Suppressing Wages of Naval Architects is the Last Thing the U.S. MIB Needs Right Now
The MOC
By
Andrej Klema
February 18, 2026
In October 2023, a class action lawsuit was filed against many of the top shipbuilders and ship design firms in the United States. The plaintiffs allege that the shipbuilders have been conspiring together to suppress wages and not recruit each other’s naval architects though secret no-poach agreements. Regardless of the eventual outcome of this case, this news has been a dark cloud over the naval architecture community, which already struggles to recruit top talent. A common sentiment at my college, Webb Institute, is that the best way to make money is to get out of the naval architecture field as soon as possible. This is evidenced by alumni and trustees who have reached significant levels of wealth by jumping ship to career fields such as IT, systems integration, finance, and consulting—sometimes going directly from graduation without ever working in the marine industry. In a time when shipbuilding is at the forefront of the nation’s priorities, this attitude within the naval architecture community is self-destructive and unattractive for high schoolers looking for a college/career to pursue. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the mean annual wage for financial and investment analysts is less than 5% more than the mean annual wage for marine engineers and naval architects. The public perception, however, is markedly different. Social media is full of videos talking about the “finance bro” whereas naval architecture is never mentioned despite having higher median pay and the same job outlook (6% growth) as financial analysts.
The U.S. Department of Labor estimates 600 openings annually for naval architects and marine engineers. However, there are less than 400 naval architecture and marine engineering graduates each year. Many of the 400 cannot enter the industry as naval architects because they are coming from federal service academies or state maritime academies which require service commitments to sail with the military or merchant marine. Based on my research using individual college websites, phone calls to departments, and the National Center for Education Statistics, the number of naval architects graduating each year from civilian undergraduate programs in the United States is roughly 100. So, on average, there are six vacancies for every graduate. In this hiring environment, the nation’s ship design firms and shipyards should be fiercely competing for naval architects. This competition would drive innovation in shipbuilding that our country so badly needs and raise salaries to the point where more top students would be attracted to naval architecture rather than other higher-paying STEM fields like computer engineering or aerospace engineering. As heartless as it may sound, money is sometimes the deciding factor. The difficulty of a naval architecture and marine engineering degree should be rewarded monetarily and socially. The median salary for a naval architect should be equal to that of an aerospace engineer, not $29,000 less. There should also be just as much social status for naval architects as there is for aerospace engineers or finance bros.
What is it with “finance bros” that gives them such social status? Movies? TV shows? Social media trends? Probably a combination of all three. There are certainly a lot more finance jobs than naval architecture jobs. BLS reported 429,000 financial analyst jobs in 2024 while only reporting 8,500 naval architecture jobs. Yet finance is so much more competitive than naval architecture despite having lower median pay. Maybe a movie about shipbuilding starring Glen Powell or Jon Hamm as a naval architect will do more for the maritime industrial base than a NASCAR with a submarine on it. For reference, Top Gun Maverick cost $177 million to produce, and it is safe to say that the franchise has been responsible for numerous people wanting to work in naval aviation. The U.S. Navy’s most recent contract with Blue Forge Alliance to strengthen the maritime industrial base was for $951 million. That’s more than enough to make a blockbuster movie that will inspire a generation of naval architects, marine engineers, and shipyard workers for decades to come.
New York has finance bros, Washington D.C. has Capitol Hill staffers, and Silicon Valley has tech bros. The big shipbuilding centers of the U.S. are Hampton Roads, Virginia; Pascagoula, Mississippi; San Diego, California; Seattle, Washington; and Groton, Connecticut. These cities all have opportunities to create the same mystique and social status for naval architects as any other city might do with their predominant career for young professionals. The first step can be small, like issuing all naval architects company Patagonia vests (which have to be returned when they leave the firm of course). Even that word “firm” has an elevated professional sound to it. Don’t call it a naval architecture company, call it a naval architecture firm. After all, it is a skilled profession that requires a licensure to practice privately. Rosenblatt & Associates calls themselves a firm. Glosten calls themselves a consultancy. These companies are taking the right step.
Next, naval architects need a stereotype. Can stereotypes be mean? Yes. Are they good publicity for a profession? Yes. Imagine a stereotype about naval architects as “yacht club kids who wanted to keep working on boats.” Is it mean? A little. Is it accurate? Actually, more than you would think. What does it do for the industry? It portrays a profession for wealthy socialites, which implies that it is a well-paying career that can allow for an expensive yacht-club lifestyle (which is true). Is this the sort of stereotype that would get people interested in the profession? Yes! But no one talks about it that way. To get to the point where the best engineers are competing for naval architecture positions, the naval architecture career field needs to have a reputation of affluence and wealth, not wage suppression.
When asked about the class action lawsuit, the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers said that it is neither plaintiff nor defendant in the case.
The American Society of Naval Engineers (ASNE) was named in the lawsuit and was subpoenaed by both the plaintiff and the defendant. Because the case is currently active before the Supreme Court, ASNE is unable to make any additional comments at this time.
Wage suppression was a short-sighted cost-cutting measure that has hurt the industry, driven away top talent, and brought dishonor to the profession of shipbuilding. Increasing wages for naval architects to a fair, competitive level will follow the law, inspire people to pursue naval architecture, and retain those who are already studying it. If all goes well, there will come a day when a naval architect can walk into a bar and when they introduce themselves as a naval architect, the answer will not be “What’s that?”.
Andrej Klema is a Nimitz Intern at the Center for Maritime Strategy pursuing a Bachelor’s of Science in Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering at Webb Institute in Glen Cove, New York.
The views expressed in this piece are the sole opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Center for Maritime Strategy or other institutions listed.
The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Department of the Navy or Department of Defense.
