This discussion is locked.

You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Professionally registered engineers report higher earnings

Former Community Member over 5 years ago

Professionally registered engineers report higher earnings

"Average salaries are higher among professionally registered engineers in all areas of industry, according to a 2018 Salary Survey produced by The Engineer. The mean average salary among professionally registered respondents was over £8,000 a year higher."

https://www.theengineer.co.uk/professional-registration-engineer-salary/

Salary survey here

Moshe Waserman BEET, MCGI, CEng MBCS, MIET

Parents

0 Roy Bowdler over 5 years ago

WRITTEN THIS MORNING

Roy Pemberton, I have nothing but respect for your post, your career and your motives. However, I hope you recognize that you are not a “threshold” Chartered Engineer, but an exceptionally developed one, you seem to have comfortably passed the CEng threshold when you were still IEng.

Perhaps the “pound of flesh” extracted by the “mature candidate scheme” helped you to develop “masters level” thinking, but most people working in areas where chartered engineers weren’t common, wouldn’t have been aware of this pathway. Also along with the chartered institutions, it was also widely distrusted anyway. My understanding is that you had first to be over 35, before being “invited” to produce a report by illustrating that you were already working at “Chartered level”, but having not met the “academic requirement”.

Mike’s reference the Cleese, Barker, Corbett sketch (originally 1966 I think) illustrates the issues perfectly. Many of my arguments are sociological rather than technical for a reason (not just that I’m better qualified in the former) they are because we can choose who we want to recognize and who we don’t. The “we” in this case is Chartered Engineers, because they have total hegemony. Some are recognizably “John Cleese”, but in a social class context, most of the more capable are Ronnie Barker and a few are Ronnie Corbetts who didn’t “know their place”, or found the right patronage to “elevate” themselves. Snobbery has evolved over the last half century and is probably more academic based now. However, I have noticed within the IET a growing and unique sub-culture of “UK-SPEC snobs”. I’m studying the characteristics of this tribe through ethnography and will report back. I’m already fully familiar with the military system of ranks and messes, which in technical branches isn’t “snobbish”, but does emphasise “knowing one’s place”.

PS good luck Lee!

WRITTEN LAST WEEK

Despite perceptions improving, stubborn myths such as apprenticeships being second best to degrees in terms of future career opportunities, remain in place. However, research by the Sutton Trust shows some apprentices can out-earn graduates over the course of their lifetimes by up to £52,000. With young people experiencing increased cost of living pressures, it is important to eradicate these untruths, particularly in the construction sector. Official data shows that in the crucial first five-year period from leaving full time education, young people who undertake apprenticeships have a much greater opportunity to earn more than their peers who opt for the higher education route. (Source Redrow plc Apprentices report 2018). This company is proud of its Corporate Social Responsibility and its founder is a great philanthropist. (A Civil Engineer by profession…Liverpool Polytechnic… he completed a two-year diploma course… In February 2017 he donated an estimated £207 million to his charitable Foundation, believed to be one of the largest public donations ever in the UK)

The Sutton Trust research report on which the claim is based is long, complex and often highly critical of “apprenticeship” policy and practice for perfectly good reasons. The earnings figure is based on a longitudinal study of those who were 16 in 2003 and does not take any student debt into account. The focus is on level 2 & 3 Apprenticeships, since training programmes at the higher levels of 4,5,6 and even 7, were not classified officially by the UK government as “apprenticeships” until relatively recently. Having become rather overlooked in the policy to expand higher education. The report does however state.

Our findings show a positive differential for having started an apprenticeship in many contexts. However, the extent of this differential depends on the apprenticeship sector. Furthermore, it is not always higher than the average payoff from only doing classroom-based qualifications, whether academic or vocational. The earnings differential from starting an apprenticeship is much higher for men than for women, partly reflecting the different sectors in which they pursue an apprenticeship. It is particularly high for those men who do an ‘advanced apprenticeship’ in engineering. In fact, those who complete an advanced apprenticeship in engineering earn more than those with a degree in engineering at age 28.

The report goes on to state (The Sutton Trust has an agenda of social mobility)

In August, the front-page of The Times reported that elite private schools are promoting degree apprenticeships to their students. The argument that a degree apprenticeship in engineering, accountancy or project management is an attractive option for these young people is strong. Their schools deliver the educational qualifications, social capital and networks that can facilitate access to the most sought-after apprenticeships offered by top firms. For this group, completion of a degree apprenticeship is an alternative route to a successful career, consolidating their social position. However, this raises a serious question about apprenticeships as a vehicle for social mobility and progression if opportunities for recruitment to higher-level apprenticeships is inadvertently curtailed for those coming from less advantaged starting points. At the same time, the high profile for higher and degree apprenticeships means that not enough work is being done to develop and invest in levels 2 and 3 where most apprentices are found, and to ensure that it offers them a strong platform for progression… Connections between the levels must be strengthened so that level 2 and 3 apprentices do not hit arbitrary glass ceilings and have similar chances as their A-level or graduate peers to access the next level including, higher and degree apprenticeships.

