After Expenses, London Graduates Are Left With Only 19 Per Cent Of Their Salary To Spend

[iamnumerate]

Easy. Don't work and let benefits pay for your housing.

Precisely, there are enough homes in London for everyone who works and studies there. There will never be enough if people don't get homes in London paid for them for by the tax payer.

[dkujsbap]

I'm approaching 30 and I really don't know many people on more than 30k. Some in oil/gas were on 50k but now redundant. A couple at KPMG/PWC but no idea on salaries. Either way the 12 hour days and cancelled dinner plans don't appeal to me.

Grads in finance, consulting etc are doing very well. Grads outside of those have either quit and such it up living a bit of a bohemian life, or left the country. Shame as I've seen entire social circles dismantled by the cost of living. Those outside of the highest earners can't come out for beers, in some cases. Still, proud to say those left here can afford it, others have sought better lives elsewhere.

I've a degree in a technical subject which is loosely based on my current job. Contracting and experience is the way to go, not PAYE and debt.

Happy to forego the corporate nonsense of matched pensions in favour of squirreling my cash away for a very rainy day.

[crashmonitor]

TBH, it beats me why most people bother to go to university these days, the days when a degree was the path to a better career are largely gone (with some exceptions) & a degree now involves getting £30-50,000 into debt for the privilege of doing a job you could probably do without a degree (not to mention the opportunity cost of lost earnings). Good practice for working for the bank/landlord in later life & not much else sadly......

I think the kids and parents are more clued up than that. They know most arts degrees are just an indulgent past time a' la the 19th century aristo's rite of passage. But that's the point they get to do the Russell group university experience for three years, it's nothing to do with work but who cares, it's a three year holiday which is subsidised in the first place and then the majority of the debt is written off. Win win in our jam today Society. The written off debt may bankrupt the public sector twenty years down the line, but that's how the world works today.

Edited October 16, 2015 by crashmonitor

[billybong]

It comes to something when the occupants of a Third World dunghill like Delhi enjoy a higher standard of living than your typical Londoner.

Indeed. Guessing but the independent/property agency Knight Frank article seems to have included Delhi and Bangalore as Third World cities that would be obviously less well off in people's perceptions than London (sort of obligatory poor cities (so called poor) relative to so called well off London - poorer if only by past reputation) but when you look into the actual figures any working graduates in both of those Third World cities are likely to have far more spare money from their income than those in London - quite contrary to what the article claims.

Guessing again but it's quite likely that they had considerable difficulty in finding cities that were lower down their league than London but they had to put some there for appearances sake - even if in reality they should have been above London making London the worst.

Edited October 16, 2015 by billybong

[spyguy]

I'm approaching 30 and I really don't know many people on more than 30k. Some in oil/gas were on 50k but now redundant. A couple at KPMG/PWC but no idea on salaries. Either way the 12 hour days and cancelled dinner plans don't appeal to me.

Grads in finance, consulting etc are doing very well. Grads outside of those have either quit and such it up living a bit of a bohemian life, or left the country. Shame as I've seen entire social circles dismantled by the cost of living. Those outside of the highest earners can't come out for beers, in some cases. Still, proud to say those left here can afford it, others have sought better lives elsewhere.

I've a degree in a technical subject which is loosely based on my current job. Contracting and experience is the way to go, not PAYE and debt.

Happy to forego the corporate nonsense of matched pensions in favour of squirreling my cash away for a very rainy day.

Median salaries for an area follow the normal distribution.

60% of people earn the median or less.

Once you get to twice the median the you are talking about less than 5% of the *working* population.

I think about that when I go about my business in an area with a 25k median wage and see lots of people drive by in 30k 4x4.

[spyguy]

I think the kids and parents are more clued up than that. They know most arts degrees are just an indulgent past time a' la the 19th century aristo's rite of passage. But that's the point they get to do the Russell group university experience for three years, it's nothing to do with work but who cares, it's a three year holiday which is subsidised in the first place and then the majority of the debt is written off. Win win in our jam today Society. The written off debt may bankrupt the public sector twenty years down the line, but that's how the world works today

Not sure.

I was unusual going to Uni in 80s/90s - HE was looked at warily as something that delayed you starting to earn money.

Now some of the people who popped out kids in their late teens have their kids starting Uni. To a person, they are all doing non-vocational /arts+humanities - I've looked at their FB posts of 'xxx staring his/her <pointless degree> posts with dread.

All the parents think they are going to be on *big* money. Seriously, further FP posts go along lines of 'I'll be able to retire when xx gets their 50k job!' And they mean it.

You also have to factor in that most people stay in the area they grew up in. Where I am from, good jobs are few + far between.

I know what the FB posts will be in 3 or 4 years - 'xx has a degree and can only get a job that pays 13k'.

