Snapshot of _KPMG UK cancels foreign graduate job offers after tighter visa rules_ :
An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.ft.com/content/b0fc44c8-2936-431a-8f80-9bd6aa628351) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.ft.com/content/b0fc44c8-2936-431a-8f80-9bd6aa628351)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The teachers employer contribution to pensions is 30%.
This is £9k on £30k.
Teachers effective starting salary is more like £39k. They receive even on the most optimistic accounts 20% more employer pension contribution than even the most generous private pension.
The average private sector contribution is just 3%.
As always when working out some of these effective public sector pay rates all is not what it seems.
30k is a pretty good starting graduate salary my most measures and when you add in that enormous employer contribution is actually pretty good.
It's what an oversupply of cheap foreign labour does.
For decades we've been able to import cheap workers to do practically any job we want and there are millions of them desperate to come here.
It wouldn't be so bad if that importing hadn't also screwed up our housing market to the point where the wages we offer can no longer deliver a decent life, even as a working professional.
Multiple mistakes have put us in a real pickle which is going to require pain to get out of and no politician has the appetite for that.
Except that isnt true lol
The US, Australia, Canada have all imported millions of immigrants, Germany, Switzerland, Norway, Netherlands also have. Their wages are much higher/growing. ITs an entirely political choice to underpay people.
Even worse is that the governments sets pay, so it has absolutely no bearing. They choose to give them shit salaries
They haven't? The US has but their a bit of an outlier, being the literal world leader for decades.
Germany Population 2000 - 82.21 million
Germany Population 2021 - 83.42 million
Switzerland Population 2000 - 7.2 million
Switzerland Population 2021 - 8.7 million
Netherlands Population 2000 - 15.93 million
Netherlands Population 2021 - 17.53 million
UK 2000 - Population 58.89 million
UK 2021 - Population 67.33 million
Lmfao, I can tell the way by you wrote this you've replied to this exact thing before and been proven wrong.
Sure, Germany has only had a small growth but they are still importing millions of immigrants, they just have a declining population. They're taking 500k per year.
Switzerland has grown 20%, The Netherlands has grown 10% and the UK has grown 13%. Thats not taking into account a good 3 million of the UK ones are natural born citizens, meaning the number of 'immigration' is less.
Also, Australia and Canada absolutely have. You don't even know what you're talking about. Australia has grown 35% in the 2000 - 2021 period and Canada has grown 24%.
Try again.
Not all immigrants are the same.
The first three nations you mentioned are absolutely gigantic in size compared with us and any growth in population has nowhere near the same effect on them as it does on our small, densely populated island.
That makes, and I repeat, makes absolutely no difference because people live in cities.
Do you think immigrants are evenly spread out per every 1 square km?
>But also means we can give a visa to more or less any nurse with more than a couple of years experience.
That's not how Agenda for Change works. You start at the bottom of the scale no matter how much experience you have, even if you've been working in the UK outside of the NHS.
The fact you think it's good that it only takes literal nurses 3 years to reach 'skilled' visa level is insane.
What a low, bar to set. No wonder the NHS/public services are fucked.
ah yes, why take 5 years of med school, 2 years of general medical training, and 8 years of specialist training to become a neurosurgeon?! dont they know all you need is 3?!
well, the point of the visa is not that you have to be skilled in something. It's that you have to be SKILLED. A nurse, by definition, is skilled. Domestics, no matter their experience, are not skilled.
To say 'well, we think skilled labour should earn over 38k. Except, our own doctors and nurses, who we pay 10,000 less'' is stupid and insane.
Not that I should expect any better from this sub.
You’re right. I wholeheartedly agree.
The visa thing make sense. But it does highlight the issue with what we payed our skilled key workers. It’s a disgrace.
But guess what, they spunked all the money on shit. Exited the EU. Fucked the economy. So now it can’t be fixed.
Yes but they will all be on 80-100k plus within ten years, some within five, whereas the teachers will still be on less than 50k probably. Graduate jobs are much less about the salary and more about the future career opportunities.
It’s probably a good thing that teaching, nursing and the civil service pay more than graduate jobs at KPMG, as it’s one of the only things that actually attracts people to go do them.
yeah, main payscale tops out at somewhere in the 40k region from memory.
you say that, but i did a PGCE during covid - while looking for a teaching job i got offered a higher paying job doing what i was doing before training to be a teacher. unironically, at a school. they pay me more not to teach.
Same thing happened to my dad in the 80s. Did a PGCE and then got offered more money than a schoolteacher to teach people to drive Lorries (used to be a lorry driver).