If we combine this study with The Engineer CBS/Butler one we get a fuller picture of what is happening to Engineer's careers and earnings. I didn’t manage to dig out in the time I had available the definition of a “Junior Engineer” for example, but if we set aside overtime payments or premiums that may accrue though self-employment , the two studies seem aligned. What is also clear is that we are not talking about International Engineering Alliance (Washington Accord) “Engineers”, but a mixed bag of those employed as Engineers , which would strongly suggest that they are potentially registerable in one of our categories. It is also seems highly likely that those who are registered are mostly in the CEng category. There are Eng Tech registrants who would be described in employment as Engineers and of course some Incorporated Engineers as well, but between the ages of 30 and 65 Eng Tech & IEng registrants combined are outnumbered by CEng at least 3:1 rising to 5:1 in the age cohort 40-45. Approximately 30% of registered engineers are over 65 although some are still employed in “salaried” roles.

I found the following particularly interesting

When it comes to choosing their route into the profession, engineers are remarkably consistent. Just as in the previous two years, half of all engineers surveyed have a degree. Meanwhile, 38.9 per cent of engineers entered industry through an apprenticeship scheme, a very similar figure to last year (38.5 per cent). What’s more, like 2017 the percentage of engineers having chosen the apprenticeship route continues to rise with age. Just 26.1 per cent of under-thirties, 21.9 per cent of those in their thirties, and 29.6 per cent of those in their forties have undertaken an apprenticeship, while 50.2 per cent of those in their fifties and 59.1 per cent of those in their sixties have taken this route.

The reverse is true for engineers choosing the university route, with 56.1 per cent of under-thirties, 52.9 per cent of those in their thirties, and 56.9 per cent of those in their forties having been awarded a degree, dipping to 45.6 per cent of those in their fifties and 40.2 per cent of those in their sixties. There is also a significant gender imbalance, with 40.9 per cent of men having chosen to undertake an apprenticeship scheme, compared with just 10.7 per cent of women. In contrast, 62.1 per cent of women surveyed have a degree, compared with 49.2 per cent of men. Among the sectors, the aerospace industry has the highest percentage of engineers who have pursued an apprenticeship (46.1 per cent), followed by the consumer goods and food and drink sector (44.4 per cent) and the chemical, pharmaceutical and medical sector (42.6 per cent). The lowest percentage of engineers with an apprenticeship can be found in the telecoms, electronics and utilities sector (28 per cent).

From post war until the 1980s Telecoms & Utilities typically recruited 10-20 Apprentices for every Graduate, with many progressing to senior engineering roles, so this represents a huge inter-generational “change”. Just in case anyone is kidding themselves that these sectors are now somehow “higher tech nowadays”, they were “high tech” then as well, in the context of the time. Each generation just builds on the achievements of the last. Tommy Flowers (an apprentice who studied for a degree at night school) Frank Whittle (an RAF apprentice who got promoted before a later degree) and my own particular favourite “local hero” the Victorian Thomas Parker (who left school at the age of 10 for an apprenticeship, before later being dubbed “The Edison of Europe” by Lord Kelvin). Oliver Heaviside (as theoretically distinguished as most, left school at 16)

There may be some useful correlations in here if they could be identified. An interesting headline could have also been: “50% of Junior Engineers are registered, compared to 32 % of Directors” and "only 10% of Directors agree that registration leads to higher salaries by seniority”; perhaps not so helpful?

A rational employer should reward more productive contributions more highly, although productivity isn’t always easy to define. For example many would regard CEng staff as an advertisement for quality which might attract a premium in the market place, or allow easier access to certain markets. Is there really a more inventive streak in some CEng and/or is it a good proxy for a suitably qualified and experienced person to manage various risks? Obviously, supply and demand is always a major factor in earnings, but it is susceptible to short-term effects such as migration etc.

Andy, Alastair, Roy, Mike and I, all advocate registration enthusiastically. Perhaps we should tease away at how we think the professional registration/PEI membership proposition can be used to add the most value to employers and society? I sense that we share common ground in feeling that, it is well past the time to move on from the agenda of neediness for social status, relative to medicine, law etc. We have a great collective story to tell if we hadn’t become so factional and classist. Any chance of the occasional sighting of a hard hat or oily rag from the “commanding heights” perhaps, just show how great engineering is at enabling social mobility and enriching society as whole.

