Where do your earnings rank you?

[GT03ROB]

Well I'm at No.55.... had a pay cut this year & on average earn 39,600......

....not at all sure what the point of these statistics is.

[anonymous-user]

Dromedary66 said:

easytiger123 said:

Barristers and judges £36,916!!

Barristers are often self employed so presumably that is declared income and the rest they siphon via dividends and other tax minimising methods.

All barristers in independent practice are self employed. There are few effective mechanisms whereby self employed barristers can minimise tax. We are amongst the most visible earners to HMRC, and we are also taxed on money that we haven't yet received, so it's great fun. The rules have just been changed to allow incorporation of the sole trader's practice, but changes to corporate taxation have eliminated any tax advantage from doing that. The average figure presented might be accurate because many barristers do purely criminal cases and their gross earnings will often be below 38K. By contrast, average gross earnings per barrister in a large commercial chambers would be closer to 500K a year, with the most fashionable Silks being on one to three million a year gross. Deduct from that operating costs of about 30 per cent to get the pre tax figure, and then apply higher rate tax. I do OK by real world standards and fair to middling by civil lawyers standards, but I reckon that for every ten quid I bill I get to keep between three and four quid.

High Street solicitors earn bupkiss. Partners in large City law firms may gross over a million a year. Junior City solicitors start on about 70K ish gross and up to 100K gross, but they all work 28 hours a day 366 days a year, so I do not know what they ever do with the money. I discourage anyone I know from becoming a City solicitor!

Judges - the figures may be skewed by the many part time junior Judges paid fairly low daily stipends. Full time Judges in the senior echelons get six figure salaries (usually over 100 but below 200).

Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 28th November 19:57

[944fan]

DavidJG said:

Some of the less varied ones are also bullsh!t.

I don't know many IT Directors / CIOs who're on a figure as low as those quoted there. Same with Sales & Marketing / CEO level roles.

Looking at this, a large part of it is pure fantasy.

Yep. The IT salaries given there are crap. According to that I'm grossly over paid. Whereas in truth I seem paid probably fairly if slightly above average

[0000]

Yeah, the IT figures look very low.

[SpeedMattersNot]

I'm at No.331 and extremely happy.

[turbobloke]

It's not my data, nor did I write the article, but for those whose reaction to the information is based purely on a knee-jerk because of the secondary source, this being the Daily Mail, it's clearly indicated that this is ONS data. Presumably the scoffers think this claim is fabricated.

To check it out, click on the link in the text to download the xls spreadsheet. This shows a range of salaries in deciles for each profession from columns H to Q of the 'All' tab.

Taking a look under Air Traffic Controllers gives the median income as £73,430 in column D and the mean income as £75,060 in column F. The change in % terms is in column G and shows as -0.5% and as far as I can see this is what the Daily Mail has published in its version of the data. The same goes for Barristers and Judges also. Obviously I haven't cross-checked every profession but those wanting to find a typo or transcription error can check the lot.

Looking in the Properties of a saved version of the file under Details reveals that the author is Chris Daffin who's been involved in this type of survey with ONS for the past ~10 years at least, see for example "Wealth in Great Britain, Main Results from the Wealth and Assets Survey 2006/08 (edited by Chris Daffin)" which will appear in online searches as a pdf file. This confirms the Mail article's claim that the data is from ONS in terms of any reasonable verification available to the likes of us.

Therefore it doesn't look made-up at all and unless somebody can find the aforementioned transcription or typo errors then complaints and expressions of disbelief need to be addressed to ONS c/o Chris Daffin.

[anonymous-user]

turbobloke said:

It's not my data, nor did I write the article, but for those whose reaction to the information is based purely on a knee-jerk because of the secondary source, this being the Daily Mail, it's clearly indicated that this is ONS data. Presumably the scoffers think this claim is fabricated.

To check it out, click on the link in the text to download the xls spreadsheet. This shows a range of salaries in deciles for each profession from columns H to Q of the 'All' tab.

Taking a look under Air Traffic Controllers gives the median income as £73,430 in column D and the mean income as £75,060 in column F. The change in % terms is in column G and shows as -0.5% and as far as I can see this is what the Daily Mail has published in its version of the data. The same goes for Barristers and Judges also. Obviously I haven't cross-checked every profession but those wanting to find a typo or transcription error can check the lot.

Looking in the Properties of a saved version of the file under Details reveals that the author is Chris Daffin who's been involved in this type of survey with ONS for the past ~10 years at least, see for example "Wealth in Great Britain, Main Results from the Wealth and Assets Survey 2006/08 (edited by Chris Daffin)" which will appear in online searches as a pdf file. This confirms the Mail article's claim that the data is from ONS.