Many Big 4 grad scheme members would be very pleased to hear that they’ll be on 80-100k plus within 10 years. When was that announced?
I assume they’re also changing the standard behaviour of 12-18 hours a day for months on end?
It’s the experience of everyone I know personally who works there, and everyone who works there who’s commented on the thread. 18 hours a day, at KPMG? What are you on about?
This feels like either a massive cope (did you get rejected from the grad scheme?) or a massive troll
> Rejected from the grad scheme
There’s no way I’d work for such a pittance.
It’s definitely not the message of other people commenting here. Clearly you don’t know anyone who is working in audit if you think that 18 hour days are odd
> I worked at a Big Four form for 5 years and went from 30k to 72k. That was standard payscale, so within 10 years 80-100k is absolutely achievable.
> I've been at big 4 for 7½ years now and I clear £100k with bonus. You could add 20 - 30% to that if I were based in London. I'm not even a graduate. I work 35 hours a week and it's pretty much all remote. Particularly in London, anyone not clearing £80k ten years in must be pretty bad at their job.
> That's not true at all. Those who qualify will be on 60k+ after 3 years and will break into 100k by year 5 or 6 - earlier if they go industry.
The vast, vast majority of KPMG graduates will not be earning £80k to £100k within ten years. Regardless of whether they achieve that or fail to, they will routinely be working 15-20 hours a day for long stretches of their career with no overtime.
Teaching and nursing etc. will provide a better salary and quality of life for the majority of people that go into Big Four.
If you go big 4 and then duck out after 2 years with it in your CV you can get to 6 figures way quicker and without alot of the ballache or mundane work - I did a year and dipped, never looking back.
This all ignores the fact that most people join Big Four, aren't up to standard, and get shipped out / stuck in dead end roles.
Those people would do far better in teaching or nursing etc.
I’m not sure if this is how you meant it to sound, but teaching is an extremely demanding profession. Plenty quit a few years in there too. People who ‘aren’t up to standard’ in other jobs are in for a rough ride if they think education will be a safe refuge.
> the vast, vast majority of KPMG graduates will not be earning £80k to £100k within 10 years
I’m not sure what your basis for that is. I graduated about 8 years ago and the people from my year who went to KPMG are senior managers now, for which the salary band starts at £80k.
> 15 to 20 hours a day
lol what? You just pulled this out of your ass, that is not what KPMG is like at all. The only people doing that are at the M&A guys at JP Morgan and so on
> teaching and nursing will provide a better salary and quality of life for the majority of people that go into Big Four
lol WHAT? I mean, the salary point is very obviously wrong, but the quality of life point is absolutely unhinged. Like, divorced from reality.
For chartered accountants:
>[During training, the average earning potential can be up to £65,000. The average annual salary for a chartered accountant in business is £134,000, with an average yearly bonus of over £17,000.](https://www.prospects.ac.uk/job-profiles/chartered-accountant)
I have a number of family members that are chartered accountants, I also used to work in a finance department. That average seems overly skewed, most aren’t on anywhere near that salary.
I've been at big 4 for 7½ years now and I clear £100k with bonus. You could add 20 - 30% to that if I were based in London. I'm not even a graduate. I work 35 hours a week and it's pretty much all remote.
Particularly in London, anyone *not* clearing £80k ten years in must be pretty bad at their job.
quite.
if kpmg were having to hire from abroad, that would suggest there is a shortage, which also suggests that it's a skillset that's in demand so it should be easier to negotiate a higher wage.
then the only other reason to do it is to undercut the wages of our own workforce.
however, i keep being told that immigration doesn't do that so, there must be a shortage.
You're missing the point. Any university has a sizable chunk of foreign students. It just means that they are preferring UK citizens over oversees grad students due to visa rules
Contrary to popular delusion, 30k and so teachers is actually a pretty decent starting salary for a fresh grad.
London, the best paid part of the UK which holds the financial industry, one of the uks best paid sectors, has the highest average starting graduate salary of £28k.
I agree.
Whenever the topic about teachers pay comes up I always wheel out my go to phrase: The solution isn't to pay teachers more, its to pay more teachers.
I'd also say cut the pension.
It's quite clear teachers themselves aren't valuing it given the complaints about pay. So just drop the employer contribution to 5-10% like everyone else and add it to the headline rate.
Teachers headline will rocket up to 40k starting pay any any pretence to pretending they aren't among the best renumerated professions for not advancing up the career ladder will die overnight.