Center for Maritime Strategy
By Andrej Klema
In October 2023, a class action lawsuit was filed against many of the top shipbuilders and ship design firms in the United States. The plaintiffs allege that the shipbuilders have been conspiring together to suppress wages and not recruit each other’s naval architects though secret no-poach agreements. Regardless of the eventual outcome of this case, this news has been a dark cloud over the naval architecture community, which already struggles to recruit top talent. A common sentiment at my college, Webb Institute, is that the best way to make money is to get out of the naval architecture field as soon as possible. This is evidenced by alumni and trustees who have reached significant levels of wealth by jumping ship to career fields such as IT, systems integration, finance, and consulting—sometimes going directly from graduation without ever working in the marine industry. In a time when shipbuilding is at the forefront of the nation’s priorities, this attitude within the naval architecture community is self-destructive and unattractive for high schoolers looking for a college/career to pursue. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the mean annual wage for financial and investment analysts is less than 5% more than the mean annual wage for marine engineers and naval architects. The public perception, however, is markedly different. Social media is full of videos talking about the “finance bro” whereas naval architecture is never mentioned despite having higher median pay and the same job outlook (6% growth) as financial analysts.
The U.S. Department of Labor estimates 600 openings annually for naval architects and marine engineers. However, there are less than 400 naval architecture and marine engineering graduates each year. Many of the 400 cannot enter the industry as naval architects because they are coming from federal service academies or state maritime academies which require service commitments to sail with the military or merchant marine. Based on my research using individual college websites, phone calls to departments, and the National Center for Education Statistics, the number of naval architects graduating each year from civilian undergraduate programs in the United States is roughly 100. So, on average, there are six vacancies for every graduate. In this hiring environment, the nation’s ship design firms and shipyards should be fiercely competing for naval architects. This competition would drive innovation in shipbuilding that our country so badly needs and raise salaries to the point where more top students would be attracted to naval architecture rather than other higher-paying STEM fields like computer engineering or aerospace engineering. As heartless as it may sound, money is sometimes the deciding factor. The difficulty of a naval architecture and marine engineering degree should be rewarded monetarily and socially. The median salary for a naval architect should be equal to that of an aerospace engineer, not $29,000 less. There should also be just as much social status for naval architects as there is for aerospace engineers or finance bros.
What is it with “finance bros” that gives them such social status? Movies? TV shows? Social media trends? Probably a combination of all three. There are certainly a lot more finance jobs than naval architecture jobs. BLS reported 429,000 financial analyst jobs in 2024 while only reporting 8,500 naval architecture jobs. Yet finance is so much more competitive than naval architecture despite having lower median pay. Maybe a movie about shipbuilding starring Glen Powell or Jon Hamm as a naval architect will do more for the maritime industrial base than a NASCAR with a submarine on it. For reference, Top Gun Maverick cost $177 million to produce, and it is safe to say that the franchise has been responsible for numerous people wanting to work in naval aviation. The U.S. Navy’s most recent contract with Blue Forge Alliance to strengthen the maritime industrial base was for $951 million. That’s more than enough to make a blockbuster movie that will inspire a generation of naval architects, marine engineers, and shipyard workers for decades to come.
New York has finance bros, Washington D.C. has Capitol Hill staffers, and Silicon Valley has tech bros. The big shipbuilding centers of the U.S. are Hampton Roads, Virginia; Pascagoula, Mississippi; San Diego, California; Seattle, Washington; and Groton, Connecticut. These cities all have opportunities to create the same mystique and social status for naval architects as any other city might do with their predominant career for young professionals. The first step can be small, like issuing all naval architects company Patagonia vests (which have to be returned when they leave the firm of course). Even that word “firm” has an elevated professional sound to it. Don’t call it a naval architecture company, call it a naval architecture firm. After all, it is a skilled profession that requires a licensure to practice privately. Rosenblatt & Associates calls themselves a firm. Glosten calls themselves a consultancy. These companies are taking the right step.
Next, naval architects need a stereotype. Can stereotypes be mean? Yes. Are they good publicity for a profession? Yes. Imagine a stereotype about naval architects as “yacht club kids who wanted to keep working on boats.” Is it mean? A little. Is it accurate? Actually, more than you would think. What does it do for the industry? It portrays a profession for wealthy socialites, which implies that it is a well-paying career that can allow for an expensive yacht-club lifestyle (which is true). Is this the sort of stereotype that would get people interested in the profession? Yes! But no one talks about it that way. To get to the point where the best engineers are competing for naval architecture positions, the naval architecture career field needs to have a reputation of affluence and wealth, not wage suppression.
When asked about the class action lawsuit, the Society of Naval Architects and Marine Engineers said that it is neither plaintiff nor defendant in the case.
The American Society of Naval Engineers (ASNE) was named in the lawsuit and was subpoenaed by both the plaintiff and the defendant. Because the case is currently active before the Supreme Court, ASNE is unable to make any additional comments at this time.
Wage suppression was a short-sighted cost-cutting measure that has hurt the industry, driven away top talent, and brought dishonor to the profession of shipbuilding. Increasing wages for naval architects to a fair, competitive level will follow the law, inspire people to pursue naval architecture, and retain those who are already studying it. If all goes well, there will come a day when a naval architect can walk into a bar and when they introduce themselves as a naval architect, the answer will not be “What’s that?”.
Andrej Klema is a Nimitz Intern at the Center for Maritime Strategy pursuing a Bachelor’s of Science in Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering at Webb Institute in Glen Cove, New York.
The views expressed in this piece are the sole opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Center for Maritime Strategy or other institutions listed.
The views expressed are those of the author and do not reflect the official position of the Department of the Navy or Department of Defense.