Therefore it doesn't look made-up at all and unless somebody can find the aforementioned transcription or type errors then complaints and expressions of disbelief need to be addressed to ONS c/o Chris Daffin.

Whenever these lists come up, PHers need to point out they earn more than the average quoted figure for their profession.

Even when you have a list or poll of actual PH salaries, it gets overrun by people making knowing comments about tax and hinting they earn loads.

[turbobloke]

el stovey said:

turbobloke said:

It's not my data, nor did I write the article, but for those whose reaction to the information is based purely on a knee-jerk because of the secondary source, this being the Daily Mail, it's clearly indicated that this is ONS data. Presumably the scoffers think this claim is fabricated.

To check it out, click on the link in the text to download the xls spreadsheet. This shows a range of salaries in deciles for each profession from columns H to Q of the 'All' tab.

Taking a look under Air Traffic Controllers gives the median income as £73,430 in column D and the mean income as £75,060 in column F. The change in % terms is in column G and shows as -0.5% and as far as I can see this is what the Daily Mail has published in its version of the data. The same goes for Barristers and Judges also. Obviously I haven't cross-checked every profession but those wanting to find a typo or transcription error can check the lot.

Looking in the Properties of a saved version of the file under Details reveals that the author is Chris Daffin who's been involved in this type of survey with ONS for the past ~10 years at least, see for example "Wealth in Great Britain, Main Results from the Wealth and Assets Survey 2006/08 (edited by Chris Daffin)" which will appear in online searches as a pdf file. This confirms the Mail article's claim that the data is from ONS.

Therefore it doesn't look made-up at all and unless somebody can find the aforementioned transcription or type errors then complaints and expressions of disbelief need to be addressed to ONS c/o Chris Daffin.

Whenever these lists come up, PHers need to point out they earn more than the average quoted figure for their profession.

Even when you have a list or poll of actual PH salaries, it gets overrun by people making knowing comments about tax and hinting they earn loads.

PistonHeads: Every Padded Wad Matters

Anyway, I come in at...er no, that's not just what the average doctor ordered - or should I say medical practitioner on £72,315 ordered.

[Blackpuddin]

Breadvan72 said:

Dromedary66 said:

easytiger123 said:

Barristers and judges £36,916!!

Barristers are often self employed so presumably that is declared income and the rest they siphon via dividends and other tax minimising methods.

All barristers in independent practice are self employed. There are few effective mechanisms whereby self employed barristers can minimise tax. We are amongst the most visible earners to HMRC, and we are also taxed on money that we haven't yet received, so it's great fun. The rules have just been changed to allow incorporation of the sole trader's practice, but changes to corporate taxation have eliminated any tax advantage from doing that. The average figure presented might be accurate because many barristers do purely criminal cases and their gross earnings will often be below 38K. By contrast, average gross earnings per barrister in a large commercial chambers would be closer to 500K a year, with the most fashionable Silks being on one to three million a year gross. Deduct from that operating costs of about 30 per cent to get the pre tax figure, and then apply higher rate tax. I do OK by real world standards and fair to middling by civil lawyers standards, but I reckon that for every ten quid I bill I get to keep between three and four quid.

High Street solicitors earn bupkiss. Partners in large City law firms may gross over a million a year. Junior City soliciors start on about 70K ish gross and up to 100K gross, but they all work 28 hours a day 366 days a year, so I do not know what they ever do with the money. I discourage anyone I know from becoming a City solicitor!

Judges - the figures may be skewed by the many part time junior Judges paid fairly low daily stipends. Full time Judges in the senior echelons get six figure salaries (usually over 100 but below 200).

Genuine question: are members of the legal profession prohibited from forming limited companies?

[RYH64E]

turbobloke said:

Therefore it doesn't look made-up at all and unless somebody can find the aforementioned transcription or typo errors then complaints and expressions of disbelief need to be addressed to ONS c/o Chris Daffin.

It's clearly not made up, but it is misleading, imo. The notes clearly state that the figures relate to employees only, the self employed are not included, so the numbers for professions or trades that include a large number of self employed people will be distorted. For instance, the mean salary for a bricklayer may well be £25k, but even in rural East Anglia a half decent bricklayer will be charging £250/day, and will be flat out busy. Same for Barristers and IT specialists, they're pretty much all self employed.

[anonymous-user]

Blackpuddin said:

Genuine question: are members of the legal profession prohibited from forming limited companies?