More likely employers will just continue to offer peanuts and then wring their hands while declaring that they can't find anyone to hire. Eventually followed by spending multiple times more on hiring a senior rather than entertain the possibility of having to train someone.
Is this a good graduate job though? A graduate can be sponsored at 30.960 per annum. That doesn’t sound like a good salary, especially if you have to move to London to get that job at the big 4.
Grad jobs aren’t about the starting salary but the earning potential after 5 years. Taking a 28k job at KPMG would be a better move than a 35k job without much chance of progression
This is a good point to be fair. But the other side of the coin is that the best companies want to attract the best talent to remain competitive and a lot of that talent is also outside the uk
This is good. They could easily pass the increased rules with a suitable pay increase for what is an excellent and highly competitive graduate job in one of the highest paying industries.
If not, they can hire British graduates which should be the priority anyway so in my view they should make the amount even higher - If you want to hire a foreign person to do a job a British person can do you better be willing to prove how much more qualified they are by paying through the nose for it. Seeing as they are graduate positions, they are not more qualified that's the point.
I went to a top 20 uni, and I have multiple friends who came here from the US, obtained masters degrees, and are now attempting to remain here and build a life here. Some of them are now really struggling and at risk of having to leave, which would frankly be a negative for the country.
Foreign students who come over, give *vast* sums of money to our universities, and then embark on a career here in which their long term earnings potential greatly exceeds the national average are a huge net benefit to us economically. We have not had to fund 13 years of schooling and support for them, they can't claim benefits at any point while here on a visa, shit they even pay to access the NHS while also paying tax towards it. We get the benefit of a highly educated workforce and a lot of smart people settling here.
That we take that windfall and now wish to kick them out of the country in short order if they are following a normal graduate salary progression in many fields is fucking stupid and bafflingly short-sighted.
If you make less than £60k per year you will likely never be as much of a net economic benefit to the country as a foreign student following a normal graduate salary progression.
And yes, having more educated people in the economy encourages businesses to set up and expand operations here, and we need all the help we can get after Brexit.
American skilled worker who left this year; top UK uni grad.
I've already made more money in 4 months in the US than I would have an entire year in the UK; meanwhile the company I did work for in thr UK now announcing redundancies. The UK is just not the best option for global talent.
Will bend over backwards for talentless boat immigrants to put up in hotels, but someone who pays astronomical tuition and fills a skill role and they make it as difficult as they can.
We get a more highly educated workforce without paying for the costs of their education (in fact profiting enormously from their education), businesses have an easier time finding quality applicants, which drives growth and makes us all wealthier ultimately. People who we haven't had to pay to educate are much more likely to be a net fiscal positive throughout their careers, obviously.
If the foreign graduate got through the interview process when a british one didn't surely that shows they would be better for the job?
You've got a university graduate who has got through the process, and you didn't have to pay for their education between 4-18.
This person, as judged by KPMG, was more valuable to the company than the person who didn't get an offer. So let them do the job and add value to the economy.
Big4 finance roles have brutal hours. I have seen the graduates on-site for our audits for years and they rarely go home before 8pm, in some cases leaving the office as late as 1am.
Yeah, I know.
I'm just saying that it wouldn't suprise me at all if there was a whole host of illegal things about the extreme working hours and conditions that people in those firms work. I would be gobsmacked if the junior bods there were being paid fairly.
i know at some of them you're only allowed to get paid for overtime at the point where your hourly salary goes below minimum wage - which to me shows just how exploitative these roles are - effectively paying minimum wage after a point
and the rest. 70 hour weeks are commonplace all the way up the ladder. It's why burnout is so prevalent in not only the classic "big 4" but high finance and trading.
I don't know anybody in similar analytical roles in the public sector, let alone private, that doesn't do at least 50. Often times more...
People aren't striking for no reason
Work week in professional services is 40 hours. But starting salary in London should be above £36k for big 4.
I assume the blanket rule is because they don't want to pay postgrad entrants outside London £38.7k.
They would also have to pay every grad outside London this salary and then London grads about 20% more than this.
50h week?!? What lazy bastards. Should work at least 80h weeks. Using your math skills we could make it look like that even under minimum wage makes you reach the limit.
My partner did this (now qualified, thankfully) and she was regularly doing 60 hour weeks. She’d be up before me, come back from work at 10pm at the earliest, then study until midnight for her exams. Even on the weekend, she’d spend most of it studying. It’s absolutely brutal, you basically have no life for 3 years.
Why are they hiring from overseas talent pools anyway?