WSP worked with the New Economics Foundation to apply the Social Return on Investment (SRoI) methodology to its own apprenticeship scheme, measuring the initiative’s outputs compared to its cost. It was found that for every £1 invested in its apprenticeship programme, £2.26 was created in return for stakeholders. By extrapolating from that figure, it was estimated that a total social value in excess of £6bn would be reached, based on the 114,400-young people that started STEM apprenticeships in England in 2017. (also from The Engineer)
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Reply

0 Roy Bowdler over 5 years ago

WRITTEN THIS MORNING

Roy Pemberton, I have nothing but respect for your post, your career and your motives. However, I hope you recognize that you are not a “threshold” Chartered Engineer, but an exceptionally developed one, you seem to have comfortably passed the CEng threshold when you were still IEng.

Perhaps the “pound of flesh” extracted by the “mature candidate scheme” helped you to develop “masters level” thinking, but most people working in areas where chartered engineers weren’t common, wouldn’t have been aware of this pathway. Also along with the chartered institutions, it was also widely distrusted anyway. My understanding is that you had first to be over 35, before being “invited” to produce a report by illustrating that you were already working at “Chartered level”, but having not met the “academic requirement”.

Mike’s reference the Cleese, Barker, Corbett sketch (originally 1966 I think) illustrates the issues perfectly. Many of my arguments are sociological rather than technical for a reason (not just that I’m better qualified in the former) they are because we can choose who we want to recognize and who we don’t. The “we” in this case is Chartered Engineers, because they have total hegemony. Some are recognizably “John Cleese”, but in a social class context, most of the more capable are Ronnie Barker and a few are Ronnie Corbetts who didn’t “know their place”, or found the right patronage to “elevate” themselves. Snobbery has evolved over the last half century and is probably more academic based now. However, I have noticed within the IET a growing and unique sub-culture of “UK-SPEC snobs”. I’m studying the characteristics of this tribe through ethnography and will report back. I’m already fully familiar with the military system of ranks and messes, which in technical branches isn’t “snobbish”, but does emphasise “knowing one’s place”.

PS good luck Lee!

WRITTEN LAST WEEK

Despite perceptions improving, stubborn myths such as apprenticeships being second best to degrees in terms of future career opportunities, remain in place. However, research by the Sutton Trust shows some apprentices can out-earn graduates over the course of their lifetimes by up to £52,000. With young people experiencing increased cost of living pressures, it is important to eradicate these untruths, particularly in the construction sector. Official data shows that in the crucial first five-year period from leaving full time education, young people who undertake apprenticeships have a much greater opportunity to earn more than their peers who opt for the higher education route. (Source Redrow plc Apprentices report 2018). This company is proud of its Corporate Social Responsibility and its founder is a great philanthropist. (A Civil Engineer by profession…Liverpool Polytechnic… he completed a two-year diploma course… In February 2017 he donated an estimated £207 million to his charitable Foundation, believed to be one of the largest public donations ever in the UK)

The Sutton Trust research report on which the claim is based is long, complex and often highly critical of “apprenticeship” policy and practice for perfectly good reasons. The earnings figure is based on a longitudinal study of those who were 16 in 2003 and does not take any student debt into account. The focus is on level 2 & 3 Apprenticeships, since training programmes at the higher levels of 4,5,6 and even 7, were not classified officially by the UK government as “apprenticeships” until relatively recently. Having become rather overlooked in the policy to expand higher education. The report does however state.

Our findings show a positive differential for having started an apprenticeship in many contexts. However, the extent of this differential depends on the apprenticeship sector. Furthermore, it is not always higher than the average payoff from only doing classroom-based qualifications, whether academic or vocational. The earnings differential from starting an apprenticeship is much higher for men than for women, partly reflecting the different sectors in which they pursue an apprenticeship. It is particularly high for those men who do an ‘advanced apprenticeship’ in engineering. In fact, those who complete an advanced apprenticeship in engineering earn more than those with a degree in engineering at age 28.

The report goes on to state (The Sutton Trust has an agenda of social mobility)

In August, the front-page of The Times reported that elite private schools are promoting degree apprenticeships to their students. The argument that a degree apprenticeship in engineering, accountancy or project management is an attractive option for these young people is strong. Their schools deliver the educational qualifications, social capital and networks that can facilitate access to the most sought-after apprenticeships offered by top firms. For this group, completion of a degree apprenticeship is an alternative route to a successful career, consolidating their social position. However, this raises a serious question about apprenticeships as a vehicle for social mobility and progression if opportunities for recruitment to higher-level apprenticeships is inadvertently curtailed for those coming from less advantaged starting points. At the same time, the high profile for higher and degree apprenticeships means that not enough work is being done to develop and invest in levels 2 and 3 where most apprentices are found, and to ensure that it offers them a strong platform for progression… Connections between the levels must be strengthened so that level 2 and 3 apprentices do not hit arbitrary glass ceilings and have similar chances as their A-level or graduate peers to access the next level including, higher and degree apprenticeships.

