stormguy80

By all means, go for it. I would just recommend 1) having a backup plan and 2) deciding on what type job(s) you might want in the field and then getting the necessary preparation for it. Just be realistic. Are you willing to make some sacrifices, especially early in your career? If so, then stay the course.

Thanks for your insight. Thinking it over the last 24 hours, I don't want to switch majors. I figure this is where my interest lies the most, and like you and others have pointed out, there are other pathways within in, just don't think narrowly.

you say there are "a good amount" of jobs out there. I'm not denying that there are jobs out there, even some good jobs, and that there still will be success stories like the ones are mentioning. You weren't reading very carefully about what it is that I have been saying but I've repeated myself waaaayyyy to many times by this point for me to say it again. I'll just leave it at this though, produces some evidence that shows that the number of jobs is roughly in balance with the number of grads, and not just once graduating class at one school, and then maybe you'll have a case. Even I'll admit this is getting old now.... Yes, I've said things that are pretty discouraging and I stand by them. But that doesn't mean that no one will get a job in meteorology or that it's ALL bad. If you work hard, get the neccssary skills for the job you want etc, and have a real passion for it and are willing to move than yes; go for it. you may have reasonable shot at success depending on your financial needs / desires and willingness to do shift work; I just think there is very little awareness of any of the negatives amoung high school age students interested in meteorology and that if they knew the whole story that those with somewhat less interest or who had unrealistic expectations about getting a forecasting job near their home town or in the NWS might think twice about going into the field - this awareness would bring the number of met majors down and more in line with the number of jobs. How is that a bad thing?

This thread is way too pessimistic.. There are a good amount of meteorology jobs right now in the energy and commodities sectors, along with alternative energy and met-tech's as well. Not to mention the broadcast openings. I graduated very recently (mid recession), and I can say that a large portion of my class has excellent jobs. We have 3 Wx Risk grads at energy firms, one at a reinsurance firm, one at a global supply chain company, a few in grad school, and the majority of the rest in private forecasting gigs. I think the job scarcity issue is more at play when it comes to general forecaster positions than anything. NWS is tough to get for seasoned mets, let alone kids out of school. Couple that with people who do nothing to further their education post grad (even COMET modules help) and are unwilling to relocate, and you can see why there is a perception that there are no jobs.

Broaden your horizons within meteorology and there are opportunities available. When you do get an opportunity, you have to seize it and you have to shine. Working hard isn't enough...you need to demonstrate social skills, show initiative, and demonstrate your value.

I can tell you right now that majoring in weather risk was the smartest decision I ever made. Commodities and energy scarcity are huge issues right now, and they will only be further stressed as the population grows further. While many people dream of the NWS, there are amazing opportunities out there if you're willing to just go for it. Commodities and energy are where the jobs are going to be moving forward. I'd argue the name on your degree matters too, but that's more about networking.

Wow. that's a quite a generalization to make about a whole profession....

engineers trade their humanity for money...they are consistently the douchiest people i interact with

no I do; but the people who are arguing against me are also saying the exact same stuff ("it's not all about the money" or "if you have drive you can be successful", etc), over and over again. It works both ways:)

Your points don't anger anyone, I think they have some merit, but you just say the exact same thing over and over again every time someone posts something that you don't agree with, and you don't seem to realize it.

My arguments weren't just about money though. Facts are fact and the issue is that there are only a couple hundred entry level jobs opening a year with the number of grads per year in the 600-1000 range ( see http://journals.ametsoc.org/doi/pdf/10.1175/2008BAMS2375.1 ) How does that make it a good time to be a met? I know my new posts are going to anger a bunch of people since they can't stand it if I have the last word on this issue. But sorry, I strongly believe I'm right - the facts unfortunately support my arguments. We'll have to agree to disagree.

My International Biz teacher from China had 7 patents on dialysis machines... eventually left the science side when sales VPs/COs of said med tech sales firms were banking on his invention.

He left and got an MBA in London around the age of 35, then he went to another med-tech firm to be the COO...

Millions later, he definitely insisted we take his later route (business), sooner.

IMO, the OP needs to understand its not a great life to be a met (or any type of science) if you are even going to introduce the idea of financial compensation into the decision-making process.

Go into the private sector with your ideas and your met degree and make a ton of money...I have only a business background and I follow weather as a hobby.

If the NWS provides my business needs with as much free info as I need, of course the market for 'mets' is low...