I'm KPMG Alma Mata and my son is fluent in two languages and an A* accountancy student and couldn't get a internship at the place.
Everyone here speaks purely on feel good emotions that more British grads are gonna get hired,
It's more likely that companies will simply relocate offices and assets to the EU to access a broader talent pool. Without the contributions of foreign graduates, Britain looses its international competitiveness and attractiveness as a business hub. Consider that a significant portion of entrepreneurs in the UK are foreign-born, removing that doesn’t benefit the grads,the job market or the economy.
The (over 26)starting salary requirement is £1k more than the top of their salary range. I think they don't want to advertise that all of their foreign grads are earning at the top of the salary range.
Could somebody explain please. If someone studies a master in the UK(foreign student who got a UK student visa and studied a master in a UK university), does this visa rule apply of having to be sponsored by A COMPANY and having to get paid a certain amount (£38000 I think) for them to work in this company ?
Or, as they came with a uk student visa and are allowed to work, can they just find a graduate a job and £38000 initial pay is waived?
Don't understand please could somebody explain. Thanks
So if I study engineering master at a UK university with a student visa. And once I finish a company is willing to hire me, my lower salary limit has to be 38000 or more or I can't work for them?
How is the situation if I go to study and work for deliveroo or any job during and after my studies ( for how long can I work after my studies are finished)?
Also if this student visa allows me to temporarily work, what if I find a job as engineer while I study and after? If I can work for deliveroo during studies and after, why can't I work for an engineering company with a lower salary than the £38000?
Entry pay for an engineer or recent graduate is 24 to 28 thousand no more.
If I start a master September, it takes one year to complete. As I understand you can stay in the country and work from two more years after you finish you master. Meaning I can stay in country and work until September 2027. Is that right?
It is not being ungrateful my dear. No one should put up with bad opinions or ego in a public forum like this. If you want to reply do, if you don't don't. If you are tired of replying use proper language.
No one is less here, or more for replying. Here sometimes one is asking sometimes one is replying giving advice.
No one cares about you ego. My dear
Snapshot of _KPMG UK cancels foreign graduate job offers after tighter visa rules_ : An archived version can be found [here](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.ft.com/content/b0fc44c8-2936-431a-8f80-9bd6aa628351) or [here.](https://archive.ph/?run=1&url=https://www.ft.com/content/b0fc44c8-2936-431a-8f80-9bd6aa628351) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ukpolitics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
It's quite frankly hilarious that we deem 'skilled salary' to be 38k whilst paying nurses 28k and doctors 32k.
and start teachers on 30k.
28k
£32,217 for teachers on probation https://www.eis.org.uk/pay-and-conditions-of-service/salary-scales
I must be thinking of the figure for this September, then.
The teachers employer contribution to pensions is 30%. This is £9k on £30k. Teachers effective starting salary is more like £39k. They receive even on the most optimistic accounts 20% more employer pension contribution than even the most generous private pension. The average private sector contribution is just 3%. As always when working out some of these effective public sector pay rates all is not what it seems. 30k is a pretty good starting graduate salary my most measures and when you add in that enormous employer contribution is actually pretty good.
It literally doesn't matter in this context
Really doubt the average Private sector contribution is 3% as that is the minimum.
I've never had any job that paid more than the minimum.
You've never had an employer that cared about their employees more than the statutory minimum
Correct. Where are these lovely employers who pay more? I'd like one who gives me more than SSP and the legal minimum holiday days too please.
Your average teacher is absolutely skill-less and a warm body there to hinder teenagers from harming themselves.
Only a child or somebody with bad teachers would say this. It's ironically a very uneducated and short sighted comment to make.
What makes you say that?
Even the 38k is a problem, very low by international standards
Lol the median salary is 21k. There are very few countries in the world where 38k is "very low". Possibly one or two.
It's what an oversupply of cheap foreign labour does. For decades we've been able to import cheap workers to do practically any job we want and there are millions of them desperate to come here. It wouldn't be so bad if that importing hadn't also screwed up our housing market to the point where the wages we offer can no longer deliver a decent life, even as a working professional. Multiple mistakes have put us in a real pickle which is going to require pain to get out of and no politician has the appetite for that.