If we combine this study with The Engineer CBS/Butler one we get a fuller picture of what is happening to Engineer's careers and earnings. I didn’t manage to dig out in the time I had available the definition of a “Junior Engineer” for example, but if we set aside overtime payments or premiums that may accrue though self-employment , the two studies seem aligned. What is also clear is that we are not talking about International Engineering Alliance (Washington Accord) “Engineers”, but a mixed bag of those employed as Engineers , which would strongly suggest that they are potentially registerable in one of our categories. It is also seems highly likely that those who are registered are mostly in the CEng category. There are Eng Tech registrants who would be described in employment as Engineers and of course some Incorporated Engineers as well, but between the ages of 30 and 65 Eng Tech & IEng registrants combined are outnumbered by CEng at least 3:1 rising to 5:1 in the age cohort 40-45. Approximately 30% of registered engineers are over 65 although some are still employed in “salaried” roles.

I found the following particularly interesting

When it comes to choosing their route into the profession, engineers are remarkably consistent. Just as in the previous two years, half of all engineers surveyed have a degree. Meanwhile, 38.9 per cent of engineers entered industry through an apprenticeship scheme, a very similar figure to last year (38.5 per cent). What’s more, like 2017 the percentage of engineers having chosen the apprenticeship route continues to rise with age. Just 26.1 per cent of under-thirties, 21.9 per cent of those in their thirties, and 29.6 per cent of those in their forties have undertaken an apprenticeship, while 50.2 per cent of those in their fifties and 59.1 per cent of those in their sixties have taken this route.

The reverse is true for engineers choosing the university route, with 56.1 per cent of under-thirties, 52.9 per cent of those in their thirties, and 56.9 per cent of those in their forties having been awarded a degree, dipping to 45.6 per cent of those in their fifties and 40.2 per cent of those in their sixties. There is also a significant gender imbalance, with 40.9 per cent of men having chosen to undertake an apprenticeship scheme, compared with just 10.7 per cent of women. In contrast, 62.1 per cent of women surveyed have a degree, compared with 49.2 per cent of men. Among the sectors, the aerospace industry has the highest percentage of engineers who have pursued an apprenticeship (46.1 per cent), followed by the consumer goods and food and drink sector (44.4 per cent) and the chemical, pharmaceutical and medical sector (42.6 per cent). The lowest percentage of engineers with an apprenticeship can be found in the telecoms, electronics and utilities sector (28 per cent).

From post war until the 1980s Telecoms & Utilities typically recruited 10-20 Apprentices for every Graduate, with many progressing to senior engineering roles, so this represents a huge inter-generational “change”. Just in case anyone is kidding themselves that these sectors are now somehow “higher tech nowadays”, they were “high tech” then as well, in the context of the time. Each generation just builds on the achievements of the last. Tommy Flowers (an apprentice who studied for a degree at night school) Frank Whittle (an RAF apprentice who got promoted before a later degree) and my own particular favourite “local hero” the Victorian Thomas Parker (who left school at the age of 10 for an apprenticeship, before later being dubbed “The Edison of Europe” by Lord Kelvin). Oliver Heaviside (as theoretically distinguished as most, left school at 16)

There may be some useful correlations in here if they could be identified. An interesting headline could have also been: “50% of Junior Engineers are registered, compared to 32 % of Directors” and "only 10% of Directors agree that registration leads to higher salaries by seniority”; perhaps not so helpful?

A rational employer should reward more productive contributions more highly, although productivity isn’t always easy to define. For example many would regard CEng staff as an advertisement for quality which might attract a premium in the market place, or allow easier access to certain markets. Is there really a more inventive streak in some CEng and/or is it a good proxy for a suitably qualified and experienced person to manage various risks? Obviously, supply and demand is always a major factor in earnings, but it is susceptible to short-term effects such as migration etc.

Andy, Alastair, Roy, Mike and I, all advocate registration enthusiastically. Perhaps we should tease away at how we think the professional registration/PEI membership proposition can be used to add the most value to employers and society? I sense that we share common ground in feeling that, it is well past the time to move on from the agenda of neediness for social status, relative to medicine, law etc. We have a great collective story to tell if we hadn’t become so factional and classist. Any chance of the occasional sighting of a hard hat or oily rag from the “commanding heights” perhaps, just show how great engineering is at enabling social mobility and enriching society as whole.

WSP worked with the New Economics Foundation to apply the Social Return on Investment (SRoI) methodology to its own apprenticeship scheme, measuring the initiative’s outputs compared to its cost. It was found that for every £1 invested in its apprenticeship programme, £2.26 was created in return for stakeholders. By extrapolating from that figure, it was estimated that a total social value in excess of £6bn would be reached, based on the 114,400-young people that started STEM apprenticeships in England in 2017. (also from The Engineer)
Cancel
Vote Up 0 Vote Down

Cancel

Children

No Data

Professionally registered engineers report higher earnings

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Community Rules & Guidelines