I now, as have heard the same whinge from my peers who either who did not vocataional degrees and/or did not more away.

HE is a vast waste of time and money of a good ~70% of current undergraduates.

[Guest]

I think 20k was quite a low starting graduate salary even in the early 2000s, so 30k seems possible. I know that law firms tended to pay 40-45k (this was back in 2006 I think) and then they'd give you a big pay rise after 2 years. I don't know so much about banks but think the pay would be similar. Also I think you get decent bonuses in banks (not the 5-10% that many get). Others in finance, management and IT earn less (maybe starting at 25-30k), but in my experience generally work shorter hours, and then get overtime if required to work longer. Accountants and actuaries get pay rises for passing exams.

Teachers get paid well. There seem to be lots of opportunities to earn more (ones I know each year took on new responsibility and get big pay rises - newly qualified to deputy head of year, or department, then head of department, etc. Pay is higher at the Harris Academies which are all over London).

I don't know much about pay for nurses, but they'd get a London weighting right? I know a policeman (early 20s), commuting to London and I asked whether he'd rather not work in London and he said the extra £8k was worth it (I don't know if that was 20k vs 28k or what, but still I was surprised at that figure).

I think you'd typically get about 20k for admin type jobs, and that's just outside London, so any that happen to be more central would presumably pay a bit more.

My first job (in Scotland, admittedly) in 2004 paid me £18k.

I think your estimates are way too high. London weighting isn't that much, when you look at the cost of housing. And most graduates aren't lawyers or bankers or high-flying accountants. A lot of them are going to be doing unpaid internships.

Median wage for all workers in London is about £35k. I expect most graduates are earning a lot less than that.

[spyguy]

My first job (in Scotland, admittedly) in 2004 paid me £18k.

I think your estimates are way too high. London weighting isn't that much, when you look at the cost of housing. And most graduates aren't lawyers or bankers or high-flying accountants. A lot of them are going to be doing unpaid internships.

Median wage for all workers in London is about £35k. I expect most graduates are earning a lot less than that.

I think the London median wage is ~28K.

[Sawitcoming]

Clearly the usefulness of the subject studied is a factor. I coached my wife into programming when she thought business was more interesting. She executed really well getting a first in computer science. Companies were competing for her and she had no problem finding a job. Even asked to interview with Google.

She started on 30k in London. After one year raised to 35.

[Guest]

I think the kids and parents are more clued up than that. They know most arts degrees are just an indulgent past time a' la the 19th century aristo's rite of passage. But that's the point they get to do the Russell group university experience for three years, it's nothing to do with work but who cares, it's a three year holiday which is subsidised in the first place and then the majority of the debt is written off. Win win in our jam today Society. The written off debt may bankrupt the public sector twenty years down the line, but that's how the world works today.

No, I don't think they're playing the system.

In the main, the generation with 18-year old children still grew up in an era where a University degree was a ticket to a higher-paying professional job. When I went, at the turn of the century, there was still this idea around that being 'the first person in your family' to go to University was something to be proud of. Or the parents had gone in an era where it was all paid for.

They have no idea what starting work and living with a student loan is like, or how difficult it actually is to pay off.

My 16k loan took me a decade to pay off. Now that the total debt is more like £40k or £50k, University is a terrible deal. The interest rates are designed such that you'll never pay it back. It's a graduate tax by the back door (an extra 9% tax!).

Young people are in a Catch 22. Attempt to get a job and you're up against graduates with degrees for jobs in Starbucks. Go to University and be in debt forever. It's a trap.

Going to University let me escape the extremely rural and isolated place my parents had decided to live, and set up on my own. I made the best friends of my life there. It sickens me that this ladder has been all but pulled up completely.

[Guest eight]

It comes to something when the occupants of a Third World dunghill like Delhi enjoy a higher standard of living than your typical Londoner.

http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xo2mr7_the-layover-s01e09-london_travel

Funnily enough I watched this on the Travel Channel last night. The single over-riding thing he kept coming back to was the expense - he must have mentioned it five or six times. Especially when considered in US$ terms. And he was only visiting for a few hours!

Edited October 16, 2015 by eight

[RichB]

Median salaries for an area follow the normal distribution.

60% of people earn the median or less.

Once you get to twice the median the you are talking about less than 5% of the *working* population.

I think about that when I go about my business in an area with a 25k median wage and see lots of people drive by in 30k 4x4.

It's a bit optimistic to say they follow a normal distribution, and fundamentally wrong to say 60% earn median or below.

[spyguy]

It's a bit optimistic to say they follow a normal distribution, and fundamentally wrong to say 60% earn median or below.

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/percentile-points-from-1-to-99-for-total-income-before-and-after-tax

[RichB]

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/percentile-points-from-1-to-99-for-total-income-before-and-after-tax

Ok... I guess you are looking at different data sets then.... median by definition mean 50% of the population earn less.

