Do salaried wages increase in line with NMW rise from 2025?

KPM2019

Apologies if this has been asked before or is a stupid question* but I am currently searching for a new job and don't know what to do for the best, so if anyone has answers/advice, I'd be very grateful to hear them. 
We're not talking mega bucks jobs here, over the years I've worked in supervisory/assistant management level hospitality, retail and property management, with my most recent hourly rate being £12.80p/hr or £26624p/a (40hr contract)
I'm applying for similar roles with salaries of between £25-30k Job #1 sounded great at £31.5k but is for 48hrs which only works out to £12.62p/hr, less per hour than I was earning before plus it's further to commute.
Given that the NMW is set to rise to £12.21p/hr from April next year, (*potentially stupid question alert) will salaried jobs rise inline with the 6.7% increase, i.e. will the current £12.62p/hr (£31.5kp/a) rate become £13.47p/hr (£33610p/a) or is there no obligation from employers to increase salaries? 
Similarly, looking at jobs with hourly rates, Job#2 is currently paying £13.75p/hr (£28600. 40hrs) Would that increase to £14.67p/hr from April? This one is through a recruiter who says there's the option of being paid hourly or salaried. What's the difference?
I could manage on those current rates, it just doesn't seem fair to advertise a position currently paying £2.31p/hr over NMW (the price of experience/position of authority I suppose) to then have that difference reduced to only £1.54 from April 2025. Especially unfair for job #1 which is a management position currently paying £12.62p/hr which could end up only being 41p more than NMW.

Can anyone help please? :-)

born_again

Only wages that rise are the ones below the NMW. Employers have no obligation to increase any wage that pays more.

Fair? Not really. But that's the way it goes. Or it becomes a inflation merry-go-round.

MeteredOut

Salaries above NMW won't automatically increase, but there may be pressure on them to rise once NMW does go up.

Consider a team lead role where the gap between their wage and the people they manage (assuming NMW) has decreased, potentially to the point where it's not worth the extra hassle. They'll naturally want pay rise or may simply ask to become a team member again, meaning management will likely have to pay more to fill that role. 

TheSpectator

I think the employers NIC increase will mean less pay rises all round.

Hoenir

Employers will offer whatever they can afford to pay / need to offer to recruit staff.  From the employers perspective it's not just the 6.7% rise to factor in. On a salary of £33,610. There's an additional £900 of employers national insurance to factor in following the budget.  Then there's the employment rights legislation coming down the road. There'll be a lot of hard thinking when recruiting staff in certain sectors. Alternatively operating shorter opening hours. To reduce the cost burden that's being imposed. 

KPM2019

It's hard enough, being 50 (shhh!), applying for jobs and not hearing back from the majority of them, probably because of my age, but in the long run, I'd be a better choice. I'm not really interested in chasing the £££ these days, I just want a decent, long term job and a fair wage to show for my 30yrs more experience than a 20yr old

MeteredOut

KPM2019 said:

It's hard enough, being 50 (shhh!), applying for jobs and not hearing back from the majority of them, probably because of my age, but in the long run, I'd be a better choice. I'm not really interested in chasing the £££ these days, I just want a decent, long term job and a fair wage to show for my 30yrs more experience than a 20yr old

It's an unfortunate truth that many employers would rather have a 20 year old who can do an ok job rather than someone with 30 years experience who could do a better job but expects a larger salary.

Hoenir

MeteredOut said:

KPM2019 said:

It's hard enough, being 50 (shhh!), applying for jobs and not hearing back from the majority of them, probably because of my age, but in the long run, I'd be a better choice. I'm not really interested in chasing the £££ these days, I just want a decent, long term job and a fair wage to show for my 30yrs more experience than a 20yr old

It's an unfortunate truth that many employers would rather have a 20 year old who can do an ok job rather than someone with 30 years experience who could do a better job but expects a larger salary.

NMW for u21's is going to phased out. 16% rise next year as part of the process. In time might be youngsters struggling to find suitable employment. 

EnPointe

Hoenir said:

MeteredOut said:

KPM2019 said:

It's hard enough, being 50 (shhh!), applying for jobs and not hearing back from the majority of them, probably because of my age, but in the long run, I'd be a better choice. I'm not really interested in chasing the £££ these days, I just want a decent, long term job and a fair wage to show for my 30yrs more experience than a 20yr old

It's an unfortunate truth that many employers would rather have a 20 year old who can do an ok job rather than someone with 30 years experience who could do a better job but expects a larger salary.

NMW for u21's is going to phased out. 16% rise next year as part of the process. In time might be youngsters struggling to find suitable employment. 

or just recognition that 18 year olds  can undertake the same work  as 21  year olds or 25 year olds...  it;s very  noticable that a lot of organisations didn't employ the differential pay rates  just having an under 18 /  1st year apprentice rate and an 'Adult'   rate ...

El_Torro

The National Minimum Wage is a complex issue. "Trickle up" or whatever you want to call it being part of the issue. As stated in this thread already I could argue that my job requires that I be paid 10% more than someone on minimum wage. Or 50% more, or three times as much, or whatever. Of course under current legislation my employer doesn't need to listen to my assertion. Point is that it's a real issue. When the NMW rises this puts pressure on wages, not just those of people who are currently paid under the NMW, on others too. 

Another issue is that too high an NMW discourages companies from employing people. Especially if they could invest in machinery (or software these days) that could also do the job. Not as well maybe, cheaper though. 

Grumpy_chap

El_Torro said:

The National Minimum Wage is a complex issue. "Trickle up" or whatever you want to call it being part of the issue. As stated in this thread already I could argue that my job requires that I be paid 10% more than someone on minimum wage. Or 50% more, or three times as much, or whatever. Of course under current legislation my employer doesn't need to listen to my assertion. Point is that it's a real issue. When the NMW rises this puts pressure on wages, not just those of people who are currently paid under the NMW, on others too. 

Another issue is that too high an NMW discourages companies from employing people. Especially if they could invest in machinery (or software these days) that could also do the job. Not as well maybe, cheaper though. 

I suspect part of the rationale behind NMW rates is towards an individual working full time on NMW should not, ordinarily, require means tested benefits in addition.
The flip side of that is to prevent employers setting low salaries and relying on the benefits top up to make good the employer's failings.