Average UK full-time wage

getmore4less

if you look at the median and mean across the age demographic the median grows a lot slower than the mean(as you would expect.

lower paid jobs/careers peak much sooner and tend to employ people with lower ambition to earn more.


Also the benifit/tax systems distributes significant income from the income healthy to income poor.

SarEl

LadyMissA wrote: »

Qualifications do not really come into it if you are in a low paid industry or the company you work for doesn't pay the going rate regardless of qualifications.

Try not to be completely ridiculous. Qualifications are not the only factor, but I used them as an example of why there are wage differentials, and they are certainly one of the factors involved. There is no such thing as a "low paid industry" or "companies that don't pay the going rate" - they are not breeds of animal. Employers pay what they need to to obtain the skills, experience and qualifications they require. The rarer those are in the workforce, the more they are forced to pay for them if they require them. So if a company doesn't need to pay more for what they require because there are a lot of people who can do the job and competition for the jobs, then they will not do so because they don't need to. So pay fluctuates according to demand, just like any other price - low pay has nothing to do with "industries" or "going rates" (and the "going rate" is being paid anyway - it is the rate that people are prepared to work for, not a national standard or fixed amount). It has to do with supply and demand.

None of which detracts from my original points that the OP's survey is statistically meaningless, and that personal subjective views of what is a high earner is not evidence of this being a fact.

ceridwen

£10k-£19,999k

SarEl wrote: »

It depends on your perspective - if you are unemployed it would be wouldn't it? But that does not mean that a personal opinion is a statistically relevant statement. In the greater world £50k is is a far from uncommon salary - therefore assuming that anyone over that is "ridiculously high" earner for a statistically vaild piece of research is silly. Which is what the OP claims to be conducting.

£50k - "far from uncommon".

Well - this will depend obviously on a variety of factors. Some parts of the country are worse paid than normal. Some parts have EXTREMELY bad unemployment problems. A variety of things will skew this.

For the record - what I consider a "fair" salary for people generally (including myself) is about £28k-£30k (tops £35,000). Anyone earning beyond that is well-paid IMO. £50,000k plus is VERY well-paid IMO.

*******************************

Knew I shouldnt have come onto this thread :think: - am now likely to have another "brainstorming session" coming up personally analysing out why I don't even earn a normal salary - still less this "apparently pretty normal salary of £50,000 plus".

Wanders off muttering to self:
- have I got at least average level intelligence? (check - higher than)
- have I got reasonable appearance? (check - did have when younger)

Hmmm....maybe its that conscience and wish to "have a life" perhaps??:think:

Wish I hadnt started this..:rotfl::rotfl:...NOTE TO SELF = Always remember what you are being paid is no reflection on your worth (tries to remember JUST how many times I've had to remind myself of that over the years....).

SarEl

ceridwen wrote: »

£50k - "far from uncommon".

Well - this will depend obviously on a variety of factors. Some parts of the country are worse paid than normal. Some parts have EXTREMELY bad unemployment problems. A variety of things will skew this.
-paid IMO.
.

And again I point out that personal opinion is not statistically valid evidence. The fact is that wages over £50k are far from uncommon, and therefore lumping everyine who earns over £50k into a bracket of "riduculously high earners" is personal bias.

Of course factors like high levels of unemployment factor into the equation - that is part of the supply and demand ratio that I referred to.

But the fact remains that I have not at any point commented on what a "fair wage" is or what is "well off" or "rich" - those are subjective opinions. What you or anyone else subjectively think is fair or well off isn't relevant - there are wage differentials, there are reasons for those differentials (and please note that I did not comment on whether they are good or bad reasons - just that there are reasons), and the assumptions of the OP about what is a ridiculously high wage are flawed.

LadyMissA

£20k-£29,999k

SarEl wrote: »

There is no such thing as a "low paid industry" or "companies that don't pay the going rate" - they are not breeds of animal. Employers pay what they need to to obtain the skills, experience and qualifications they require. The rarer those are in the workforce, the more they are forced to pay for them if they require them. So if a company doesn't need to pay more for what they require because there are a lot of people who can do the job and competition for the jobs, then they will not do so because they don't need to.

It is well known that hospitality pays less for accounts people than say in the media companies or law so there are low paying industries (not matter what you say) yet you do the same job and need the same knowledge. I know my old company wasn't paying the going rate due to looking at salary surveys and talking to agencies. Pay increases weren't exactley great that's why they couldn't keep staff and spent over £60k in recruitment fees in the time I was with them.

Tiddlywinks

LadyMissA wrote: »

It is well known that hospitality pays less for accounts people than say in the media companies or law so there are low paying industries (not matter what you say) yet you do the same job and need the same knowledge. I know my old company wasn't paying the going rate due to looking at salary surveys and talking to agencies. Pay increases weren't exactley great that's why they couldn't keep staff and spent over £60k in recruitment fees in the time I was with them.

But they WERE paying the "going rate" as they managed to retain staff in those roles - had the existing staff left for more pay then they would need to employ new staff at a salary that would entice suitable applicants - it's just market forces.

As unemployment levels rise, employers will be able to test the waters by lowering the value of their remuneration packages - if suitable applications are received then happy days, if not then they can creep up the package until they get someone.

Geography also plays a part - I work for a national organisation and my colleagues on an equal grade to me but who live in more affordable areas can get more pirchasing value from the same pay because property costs for one are less than I need to pay in my London commuter belt area - that's life and I have a choice as to my location so I accept that.

Salaries do not really reflect the value of the post holder but more of the skills held by the post holder and how rare they may be in the employment market - it's not personal, it's business.

getmore4less

SarEl wrote: »

.......There is no such thing as a "low paid industry" or "companies that don't pay the going rate" - they are not breeds of animal. Employers pay what they need to to obtain the skills, experience and qualifications they require. The rarer those are in the workforce, the more they are forced to pay for them if they require them.........

But some sectors do manipulate the supply through the use of closed shops.

persa

Tiddlywinks wrote: »

But they WERE paying the "going rate" as they managed to retain staff in those roles - had the existing staff left for more pay then they would need to employ new staff at a salary that would entice suitable applicants - it's just market forces.

LadyMissA works in accountancy.

Claw back clauses, restrictive covenants, 3 month notice periods... It can be very difficult to get out sometimes and get a job with another employer who is offering market rates. Staff turnover is generally quite high within accountancy - for a lot of people, as soon as they spot a way to get out (e.g. clause in contract expiring), they make a break for it!

A lot of employers in this field will offer market rates to new joiners, but as their qualifications and experience grow, their salary remains static. It's easy to recruit an accountant, less so to retain a happy one.

This is a very odd profession - if you want a decent payrise, generally you have to get a promotion at a different employer, rather than just work your way up at your existing one.

getmore4less

persa wrote: »

LadyMissA works in accountancy.

Really!

I though she WAS just a desk jockey in accounts departments for companies that don't pay the going rate but still can't afford them so let them go.

Andy_L

£30k-£39,999k

SarEl wrote: »

It depends on your perspective - if you are unemployed it would be wouldn't it? But that does not mean that a personal opinion is a statistically relevant statement. In the greater world £50k is is a far from uncommon salary - therefore assuming that anyone over that is "ridiculously high" earner for a statistically vaild piece of research is silly. Which is what the OP claims to be conducting.

IIRC it puts you in the top 10%