE Membership Grade as of January 1, 2010 (or as of the date you joined, if you joined after January
1, 2010)? (Note: "Life" is not a Membership Grade.)

5.
As of January 1, 2010, what degrees did you hold? (Please select all that apply.)

6.
Fellow
Senior Member
Member
Associate Member
Student Member
Graduate Student Member
No Degree
Two-year Degree
BA Degree
BET or BSET Degree
BSCS Degree
BSEE or BSCE Degree
Other Bachelors Degree
MSEE or MSCE Degree
Other Masters Degree
MBA Degree
Law Degree
PhD or equivalent
Do you have a Professional Engineers (PE) license?

Yes
No
7.
What is your Gender?

Male
Female
8.
As of January 1, 2010, what was your age?

__________ years old
9.
What is your ethnicity?

White (not Hispanic origin)

African American (not Hispanic origin)
Hispanic
Asian or Pacific Islander
American Indian or Alaskan Native
Other ethnicity (please specify):____________
10. As of January 1, 2010 please indicate your citizenship status.

Citizen of the USA, by birth

Citizen, by naturalization
Permanent resident alien
Visa Holder, H-1
Visa Holder, other, (please specify):____________
11. Please enter the 5-digit zip code for your work location or your primary employment (or self-employment) in calendar
year 2009. If no such code applies, enter the zip code for your primary 2009 residence.
______________
12. Considering the full calendar year 2009, what was your pre-tax income from the following sources, before all
deductions such as health insurance, savings, or other pre-tax programs? (Please enter only whole numbers no dollar
signs, commas, percent signs, periods, or dashes).
NOTE: The sum should equal your actual earned income from all sources in 2009. You must provide an entry for all possible
components of pay; if one or more of them do not apply in your case, enter 0 in each such case.
$____________
$____________
$____________
$____________
$____________
$____________
$____________
$____________
$____________
$____________
$____________
$____________
$____________
Base salary
Overtime pay, if any
Commission
Signing bonus
Performance bonus
End-of-year bonus
Other bonus
Profit sharing
Any net income from self employment
Supplemental earnings (consulting, teaching, other part-time job, etc.)
Retirement/pension plan benefits (exclude Social Security)
Social Security
Other Income (Do not report stock options here)
$____________ TOTAL
a. What was the type of "Other Bonus" you received?
b. What was the type of "Other Income" you received?
13. Which option best describes your employment status on January 1, 2010? If your employment has a tax status other
than W-2 (e.g., 1099, S corp.), please select one of the self-employed options.

Employed full time

Employed part time
Retired and employed full time
Retired and employed part time
Self-employed full time
Self-employed part time
Full-time student
14. Did half or more of your personal earned income in calendar year 2009 come from fee-based consulting?
Yes
No
15. What percentage of your time consulting do you bill in each of these ways? (Please fill in each blank with a whole
number. The total should add to 100%.)
__________ % hourly
__________ % daily
__________ % fixed price
=100%
16. During 2009, what was your average number of billable hours per week as a consultant? (Please fill in a number below;
0 if none)
__________ billable hours/week
17. Please select all of the technical specialties listed below in which you offer consulting services.

Acoustics
Aerospace
Analog Design
Antenna
Application Software
ASIC
Automation
Broadcast, Radio and Television
Business Application & Management
Business Planning
C++
CAD
Circuits and Printed Circuit Design
Client Server
Communications
Computers
Databases and Data Management
Diagnostic Software
Digital Design
DSP
Electrical Power Generation, Transmissions & Distributions
Electrical Power Quality, Reliability and Safety
Electrical Power Systems
Electrical Power, Transformers, Switchgear and Controls
Electro-Mechanical
Electromagnetics, including EMI, EMC and EMP
Electronic Components
Embedded Systems, Hardware, Software and Controls
Expert Witness
Failure Analysis
Fiber Optics
Financial
Forensic Engineer
FPGA
GPS
Hardware, General
Human Factors
IC Design
Illumination/Lighting
Instrumentation and Controls
LAN/WAN
Languages
Large Systems
Lasers
Linux
Management
Manufacturing
Marketing
Materials and Material Handling
Mechanical
Medical
Microprocessors
Microwave
Military
Motors
MS Windows
Networks - LAN/WAN - Other
New Product Development
Object Oriented
Oceanic
Optics
Packaging
Peripherals
Power Supply Design
Process Controls
Project Management
Quality and ISO-Related
Radar
Reliability and Availability
RF
Semiconductor Fab
Servo/Control Systems
Signal Conditioning
Simulation and Modeling
Software Development, Application &
Management
Systems Engineering
Technical Writing
Telecom and Telephone
Telemetry
Test Engineering, Equipment or Services
Testability
Thermodynamics
Training
Troubleshooting
UNIX
Vehicular
Wireless Networks, Systems, Instrumentation
World Wide Web
18. Please specify below any additional technical specialties that did not appear in the above list but in which you offer
consulting services:
19. Please indicate what percentage of your consulting hours were performed for each of the categories below during
2009. (Please fill in each blank with a whole number; 0 if none. The total should add to 100%.)
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
An independent
With partners
Incorporated
As a contract employee (job shopping)
As an employee of another company (not your own)
=100%
20. Is your office in your home?
Yes
No
21. Do you carry professional liability (errors & omissions) insurance?
Yes
No
22. How do you get your consulting business? Estimate the percentage of total dollars earned from each of the following.
(Please fill in each blank with a whole number; 0 if none. The total should add to 100%.)
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
Repeat business from your clients