[ccc]

Ok... I guess you are looking at different data sets then.... median by definition mean 50% of the population earn less.

Shouldnt that be something like 49.999 or similar. You cant have something in the middle and 50% either side.

Anyway..

[ARIMA]

it's enough for an iPhone contract

[Pablosammy]

Shouldnt that be something like 49.999 or similar. You cant have something in the middle and 50% either side.

Anyway..

In an infinite data set, you can have just that!

[RichB]

Shouldnt that be something like 49.999 or similar. You cant have something in the middle and 50% either side.

Anyway..

Nope. I believe strictly speaking 50% is less than or equal to.

[Olebrum]

At least it's a plus figure.....

[Kiwi Toast]

My first job (in Scotland, admittedly) in 2004 paid me £18k.

I think your estimates are way too high. London weighting isn't that much, when you look at the cost of housing. And most graduates aren't lawyers or bankers or high-flying accountants. A lot of them are going to be doing unpaid internships.

Median wage for all workers in London is about £35k. I expect most graduates are earning a lot less than that.

You may well be right.

But presumably quite a lot of the low paid graduates are living with parents and wouldn't be able or wouldn't be willing if their parents didn't live in or near London.

Therefore actually the average salary of salary of graduates working in London without London parents could be quite high. And it is presumably these are the people on whom the data was based.

I have noticed a lot of graduates getting admin jobs, but quite a lot of them use that as a foot in the door (I did this - first job paid a bit less than 20k, then moved to the graduate job earning 30k).

The starting salary for trainee actuaries was 30k several years ago (this is a big insurance company and most of its actuaries work in the Surrey office. I'm not sure but I suspect competitors in London pay a bit more and especially consultancies pay more) .

You might think actuaries are well paid and you might think actuaries are clever. But I was surprised by the universities people had attended. I would have assumed a significant proportion were Oxbridge or maybe Warwick Maths or MORSE, or LSE. But it seems quite rare and then it's maybe 50-50 between good and OK universities. I thought if a bunch of graduates from mediocre universities are earning 30k in their first job, the better graduates would be earning a lot more. I know if you pick a student at random you might get one from Manchester Metropolitan, Liverpool John Moores, Luton, East London, Bath Spa, Napier, Paisley, London Metropolitan, Southampton Solent, Wolverhampton, Hull or Plymouth (there must be hundreds of thousands graduates from these places and others like them each year). But how many of these head to London afterwards (apart from the London ones I mentioned!)?

[ccc]

In an infinite data set, you can have just that!

Er OK then I stand corrected !!

[Frugal Git]

Others in finance, management and IT earn less (maybe starting at 25-30k), but in my experience generally work shorter hours, and then get overtime if required to work longer.

Haha - gave me a laugh. I agree on the starting sal, but the shorter hours and *paid overtime*???

I haven't ever encountered it the latter certainly. Where am i going wrong?

Anecdotally I took it upon myself at a 'pay rise' 3 years ago to make it a rule to only ever do my contracted hours henceforth. Down from circa 9 hours a day at the desk with a half hour lunch (9-6.30) back to 7.5 and the full hour lunch (8 to 4.30). Also has made commuting fantastic.

That gave me a bigger effective payrise per hour then I've ever had in one go. And there have been no complaints. If everyone else wants to work for free good on them.

Edited October 16, 2015 by Frugal Git

[peakbear]

"Shame as I've seen entire social circles dismantled by the cost of

living. "

That is what generally happens when people get older, they move, get married, have kids etc... and not everyone stays in touch with old friends. The general 'active' social circle is based on common activities they do (ie raising kids for example)

[winkie]

Who needs a degree when you have free access to a comfortable home living in London.rent and mortgage free is worth a £30k pay rise.......

[Kiwi Toast]

On paid overtime I'm only giving my experience Frugat Git!

My experience of admin is there's still some, but not as much as before. A colleague told me a bunch of them would regularly do their 9-5 and then 5-9 several nights a week (earning time and a half) and perhaps weekends sometimes too. But then at some point I suppose this was just too expensive (it would be better to get more staff, and perhaps there wasn't really enough work to justify the work).

There's a fair amount of overtime for trainee actuaries (once your qualified, or even nearly qualified manager you just earn a salary and it doesn't matter if you get everything done in 35 hours a week, or you work all hours). Some departments have restrictions (you have to take some time off rather than just taking money) but it's generally accepted that you get compensated for it and there's generally a more relaxed attitude to it. My previous manager tried to minimise the amount we did (we were supposed to warn him first and be able to justify why we couldn't manage to get it done during normal working hours) but the current one says just put in the claim for how much you do - we trust you.

I know IT people who get paid for unsociable hours. Maybe it's a bit different to overtime, but something has to be done overnight, so you come back to the office about 11pm and are paid for that.