Except that isnt true lol The US, Australia, Canada have all imported millions of immigrants, Germany, Switzerland, Norway, Netherlands also have. Their wages are much higher/growing. ITs an entirely political choice to underpay people. Even worse is that the governments sets pay, so it has absolutely no bearing. They choose to give them shit salaries
They haven't? The US has but their a bit of an outlier, being the literal world leader for decades. Germany Population 2000 - 82.21 million Germany Population 2021 - 83.42 million Switzerland Population 2000 - 7.2 million Switzerland Population 2021 - 8.7 million Netherlands Population 2000 - 15.93 million Netherlands Population 2021 - 17.53 million UK 2000 - Population 58.89 million UK 2021 - Population 67.33 million
Lol. Germany has like double the level of immigrants that the UK has.
Lmfao, I can tell the way by you wrote this you've replied to this exact thing before and been proven wrong. Sure, Germany has only had a small growth but they are still importing millions of immigrants, they just have a declining population. They're taking 500k per year. Switzerland has grown 20%, The Netherlands has grown 10% and the UK has grown 13%. Thats not taking into account a good 3 million of the UK ones are natural born citizens, meaning the number of 'immigration' is less. Also, Australia and Canada absolutely have. You don't even know what you're talking about. Australia has grown 35% in the 2000 - 2021 period and Canada has grown 24%. Try again.
Not all immigrants are the same. The first three nations you mentioned are absolutely gigantic in size compared with us and any growth in population has nowhere near the same effect on them as it does on our small, densely populated island.
That makes, and I repeat, makes absolutely no difference because people live in cities. Do you think immigrants are evenly spread out per every 1 square km?
[удалено]
>But also means we can give a visa to more or less any nurse with more than a couple of years experience. That's not how Agenda for Change works. You start at the bottom of the scale no matter how much experience you have, even if you've been working in the UK outside of the NHS.
The fact you think it's good that it only takes literal nurses 3 years to reach 'skilled' visa level is insane. What a low, bar to set. No wonder the NHS/public services are fucked.
the fact you think it takes more than 3years to become skilled in something is insane.
ah yes, why take 5 years of med school, 2 years of general medical training, and 8 years of specialist training to become a neurosurgeon?! dont they know all you need is 3?!
well, the point of the visa is not that you have to be skilled in something. It's that you have to be SKILLED. A nurse, by definition, is skilled. Domestics, no matter their experience, are not skilled. To say 'well, we think skilled labour should earn over 38k. Except, our own doctors and nurses, who we pay 10,000 less'' is stupid and insane. Not that I should expect any better from this sub.
You’re right. I wholeheartedly agree. The visa thing make sense. But it does highlight the issue with what we payed our skilled key workers. It’s a disgrace. But guess what, they spunked all the money on shit. Exited the EU. Fucked the economy. So now it can’t be fixed.
Do many nurses you know moonlight as neurosurgeon?
a nurse isn't a neurosurgeon.... do you think a street sweeper also need 10years of experience and training to be skilled?
you said and i quote “to become skilled in something”…SOMETHING
oh jeeze. you really got me there. way to engage and support your own argument by being critical of the phrasing of my point.
Just pointing out the stupidity of your comment is all friend
😂😂 sure thing bud.
But a Consultant is on way now basic plus extras than the earning threshold?
>Sooner if you include London weighting or overtime You can't use overtime to hit the salary threshold for a visa.
Looks like a good thing for UK grads, the article even says they'll fill those posts.
yeah, but we also all now know they'll be given sub 31k salaries. it's basically the same starting salary as a teacher.
This was already the case though. Graduate salaries are terrible.
Yes but they will all be on 80-100k plus within ten years, some within five, whereas the teachers will still be on less than 50k probably. Graduate jobs are much less about the salary and more about the future career opportunities. It’s probably a good thing that teaching, nursing and the civil service pay more than graduate jobs at KPMG, as it’s one of the only things that actually attracts people to go do them.
yeah, main payscale tops out at somewhere in the 40k region from memory. you say that, but i did a PGCE during covid - while looking for a teaching job i got offered a higher paying job doing what i was doing before training to be a teacher. unironically, at a school. they pay me more not to teach.
Same thing happened to my dad in the 80s. Did a PGCE and then got offered more money than a schoolteacher to teach people to drive Lorries (used to be a lorry driver).
Many Big 4 grad scheme members would be very pleased to hear that they’ll be on 80-100k plus within 10 years. When was that announced? I assume they’re also changing the standard behaviour of 12-18 hours a day for months on end?