Client contacts made by networking
Referrals from clients and friends
Contacts through IEEE directories/databases
Print advertising
Cold calls
A marketing or referral service with a fee
Other
=100%
23. How many years of consulting experience have you had? (Please round to the nearest whole number; enter 0 if you have
six months or less experience.)
_______ years
24. What is your current hourly rate for consulting? Please convert other rates to an equivalent hourly rate. If your rate
varies, select the average or most common rate. (Please enter whole numbers without a dollar sign or a comma.)
$__________ per hour
25. What is the gross income that you received in 2009 from consulting? (Please enter whole numbers without a dollar sign
or a comma.)
$___________
26. Estimate the percentage of your consulting hours that you do in the following fields. (Please fill in each blank with a
whole number; 0 if none. The total should add to 100%.)
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
__________ %
Hardware
Software
Management
Marketing
Manufacturing
ICs and devices
RF
Telecom
IT
Computers
System Engineering
Power
Quality and Reliability
Control Systems
Expert Witness & Forensics
Other
=100%
27. Are you having any trouble getting paid?
Yes
No
a. Was the work you had trouble getting paid for performed under contract?
Yes
No
b. Please indicate your comments here regarding these difficulties.
28. Where are the largest number of your clients located?

In the United States or Canada
Outside the United States or Canada
a. In what State/Province are the largest number of your clients located?
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
District of Columbia
Florida
Georgia
Hawaii
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming
Alberta
British Columbia
Manitoba
New Brunswick
Newfoundland and Labrador
Nova Scotia
Northwest Territories
Nunavut
Ontario
Prince Edward Island
Qubec
Saskatchewan
Yukon
b. In what country are the largest number of your clients located?

Afghanistan
Albania
Algeria
Andorra
Angola
Antigua & Deps
Argentina
Armenia
Australia
Austria
Azerbaijan
Bahamas
Bahrain
Bangladesh
Barbados
Belarus
Belgium
Belize
Benin
Bhutan
Bolivia
Bosnia Herzegovina
Botswana
Brazil
Brunei
Bulgaria
Burkina
Burundi
Cambodia
Cameroon
Cape Verde
Central African Rep
Chad
Chile
China
Colombia
Comoros
Congo
Congo {Democratic Rep}
Costa Rica
Croatia
Cuba
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Denmark
Djibouti
Dominica
Dominican Republic
East Timor
Ecuador
Egypt
El Salvador
Equatorial Guinea
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Fiji
Finland
France
Gabon
Gambia
Georgia
Germany
Ghana
Greece
Grenada
Guatemala
Guinea
Guinea-Bissau
Guyana
Haiti
Honduras
Hungary
Iceland
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Ireland {Republic}
Israel
Italy
Ivory Coast
Jamaica
Japan
Jordan
Kazakhstan
Kenya
Kiribati
Korea North
Korea South
Kosovo
Kuwait
Kyrgyzstan
Laos
Latvia
Lebanon
Lesotho
Liberia
Libya
Liechtenstein
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Macedonia
Madagascar
Malawi
Malaysia
Maldives
Mali
Malta
Marshall Islands
Mauritania
Mauritius
Mexico
Micronesia
Moldova
Monaco
Mongolia
Montenegro
Morocco
Mozambique
Myanmar, {Burma}
Namibia
Nauru
Nepal
Netherlands
New Zealand
Nicaragua
Niger
Nigeria
Norway
Oman
Pakistan
Palau
Panama
Papua New Guinea
Paraguay
Peru
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Qatar
Romania
Russian Federation
Rwanda
St Kitts & Nevis
St Lucia
Saint Vincent & the Grenadines
Samoa
San Marino
Sao Tome & Principe
Saudi Arabia
Senegal
Serbia
Seychelles
Sierra Leone
Singapore
Slovakia
Slovenia
Solomon Islands
Somalia
South Africa
Spain
Sri Lanka
Sudan
Suriname
Swaziland
Sweden
Switzerland
Syria
Taiwan
Tajikistan
Tanzania
Thailand
Togo
Tonga
Trinidad & Tobago
Tunisia
Turkey
Turkmenistan
Tuvalu
Uganda
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
Uruguay
Uzbekistan
Vanuatu
Vatican City
Venezuela
Vietnam
Yemen
Zambia
Zimbabwe
Other
29. How has your consulting business been affected by the trend to move engineering offshore?
10
30. How has your consulting business been affected by the downturn in the economy?
31. What action do you recommend that the IEEE Consultants Network take in response to your answers to the two
questions immediately preceding?
32. IEEE-USA has an online Consultants Database (see http://www.ieeeusa.org/consultants) to allow member consultants to
advertise their services to prospective clients. What is your level of interest in the Database?

