MLT starting salary

Overall I see that there is always tension per se amongst MT vs MLT, LVN/LPN vs RN, and MT/MLT vs everyone in allied health even the janitor gets in on the hating.

Why is this petty & unprofessional banter occurring when we all need to focus on completely are job to help the patient, I'm sorry to say when you have tension in your work environment you cant not say you are doing your job well.
I personally think the health care industry should do a lot of revising in allied health and make it more stringent as other professions like law, accountants, financial planner, and the like. I just see desperation amongst the healthcare industry because of the shortage and retiring they will accept/hire anybody. Within my program if you didn’t brown nose have a sad back story such as the father of my children don’t want to work because he has a dui and like to drink all day and I need to get out of my trailer in 3 mos, could you please give me a job referral before I graduate even though I really shouldn’t be in the program because I'm not a stellar student. So I had to pound the pavement and look for my own job while the others who didn’t take the certification exam yet and or failed got a full time job in a stat lab instantly. Oh you know how they say if you don’t acquire your certification with 6 mos you are released from employment is a big lie especially if you are a certain demographic.
So I see why some people don't care for MLTs those are the one I worry as well they just got by not being interested in science but brown nosing and cheating in the program. While there are good solid MLTs that have a BA/BS in a science went to MLT program because they were unaware of a 1 year MT program at a hospital or didn’t have that type of program offered in their area.

I'm appauled by the powers that be that hire incompetant techs period maybe it MT or MLT.

CLS48 in California said: I'm not sure MLTs can report results out. I'd like to see evidence of that. Do you have a link that specifically says this? While they do have licensed MLT, I do not believe they can report results out yet.[/QUOTe

The level one hospital where I did my clinicals had MLT'S reporting the results out every day. They did the EXACT same thing as MT'S, except blood bank.

I am going to start a 2 year MLT program at my local community college (even though there's an additional 2 years of prerequisites in micro, human anatomy/physiology, phlebotomy etc., so it's actually a four year program)and I have a few questions.

How much would a new MLT make in Southern California? When I research all I get are average national salaries, but the cost of living is higher in California. Are there any programs that are tailored for MLT's who want to become MT's? Kinda like there are faster paced Registered Nursing (RN) programs for Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVN)? And lastly, would I be able to practice in other states even though I will be educated and certified in California?

I can answer only one of your questions. There is a national certification that you will get at the end of your program and there may also be a state certification that you will have to get. I know that for me, I have to get both. If I was to work in Kentucky, I would only have to have my national certification which will allow you to work anywhere. Each stat requirements are different. Hope that helped.

sirahola in Canyon Country, California said: I am going to start a 2 year MLT program at my local community college (even though there's an additional 2 years of prerequisites in micro, human anatomy/physiology, phlebotomy etc., so it's actually a four year program)and I have a few questions.

How much would a new MLT make in Southern California? When I research all I get are average national salaries, but the cost of living is higher in California. Are there any programs that are tailored for MLT's who want to become MT's? Kinda like there are faster paced Registered Nursing (RN) programs for Licensed Vocational Nurses (LVN)? And lastly, would I be able to practice in other states even though I will be educated and certified in California?

MLTs would probably get the same as lab assistants who can't release results, $15 to $18 an hour. There are no jobs for certified MLTs in labs at this time. In CA, there is no MLT to CLS program because the restrictions are too much for the CA CLS license. You're better off going to a CLS program.

I might have some better perspective on your questions, well depending on the facility you will be working at, but at my hospital where the MLT's do release results they start off at 25.00 an hr and go up. That is incorrect about there not being any certified jobs for MLT'S in CA, as I do research on this all the time. I see postings and have spoken to the managers in a few labs in San Diego, LA, Sanfrancisco, and a few up North. But unfortunately there is no MLT to CLS program here in california, and in order to challenge the ASCP you have to have 3 yrs of experice in all areas of the lab, including blood bank & microscopy + the bachelors degree, which in CA you will not be working in blood bank, or looking in the scopes unless the law changes. Now with your other question, for CA MLT's the ASCP, which is the licensing agency CA uses even for the state license has 2 options, either you can take the full MLT exam, which includes blood bank & microscopy, and then you will be able to work in the other 39 states that do not require a state license. For the other 11 you will have to pay the state and submit some paper work. If you take the other option of the ASCP exam which only statisfies CA requiments state license, then that exam does not include blood bank and microscopy, and i would expect you to find it to be more challenging to find a job in other states, because in other states as a MLT you are expected to do more than you are in CA. Also in other states there is a fast track program for MLTs to CLS, where you get your bachelors degree & laboratory training, but your degree would be in medical technology or something similar. A few universties do offer that degree online, but CA doesn't recongize some of those schools as valid CLS schools because CA has different requirments for CLS. Now at this past year at the CAMLT convention in San Jose there was disccusion about making a fast track program for MLT to CLS, and about MLT's and the future of Labs.