Show my business how you can provide me with something my tax dollars don't, and I'll pay you what your value prop is worth.

IMO, the OP is backwards. The state of affairs is perfect for people to innovate, create and discover in met....instead of working in a local weather office cranking out forecasts, you are creating new ideas and advancing technology.

It couldn't be a better time to have a degree in met, actually. The internet is making people far more in tune with weather, and there are enormous opportunities to enjoy a successful career in nearly every industry by having a degree in met...

What other factor, besides weather, does everyone in the world have to factor in to their daily plans in some way, shape or form?

That's why I tell the sales team I manage to bring up weather if they're having a tough time breaking the ice with a client - it never fails.

using Tapatalk

The problem is that there are only so many mets that are needed and as a result the continuing growth in the number of graduates in unsustainable. In some fields, supply can create its own demand and/or there are good reasons that the field will grow. I think in the comming years growth in some sectors of meteorology will be roughly offset by the number of jobs lost to automation. If you have the time and money and have a real passion for meteorology the best bet is probably to do a double major in a related field, such as math or computer programming. This helps you in two ways: 1) you have something to fall back on 2) you will be that much more marketable since many jobs in meteorology are also looking for someone with these additional skills. It's tough. One question, have you had someone critique your resumes / cover letters? These things will make you or break you just as much or more than your actual qualifications - if its not written in the best possible format / wording you may not stand out. Good luck to you.

This thread is a pretty discouraging read for anyone trying to enter the field like myself. Unfortunately, I don't have anything good to add to it since I've been looking for a job in the field for a better part of a year without much luck. I'm a case in point that even with an MS degree and some programming background it is still very difficult to break-in. Despite applying for a number of positions and a some interviews, no offers. Due to my lack of success, this leaves me in a position where I will probably have to either train for a new line of work or return to grad school pursue a PhD in the field if I don't land a job soon. This is not where I saw myself several years ago when I began my pursuit of meteorology. Yes, it is my passion, but I wasn't really thinking about the job market in this field when I was entering college.

If I chose to find something else, I may try to go into the computer programming or IT field as this seems to be a field where there are many more opportunities with better compensation than meteorology. I'm not sure if IT certification or an Associate's Degree is enough to land me a job in IT or computer programming, but I can't stay motionless forever. Of course, my other option is to return to grad school to pursue a PhD, provided I can gain admission to a program. Question is, what are the job prospects for someone with a PhD in atmospheric science or related discipline? I was told that it may "open more doors", but if it's still really tough to break in with a PhD, then it may not be worth the effort. However, I enjoy research and programming a lot more than forecasting, so maybe this is in my best interest. Then again, if it doesn't ultimately land me a position such as a postdoc or research job, maybe not.

While I certainly don't want to discourage anyone from pursuing their passions and dreams, please be aware of how competitive getting into this field is. Jobs are scarce and exceedingly difficult to get. Considering the challenge of the meteorology major and the state of the job market in this field, I think that the energy is better invested in another major such as engineering or computer science where there are more opportunities for employment upon graduation.

Ok. I’m not following your logic here…I stated that only the top qualified people will get “better jobs” but then you said no, these jobs will sometimes go to people right out of school since they can pay them “a lot less” Well if they are going to pay them a lot less then they are not exactly good jobs anymore.

Even that section I have bolded is often not true....I know of several very good jobs in the private sector that were open in the last couple of years which went to people right out of school despite the fact they did indeed interview multiple candidates who were way more eperienced and qualifited....the reason? Obviously they can pay them alot less....in reality people coming out of school have alot of say as to whether or not they break into the career...if they do 1 or 2 internships during the course of their undergraduate career and develop knowledge of forecasting they will have an exceptionally good chance of being competitive for entry level jobs, a decade ago someone could be a forecast ditz out of school and probably still get hired...the hardest job to get in this field nowadays is more the 2nd one than the first since because as you said there is such a massive supply of entry level folk you need to give them a damn good reason they should hire you for more money instead. This of course brings up the other issue that you could get stuck where you're at...this has become a topic of discussion recently in the NWS...people at HPC/TPC/OPC are having a very hard time transferring to a WFO, the same goes for interns trying to lateral and interns trying to become forecasters at offices other than the one they are in....one of the mets on this board tried to lateral as an intern 4 or 5 times and was rejected on each one.