I am currently a member
I am a former member
I have been aware of the Database but choose not to join
I have been aware of the Database and may have an interest in joining
I have not been aware of the Database and do not have an interest in joining
I have not been aware of the Database and may have an interest in joining
33. IEEE-USA is considering establishing relationships with other consultants databases whereby IEEE members joining or
renewing membership in the IEEE-USA Consultants Database would be offered the opportunity to cross-post their
profiles on other Web sites at no extra charge. If you were considering joining or renewing your membership in the
IEEE-USA Consultants Database, how would such opportunities affect your decision?
I would be more likely to join or renew
I would be less likely to join or renew
Neither / unsure
34. If you would like a coupon for a free 2010 Survey Report emailed to you, please provide your email address here. (The
Survey Report will be published as an IEEE-USA ebook and offered for sale to non-respondents during the last quarter
of 2010.)
a. Please re-enter your e-mail address.
A-1
2010 Edition
35. Using the definitions of levels of professional engineering responsibility provided, please choose the one level that best
describes your responsibility as of January 1, 2010, or, if you were not then employed, as of the date that you were last
previously employed.
These definitions are based on U.S. Department of Labor criteria and have been used for many years by IEEE-USA to
support more precise information on the compensation of engineers. Note that a tenth and final level applies if you are
working but are not employed as an engineer. If you are currently unemployed, a full-time student, or completely retired
and no longer working, use the level that applied to your most recent job.
Click here to view definitions

Engineer Level 1 (equivalent to GS-5)

Engineer Level 2 (equivalent to GS-7)
Engineer Level 3 (equivalent to GS-9 or Academic Instructor)
Engineer Level 4 (equivalent to GS-11 or Assistant Professor)
Engineer Level 5 (equivalent to GS-12 or Associate Professor)
Engineer Level 6 (equivalent to GS-13 or Full Professor)
Engineer Level 7 (equivalent to GS-14 or Distinguished Professor or Academic Department Head)
Engineer Level 8 (equivalent to GS-15 or Academic Department Head or Dean)
Engineer Level 9 (greater than GS-15 or Academic Dean or higher)
Other/Not Employed as Engineer
Unknown
36. Listed below are ten broad areas of technical competence. Please select the one response that best describes your
primary area of technical competence.
Circuits and Devices
(includes Circuits and Systems; Components, Packaging and Manufacturing Technology; Electronic Devices; Lasers and Electro-Optics; Solid-State Circuits;
Other or combinations within this area)
Communications Technology
(includes Broadcast Technology; Communications; Consumer Electronics; Vehicular Technology; Other or combinations within this area)
Computers
(includes Hardware; Non-Internet Software Development; Non-Internet Systems Analysis/Integration; Non-Internet Software Applications Including Database
Admin.; Internet/Web Development/Applications; Other or combinations within this area)
Electromagnetics and Radiation