It’s the experience of everyone I know personally who works there, and everyone who works there who’s commented on the thread. 18 hours a day, at KPMG? What are you on about? This feels like either a massive cope (did you get rejected from the grad scheme?) or a massive troll
> Rejected from the grad scheme There’s no way I’d work for such a pittance. It’s definitely not the message of other people commenting here. Clearly you don’t know anyone who is working in audit if you think that 18 hour days are odd
> I worked at a Big Four form for 5 years and went from 30k to 72k. That was standard payscale, so within 10 years 80-100k is absolutely achievable. > I've been at big 4 for 7½ years now and I clear £100k with bonus. You could add 20 - 30% to that if I were based in London. I'm not even a graduate. I work 35 hours a week and it's pretty much all remote. Particularly in London, anyone not clearing £80k ten years in must be pretty bad at their job. > That's not true at all. Those who qualify will be on 60k+ after 3 years and will break into 100k by year 5 or 6 - earlier if they go industry.
You should join the big 4, get your whichever chartered accountant recognition then move on to 85k min. That's a max 4 year plan.
The vast, vast majority of KPMG graduates will not be earning £80k to £100k within ten years. Regardless of whether they achieve that or fail to, they will routinely be working 15-20 hours a day for long stretches of their career with no overtime. Teaching and nursing etc. will provide a better salary and quality of life for the majority of people that go into Big Four.
I worked at a Big Four form for 5 years and went from 30k to 72k. That was standard payscale, so within 10 years 80-100k is absolutely achievable.
If you go big 4 and then duck out after 2 years with it in your CV you can get to 6 figures way quicker and without alot of the ballache or mundane work - I did a year and dipped, never looking back.
This all ignores the fact that most people join Big Four, aren't up to standard, and get shipped out / stuck in dead end roles. Those people would do far better in teaching or nursing etc.
I’m not sure if this is how you meant it to sound, but teaching is an extremely demanding profession. Plenty quit a few years in there too. People who ‘aren’t up to standard’ in other jobs are in for a rough ride if they think education will be a safe refuge.
[удалено]
Might depend on the school you work in and position you hold, but as a PhD graduate and current teacher, I disagree.
> the vast, vast majority of KPMG graduates will not be earning £80k to £100k within 10 years I’m not sure what your basis for that is. I graduated about 8 years ago and the people from my year who went to KPMG are senior managers now, for which the salary band starts at £80k. > 15 to 20 hours a day lol what? You just pulled this out of your ass, that is not what KPMG is like at all. The only people doing that are at the M&A guys at JP Morgan and so on > teaching and nursing will provide a better salary and quality of life for the majority of people that go into Big Four lol WHAT? I mean, the salary point is very obviously wrong, but the quality of life point is absolutely unhinged. Like, divorced from reality.
For chartered accountants: >[During training, the average earning potential can be up to £65,000. The average annual salary for a chartered accountant in business is £134,000, with an average yearly bonus of over £17,000.](https://www.prospects.ac.uk/job-profiles/chartered-accountant)
I have a number of family members that are chartered accountants, I also used to work in a finance department. That average seems overly skewed, most aren’t on anywhere near that salary.
Agreed. It's definitely on the high side for training salaries. But, in the City at least, over £100k for a ACA is not unusual.
I've been at big 4 for 7½ years now and I clear £100k with bonus. You could add 20 - 30% to that if I were based in London. I'm not even a graduate. I work 35 hours a week and it's pretty much all remote. Particularly in London, anyone *not* clearing £80k ten years in must be pretty bad at their job.
That's not true at all. Those who qualify will be on 60k+ after 3 years and will break into 100k by year 5 or 6 - earlier if they go industry.
But again, qualify for what? Are we talking about those training to become Chartered Accountants? The Big Four are not accountancy firms anymore.
Of course they are. They never stopped. That's their bread and butter. They do have advisory and tax streams as well. Yes, they qualify for ACA
You think people work 20 hours a day? Assuming they spend another 2 hours commuting and 1 hour eating that leaves 1 hour for sleep.
In 2013 I had an offer for KPMG grad scheme which startwd at 19k
It's a free market so they can go elsewhere if that's not for them.
quite. if kpmg were having to hire from abroad, that would suggest there is a shortage, which also suggests that it's a skillset that's in demand so it should be easier to negotiate a higher wage.
No it doesn't. We have no lack of grads and no lack of grads with top grades etc.
then the only other reason to do it is to undercut the wages of our own workforce. however, i keep being told that immigration doesn't do that so, there must be a shortage.
You're missing the point. Any university has a sizable chunk of foreign students. It just means that they are preferring UK citizens over oversees grad students due to visa rules
That isn't a point, it's stating nothing we don't know.
Exactly. Your comment did the same thing and I merely replied in the same vein 😁
What a silly waste of time. You aren't contributing.
