Salary Expectations

What sort of salary should a junior student be expecting if:
- works in the north (lancashire)
- 3/4 exams
- been working for 1 year
- pensions consulting field????

Any views will be helpful to determine whether I'm getting above or below average!

 

i'd guesstimate around £25K

 

Companies in the North of England are notorious for paying low wages - I really don't know how they get away with it. The difference is well in excess of the difference in the cost of living, in the North as opposed to the South.

Since it's a consultancy (i.e. they pay more) I'd guess about 22K.

However, I think an appropriate amount, after one year, would be around 24-26K. But I bet they aren't paying that!!

Of course, there is always another consideration in all of this, you're work!

Are you adding value to your company? Do you complete work to high standards maybe improving on prevous assignments? Or are you (excuse the pun) just making up the numbers?

 

Unfair salary?!

So....... do other people think £24,500 is low for 8 exams and 4 years experience?!??

 

definitely.....it should be well above 30K.

 

I think Carolyn's salary should be well in excess of this! I think that is really unfair! Are you in the north or south of the country?

 

that's very very very low.

should be at least £32-34K

 

if what is said above is true....then this is exploitation.

 

I think 20K is excellent pay for the majority, considering the number of daft money seeking opportunists who have loafed their way into the profession.

From my observations, actuarial work isn't rocket science so I don't understand why people should expect to be paid large amounts. There is hardly any innovative work involved to justify these amounts - most of the work is robotic. Companies can save a lot by outsourcing to asia.

 

I'm in the south

 

I wonder why people think that earning money is a bad thing?

Would you accept a pay raise if given to you, or would u rather say that: "I'm enjoying the work and do not want any pay rise"?

If you accept or look forward to the raise, would you not become a money seeker as well?

Research is innovative, application is not.

Remember (most of us) are being paid for the application of this work, which is very hard to learn.

The very low pass rates in the actuarial exams are ample proof of this fact.

The pass rate is well well below 50%, and this also for such students who are generally very high achievers.

That statement is true for all services, and explains nothing.

 

So what are you trying to say then? Do you agree with me or not?

 

I would obviously have to disagree.

1. You don't have a right to deem others as daft money seeking opportunists and loafers (if that is what actuarial students are I doubt you would be any different); you haven't even met them, heard of them let alone spoken to them about their situations. Like many students in this country, I need to think about paying off a student loan and getting a mortgage - I am not a "mummy's boy".

2. Companies could save by outsourcing from asia, but they also need to consider things like:
(i) communication. Whilst the asian students in my workplace have exceeded expectations in all the technical work, they have under-performed when it comes to communicating the results behind all the numbers despite having years and years of practice.
(ii) moral issues. If there are local students who have shown that they are suitable for the job, why not give it to them and contribute to the future development of their country and manage the risk of not having a brain drain in the future?

3. Have you ever worked in an actuarial role? Does not seem like it to me from other postings on this forum. You've only been studying the exams for a few months. You can't say that you really know what its about until you've had some experience - saying that you've spoken to others or passed an exam or 2 or read things about actuarial work here and there isn't as good as working in the profession.

4. Actuarial work isn't about being in a back office all day doing fiendishly complicated mathematics. When you can prove that you are a good communicator (which is primarily what the work is about), you can give yourself:
a) A pat on the back
b) 10 Brownie Points.

 

i find this whole discussion amuzing...of course actuaries should get paid well, why else would they sacrifice the best years of their life studying in their spare time (having already done a degree)...just to get paid less than a McDonalds manager...come on.

 

I know p51ng well enough by now to know that he was joking in his post. Salaries are set by the law of demand and supply and because the exams are so tough, the supply is low and thus salaries high.

Just one thing, p51ng: Visitors and newcomers might think you are serious and if an actuary "admits" that his job is repetitive and pays too much, general opinions about us and the profession develops.

Cheers

 

Interesting replies everyone....

I am a student still at uni with no practical experience of actuarial work. I've just completed a one year placement with a microelectronics firm and I can admit that the work I have done is far more intellectually demanding than my observations about actuarial work. And yet salaries don't reflect this. I don't understand why actuaries should be paid rediculous amounts for replicating easy work. I call it easy because you need to know how to do the work and thats it, whereas in engineering you first need to know how to do the work, and then change the way it is done without doing harm to other related work. Now thats not easy.

I have worked with a lot of international students and communication has never been a barrier at any level. They just have a less rhetorical way of communicating which is perceived differently by native english speakers but this doesn't harm their productivity in any way.

Engineers and scientists study for years and do work that has a greater impact on our lives. Actuaries don't care about improving our lives, apart from making us believe that we'll be helped in the event of adversity, which usually don't happen. And if they do happen, they try their best to look for ways to refuse a claim. Salaries don't reflect the usefulness of scientists and the uselessness of actuaries.

I am not labelling anyone daft, opportunist or loafer. I am just annoyed at the rediculous paychecks that are awarded to people who are there just for the money, like yourself. I think actuarial work is repetitive and unnecessarily pays too much. I'm sure a few would agree with me on that.

What would you award lower pay to? Work that is replicative or work that innovative? Think about it!

 

Come back when you know what you're talking about.

 

the actuarial salaries reflect the pain and endurance required to complete the exams. there is no other profession that has exams this difficult to pass.

technically many actuaries are weak (e.g compared to say quants working in investment banks), and the work does not require high level maths skills in some areas (e.g. pensions). in other areas there are some extremely talented actuaries, who are developing very complex stochastic models.

generally speaking pay corresponds to demand and supply. as we have very few qualified actuaries compared to engineers and accountants (thanks to the impossible exams), we get paid a lot more. simple economics really.

 

no... pass rates for the CFA exams are less than 30%

 

That doesn't necessarily mean that CFA is more difficult than actuarial. For all you know, 90% of the people writing the CFA exams may have only started studying a week before the exam!

You can't say!

 

with regards to cfa exam
on teh exemptions site of IOA i think whole quialification counst towards ST0
(i.e one examination)
so IOA dont see CFA that "hard" relative to entire actuarial qualification, of course thats IOAs view

ask many though and theyll say actuarial exams are by far the hardest of any profession

(i think even "medical" exams only really need memory work and very little problem solving/applied skills)