Of course that was just discussion at a Lab convention, and no way means or garrentees anything in the near future, especially since CA law is so complex, and that it took 7 yrs just to get MLT's in CA, but it is what it is. Also to note is that as certified MLT jobs increasing in CA, it is no where near the level that is availiable for CLS right now, and because in CA use to have what i like to call a 2 tier lab system, of CLS, and lab assistants, many facilities still operate as such. Your best bet to find a certified MLT position is either at a facilty that is cutting age, or where it is a national lab such as Quest, LabCorp, ect... Good luck and watch out for MLT haters.

Wow, thanks so much!

batttie in Seaside, California said: Of course that was just discussion at a Lab convention, and no way means or garrentees anything in the near future, especially since CA law is so complex, and that it took 7 yrs just to get MLT's in CA, but it is what it is. Also to note is that as certified MLT jobs increasing in CA, it is no where near the level that is availiable for CLS right now, and because in CA use to have what i like to call a 2 tier lab system, of CLS, and lab assistants, many facilities still operate as such. Your best bet to find a certified MLT position is either at a facilty that is cutting age, or where it is a national lab such as Quest, LabCorp, ect... Good luck and watch out for MLT haters.

Unfortunately as of now there are no MLTs jobs in CA as I said. Having worked in or rotated in about 7 laboratories in southern CA, both hospital and reference, they do not have MLT certified positions that release results. They have just lab assistants that do not release results, and CLSs. Even in Quest, in CA, there are just lab aides and then CLSs. If you don't believe me, do a job search on indeed in this area for MLTs and you will see there basically are no jobs for them. There are just CLSs and lab assistants.

Battie, if you do have such an MLT job that releases results, then I would agree with you. However, you sound like a student who hasn't been out in the actual work environment. I have yet to encounter a certified MLT who makes $25 an hr and releases results. I severely doubt that exists especially since I know some certified CLSs that make about $27 an hour here in CA at smaller hospitals.

Even if such an MLT exists, I doubt they are paid as much as these CLSs, and it is more likely they are paid as much as phlebotomists which would be $15 an hour..

Battie what hospital system do you work at. I can just call the HR director and see if they hire MLTs.

Nelson said: Battie what hospital system do you work at. I can just call the HR director and see if they hire MLTs.

All it takes is an online search on the internet for CA jobs. I just did and I have yet to see a job for a medical laboratory technician that asks for ASCP certification, or even CA MLT certification. These jobs just do not exist.

The most they would ask for is phlebotomy certification so you can draw blood. CA has not utilized MLTs for the past 3 years, even though they have supposedly been in existence for that long.

In fact, I have encountered several certified ASCP MLTs from other states who are just "lab technicians" or "lab aides" or "lab assistants", whatever you want to call them who make just as much as the phlebotomists, $14 to $18 an hour. They do not release results. This is just the reality of the situation in CA.

Maybe in 5 to 10 years, this will change but as of now it hasn't.

Yea her lack of a response indicates she might be making her information up.

And while you are correct, there are few positions that hire certified MLTs, like I stated before, I have noticed a growing trend. While you have worked in CA for the last 7 years, unless you had an interest in this specific profession you wouldn't have watched it as it began to grow. I know that my hospital is unique in the fact that it has hired so many MLT's. But i want to stress that what the reality of the situation is changing and its happening now. I work in one, hospital, spoken with a few other lab directors, and that DO allow MLT's release results. But i won't argue that the MAJORITY do not even have MLT positions, but only as Lab Assistants, as the Quest Lab that I worked at in Sacramento had. There are only 93 licensed MLT's in CA right now, so how many positions do you think there are open right now?

