Rules and Guidelines
Want to participate in the discussions? Please read our Community Rules and Guidelines. Need some help? Visit Support and Answers.

  • State Not Answered
  • Locked Locked
  • Replies 7 replies
  • Subscribers 9 subscribers
  • Views 1127 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
You may also be interested in
This discussion is locked.
You cannot post a reply to this discussion. If you have a question start a new discussion

Is it time for the IET to conduct a new Salary Survey - for the benefit of all UK and Ireland Members and Employers?

Malcolm Davies







Is it about time that the IET carried out another UK and Ireland Engineering Salary Survey before Brexit Chaos Ensues ? On 6 Feb 1998 the IEE received responses from some 10,575 UK and Eire based Fellows, Members, Associate Members and Associates at a time when the total UK wide IEE Membership was 69,775. The recent Salary Survey 2019 - published in The Engineer Magazine in collaboration with CBS Butler received responses from just 1568 engineers covering 12 engineering sectors, ranging from Academia, through Rail and Infrastructure, Defence and Security, Automotive, Aerospace, Telecomms/Electronics, Food and Drink, Chemicals, Oil and Gas and Energy/renewables/nuclear, 3 levels of responsibility (Junior, Senior/Manager and Director) and 6 geographical regions. This works out to be 12 x 3 x 6 groups spread over 1568 data points i.e. an average of just 7 data points per cell. Needless to say this Survey could not show either salary medians, upper and lower quartiles nor any analysis on the basis of Class of Membership e.g. Chartered, Incorporated, Technician. By comparison the IEE Salary Survey 1998 covered six responsibility levels and was able to show meaningful statistical data by age group in 5 year age bands from graduation to retirement. The IET alone now has 168,000 members in 150 countries world wide, surely a golden opportunity for a New Salary Survey? The President Elect, Dr Peter Bonfield asked us, at his recent address, entitled 'The Future of Engineering' given on 3rd July 2019, at The University of Hertford, for suggestions to facilitate the ongoing advancement of the IET Profession both individually, collectively, educationally, and reputationally in the public eye in order to encourage many more bright youngsters and school leavers to take Professional Engineering in the UK as their career of first choice. Maybe this survey would provide an up to date view of where we are and where we need to make improvements for the sake of all our futures.




Parents
  • 0
    The salary scales of many public sector employees are published.  If we wish to use Engineering Council’s three “types” of registration, then it would be possible to compare the criteria published on the IET website for different categories of registration with Armed Forces salary scales.  Outside MOD and its sphere of influence, registered Technicians and Incorporated Engineers are thinly spread and effectively extinct in many sectors.  As Andy pointed out it is also the case that most Engineers operating a broadly graduate level and beyond are non-registrants. Furthermore, nearly half of those that are Chartered are over 60 and the average age of a new registrant is nearly 40.  There is a younger cohort coming on stream from late 20s in those sectors where graduate recruitment (e.g. MEng) is prevalent with CEng as the target.  This would include a significant number of “blue-chip” employers, who are themselves well-aware of the market in some cases worldwide and prepared to pay a premium for exceptional talent. 


    Two further factors that are likely to distort any survey, is the tendency for many who trained as engineers or technicians to move into different roles. Two examples that immediately spring to mind “bagged” CEng early and became a Barrister and Chief Executive respectively.  Many former apprentices also move into senior leadership roles or become self-employed SME owners, but tend not to seek registration, because of its academic bias. There are still a few who retain a non-CEng registration also for largely sentimental reasons, but are “in the closet”.


    I’m not against the idea in principle of the IET conducted any survey including salaries, if it has clarity of purpose and benefit. That would include focussing on some sub-set of Chartered Engineer salaries if that were useful. However, I am somewhat sceptical of surveys which merely set out to make a “political” point and unsurprisingly find data to support it.  I’m more enthusiastic about research that questions existing assumptions or helps to drive higher performance and productivity.  So for example the IET skills survey highlighted problems around the useful productivity of graduate engineers, for which our policies, prioritising theory over practice are partly culpable.  If we consider only rewards influenced by the market, accepting that all markets are imperfect to some extent, an employer needs to gain some return on investment from each employee. The fact that many self-employed Plumbers, Electricians and others with in-demand skills earn more than typical Chartered Engineers is the market in action , even if it annoys those who see the IET as a form of Chartered Engineer’s Trades Union or at least “lobby group”.