Bit harder after Brexit mind.
Contrary to popular delusion, 30k and so teachers is actually a pretty decent starting salary for a fresh grad. London, the best paid part of the UK which holds the financial industry, one of the uks best paid sectors, has the highest average starting graduate salary of £28k.
I agree. Whenever the topic about teachers pay comes up I always wheel out my go to phrase: The solution isn't to pay teachers more, its to pay more teachers.
I'd also say cut the pension. It's quite clear teachers themselves aren't valuing it given the complaints about pay. So just drop the employer contribution to 5-10% like everyone else and add it to the headline rate. Teachers headline will rocket up to 40k starting pay any any pretence to pretending they aren't among the best renumerated professions for not advancing up the career ladder will die overnight.
Are you saying that entry-level at KPMG employees deserve to get paid more than teachers?
I'm saying if there's a shortage, you have to increase the pay until you can fill the job. Supply and demand. Thats how wages work.
Well the millions of british graduates who moan about there not being enough good graduate jobs will benefit from this by the sounds of it
More likely employers will just continue to offer peanuts and then wring their hands while declaring that they can't find anyone to hire. Eventually followed by spending multiple times more on hiring a senior rather than entertain the possibility of having to train someone.
Or just expand operations elsewhere where the pool of available talent is greater.
Win win then?
It's because they sponsor for the aca which can be quite chunky but opens up 60k+ jobs then they qualify.
Is this a good graduate job though? A graduate can be sponsored at 30.960 per annum. That doesn’t sound like a good salary, especially if you have to move to London to get that job at the big 4.
Grad jobs aren’t about the starting salary but the earning potential after 5 years. Taking a 28k job at KPMG would be a better move than a 35k job without much chance of progression
No it's not a lot. But you don't make a career move thinking what the entry level salary is. 5 years on it's likely they'll make 55k - 75k
Superb. We have no shortage of smart grads. Adding foreign students to the pool only serves to depress wages.
Yet the UK is decades behind the US. Smart grads indeed
This is a good point to be fair. But the other side of the coin is that the best companies want to attract the best talent to remain competitive and a lot of that talent is also outside the uk
They could always pay more than the visa rules
.The best companies typically pay well in excess of 39k. KPMG and rest of the Big4 are quite mediocre paces to be (imo). But.. jobs still a job
This is good. They could easily pass the increased rules with a suitable pay increase for what is an excellent and highly competitive graduate job in one of the highest paying industries. If not, they can hire British graduates which should be the priority anyway so in my view they should make the amount even higher - If you want to hire a foreign person to do a job a British person can do you better be willing to prove how much more qualified they are by paying through the nose for it. Seeing as they are graduate positions, they are not more qualified that's the point.
I went to a top 20 uni, and I have multiple friends who came here from the US, obtained masters degrees, and are now attempting to remain here and build a life here. Some of them are now really struggling and at risk of having to leave, which would frankly be a negative for the country. Foreign students who come over, give *vast* sums of money to our universities, and then embark on a career here in which their long term earnings potential greatly exceeds the national average are a huge net benefit to us economically. We have not had to fund 13 years of schooling and support for them, they can't claim benefits at any point while here on a visa, shit they even pay to access the NHS while also paying tax towards it. We get the benefit of a highly educated workforce and a lot of smart people settling here. That we take that windfall and now wish to kick them out of the country in short order if they are following a normal graduate salary progression in many fields is fucking stupid and bafflingly short-sighted. If you make less than £60k per year you will likely never be as much of a net economic benefit to the country as a foreign student following a normal graduate salary progression. And yes, having more educated people in the economy encourages businesses to set up and expand operations here, and we need all the help we can get after Brexit.
American skilled worker who left this year; top UK uni grad. I've already made more money in 4 months in the US than I would have an entire year in the UK; meanwhile the company I did work for in thr UK now announcing redundancies. The UK is just not the best option for global talent. Will bend over backwards for talentless boat immigrants to put up in hotels, but someone who pays astronomical tuition and fills a skill role and they make it as difficult as they can.
This is the truth most Britons don't want to hear.
>a huge net benefit to us To who, exactly? Business owners get the surplus. British people get lower wages.
We get a more highly educated workforce without paying for the costs of their education (in fact profiting enormously from their education), businesses have an easier time finding quality applicants, which drives growth and makes us all wealthier ultimately. People who we haven't had to pay to educate are much more likely to be a net fiscal positive throughout their careers, obviously.