And yes I have encountered, and I personally know at least 10 MLT's that make $25 hr or more. I do know that is no where being the norm as I have worked out of state I fully realize what the salary is in even in the poorest of hospitals and labs.

BTW I,m not a student, and why do you think I'm a she? And because I don't respond with lighting reflexes to posts do not indicate anything except I do spend time away from the pc.

Also by searching this very site for jobs will land a few hits for MLT positions. I tried posting the links but I guess its against the rules of the forum. And they are few, it is growing. This time last year there were even less. MLT certification in CA has only been around for 2 years now, so MLT's reporting results is extremely new, so the last 7 years is irrelevant. While I will not give out my hospital, do a google search, and its a close hospital in seaside, california.

I never said 7 years, I said the 7 laboratories I've rotated in or been at. As I said, it'll probably be 5 to 10 years before it becomes prevalent.

I agree with that it will be 5-10 years before you see MLT's prevalent in the laboratories in CA. My apologies for the misconception of 7 years, 7 labs lol. I just wanted to inform people that the future has begun in CA, but I do understand your experience because I have also seen exactly what you describe in the laboratories in CA. My advice to any MLT's that may move and work in CA is make sure you research, and its all about location. True MLT jobs are very rare in CA, where most are only lab assistants. I remember I first found this thread 2 years ago because I was looking for a MLT job in CA, and have developed a slight interest in it.

i am BSc (micro)and dmlt degree from india,so in usa this degree is valid?

and ihave 2 yr experience in india as a lab technician,so in usa i can do the job ?and how many salary i deserve?

Good Lord, people. Seriously...are you all that pathetic to think that your four year degree is THAT much more respected than that of a two year degree? It's not.
I am an MLT and have been in the field for 15years.....the past four of those years in a Lead Technologist position. They changed the requirements for another MLT and myself. Hmmmmm.....imagine that....an MLT running a laboratory. What is the world coming to?
I help in the hiring process. We don't pay a bit of attention to what their degree is....two vs four. We see how well they interview, references, experience...but never have I heard "they are an MLT that we can pay a lesser wage to so let's hire them." That would be a huge mistake if the MT is actually a better fit and more qualified (years of experience).
I have worked with MT's that are truly stupid and MLT's that are brilliant....and vice-versa. DON'T judge MLTs by their degree.
LPN vs RN isn't a match to MT/MLT...more like BSRN vs RN. An RN is a two year degree and a BSRN is a four year degree.......

Steph you are incorrect,

AS RN and BS RN are equivilant bc they take the same licensing test. MT and MLT take two different certification exams by the ASCP.

So the LPN to MLT and RN to MT is the correct comparison.

K...I wasn't looking at certification.....just at classroom time. My point was that an RN with a two year degree and a BSRN with a four year degree work hand in hand and make the same salary...and actually can still work their way up in the healthcare system. You don't have to have a BSRN to be in management which is generally the point in getting the BSRN. Most of those with a BSRN don't put down those with an RN so why do those with an MT degree feel they are so much better than those of us with MLT degrees? So we didn't take a bunch of extra classes that have nothing to do with our field.....how does that make us less qualified? That was my point....but thx for the clarification.

There should be no way that an MLT makes as much as an MT anywhere in the US. If they do make the same, then the laboratory system in that area is seriously flawed.

I agree....unless of course it's an MLT that has been in the field a while verses a MT that has just graduated from college.

No I would still say the CLS should make more. This is a job description of a lab technician in CA and how it should be everywhere in the US. It was taken from a current open position. "Under the direction of the Clinical Laboratory Scientist" is the important part and why the CLS should always get paid more then the technician.

POSITION SUMMARY:
The Laboratory Technician works under the direction of the Laboratory
Supervisor, and in their absence under the direction of the Clinical Laboratory
Scientist (CLS), to provide technical, clerical and patient care support
services. The Laboratory Technician sets up cultures, sets up testing to be
performed on instruments. Service is provided to patients of all age groups:
premature infants, infants, pediatrics, adolescents, young, middle and older
adults. Non-technical duties include taking of supply inventories, stocking
supplies, cleaning and maintaining work area, equipment and instrumentation.