    I would certainly be supportive of any initiative that set out to increase the productive contribution of engineers and technicians, which will ultimately enhance their earnings. That includes academic excellence where that is a relevant factor. If professional bodies could control the supply of engineers, then they could make the market instead of employers, but UK governments have never bought into that proposition. What we currently have is the CEng kicks the IEng, who kicks the Eng Tech, who kicks the unregistered skilled person, who kicks the “handyperson”.  However if the “handyperson” is honest and ethical and knows his place (like Ronnie Corbett in the famous sketch) he might be very productive and earn an honest living.   


    Returning to the Public Sector where salaries are published anyway, or not for profit enterprises, salaries are determined somewhat differently and influenced by other factors. So some mechanism like “Job Evaluation” may be used.  I was involved in that many years ago in a fully unionised environment where “differentials” and progression  through pay scales were high priority for the representatives of skilled workers (including Chartered Engineers). Factors in job evaluation might include “thinking challenge”, “specialist training required”, “responsibility” etc.  I would happily debate this if anyone wants to.


    PS Good luck to Peter Bonfield , unfortunately I couldn’t make the event despite living locally (very locally to BRE).                  

                 

Reply
  • 0
    The salary scales of many public sector employees are published.  If we wish to use Engineering Council’s three “types” of registration, then it would be possible to compare the criteria published on the IET website for different categories of registration with Armed Forces salary scales.  Outside MOD and its sphere of influence, registered Technicians and Incorporated Engineers are thinly spread and effectively extinct in many sectors.  As Andy pointed out it is also the case that most Engineers operating a broadly graduate level and beyond are non-registrants. Furthermore, nearly half of those that are Chartered are over 60 and the average age of a new registrant is nearly 40.  There is a younger cohort coming on stream from late 20s in those sectors where graduate recruitment (e.g. MEng) is prevalent with CEng as the target.  This would include a significant number of “blue-chip” employers, who are themselves well-aware of the market in some cases worldwide and prepared to pay a premium for exceptional talent. 


    Two further factors that are likely to distort any survey, is the tendency for many who trained as engineers or technicians to move into different roles. Two examples that immediately spring to mind “bagged” CEng early and became a Barrister and Chief Executive respectively.  Many former apprentices also move into senior leadership roles or become self-employed SME owners, but tend not to seek registration, because of its academic bias. There are still a few who retain a non-CEng registration also for largely sentimental reasons, but are “in the closet”.


    I’m not against the idea in principle of the IET conducted any survey including salaries, if it has clarity of purpose and benefit. That would include focussing on some sub-set of Chartered Engineer salaries if that were useful. However, I am somewhat sceptical of surveys which merely set out to make a “political” point and unsurprisingly find data to support it.  I’m more enthusiastic about research that questions existing assumptions or helps to drive higher performance and productivity.  So for example the IET skills survey highlighted problems around the useful productivity of graduate engineers, for which our policies, prioritising theory over practice are partly culpable.  If we consider only rewards influenced by the market, accepting that all markets are imperfect to some extent, an employer needs to gain some return on investment from each employee. The fact that many self-employed Plumbers, Electricians and others with in-demand skills earn more than typical Chartered Engineers is the market in action , even if it annoys those who see the IET as a form of Chartered Engineer’s Trades Union or at least “lobby group”.


    I would certainly be supportive of any initiative that set out to increase the productive contribution of engineers and technicians, which will ultimately enhance their earnings. That includes academic excellence where that is a relevant factor. If professional bodies could control the supply of engineers, then they could make the market instead of employers, but UK governments have never bought into that proposition. What we currently have is the CEng kicks the IEng, who kicks the Eng Tech, who kicks the unregistered skilled person, who kicks the “handyperson”.  However if the “handyperson” is honest and ethical and knows his place (like Ronnie Corbett in the famous sketch) he might be very productive and earn an honest living.   


    Returning to the Public Sector where salaries are published anyway, or not for profit enterprises, salaries are determined somewhat differently and influenced by other factors. So some mechanism like “Job Evaluation” may be used.  I was involved in that many years ago in a fully unionised environment where “differentials” and progression  through pay scales were high priority for the representatives of skilled workers (including Chartered Engineers). Factors in job evaluation might include “thinking challenge”, “specialist training required”, “responsibility” etc.  I would happily debate this if anyone wants to.


    PS Good luck to Peter Bonfield , unfortunately I couldn’t make the event despite living locally (very locally to BRE).                  

                 

Children
No Data

Join us to get the best from IET EngX.

Joining EngX lets you personalise your experience so you stay up to date on the topics that interest you, plus you’ll be able to make connections who are looking to collaborate, exchange ideas and more.

Join us Not now

Community Rules & Guidelines