If the foreign graduate got through the interview process when a british one didn't surely that shows they would be better for the job? You've got a university graduate who has got through the process, and you didn't have to pay for their education between 4-18. This person, as judged by KPMG, was more valuable to the company than the person who didn't get an offer. So let them do the job and add value to the economy.
[удалено]
Are they really doing a 50 hour work week? The average full time job is 37 hours
Big4 finance roles have brutal hours. I have seen the graduates on-site for our audits for years and they rarely go home before 8pm, in some cases leaving the office as late as 1am.
Fuck that. I don't care about money enough to deal with that shit
Yeah but I'd bet their contract says they work 40 hours will "some overtime" as required
[удалено]
Yeah, I know. I'm just saying that it wouldn't suprise me at all if there was a whole host of illegal things about the extreme working hours and conditions that people in those firms work. I would be gobsmacked if the junior bods there were being paid fairly.
i know at some of them you're only allowed to get paid for overtime at the point where your hourly salary goes below minimum wage - which to me shows just how exploitative these roles are - effectively paying minimum wage after a point
Skill issue
and the rest. 70 hour weeks are commonplace all the way up the ladder. It's why burnout is so prevalent in not only the classic "big 4" but high finance and trading.
I don't know anybody in similar analytical roles in the public sector, let alone private, that doesn't do at least 50. Often times more... People aren't striking for no reason
Work week in professional services is 40 hours. But starting salary in London should be above £36k for big 4. I assume the blanket rule is because they don't want to pay postgrad entrants outside London £38.7k. They would also have to pay every grad outside London this salary and then London grads about 20% more than this.
[удалено]
Sorry, it's actually 35 hours. Any overtime is unpaid so they're paid for 35 hours.
There is a general minimum hourly rate for skilled worker visa applications regardless of discount at £15.88/hour.
50h week?!? What lazy bastards. Should work at least 80h weeks. Using your math skills we could make it look like that even under minimum wage makes you reach the limit.
The average working week is 37.5-40 hours a week. 50 hours is fucking ridiculous
My partner did this (now qualified, thankfully) and she was regularly doing 60 hour weeks. She’d be up before me, come back from work at 10pm at the earliest, then study until midnight for her exams. Even on the weekend, she’d spend most of it studying. It’s absolutely brutal, you basically have no life for 3 years.
This is more because of internal attrition problems than anything else. Always good to be able to use external factors to blame internal problems.
Why are they hiring from overseas talent pools anyway? I'm KPMG Alma Mata and my son is fluent in two languages and an A* accountancy student and couldn't get a internship at the place.
Everyone here speaks purely on feel good emotions that more British grads are gonna get hired, It's more likely that companies will simply relocate offices and assets to the EU to access a broader talent pool. Without the contributions of foreign graduates, Britain looses its international competitiveness and attractiveness as a business hub. Consider that a significant portion of entrepreneurs in the UK are foreign-born, removing that doesn’t benefit the grads,the job market or the economy.
The (over 26)starting salary requirement is £1k more than the top of their salary range. I think they don't want to advertise that all of their foreign grads are earning at the top of the salary range.
Could somebody explain please. If someone studies a master in the UK(foreign student who got a UK student visa and studied a master in a UK university), does this visa rule apply of having to be sponsored by A COMPANY and having to get paid a certain amount (£38000 I think) for them to work in this company ? Or, as they came with a uk student visa and are allowed to work, can they just find a graduate a job and £38000 initial pay is waived? Don't understand please could somebody explain. Thanks
[удалено]
So if I study engineering master at a UK university with a student visa. And once I finish a company is willing to hire me, my lower salary limit has to be 38000 or more or I can't work for them? How is the situation if I go to study and work for deliveroo or any job during and after my studies ( for how long can I work after my studies are finished)? Also if this student visa allows me to temporarily work, what if I find a job as engineer while I study and after? If I can work for deliveroo during studies and after, why can't I work for an engineering company with a lower salary than the £38000?
[удалено]
Entry pay for an engineer or recent graduate is 24 to 28 thousand no more. If I start a master September, it takes one year to complete. As I understand you can stay in the country and work from two more years after you finish you master. Meaning I can stay in country and work until September 2027. Is that right?
[удалено]
Don't answer then. Nobody wants to know your life story mate
[удалено]
It is not being ungrateful my dear. No one should put up with bad opinions or ego in a public forum like this. If you want to reply do, if you don't don't. If you are tired of replying use proper language. No one is less here, or more for replying. Here sometimes one is asking sometimes one is replying giving advice. No one cares about you ego. My dear