No really! It IS getting hot in Seattle – and not just from of all of the amazing development projects we are working on at IdentityMine. The thermometer is climbing up to hit an expected high of 95 degrees today which rarely happens. For years, every time we’ve had a major meteorological swing I’ve tossed out that question that always seems to elicit such interesting dinner conversation and variety of answers. . . who gets paid more? Meteorologists in Seattle or those in other, more predictable areas of the country?
If you’ve never been to Seattle, locals will tell you that getting an accurate weather prediction more than 48 hours out seems to be about 60% successful and 24 hours out improves it to maybe 80%. Most other places in the country, particularly in the Midwest, have more than a week’s of notice of what impending weather conditions look like. My theories ranged from Seattle meteorologists could be paid more because they have to deal with a lot of criticism and frustration for the higher level of inaccuracy. On the other hand, I could see other area meteorologists being paid more because they had to be more entertaining and engaging to keep audiences tuned in when nothing changes day after day.
So I decided to finally come up with some hard numbers to answer the question. Doing what any trusty Internet user does, I Googled it and found an excellent site http://meteorologistsalary.net/ and discovered that Seattle does pay the most--$128k versus a national average of $66k. Way to go guys (and gals)! Here’s a little chart outlining a few major markets and salaries with cost of living adjustments to keep everything fair and square.
LA stands out sitting so low on the pay scale. My unscientific guess is that LA salaries are lower due to the plethora of talent hoping to find their way into the spotlight, but who knows. Does any of this surprise you? Have any thoughts as to the pay differences? Do tell!