Some other notable busts: 1) early March 94 storm - a couple days out this was forecast to produce 1-2 feet in the Boston area but ended up giving less than 6 inches with a change to rain. 2) Dec 30, 2000 storm. Another bust for E Mass. a couple days out 20-30 inches was forecast and right up until the day of it looked like at least 3-6 inches or more. Instead it was ALL rain right along the MA coast with areas to the west getting hammered. I remember going out that evening and they still had all the flashing blue lights on in my town for a snow emergency despite it being 35 degrees and pouring rain. I remember seeing cars driving in from the west on 110 though and that they were snow covered! just a couple degrees and a couple miles off. Like I said in the other recent post, I think in a lot of these cases the experienced mets at least cover themselves when they know there is bust potential by using words like "possible" accumulation or "potential storm" when its 48 hours out. the public doesn't get it though....

Well; this is weather and things are never certain. It's interesting to note that the title of the map was "potential" snow storm and that Paul Kocin used the word "likely" not definately. Bottom line is that with major snowstorms there is always some inherrent uncertainty and I think this uncertainty is even hinted at in this clip as he even says that rain may cut down amounts. The public doesn't get this though. They just hear potential blizzard / 2 feet of snow and intstantly interpret that as "expected" blizzard.

Someone can Correct me if I am wrong, but I am pretty sure this was the storm -- and what the Weather Channel was saying about it at the time. Obviously, at the end of this clip, someone in northern New Jersey was mocking at the outcome.

The '89 one was dec 15. Another classic bust (at least where I lived) was the early Feb '95 storm (4th and 5th I believe). This was supposed to track just off the outer Cape and give eastern Mass 12+ inches of all snow with mixing / rain confined mainly to the Cape. In the end the change to rain came all the way up at least to the NH border after 9 inches of snow fell. the 3-4 hours of rain and temps rising into the upper 30s near the storms end was, as per the usual, followed by a cold snap behind the storm which meant one big icy mess.

Can somebody provide me with the date of the December 1989 "bust"? I want to review it on the PSU NARR site.

Funny you mention this storm! I have a really goog memory and remember a storm that occurred on the night of Fri dec 15 into early Sat morning that year. I lived about 40 minutes north of Boston at the time near the NH border. Anyway - yes, I remember this was supposed to be a foot of snow with maybe some mixing on the outer cape. That was what the 6 pm news was saying. In the end about 8 inces of heavy wet snow fell in 4-5 hours from roughly 10 pm - 2am any then it changed to sleet and freezing rain. When I had gone to bed the evening it was in the mid teens and every time I woke up it was warmer and warmer. Yes, that storm was a bit dissapointing..We had about a 1 inch thick crust of ice on top of the 8 inches of snow and behind that storm the great cold wave of late Dec 89 was ushered in...

It comes down to what many people say here alot, especially Steve D...you have to be looking at the satellite/radar images with an unbiased eye 12-24 hours from the event, very often you will see things that tell you something is going differently...its less an issue now with the great models we have but 20+ years ago it was way more useful...The Dec 89 storm was a disaster because it was obvious by 2-3pm that afternoon if you looked at the satellite imagery that the low was going to develop way west....its remarkable to this day how badly that event was handled by the models and the forecasts....the warnings for 5-8 inches were not dropped til midnight.

The storm developed/tracked farther north than the models predicted several days out. So instead of NY city getting 2 ft of snow these amounts fell over interior New England and areas farther south had lighter precip and/or rain. Sometimes the models just bust..I'm sure there have been other times the models have had a bust of similar magnitude but its just that in this case the impact of the bust was so great since the models had incorrectly forecast massive snow for New York City as opposed to a more remote area where it would not have affected nearly as many people or if it were in the spring and it had been a forecast of 2 inches of rain that never materialized.

I know a lot of people don't want me to bring this particular storm up but what really happen that made this storm one of the biggest forecast busts in recent memory?? Also, what happen if everything did come together.. Anyone care to chime in?

Thanks guys.

you would be far better off, in my opinion, to do comp science as a double major as opposed to broadcast met. like other jobs in the met field, broadcast jobs are extremely competive. Since you have the opportunity I strongly recommend not puting all your eggs in one basket with meteorology.