POSITION REQUIRES:
1.High school diploma or equivalent. 2. Phlebotomy Certification 3. California
Phlebotomy Certification. 4. Must meet the physical requirements of this job
listed on the RU-91 form for Laboratory Technician.

PREFERRED SKILLS:
One year�s experience as a Laboratory Technician in a hospital based clinical
laboratory. 2. One year�s experience as a phlebotomist. 3. Ability to work
flexible shifts.

In Ohio, we don't "report" to a CLS....we report to a Lead Technologist, Manager, Director and Medical Director.
The position you posted seems more like a laboratory assistant, which per the requirements only needs a "high school diploma." No one in our laboratory that is labeled an MLT has "just" a high school diploma. We all have at least TWO YEARS OF COLLEGE AND MUST have PASSED the ASCP. We cannot take any other exam and expect a job at many of the hospitals in Ohio.

We don't allow Laboratory Assistants in our laboratory. They can be very helpful but why have a lab assistant when you can have someone with a DEGREE...2 or 4 year.

Seriously, get over it. I agree that starting salaries for MT should be more than an MLT.....OK. I'm just saying that you need to grow up and realize that MTs aren't the saviors of the laboratory. MLTs contribute just as much and are just as capable as someone with an MT.

I agree that duties for a MLT vary state by state. I have been a traveling MT for 15 years and seen it all.

Western NY: MT are the majority, MLT have limited roles, not allowed in BB and Micro

Harrisburg PA: Mlt work with MTs, some hospitals in PA MLT cannot work by themselves.

Tampa FL: MLT and MTs work together, some hospitals MLTs are limited in BB and Micro.

Dallas Tx: in the city there are mostly MTs, some MLTs, didn't see much limititation.

What I did see are most laboratory director and department managers are BS MT (ASCP).
With this DCLS program coming out I see higher standards for lab directors, possible the doctorate degree.

I also have to add, at the rural hospitals I saw more MLTs and they were not limited. If there is a MLT progra
in that area, that is what the surrounding hospitals will hire. There are alot of foreigners as well, probably bc MLT and some MT schools are closing across the country.

The popular areas like NYC and all of California have really high regulations, you rarely see MLTs in those areas.

i am bachlor of science with microbiology subject,and i have also diploma medical lab. technician(DMLT) degree ,in india so ihava question,this indian degree is valid in usa

Should be...depends on the institution to which you are applying.

runions in Columbia, Tennessee said: I have an associate applied science in Medical Laboratory Science..I am state Liscensed..ASCP certified..and I performed as well as any MT's in my lab, in fact, in some areas I had MT's come to me for help or to give a second opinion on cell classification/antibody id's etc In TN you have to have the AAS degree and pass an exam like ASCP in order to be liscensed.

AMEN Tennessee! Right there with you!!!!!!

Proud MLT in Marietta, Georgia said:

We do report out results in most states! I am proof of that.....as well as many of the people I work with!

CLS48 in California said: Unfortunately as of now there are no MLTs jobs in CA as I said. Having worked in or rotated in about 7 laboratories in southern CA, both hospital and reference, they do not have MLT certified positions that release results. They have just lab assistants that do not release results, and CLSs. Even in Quest, in CA, there are just lab aides and then CLSs. If you don't believe me, do a job search on indeed in this area for MLTs and you will see there basically are no jobs for them. There are just CLSs and lab assistants.

Battie, if you do have such an MLT job that releases results, then I would agree with you. However, you sound like a student who hasn't been out in the actual work environment. I have yet to encounter a certified MLT who makes $25 an hr and releases results. I severely doubt that exists especially since I know some certified CLSs that make about $27 an hour here in CA at smaller hospitals.

Even if such an MLT exists, I doubt they are paid as much as these CLSs, and it is more likely they are paid as much as phlebotomists which would be $15 an hour..

I exist. I am an MLT that makes 25++ and hour AND releases results!

Ken said: I agree that duties for a MLT vary state by state. I have been a traveling MT for 15 years and seen it all.

