To accurately assess the 200 jobs featured in our 2010 Jobs Rated Report, we examined multiple aspects of each profession, categorizing them into four Core Criteria: Environment, Income, Outlook, and Stress. Each job’s physical demands were factored into the Environment score to provide a comprehensive evaluation of workplace conditions.

A significant portion of the data used in the rankings was sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), a division of the U.S. Department of Labor.

Below is a breakdown of how we determined rankings for each of the four Core Criteria, followed by an explanation of how Overall Rankings were computed.

1. ENVIRONMENT

The Environment category evaluates both the physical and emotional factors of a job. A higher score indicates a more challenging or hazardous work environment, while a lower score reflects a more favorable one.

Environmental Factors Considered:

EMOTIONAL FACTORS:

  • Degree of competitiveness (0-15)
  • Degree of personal hazards faced (0-10)
  • Degree of peril faced by colleagues (0-8)
  • Degree of public contact (0-8)
  • Total Maximum Points: 41

PHYSICAL FACTORS:

  • Necessary energy component (0-5)
  • Physical demands (crawling, stooping, bending, etc.) (0-12)
  • Work conditions (toxic fumes, extreme noise, etc.) (0-13)
  • Stamina required (0-5)
  • Degree of confinement (0-5)
  • Total Maximum Points: 40

The physical demands of each job were evaluated using data from the Department of Labor, with lifting requirements categorized into five levels—ranging from sedentary (lifting up to 10 lbs.) to very heavy work (lifting over 100 lbs.). Additional points were added for hazard exposure and extreme work conditions (e.g., outdoor work in harsh weather).

Additionally, work hours were factored into the final environment score, with higher scores assigned to jobs requiring extended or irregular hours.

2. INCOME

The Income score is derived from mid-level salaries, rather than average income, to provide a more accurate representation of earning potential.

Income Considerations:

  • Beginning income: 10th percentile of workers
  • Midlevel income: 50th percentile of workers
  • Top-level income: 90th percentile of workers

Growth Potential was also included in the scoring process, calculated as the percentage increase from entry-level to top-level salary. For example, an actuary earning $57,000 at entry-level and $176,000 at peak results in a growth potential of 209%, which is factored into the income score.

Income figures were rounded to the nearest $1,000 for ranking purposes.

3. OUTLOOK

Higher scores indicate strong future job prospects, while lower scores reflect less promising outlooks.

Outlook Factors Considered:

  • Employment Growth: Based on BLS projections (2008-2018).
  • Income Growth Potential: Projected salary increases over time.
  • Unemployment Rate: Ranked on a 1-to-5 scale, with adjustments for underemployment and discouraged workers.

Outlook scores reflect a job’s long-term viability and stability, incorporating both employment demand and potential earnings growth.

4. STRESS

Stress levels were calculated based on 11 job-related demands, with higher scores indicating greater stress.

Stress Factors Considered:

  • Travel requirements (0-10)
  • Income growth potential (income divided by 100)
  • Deadlines (0-9)
  • Working in the public eye (0-5)
  • Competitiveness (0-15)
  • Physical demands (stooping, climbing, lifting, etc.) (0-14)
  • Environmental conditions (toxins, noise, extreme temperatures) (0-13)
  • Hazards encountered (0-5)
  • Risk to own life (0-8)
  • Risk to another’s life (0-10)
  • Public interaction (0-8)

When ties occurred, income growth potential was used as a tiebreaker, as higher-income potential jobs often correlate with greater stress levels.

5. OVERALL RANKINGS

The Overall Rankings were determined by summing the scores from each of the four Core Criteria:

  • Environment
  • Income
  • Outlook
  • Stress

Each criterion was equally weighted, ensuring an objective comparison across all 200 jobs included in the report.

Tiebreaking Process:

In cases where jobs received identical scores, the same rank was assigned to all tied positions. This could result in skipped rank numbers (e.g., two jobs ranked #10, with the next job listed as #12).

This methodology ensures that the 2010 Jobs Rated Report provides a data-driven, objective evaluation of careers based on key workplace factors.