(includes Antennas and Propagation; Electromagnetic Compatibility; Magnetics; Microwave Theory and Techniques; Nuclear and Plasma Sciences; Other or
combinations within this area)
Energy and Power Engineering

(includes Power Engineering; Other or combinations within this area)
Engineering and Human Environment

(includes Education; Engineering Management; Professional Communication; Reliability; Social Implications of Technology; Other or combinations within this
area)
Industrial Applications
(includes Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation; Industry Applications; Instrumentation and Measurement; Power Electronics; Other or combinations within this area)
Signals and Applications

(includes Aerospace and Electronic Systems; Geoscience and Remote Sensing; Oceanic Engineering; Signal Processing; Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and
Frequency Control; Other or combinations within this area)
Systems and Control

(includes Control Systems; Engineering in Medicine and Biology; Industrial Electronics; Information Theory; Robotics and Automation; Systems, Man and
Cybernetics; Other or combinations within this area)
Other (please specify):___________________________

a. Within the area of Circuits and Devices, please check the one response that best describes your primary area of
technical competence.


Components, Packaging and Manufacturing Technology
Electronic Devices
Other Circuits and Devices specialties or combinations of the above (please specify):____________
A-2
2010 Edition
b. Within the area of Communications Technology, please check the one response that best describes your primary area
of technical competence.

Communications
Other Communications Technology specialties or combinations of the above (please specify):____________
c. Within the area of Computers, please check the one response that best describes your primary area of technical
competence.

Hardware
Non-Internet Software Applications Including Database Admin.
Other Computer specialties or combinations of the above (please specify):____________
d. Within the area of Electromagnetics and Radiation, please check the one response that best describes your primary
area of technical competence.


Magnetics
Other Electromagnetics and Radiation specialties or combinations of the above (please specify):____________
e. Within the area of Engineering and Human Environment, please check the one response that best describes your
primary area of technical competence.

Education
Reliability
Other Engineering and Human Environment specialties or combinations of the above (please
specify):____________
f. Within the area of Industrial Applications, please check the one response that best describes your primary area of

Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation

Power Electronics
Other Industrial Applications specialties or combinations of the above (please specify):____________
g. Within the area of Signals and Applications, please check the one response that best describes your primary area of


Oceanic Engineering
Signal Processing
Other Signals and Applications specialties or combinations of the above (please specify):____________
A-3
2010 Edition
h. Within the area of Systems and Control, please check the one response that best describes your primary area of

Control Systems
Information Theory
Other Systems and Control specialties or combinations of the above (please specify):____________
37. As of January 1, 2010, were you employed (or self-employed) in your primary area of technical competence, as indicated
in the previous question?
Yes
No
38. Check the one response that best describes your primary job function as of January 1, 2010 or, if you were not then
employed (or self-employed), on the last date that you are/were employed.

Basic research
Consulting
Engineering support
Management, general
Marketing, sales
Systems engineering
Other job function (please specify):____________
39. During calendar year 2009, were you employed at any time on a contract (job-shop engineering) basis?
Yes
No
40. How many different employers have you worked for full time in the electrical, electronics, computer engineering or
related technical fields in the last ten years? (Please fill in the number of employers, 0 if none. Include managerial positions
and your present full-time employer. If self-employed, count that. Treat company name changes, transfers, mergers, etc. as one
employer.)
____________ employers in past 10 years
A-4
2010 Edition
41. Did you have any gross income in 2009 from self employment?
Yes
No
42. How many years had you worked for your present employer as of January 1, 2010, or, if you were not then employed, on
the last date that you are/were employed? (Round to the nearest whole number; enter 0 if you have six months or less
experience.)
_______ years
43. What is the approximate number of employees that your employer has in the USA?