Western NY: MT are the majority, MLT have limited roles, not allowed in BB and Micro

Harrisburg PA: Mlt work with MTs, some hospitals in PA MLT cannot work by themselves.

Tampa FL: MLT and MTs work together, some hospitals MLTs are limited in BB and Micro.

Dallas Tx: in the city there are mostly MTs, some MLTs, didn't see much limititation.

What I did see are most laboratory director and department managers are BS MT (ASCP).
With this DCLS program coming out I see higher standards for lab directors, possible the doctorate degree.

I also have to add, at the rural hospitals I saw more MLTs and they were not limited. If there is a MLT progra
in that area, that is what the surrounding hospitals will hire. There are alot of foreigners as well, probably bc MLT and some MT schools are closing across the country.

The popular areas like NYC and all of California have really high regulations, you rarely see MLTs in those areas.

I am beginning to realize that California calls their "MLTs" what we call MLT, non testing or Lab assistants. They seem to not have to have a degree at all...except for a HS diploma. Is that right or are there just a lot of narcisistic people in the lab field?

Steph reread my previous post regarding how CA is, the one which you just quoted me. That's how it is here. MLTs basically do not exist. Only CLSs release results and then lab assistants help out.

This is why our pay is the highest in the nation. MLTs don't drag down our pay like they do everywhere else. This is not about narcissism and more about reality.

Steph, you are correct as in what some in CA call MLT's. Most "MLT's" in CA do not have a degree except maybe highschool and a phelebotomy license. Most of the Lab Assistants in CA do not report out results. CA has changed there law and facilities are slowly hiring certified MLT's in CA. The reason why CLS's or MT pay is the highest in the nation in CA is not because there are no MLT's to drive down wages, but its because the combination of higher cost of Living, and the fact that there are becoming fewer and fewer CLS in the field.

Also I'd like to point out is why should the pay be much different if two individuals are doing the same job??? Its not rocket science to perform alot of the simple testing that I see CLS & MT performing and then complain about the pay difference. Someone's pay should reflect there competencies, responsibilities and work. If two people have the same in all three, why pay one more because of there degree??

Tell that to the pharmacist that are counting pills for 50/hour. I forgot it takes a PHD to do that.

Hmmm...so MLTs in California only need a HS diploma and phleb certification. Interesting. A couple of years ago New York State proposed a plan to hire specialized...hmmm...for lack of a better word...MT substitutes. Their plan basically stated that if you had a HS diploma and took a 6 month certification course in say, histology, hemo, chem, etc. that you could work as a semi-tech for that specific department. This of course was in response to the drastic shortage that hospitals were facing. Suffice it to say, MTs were up in arms crying that it would jeopordize the quality of the work (that and of course, lower our pay). I signed a petition against it, though, I haven't really heard much of that whole thing in the past few months.

pharmacists duties are a little more inclusive than just "counting pills" and that job function is usually given to a pharmacy technician.
Thats basically how the CA laboratory system has worked for years, from my understanding. A better word I would use is Lab-Aides or Lab Assistants. But basically the principle is the same that they would do the majority of testing, and the few CLS's or MT's would just review the results and release them out. Its still like that in the majority of the hospitals, and that system was probably created due to the fact that there is an ever increasing shortage of CLS's / MLT's . Now recently last two years CA did pass law allowing certified MLT's to do moderately complex testing and release those results. The requirements are much higher, but basically if the ASCP will certify you then so will CA. They did however put a little distinction between MLT;s and CLS/MT in CA. MLT's are not allowed to report out Microscopic or Blood bank. Which kinda of brings me to my point. I'm not saying that every MLT can do everything in the laboratory. But as technology increases the job functions change.

The point is there is no way a lower degree can verify scripts bc they created standards and the pharmacists control their own profession.

MTs are under the pathologist, they are the ones that created the MLT to deal with the shortage, what they also created was confusion about standards and job description.

Standard degree and a nationwide license is what is needed like every ancillary field.

Pharmacists basically do just count pills. The pharm tech does most of the work and shows it to the pharmacist to sign it off. They get paid highly because of their doctorate. The higher the degree the higher you generally get paid in the US.

