• We are pleased to announce that the winner of our Feedback Prize Draw for the Winter 2024-25 session and winning £150 of gift vouchers is Zhao Liang Tay. Congratulations to Zhao Liang. If you fancy winning £150 worth of gift vouchers (from a major UK store) for the Summer 2025 exam sitting for just a few minutes of your time throughout the session, please see our website at https://www.acted.co.uk/further-info.html?pat=feedback#feedback-prize for more information on how you can make sure your name is included in the draw at the end of the session.
  • Please be advised that the SP1, SP5 and SP7 X1 deadline is the 14th July and not the 17th June as first stated. Please accept out apologies for any confusion caused.

Contract vs. Permanent Roles in the UK

V

Viki2010

Member
I noticed that the market for actuaries in the UK is offering a lot of contract roles. What do you think of working on a contract? What are the potential advantages? As I understand, a contract would not offer any study support (e.g. 40 day bank to study etc). Is it better paid in general or it all varies and there is no rules....? :confused:
 
This is a mindfield but I'll try and help....

Any contract tends to pay a premium over permanent to compensate for the temporary nature. The higher the prem, generally the shorter the contract. Ultimately if you work per hour then the premium is huge and you can effectively choose when/where you work.

Attractions depend on where you live. Are there lots of options in your geographical area eg in London.

Regarding study, some do offer a study allowance though may not be as good as permanent contracts. The extra premium in £ you get covers in part cost of expenses though naturally time off is hard to get.

If you take a longer term fixed contract (6months +) you start to get treated more like permanent.

So if its quick variety you like, then contract is good. But if you like just one company its less so as there's no gtee of extensions.

Also yes the market is good now with many solvency II projects but longer term this may reduce. Bit like pension review work about 5 years ago.

Talk to a recruitment agent who can elaborate more.
 
contract vs permenant

The headline salary figures for contract roles can look very attractive, but once you factor in holidays, pension contributions, other benefits, which may well be excluded from contract salaries, the premium is less impressive, but can still be quite significant. And of course, if you do well there's often potential to extend the contract, or even move in to a permenant role.

Flexibility vs security is the other main trade-off as bystander said. Risk vs reward I suppose. Contracts can be a great way to jump between projects of your choosing and build up experience, if you don't mind looking for work again soon.

Recruiters should be a good source information, but of course they are incentivised to fill roles to make commission, so may not always be entirely impartial.

Are there many contract roles for part-qualified actuaries with only a few years experience? I tend to think of them as more aimed at more experience people, who are able to work more independently.
 
For a student I would think a contract role would be less attractive, even with study support, unless there was a significant premium.
One or two bad exam sessions could leave you in a weak position & seeking a new employer.
Would I be correct in saying most students join an employer with the intention of remaining with them until qualification, or is change relatively frequent and accepted? (in which case a contract may work).
 
I think its pretty common to move just after qualification, possibly partly becuase employers tend not to increase salary on qualification enough to reflect your increased market value, but I guess also its just a natural time to re-evaluate your career slightly.

Its not at all unusual to move before qualification also though - it does take 5 or 6 years for most people to qualify after all! I think its accepted as much as it would be for anyone else (although i've heard of some employers deducting any recent training costs from your salary before you leave - a bit harsh I think). And once you have a few years experience and most of the exams done you're already in quite a strong position to find another actuarial job (or move into one if you didn't start in one). Lots of roles advertised are for 'part qualified' or 'nearly qualified' actuaries.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mattt78 said:
I think its pretty common to move just after qualification, possibly partly becuase employers tend not to increase salary on qualification enough to reflect your increased market value, but I guess also its just a natural time to re-evaluate your career slightly.

Its not at all unusual to move before qualification also though - it does take 5 or 6 years for most people to qualify after all! And once you have a few years experience and most of the exams done you're already in quite a strong position to find another actuarial job (or move into one if you didn't start in one). Lots of roles advertised are for 'part qualified' or 'nearly qualified' actuaries.
Click to expand...

Yes, exactly. I think also typically it takes 5 years to qualify if you have a good study package :eek:

and what is understood under "part-qualified" (how many exams) and "nearly qualified" (how many exams)? :confused:
 
contract vs permenant

i always wondered about that myself. I've seen these terms in quite a few job ads, but I don't think there's a proper definition. My guess would be nearly usually means within a couple of exams of passing, and part qualified could mean anything, but probably i'd guess usually means at least 5 CTs done, but not enough to be considered 'nearly qualified'.
But if a job ad uses these terms i'd assume they're using them as a guide to your level of experience as much as anything.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top