Regulated lawyers can form limited companies but do not pactise law through limited companies. Most firms of solicitors are now what are called LLPs (Limited Liability Partnerships). Some may have limited companies that provide some specialist services but not within the regulated solicitor role.

Barristers now have the option of becoming single member LLPs, but my chambers' accountants' analysis of the structure is that it has no tax advantages. My chambers collectively owns a limited company that contracts with suppliers, employs the staff and so on, but that company does not provide legal services or indeed conduct any trading. It is a service company. The chambers is what the Americans might call an eat what you kill collective, not a partnership or a company. Each member is a sole trader. Each member bills clients and pays a percentage of the gross fee received to chambers to cover staff, building, IT, marketing etc. Chambers has become a brand, and work comes in sometimes on an "I want Mr/Ms X" basis and sometimes on "I want one of your people, who have you got at price point Y?" basis. Sometimes two or more members of chambers are on opposite sides in the same case (there are Chinese Wall procedures to deal with this). We no longer pay commission to clerks, although some old fashioned chambers still do. The clerks (now salaried) are, in my opinion, now redundant, as we have pro marketers and pro admins and no longer need to be pimped by barrow boys, but my colleagues are conservative, and slow to agree with this.

Various unregulated law shops may trade through limited companies. The Government supports de skilling and de regulation across many industry sectors, so expect more unregulated law shops with McLawyers, but that is another debate.

Edited by anonymous-user on Saturday 28th November 10:02

[frisbee]

The scary part are the number of people in some of these roles. Do we really need 416,000 account managers?

[vonuber]

I'm not sure I believe those civil engineering statistics. According to that I am well over the top bracket, and I know plenty who earn more (and jobs going for a lot more).
Although it doesn't say what level of qualification it is (I.e chartered, incorporated etc).

[Greshamst]

fido said:

Also what is the difference between 'Financial managers and directors' and 'Financial institution managers and directors'?

Financial Manager/Director - The person in charge of finance for any company, i.e the finance director of WH Smith, or the Head of Finance for a company selling printers.

Financial Institution Manager/Director - Manager at a bank or another financial institution, so could just be the the manager of analysts, or a director of a loans company.

[Derek Chevalier]

RYH64E said:

Same for Barristers and IT specialists, they're pretty much all self employed.

Large number of my IT contacts have gone back to permie as it pays better as you get more senior

[Derek Chevalier]

vonuber said:

I'm not sure I believe those civil engineering statistics. According to that I am well over the top bracket, and I know plenty who earn more (and jobs going for a lot more).
Although it doesn't say what level of qualification it is (I.e chartered, incorporated etc).

Not sure why you don't believe it - Engineering pay in the country is, on average, rubbish considering the calibre of people that work in it. Every single one of my Engineering coursemates left to go into IT, banking, sales or accountancy.

[matchmaker]

P5BNij said:

snuffy said:

PositronicRay said:

Trains and Tram drivers £48k

Be fair, it's a very difficult job. How they keep those trains and trams on those rails amazes me. And they never take a wrong turning either !

We're paid for what we know, not just what we do...!

There aren't many professions that can drive safely at 125mph in fog!

[anonymous-user]

fido said:

Legal professionals - £76,434. Think someone cut and paste without checking from a spreadsheet.

Also what is the difference between 'Financial managers and directors' and 'Financial institution managers and directors'?

Quite. Barristers & Judges (odd mix, as barristers are self employed and Judges are civil servants) 36k; solicitors 43k, but legal professionals - which should mean barristers and solicitors 76k. Something not right there.

[V8 Fettler]

Derek Chevalier said:

vonuber said:

I'm not sure I believe those civil engineering statistics. According to that I am well over the top bracket, and I know plenty who earn more (and jobs going for a lot more).
Although it doesn't say what level of qualification it is (I.e chartered, incorporated etc).

Not sure why you don't believe it - Engineering pay in the country is, on average, rubbish considering the calibre of people that work in it. Every single one of my Engineering coursemates left to go into IT, banking, sales or accountancy.

Would interesting to read a similar report on earnings within Germany.

[vonuber]

Derek Chevalier said:

Not sure why you don't believe it - Engineering pay in the country is, on average, rubbish considering the calibre of people that work in it. Every single one of my Engineering coursemates left to go into IT, banking, sales or accountancy.

Define 'rubbish'. Our grads start at 27-28 which is not bad.
But yes i agree salaries have lagged behind other industries, but they are definitely ramping up year on year (finally ).