This is why CLSs should always get paid more then MLTs. In all honesty, there is no need for MLTs with certification that can release results. CA has it the right way. Just have a few CLSs that do the microscopic work and release results that are paid highly. Then have a whole bunch of lab assistants that help to process specimens and run the instruments, that are paid low, but do not require certification.

Much like LVNs are getting phased out of the hospital because RNs are more desired since they can do more, the laboratories in CA should not allow MLTs to become integrated in the system because there is no need for them.

Labs would save alot more money than having a bunch of MLTs that get paid almost like CLSs, but function basically like lab assistants.

by the way...forgot to ask what type of certification you have. To get an actual MT position you would probably have to take an ASCP exam....at least I would assume since we all have to be certified by ASCP or another acceptable accred. agency to work in the laboratory in the states.

Yes Steph, most if not all candidates have a ASCP certification, with the merger with NCA that is what all employers look for now.

Steph in Columbus, Ohio said: by the way...forgot to ask what type of certification you have. To get an actual MT position you would probably have to take an ASCP exam....at least I would assume since we all have to be certified by ASCP or another acceptable accred. agency to work in the laboratory in the states.

Well I took and passed 2 exams, one for the CA CLS license and one for the MT(ASCP) certification. I also have two bachelors degrees from 6 years of schooling, with my last being in CLS. My CLS program had me do 1 year of rotations at 5 different hospitals in all departments.

I could have done CLS in 4 years, but ended up finding out about the field after my first degree. Perhaps as a result of my schooling and experience I feel the way I do about MLTs. I don't think it's right for an MLT to do what I do and make as much as I do. If that's how it is in the rest of the US then that is just messed up.

I will add that no way an MLT will make $25 an hour in CA when some CLSs still make under $30 here. Especially if MLTs will not be able to do micro, blood bank, or even hematology or UA since they can't do microscopic work legally here. There really is no reason for an employer to higher an MLT for that high a pay when they can basically only release chemistry results. They would rather pay a CLS a bit more to do everything.

MLT's can work hematology, UA. They can not read a microscopic so no manual diffs, and as far as Urines, some hospitals use the AUW by Siemens, an analyzer that does the Microscopic for you, and some occasions will need a conformation by a CLS, but basically the CLS that is reading all the diffs will also do the conformations for the UA. And in some areas, where CLS start off making 40 and hour its quite possible for MLT's to make $25. Try the bay area where the cost of living is more, there for more pay. I'm sure in the Valley near Fresno, Modesto ect.... where pay is lower MLT's would not make nearly that much, probbly 18-20 like the rest of the country. Also there is plenty of reason for an employer to hire mlt's especially if you only need a few CLS to look at diffs, microscopics, blood bank, the rest of the testing can be done by a lower class of personell, chemistry, coag, hematology, UA,. Thats a saving of probbly $10 dollars per hour, enough to hire another full time employee, for the price of 4 CLS's, because not every laboratory does every CLS actually work in every department. Alot of the times people get pigeoned holed into one or two departments, so why pay a CLS to run a Chemistry analyzer if that is all they are gonna run??? In small facilities it would not be cost effective, because the CLS have more duties, but in a larger volume lab it would be.

My lab has the AUW by siemens and it sucks. Half of the results are off and require a manual microscopic UA to be done. The lab assistant runs the AUW while the CLS performs the confirmations and does the manual microscopic UA to correct the errors of the AUW which is most of the time. It calls cyrstals and yeasts RBCs all the time. It would not be cost effective to have an MLT there who cannot even do half the work.

Secondly, in most hematology departments, the CLS releases the CBCs and runs the manual differentials. In my lab, the lab assistants run the CBCs while the CLSs do most of the releasing and diffs. Not only that, we have autorelease where the normals are sent off. What would be the point of hiring an MLT $25 an hour who cannot even do differentials and while a computer can release the normals for free? The lab assistant gets paid $15 an hour for running the instrument and perform maintenance, so an MLT is overpriced for that.

I suppose an MLT can just do coagulation but most hematology departments have the CLS run coag and hemat at the same time. I suppose if it is a large hospital, an MLT can just do coag but at large hospitals they would have complex coagulation testing such as mixing studies and factor deficient assays, all of which a lab would probably want a CLS running and not an MLT.