I'll be starting on my B.S. in Atmos. Sci next fall at Lyndon State. After reading this thread I'm considering double majoring in computer science - they require a track for the "Computer Studies" degree, one of which is Atmospheric Science, and I'll be taking those classes already anyway. The double major therefore would require about 34 additional credits. I was planning on doing broadcasting/NWS "tracks" for the met degree, each of which are 15 credits. My ultimate goal has been, like many, a job in the NWS, but figured taking the broadcasting courses would be a good idea since I also like the broadcasting field of meteorology. Would it be beneficial to do the Comp. Studies major instead of broadcasting track? I've known about the lack of/difficult of getting jobs in the field however wasn't quite aware of how useful Computer Sci could be.

Yes, specifically that part of the equation has not changed too much. But the overall picture (salary, ect..) is far more challenging for mets today and when I was in school I was not given honest "straight talk" about the reality of the field. The realities have been mainly an underground thing known by insiders but not by those in the mainstream or on the fringes of the field (weather enthusiasts, prospective students, the media, etc). That is why it becomes up to us to make this known. Also remember, the truth is easy to "spin". That is the really frustrating part. One can say there are for more types of weather jobs and new opportunities today (private sector, environmental, cable tv, networks) compared to the past (mainly just NWS) even though the ratio of jobs:mets has decreased, as have salary outlooks for most new mets, which is conviniently ignored. When asked "do your graduating mets get jobs?", the way this is spinned is saying "oh yes indeed! We have mets doing all kinds of amazing stuff! This one fellow, he's working in Alaska, several are in the Air Force, and another grad from a few years back is doing ground breaking research in Antarctica! What isn't told is that the market essentially forced them into these non traditional type jobs if they wanted to utilize their degree as opposed to staying at home and working at McDonalds. Students should do their homework but most of the information you find is in the "spin zone". For example, meteorology being in the top 15 or whatever jobs of 2009 - this was debunked in the original post.

Understand your points here, but the need to be willing to move to get a job has not changed. When I was in school 25 years ago, I was fully aware that if I wanted to work for the NWS, I was going to have to be willing to move. I was also aware that breaking into the field would be challenging. And that was when the job field was not nearly as competitive as it is today. I am not disagreeing with your original points - the job field is extremely competitiive right now, and you have to be willing to work your a$$ off to get a job. But it is incumbent upon students in the field to do the research to find that out early on in their pursuit of a degree, like I and many other did. It is also incumbent upon people in the field (and colleges) to be honest and proactive in getting that message out.

Yes, but as I've said elsewhere in this thread meteorology brings this problem to a new scale that matches few other professions since the field is so small and the number of jobs are orders of magnitude smaller. Generally speaking, most young people are looking to settle down in a particular area or have settled in an area and are looking for jobs roughly within roughly a 1 hr radius of where they live, and yes indeed it is very difficult finding a job in many if not most professions these days. With meteorology, finding a job in a particular region of your choosing is virtually out of the question unless you happen to be in a one of the few places there are multiple met jobs (DC area, Boulder, S Texas). Unlike most professions, it's a given mets have to open up their job search nation or even world wide right off the bat. A lot of mets don't realize this as they are making the decision to major in meteorology and it only comes as a rude awakening later on. Hence, the reason for this thread I started.

It's the same with many professional degrees right now. Go interview some Law School or Business School Seniors right now and ask them how their employment prospects look.

If I was in school right now I'd be studying Mandarin Chinese, and Arabic. Then I'd get an MBA in international finance.

in theory you could but in practice its not always possible. For example, I took a job outside the country as I refused to do the sweatshop thing any longer.

Or you could just demand that your significant other move.

regarding the find a job anywhere thing, you gotta remember some people are in committed relationships or have family responsibilities preventing them from wanting to do this. Hence my saying that unless meteorology is the most important thing in your life and your willing to do anything for it you should probably find a different field since you won't be able to pick where you live.

In regards to using technology to forecast... I had to spend TWO semesters doing everything by hand. That's the only way you can learnt to look for patterns is when you do it yourself. How else are you going to actually see the CAA or WAA or even isentropic lift and all that fun stuff unless you sit there and take the time to contour it yourself. Yes, computers are a very important part of our work environment now a days, but it shouldn't be the MAIN emphasis when learning all of the material. I didn't learn how to graph maps on computers until my last semester in school (Synoptic 2). I was okay with this since I had a sound understanding of most of the material and had already been through the blood, sweat, tears, and colored pencils. Many times my classmates would wonder why I was able to forecast the next few days so well... It's easy... look to the skies! Or even the conditions to the West/North of you (depending on where you are this helps a ton).