1-10 Employees
11-50 Employees
51-500 Employees
501-10,000 Employees
More than 10,000 Employees
Dont know
Does not apply
44. In calendar year 2009, what was the average number of hours you worked per week? (If you did not work this year, enter
0.)
_______ hours/week
45. In your primary position, how many technical employees did you directly or indirectly supervise as of January 1, 2010?
(If none, enter 0.)
_______ technical employees supervised
46. In your primary position, how many non-technical employees did you directly or indirectly supervise as of January 1,
2010? (If none, enter 0.)
_______ non-technical employees supervised
47. Were you awarded stock options by an employer in 2009?
Yes
No
a. Please enter your best estimate of the present value of those options. Count only the value of options awarded in 2009.
(Enter dollar amount rounded to the nearest whole number. Do not enter dollar sign or a comma.)
$_____________ in stock options
48. What was your pre-tax annual base salary rate with your primary employer as of January 1 of each of these years? If
you were self-employed, enter your best estimate of a base salary equivalent.
(Enter dollar amount rounded to the nearest whole number -- do not enter commas. Exclude commissions, bonuses, overtime
compensation, etc.; include base income before all deductions for health insurance, savings, or other pretax programs. If not
applicable because you were not working, enter zero).
January 1, 2010 base salary $
______________________________
______________________________
______________________________
A-5
2010 Edition
49. What was the total income of your household from all sources in 2009? (Enter dollar amount rounded to the nearest whole
number. Do not enter dollar sign or comma.)
$_______________
50. In your primary employment as of January 1, 2010, how many days off (if any) are you annually entitled to in each
category below?
(Enter the number of days for each category you are entitled to, even if you dont expect to use them all. If not entitled to any
days in a category, enter 0. If unsure how many days youre entitled to, enter "999". Be sure not to double-count days - total paid
days off should not exceed 52 weeks x 5 days = 260 days.)
#_________
#_________
#_________
#_________
#_________
Paid vacation days

Paid holidays
PTO (Paid Time Off, regardless of how used - often replaces sick/holiday/vacation days)
Paid maternity or paternity leave
Other paid leave
#_________ TOTAL
51. Including your current and all prior companies, in how many company retirement plans are you fully vested? (Enter 0 if
none.)
_______ retirement plans in which fully vested
52. As of January 1, 2010, approximately what percentage were you vested in the retirement program of your current
primary employer? (Indicate percentage from 0 to 100 or select "Unknown" or "Not applicable.")
_______ % vested
Unknown
Not Applicable
53. Have you ever been offered incentives to retire before you plan (or planned) to retire? (Check all that apply.)
Yes, in 2009
Yes, before 2009
No
54. Was an academic (degree-granting) institution your primary employer as of January 1, 2010?
Yes
No
a. On January 1, 2010, which type of contract covered your academic employment?
Other academic contract (please specify):___________________________
b. What is the academic rank for this position?

Full Professor
Associate Professor
Assistant Professor
Visiting/Adjunct Professor/Instructor/Lecturer
No Institutional Ranks
Non-Teaching Research Appointment
Other Non-Faculty Position
Other Faculty Position, (please specify):___________________________
A-6
2010 Edition
c. What is the tenure status for this position?

Tenured
On Tenure Track
Not on Tenure Track
Tenure Not Applicable
d. What type of institution applies to this position? (Please select the applicable response that grants the highest degree.)

Public associate degree-granting school

Private associate degree-granting school
Public bachelor degree-granting school
Private bachelor degree-granting school
Public masters degree-granting school
Private masters degree-granting school
Public PhD or comparable degree-granting school
Private PhD or comparable degree-granting school
Other type of institution, (please specify):___________________________
55. Please rate your satisfaction with each of the following aspects of your work (for your primary employment in calendar
year 2009). (Please select one response in each row.)
Overall satisfaction with your job

Satisfaction with advancement opportunities
Satisfaction with the technical challenges of
your job
Satisfaction with employers support for
your technical vitality
Satisfaction with your current compensation
Very
satisfied
1
Satisfied
2
Neutral
3
Dissatisfied
4
Very
dissatisfied
5
Not
Applicable

56. If your current employer offers medical coverage, is this limited to HMO-type plans?
Yes
No
Not Applicable
57. Please indicate if, as of January 1, 2010, you are making use of any employer-offered benefits (including pension,
retirement or other plans, health benefits and/or other services/benefits).
Yes
No
A-7
2010 Edition
58. For each of the Pension/Retirement benefits or services listed below, indicate if, as of January 1, 2010, the benefit was
or was not offered by your employer, and if offered, whether your employer contributes to the benefit. You may view a
description of these plans here.
Click here to view descriptions
(Please select one response in each row.)
Employer
offers and
contributes
Defined Benefit Pension Plan
Employer
offers but
does not
contribute
Employer
does not
offer
Profit Sharing Plan
Stock Options
401(k), 403(b), or 457 Salary Reduction Plan
Other Defined Contribution Pension Plan
SEP (Simplified Employee Pension Plan)
ESOP (Employee Stock Ownership Plan)
TIAA/CREF
IRA (Individual Retirement Account)

