Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
TheCountOfNowhere

Real Wages Back To 2002 Levels

Recommended Posts

"Workers in the public sector still earn more than those in the private sector, partly due to the higher proportion of jobs requiring a university education"

Is that actually true?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Workers in the public sector still earn more than those in the private sector, partly due to the higher proportion of jobs requiring a university education"

Is that actually true?

Probably. Doctors, teachers, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It should be noted that the public and private sectors have workforces which are composed quite differently. Consequently, differences in weekly earnings do not reveal differences in rates of pay for comparable jobs. For example, many of the lowest paid occupations, such as bar and restaurant staff, hairdressers, elementary sales occupations and cashiers, exist primarily in the private sector, while there are a larger proportion of graduate-level and professional occupations in the public sector.

ONS pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My last understanding of this was that degree qualified people were paid less in the public sector but at lower levels of academic qualification, the public sector was higher paid.

The article in question dates back to the 2010 Labour Force survey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Graduate level in many cases being only a barrier to entry enforced by unions

Many so called managers on management salaries in the public sector are nothing more than under worked office monkeys by any other measure

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's CPI adjusted. Wonder what the RPI figure is. Back to 2000?

AWEDec2013.gif

The AWE dataset is noisy and so I use a 6 month average.

On a straight month-to-month comparison, Dec 2013 is equivalent to Nov 2000.

If you use the more comprehensive Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE) then we're back in the late 1990s on both median and mean measures.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Graduate level in many cases being only a barrier to entry enforced by unions

Many so called managers on management salaries in the public sector are nothing more than under worked office monkeys by any other measure

You're going to love this.

Same article but from ASHE, between 2002 and 2010, the percentage of public sector jobs described as 'high skill' increased from 23% to 31%.

In the private sector, the increase was from 23% to 26%.

Where did all those high skill public sector jobs come from? What roles are they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're going to love this.

Same article but from ASHE, between 2002 and 2010, the percentage of public sector jobs described as 'high skill' increased from 23% to 31%.

In the private sector, the increase was from 23% to 26%.

Where did all those high skill public sector jobs come from? What roles are they?

Sadly, that's probably related to the nationalised banks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're going to love this.

Same article but from ASHE, between 2002 and 2010, the percentage of public sector jobs described as 'high skill' increased from 23% to 31%.

In the private sector, the increase was from 23% to 26%.

Where did all those high skill public sector jobs come from? What roles are they?

The job description will justify the salary and on paper the job competencies will be ticked by the right academic or professional background, but the workload pressure has been comparatively none existent in some cases that I know of

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many so called managers on management salaries in the public sector are nothing more than under worked office monkeys by any other measure

And why this implicit assumption that a job requiring a higher education qualification must be worth more? Its worth what it brings, not what it cost to get there. Tail wagging the dog. They're all a bit confused in the public sector.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And why this implicit assumption that a job requiring a higher education qualification must be worth more? Its worth what it brings, not what it cost to get there. Tail wagging the dog. They're all a bit confused in the public sector.

True

It should just be a market rate

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've said it before and I'll say it again, there are plenty of positions being sent to me by agencies for CAD design engineers that have an hourly rate that is less than the one I was getting paid in 1996.

The cynic in me might think that this was to ensure a totally unsuitable level of applicant, so fostering the belief that there is a lack of suitably skilled workers in this country, only the true cynic in me might believe that this would then lead to calls to increase immigration levels from countries that might have thousands of so called CAD designers (India etc).

I have witnessed this process when I was working in the USA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's CPI adjusted. Wonder what the RPI figure is. Back to 2000?

Wonder what the figure would be like if either of the inflation metrics accurately reflected a typical person's cost of living rise instead of doing everything they can to understate it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And why this implicit assumption that a job requiring a higher education qualification must be worth more? Its worth what it brings, not what it cost to get there. Tail wagging the dog. They're all a bit confused in the public sector.

If the job didn't pay then people wouldn't invest the time and money needed to get the qualification.

Similarly, the requirement of the qualification is going to narrow down potential candidates to ones who have put the work in to get qualified, so all told they are going to end up paying more to get people to work in that job. It's self-regulating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the job didn't pay then people wouldn't invest the time and money needed to get the qualification.

Similarly, the requirement of the qualification is going to narrow down potential candidates to ones who have put the work in to get qualified, so all told they are going to end up paying more to get people to work in that job. It's self-regulating.

Unless it's a spurious qualification with little real applied value

And that also negates the time lag required in getting qualifications

Additionally money is not the only motivation to getting qualified, many people in both public and private sectors have qualifications behind them to get into work they enjoy

Edited by Si1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the job didn't pay then people wouldn't invest the time and money needed to get the qualification.

Yep. If the job is worth less than the qualification required to get it, then its not a sustainable position. Unsustainable positions is what spending tax payers money is all about, which is why I point it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the job didn't pay then people wouldn't invest the time and money needed to get the qualification.

As university was free 20 years ago, it should therefore be the case that new starters at jobs asking for university qualification should have jumped up significantly in their salaries over the same period. Now as university courses are charging in the many tens of thousands, future salary inflation should be quite monumental (as qualified jobs must make up a significant proportion of the jobs market). That it is (on average) going down is a disgrace.

Edit: added bracketed lines.

Edited by jammo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've said it before and I'll say it again, there are plenty of positions being sent to me by agencies for CAD design engineers that have an hourly rate that is less than the one I was getting paid in 1996.

The cynic in me might think that this was to ensure a totally unsuitable level of applicant, so fostering the belief that there is a lack of suitably skilled workers in this country, only the true cynic in me might believe that this would then lead to calls to increase immigration levels from countries that might have thousands of so called CAD designers (India etc).

I have witnessed this process when I was working in the USA.

In the UK it usually goes hand in hand with calls from the incumbent Prime Minister that there's a UK shortage of skilled engineers and such like (meaning a shortage of cheap engineers). How the UK desperately needs them and how young people in the UK should apply at their nearest college.

At the same time they're introducing schemes to import cheaper people from overseas who have those skills.

Of course the PMs, their families and associates will have never been anywhere near that sort of job.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the UK it usually goes hand in hand with calls from the incumbent Prime Minister that there's a UK shortage of skilled engineers and such like (meaning a shortage of cheap engineers). How the UK desperately needs them and how young people in the UK should apply at their nearest college.

At the same time they're introducing schemes to import cheaper people from overseas who have those skills.

Of course the PMs, their families and associates will have never been anywhere near that sort of job.

Indeed, where are the calls for politicians and elected representatives at government level that:

Are cheap.

Don't lie about their policies, pledges, election commitments.

Don;t fiddle their expenses.

Don't set policy by lobby and then get the favour returned when they leave their seat.

etc, etc,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

AWEDec2013.gif

The AWE dataset is noisy and so I use a 6 month average.

On a straight month-to-month comparison, Dec 2013 is equivalent to Nov 2000.

If you use the more comprehensive Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings (ASHE) then we're back in the late 1990s on both median and mean measures.

Thanks FT, although pretty depressing viewing. No end in sight for real earnings erosion.

More pressure on house price levels. Roll on MMR implementation in April (although I understand many lenders are already applying the expected standards).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless it's a spurious qualification with little real applied value

And that also negates the time lag required in getting qualifications

Additionally money is not the only motivation to getting qualified, many people in both public and private sectors have qualifications behind them to get into work they enjoy

Yes, there are lots of people that read good informative books, are interested and have a passion for certain subjects, have attended many courses and do it all to help improve their own self knowledge, no certificate requested, asked for or required. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   223 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.