I agree with many on here about picking up another major in Computer Science or even GIS if possible. If you have a GIS certificate or better, then you will have no issue finding a job. If you want to do television... make sure that is what you want to do and have a VERY thick skin. Also, as with any other major, find internships! These are THE most important part of finding a job ANYWHERE! I did two, while some of my friends didn't do any... and you know what? They are still looking for jobs. I graduated in April and found a job in October. Jobs are to be had out there, but you just have to set yourself above all others.

Those are just my words of wisdom, from someone who recently graduated and found a job in broadcasting.

Its not an all or nothing argument here. I agree that the old school stuff is good too and shouldn't all be abandoned for the new stuff. It needs to be a mix of both. plotting soundings and hand analysis should be covered at the beginning of synoptic but it should not be the meat and potatoes of that course at the expense of learning the new stuff that you will need to know in the field. You may not agree with the way things currently are but that''s the reality and students need to be prepared for it. I work in an office with no windows to the outside and even if I did have windows it would only help with a small number of local clients. The days of just forecasting for your immediate local area are over

And that's the issue with things today-Everyone relies too much on technology and not using the older techniques used back in the earlier days. Before I bought a smartphone and I was away from my computer I would look up at the sky and look at clouds to determine what the weather would be like for the next few hours. I used to carry around my Intro Met book in my truck because of the great appendix in the back for a quick reference guide on how to nowcast.

I also feel that what I learned from that one professor really enhanced my forecasting skills- although sometimes it was tedious to hand plot a sounding and hand analyze every level of a case study back in 1963, it helped me appreciate what our forefathers of the field went through.

The original post about this was referring to difax charts so it is obvious that he was talking about synoptic or some other forecasting/ analysis type class, not theoretical meteorology. In my response I was also referring to the teaching of synoptic met and forecasting - the practical stuff that you need for most met jobs. Maybe that wasn't clear but that is what I meant. Yes, for some met subjects computers are not needed as much or even at all.

The idea that you need computers to teach the theory or background of several meteorological subjects is completely absurd and without merit.

Ok, anyone who hates computers should be banned from teaching meteorology. Teaching the old school way and ignoring the modern techniques and skills needed which involves computers will make for some very unemployable met grads. Simply put; you need to know computers! Its the modern tool of the trade. Not saying printout difax maps are bad, I still use them to analyze, but you gotta know the computer stuff too. That said, best to have a double major if you are doing meteorology with the job market the way it is in the field.

For people reading this thread intending to pursue a met degree should check out Kean-we have many unique professors including what was mentioned before, an old school met whom still prefers the printout/fax maps to analyze storms(he hates computers), and a former NWA president!

Yes, there are indeed great mets from all backgrounds. My only point is that at this time white males still make up the majority of met grads, at least 70-80% I'd say. But if they are only getting 50% or so of the jobs because of affirmative action I don't think that's fair. Its like title 9 - If 70% of those wanting to play high school sports are boys simply because to this day boys are generally more into sports, then 70% of high school sports teams should be boys teams, not the 50% that title 9 tries to artificially enforce.

Agreed.

I agree with your assessment that some of the best meteorologists I have met were non-American. Great mets come from everywhere , I guess. Perhaps a discussion for a different thread, but great minds come from all backgrounds.

Then that goes even further to prove my point. Unless they (females) happen to be better qualified grads then they should only be getting 15-20% of jobs, not 40-50%.

30-40%??? Try maybe 15-20% sir and that might be a over estimated percentage as well.

exactly. Also issues like affirmative action rear their ugly head. I've heard females are getting about 50% of jobs when in fact they still only represent at best 30-40% of graduating mets. Logic would dictate they should only be getting 30-40 % or so of jobs .

I can think of counterexamples from personal experience.

I can think of counterexamples from personal experience.

Not saying those aren't good rules of thumb, but you have to remember that like any other situation involving human discretion, the acceptance/hiring/promotion process in this field has its flaws.

wow.

I'm not sure, I've never applied for an NWS position, but that sounds right.

top 'bin'? what does that mean? Basically just that to get the highest score for that question you have to have 18 published since that's what one of the applicants had?

I didn't apply, but I think the top "bin" for authorships is now 18 publications, perhaps it was fewer in the past, I'm not sure.