Cash Balance Plan
Other salary reduction savings plan (please specify): ____________
a. Is your employers defined benefit plan portable? (Portable: You can take your vested benefits with you when you terminate.)
Yes
No
Dont Know
59. For each of the Health/Other benefits or services listed below, indicate if, as of January 1, 2010 the benefit was or was
not offered by your employer, and if offered, whether your employer contributes to the benefit. (Please select one for
each row.)
Employer
offers and
contributes
Employer
offers but does
not contribute
Employer does
not offer
Basic health insurance for dependents
Major medical insurance
Major medical for dependents
Dental insurance
Dental for dependents
Eyeglasses, lenses, exams
Life insurance coverage
Disability insurance
Well baby care
Long-term care insurance
Prescription/drug coverage
Day care (service or subsidy)
Elder care referral services
Basic health insurance
A-8
2010 Edition
60. For each of the benefits or services listed below, indicate if, as of January 1, 2010, it was or was not offered by your
employer. (Please select one for each row.)
Professional association membership fees

Paid attendance at professional conferences
Paid maternity or paternity leave
Unpaid personal leave
Flexible working hours
Other services/benefits (please specify): ____________
Employer
offers

Employer
does not
offer

61. We are now at the end of the survey. If you would like to make any additional comments, please do so here:
Thank you very much for your input.
A-9
2010 Edition
IEEE-USA
2001 L Street, NW, Suite 700
Washington, D.C. 20036
Tel: +1 202 785 0017
Fax: +1 202 785 0835
E-mail: ieeeusa@ieee.org
Web: www.ieeeusa.org

Ieee Usa Salary Survey 2010 Final

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ieee Usa Salary Survey 2010 Final

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IEEE-USA

Copyright 2010 by IEEE

IEEE-USA Salary & Fringe Benefits Survey

IEEE-USA Salary & Fringe Benefits Survey

IEEE-USA Salary & Fringe Benefits Survey

Members in the Work Force: Age ...........................................................................................................................................2-1

IEEE-USA Salary & Fringe Benefits Survey

Full-Time Workers: Pension and Retirement Benefits ............................................................................................................5-1

IEEE-USA Salary & Fringe Benefits Survey

The Survey Data Base

Final number of responses for salary and consultant

Consultants (reported separately)

1.2 THE SURVEY

The 2010 IEEE-USA Salary & Fringe Benefits Survey is

Employed in their PATC; much of the data in

Others not working full time, including:

Retired, not working

Of the 14,187 usable non-consultant cases, 12,825 (90%)

A total of 14,724 usable cases are included in the 2010

IEEE U.S. members invited by email in the summer of

Note that the omission of consultants from all the current

As has been the case in prior surveys, 2010 results show

Exhibit 1-2 recaps median income for survey years 2008 to

This survey reports typical salary outcomes for groups of

Income Profile by Employment Status, 2008-2010

Median 2007 Income

Median 2008 Income

Median 2009 Income

Retired, not unemployed

IEEE-USA Salary & Fringe Benefits Survey

1.3 THE ANALYSES

The remainder of this report is organized as follows:

Section 3, Income Statistics, presents the bulk of the

Section 6, IEEE-USA Salary Time Series Data,

In both Sections 3.2 and 3.3, statistics deal only with

IEEE-USA Salary & Fringe Benefits Survey

Practically all (97%) 2010 Salary Survey respondents are

Note those who indicated half or more of their personal

Gender, Ethnicity, and Citizenship. Results for these

Number of cases: 13,755

Years of Experience in the Profession

About four in five members in the work force (77%) are

IEEE-USA Salary & Fringe Benefits Survey

Number of cases: 13,755

Compared to last year, slightly more members in the

Years with Current Employer

Number of Different Full-Time Employers

Number of cases: 13,755

Tenure with the current employer declined from a mean

Length of the Work Week. The typical (median)

Number of cases: 13,755

Median # supervised, if any:

Number of cases: 13,755

IEEE-USA Salary & Fringe Benefits Survey

Highest Degree Held

PhDs and JDs

Number of cases: 13,755

Although professional registration is a prerequisite for

Education and Certification. As the chart in Exhibit 2-6

IEEE-USA Salary & Fringe Benefits Survey

Level of Professional Engineering Responsibility

Number of cases: 11,964 (excludes 1,791 not employed as engineers)

Exhibit 2-8 shows that, many (10%) are competent in the