Wage Inflation vrs. HPI

System

Our PA.s get between 18 and 25k I think.

kriss_boy

Generali wrote: »

According to the BBC (no link) over the past 50 years real (inflation adjusted) house prices have risen by 2.79% and wages by 2.70%.

Well hopefully the inverse will emerge over the next 10/15 years!

silvercar

When I first graduated (1985) a new graduate recruit public sector post would pay about 8k, now it is about 25k+. (central London figures)

michaels

Ceteris paribus (specifically with regard to interest rates) as incomes rise the proportion of income on non-internationally trade-able goods will increase as the relative price of trade able goods falls.

Sorry if this supports Hamish but it goes to reason - if a dvd player used to cost 200 but now costs 20 do people buy 10 dvd players or use the spare income for other things - such as devoting a higher proportion of their income to housing costs, housing land being in limited supply it is not possible to just build more houses as the rising price signal would cause in other industries.

1984ReturnsForReal_2

Average Wage Inflation

---

£23,452 per annum with a 3% rise = £703.56 rise


House Price Inflation

---

£161,783 with a 3% rise £4853.49 rise



MPs Salary

---

£64,766 per annum with a 3% rise £1942.98



Just a thought, why does an MP need an extra £2k per annum?

This is the problem with working a deal out on % 's......

PasturesNew

Cleaver wrote: »

According to the BBC the average wage in 1990 was £13,760 (link). Assuming a 40 hour week, working at £6.60 an hour (as you did in 1990) would be £13,765 per year.

Could you really earn above the average wage in 1990 doing a typing job?

Well, the world's changed since then, so yes. But the world's changed in a lot of jobs/industries.

Back in 1990 I was a highly qualified and experienced secretary, doing temping work, in a world where not many people could actually type - because you used a typewriter and had to have RSA II and RSA III to be able to do the job. You had to calculate by hand how to lay out tables and get it right first time, along with carbon copies. Secretaries were therefore very bright and very able, bringing skills to the job beyond pressing buttons.

Now, everybody's given a PC and Word and churn out typing .... and there's no premium for the skill any more. It's just perceived as pressing buttons. Also, in a lot of cases, secretaries have been dispensed with entirely - managers don't now dictate, they type their own documents. So there are less jobs too.

PCs have "stolen" a lot of previously skilled jobs and enabled "anybody to have a go".

Now the rate is £6-6.50 because people just want somebody to sit in front of a PC and type/press buttons. People aren't qualified, they don't know the rules about salutations or layout. The employers can't tell the difference between a skilled secretary/PA and somebody who has used Word for years... but that's because they have rarely seen somebody like me working, they've not experienced the superior quality and faster speeds achieved; they just want a bum on a seat. So now, if you want a temp to come in and do some typing, it's the lowest rate everybody can get away with.

If I hadn't shredded my timesheets from this period when I last moved, two years ago, I'd have scanned one in to prove my basic rate of pay was £6.60/hour.

Cleaver

PasturesNew wrote: »

Now the rate is £6-6.50 because people just want somebody to sit in front of a PC and type/press buttons. People aren't qualified, they don't know the rules about salutations or layout. The employers can't tell the difference between a skilled secretary/PA and somebody who has used Word for years... but that's because they have rarely seen somebody like me working, they've not experienced the superior quality and faster speeds achieved; they just want a bum on a seat. So now, if you want a temp to come in and do some typing, it's the lowest rate everybody can get away with.

If I hadn't shredded my timesheets from this period when I last moved, two years ago, I'd have scanned one in to prove my basic rate of pay was £6.60/hour.

When I bring temps in to my team, I don't just look for a 'bum on a seat', but you're right, I'm not that bothered how fast they can type. And I guess in this day and age we're all more concerned with the content and purpose of a document, report or letter rather than the layout etc.

The admin temps we've taken on as permenant have been ones with good initiative, decent knowledge of all packages (powerpoint, project, excel, word, access etc. etc.), taken on work when they weren't asked and also have just 'got' what we're about as a team and what we do. Gotta be honest, I've never really looked at whether they've had RSA qualifications. Most of us twentysomethings have been brought up on computers and can type like deamons, so I tend to type everything myself.

PasturesNew

Cleaver wrote: »

According to the BBC the average wage in 1990 was £13,760 (link). Assuming a 40 hour week, working at £6.60 an hour (as you did in 1990) would be £13,765 per year.

Could you really earn above the average wage in 1990 doing a typing job?

I just realised, your maths and assumptions are flawed.

I did a 37.5 hour week, but back then there was no paid holiday. Temps didn't get any paid holiday at all. So, if you say you have off 5.6 weeks per year (4 weeks + bank holidays), then you're only working for 46.4 weeks/year, so £11,500/year.
http://www.google.co.uk/#hl=en&source=hp&q=37.5*6.6*%2852-5.6%29&btnG=Google+Search&meta=&aq=f&oq=37.5*6.6*46.6

vivatifosi

I'd go along with what Pastures is saying Cleaver. When I was temping in 1981 I was earning £5.70 an hour in London for being an experienced Word Processor operator. The rate now is only a little higher, for all the reasons stated. Plus because we can touch type properly, we will always be faster. Both of us can type 90 wpm plus, the average keyboard junkie that I know can probably do about 40.

Cleaver

vivatifosi wrote: »

The rate now is only a little higher, for all the reasons stated. Plus because we can touch type properly, we will always be faster. Both of us can type 90 wpm plus, the average keyboard junkie that I know can probably do about 40.

I just timed myself - 69 wpm. You're right, 90 is fast.

But as discussed, I just don't know whether fast typing is a required skill in most general offices nowadays.