What jobs earn £100k a year?

prowla

robatwork said:

coffeehound said:

This looks like a lucrative gravy train

It appears somewhat bizarre that the NHS would spaff money away on a role that isn't medical and isn't needed.
Anyone who has spent time in a Birmingham hospital, or frankly just about anywhere else in the UK would see the most diverse and inclusive workforce on the planet. The NHS need no help to employ staff no matter their race,  religion or sexual orientation - they've done a fabulous job already. 

The NHS will soak up any money it can get and this is an example of why simply throwing money at it is not the answer.

Andy_L

robatwork said:

Andy_L said:

robatwork said:

coffeehound said:

This looks like a lucrative gravy train

It appears somewhat bizarre that the NHS would spaff money away on a role that isn't medical and isn't needed.
Anyone who has spent time in a Birmingham hospital, or frankly just about anywhere else in the UK would see the most diverse and inclusive workforce on the planet. The NHS need no help to employ staff no matter their race,  religion or sexual orientation - they've done a fabulous job already. 

"Repeated cases of bullying and a toxic environment at one of England's largest NHS trusts have been found in a review.

The Bewick report was ordered after a BBC Newsnight investigation heard from staff at University Hospitals Birmingham (UHB) saying a climate of fear had put patients at risk."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-65098307

If you're intimating that a Director of Equality Diversity and Inclusion will fix a "toxic bullying" workplace then I'll tell you it won't.

I'm intimating that UHB isn't particularly inclusive since it has big problems with "bullying, coercion, intimidation and misogyny"

coffeehound

MeteredOut said:

coffeehound said:

There are 215 NHS trusts in the UK, so if each is paying the medium figure that would be over £19M.  Yikes

For the full Daily Express effect, you're meant to also convert that into the "number of full time equivalent nurses" currency.

Yes, that would be a useful comparison

coffeehound

MacPingu1986 said:

coffeehound said:

This looks like a lucrative gravy train
<snip>

What makes you think the role would be a "lucrative gravy train"? It's a good salary sure, but reflects a senior leadership role involving leading & managing a function, project management, legal & reg compliance, reporting into the board, etc... 

For an employer as large as an NHS trust (where good people really are a key resource) ensuring you're treating staff well, monitoring this and tackling D&I issues are pretty important. *Lots* of comparable private sector organisations where people are a key asset have these types of role.

You're working hard to make the job sound difficult, but, assuming the job fuction is worthwhile, would it really require a director grade to implement some standard monitoring processes and tools?  HR do this sort of work every day.  It seems to be more about appearances than anything else.  Many agree the NHS needs less bureaocracy rather than more

MacPingu1986

coffeehound said:

MacPingu1986 said:

coffeehound said:

This looks like a lucrative gravy train
<snip>

What makes you think the role would be a "lucrative gravy train"? It's a good salary sure, but reflects a senior leadership role involving leading & managing a function, project management, legal & reg compliance, reporting into the board, etc... 

For an employer as large as an NHS trust (where good people really are a key resource) ensuring you're treating staff well, monitoring this and tackling D&I issues are pretty important. *Lots* of comparable private sector organisations where people are a key asset have these types of role.

You're working hard to make the job sound difficult, but, assuming the job fuction is worthwhile, would it really require a director grade to implement some standard monitoring processes and tools?  HR do this sort of work every day.  It seems to be more about appearances than anything else.  Many agree the NHS needs less bureaocracy rather than more

I'm not working hard to make the job sound difficult, I just took a few of the core items from the job spec that are exactly the sort of things that a head of/director of D&I is responsible for.

This sort of role for a large employer goes far beyond just implementing standard monitoring processes - does the existing D&I monitoring work? What could be improved? What new initiatives will you drive forward? How will you protect the trust from staff or patient discrimination claims? For a large employer of people, many with specialist skills, staff morale & engagement are key in getting more value out of existing staff, and staff turnover is a substantial cost. These are all worthwhile things that affect the bottom line, plus the general human decency of having a workplace that treats people fairly and doesn't unfairly discriminate against staff or patients. Plenty of large private sector organizations see the value in having senior leadership roles looking after D&I.

You're absolutely right HR functions do this kind of work -  this role *is* a HR role, it sits in the HR team and reports into the Chief People Officer of the Trust

Cromwell77

Be careful what you wish for, I was earning over that as CTO in London, to earn these salaries you need to give them more than the amount back it ability, effort and reward and it’s not always nice. I would be disturbed frequently when on holiday suddenly have to work late nights or early morning or weekends with no notice there is always a price. 

Now I earn around £25k a year working for myself as an artist and I love it.

DKLS

Work for the NHS or the Civil Service as an external contractor, you will get £500 pd easy. 

I was in a meeting yesterday where we discussed retention for Business analysts and Project Managers as they keep leaving. It's really not difficult, on average they pay 35k for those roles, which is well below industry averages. So they get contractors in, and upskill other staff, throwing training and certificates at them. They then get a couple of projects under their belt, realise what the contractors are on and leave for more money. 

Elliott.T123

DKLS said:

Work for the NHS or the Civil Service as an external contractor, you will get £500 pd easy. 

I was in a meeting yesterday where we discussed retention for Business analysts and Project Managers as they keep leaving. It's really not difficult, on average they pay 35k for those roles, which is well below industry averages. So they get contractors in, and upskill other staff, throwing training and certificates at them. They then get a couple of projects under their belt, realise what the contractors are on and leave for more money. 

The public sector generally still pays below going rate for most contractors too. I work in recruitment and have PM's and BA's working on a few projects the PM's are on between £600-800 per day and the BA's £550-700.

Regarding jobs paying over £100k, the list is almost endless, if you are good and at the peak in your profession a hell of a lot will pay that, equally if you aren't then a lot wont. For example National League footballers earn around £1k a week, a top premiership player will earn £300k a week. I have placed Sales Managers on £25k plus £5k commission, I have also placed Sales Managers on £250k base £250k Commission. 

If you want to have the highest chance of earning over £100k fairly quickly into a career I would probably suggest lawyer, consulting firm or sales. 

strawb_shortcake

Where I am in the CS we've seen "Contractors" paid larger sums, as they come through a consortium they are actually employed through another company
An equivalent Contractor to myself would be paid £65-70k to my £45k. 

We have just got rid of lots of these staff, they do have other opportunities with both OGD and private companies both in the UK and overseas. I'm not sure I'd want that much uncertainty and there's always the question of how long the CS will be able to fund these Contractors.

I wouldn't mind being paid £100k a year, but earning it? Not so keen 

mark_cycling00

£100k PAYE contractor has to pay both national insurance rates and gets no pay for holidays or illness. If you're lucky the take-home is £50,000

You would then have very different expectations in the workplace with less flexibility in hours and usually less working from home. So increased travel and childcare costs too. Then lots of companies refuse to employ ex-contractors so longer periods without work potentially.

It does work for older employees who's children are more grown up and who want to pile £40k tax-free into a pension each year 

£100k however is the average salary in California. 
Average. Move!

You don't get rich from Salary. It's taxed and you never earn what you actually produce.

Set-up a small business, or invest. 
As the UK continues to sink in world trade and relevance you want to be one of the people who's income comes mostly from non-uk investments