Microbiology is not MLT territory because of having to identify all the different types of bacteria, that of which a CLS education would be superior. Blood bank is already off limits. Chemistry perhaps can be MLT territory. But even in chemistry a lot of labs just have autorelease so I'm not sure an MLT would matter much.

Immunology and special chemistry particularly EIA assays are mostly complex tests, and I doubt any lab would want an MLT doing the pipetting and so forth especially since these are the tests that bring the most profit in.

Finally, the bay area starts off CLSs around $35 an hr. $40 an hour if you're including a differential.

My point is, MLT in CA is a nonstarter. This is why it has been around for 2 years but no one is hiring them. CA has made the MLT here limited by not allowing microscopic work, blood bank, micro, or complex testing. I read somewhere that the ratio here in CA has to be 1 CLS to 4 MLTs because the CLS supervises them. Labs would rather hire 4 lab assistants $14 an hour to be supervised by CLSs rather than 4 MLTs $24 an hour.

In other states as I understand it, MLTs can do the same as CLSs. In that instance, it would make sense to hire MLTs because they are cheaper. This is also why pay for CLSs in other states is lower because MLTs bring the pay down.

I honestly don't see MLTs being utilized that much in this state for all of the above reasons.

Yep...in Ohio we can do all of those areas.....even pipetting. I didn't realize pipetting was considered a duty that only MT's can perform. There are MLT's(two year degree plus certification) working in EVERY department in the laboratories...including BB, Micro. We actually have a Lead in the Micro dept that is an MLT.

Sorry CLS48. My post was supposed to be for some guy that is trying to find out if he can work in the US after getting schooling in India. I wasn't actually inquiring about your credentials.
I shared these past posts with another MLT (supervisor) in my Laboratory and she laughed. She thought the best part was regarding the Pharm/pharm tech. Since she has been a Pharm tech and one of her sisters is a Pharm. she totally disagreed with getting paid 50.00 per hour to count pills. She knows first hand that is incorrect and in no way correlates to the MT/MLT discussion.

I really find it hard to believe that mlt's are the reason MT's aren't better paid. I mean if there really is a shortage of lab professionals you would think wages would go higher.
Engineers have techs that do some of the work that the degreed engineers would do. CAD designers, electronics techs, field service techs, etc. But they're still well paid because few people major in engineering to keep up w/ demand.
Why isn't the same true of lab professionals if there really is a shortage.

If an MLT can do everything an MT does, what is the point of paying more for an MT? There would be more of a demand for MLTs than MTs and more hospitals would hire them because they are cheaper to pay.

In CA, only CLSs can release results so we are in high demand. MLTs supposedly can now start releasing results but since they can't do microbiology, blood bank, or microscopic work such as differentials or UAs, they are basically like lab assistants so CLSs will still be in high demand.

Carlos in Sugar Land, Texas said: I really find it hard to believe that mlt's are the reason MT's aren't better paid. I mean if there really is a shortage of lab professionals you would think wages would go higher.
Engineers have techs that do some of the work that the degreed engineers would do. CAD designers, electronics techs, field service techs, etc. But they're still well paid because few people major in engineering to keep up w/ demand.
Why isn't the same true of lab professionals if there really is a shortage.

OUTSOURCING

Carlos in Sugar Land, Texas said: I really find it hard to believe that mlt's are the reason MT's aren't better paid. I mean if there really is a shortage of lab professionals you would think wages would go higher.
Engineers have techs that do some of the work that the degreed engineers would do. CAD designers, electronics techs, field service techs, etc. But they're still well paid because few people major in engineering to keep up w/ demand.
Why isn't the same true of lab professionals if there really is a shortage.

Carlos, WE DO NOT CONTROL OUR OWN PROFESSION, the pathologist do. So their solution was to create the MLT, what this created was more CONFUSION bc MLTs in some areas have the same job description as MT.

Even that did not help bc the salaries for lab tech are terrible, nownthey are hiring from overseas.

So what they created was 1. Mlts thinking that the associate degree is the end all be all.
2. Foreign MT with the AMT just happy to get a H1visa

So the shortage did not increase wages, instead created alot of power strugles btw MLT an MTs.