The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

Original post by sr90
I've heard a lot of stories that the big 4, especially audit, isn't all its made out to be

Posted from TSR Mobile


I really wouldn't recommend audit at big 4, my brother just is an auditor at the big four, he probably had one of the worst schedules in his year but is regularly working 12 hours a day pretty much throughout the year, constantly gets thrown into big audits with barely any instruction and then expected to get everything done very quickly and accurately. I think he said almost everyone in his year agrees with the same and you know it is bad when almost everyone (I think the rates are around 90% I believe) leaves after they get their qualification.*
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by difeo
man like Luke trying to pretend he doesn't care about money after mentioning his salary in every post he's made for the last 9 months


Pls

This isn't in my area of interest pal so money shoots up to being near the top!
Original post by Zayn is Bae
Hey, don't be mean. He's named after a known nonce anyway.

In terms of work, salary is the endgame. Of course, life is much more than work, but considering it's an unfortunate fact we have to work near 40 hours a week whether we like it or not, we all strive to maximise our earnings. And then of course use it to further our happiness (e.g. If you like travelling then you need money for it, if you like nice cars etc.) Thoughts? @everyone


Salary past a certain point isn't end game to me.

Once I get to £30k, I will stop seeking further development on the financial front (as long as my life is comfortable). I have no desire for expensive cars and travelling is cheap if you do it correctly. I intend to live within my means.

The main thing for me in a job is free time and perks. A job that came with a gym membership would be #Goals to me.
Basketball bros, thoughts on KD
God, is that Pimped Dickhead back? How great
Original post by SUGar Daddy
Basketball bros, thoughts on KD


Durant scare me cuz when Durant score he dont say nuthin.
ISIS blast near the Prophet's Mosque in Medina

"But they're Muslims"

Kill the bastards.


Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by samiz20891
I really wouldn't recommend audit at big 4, my brother just is an auditor at the big four, he probably had one of the worst schedules in his year but is regularly working 12 hours a day pretty much throughout the year, constantly gets thrown into big audits with barely any instruction and then expected to get everything done very quickly and accurately. I think he said almost everyone in his year agrees with the same and you know it is bad when almost everyone (I think the rates are around 90% I believe) leaves after they get their qualification.*


Hmmm, guess it's different for everyone. I've heard that during busy periods, you can be spending long nights at a client's office. But there'll be long periods of time during the year where you'll have absolutely nothing to do. And the busy periods I'd say cover ~3 months over the calendar year?*
Original post by zKlown
Salary past a certain point isn't end game to me.

Once I get to £30k, I will stop seeking further development on the financial front (as long as my life is comfortable). I have no desire for expensive cars and travelling is cheap if you do it correctly. I intend to live within my means.

The main thing for me in a job is free time and perks. A job that came with a gym membership would be #Goals to me.



Just curious, what sort of background were you raised in?

Original post by Zerforax


Background/personal reasons for it? Usually I've found other ethnics who have come from families who have had to make sacrifices due to money are the ones who focus on earning a lot of money (not saying it in a bad way).



Found the opposite tbh. Usually those that you've described are ones that just focus on earning a stable salary first, enough to raise their kids and support them in their education etc. The ones that focus on maximizing salary are usually people who come from medium/higher classed families. Stating the obvious here though.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Kenan and Kel
Hmmm, guess it's different for everyone. I've heard that during busy periods, you can be spending long nights at a client's office. But there'll be long periods of time during the year where you'll have absolutely nothing to do. And the busy periods I'd say cover ~3 months over the calendar year?*


I think to an extent it is Luck of the draw. I would say the traditional busy periods are Jan to April. However, you have different audit deadlines depending on clients, what the completion date agreed is, size of client, interim or final..etc.
The problem I guess he has had is he is liked by some of the managers I believe so has been sent to the longer and more complex clients. However, he knows a couple who have not been on a lot of jobs at all and have been largely in the office, performing mainly clerical and written duties for seniors. This and tight deadlines mean he is often putting in long hours most days other than tuition days/study leave of course.
However, I think a lot of companies try to do this to grads anyway and they like using non qualified auditors as there charge rates are lower, so can stay longer but also be within their budgets.
Original post by Kenan and Kel
Hmmm, guess it's different for everyone. I've heard that during busy periods, you can be spending long nights at a client's office. But there'll be long periods of time during the year where you'll have absolutely nothing to do. And the busy periods I'd say cover ~3 months over the calendar year?*

Audit hours are overstated pre-ACA tbh, don't think brother stayed in office past 7 (around April time) and as you said used to sit around on his ass a lot of the time. Not sure about post-ACA as he moved into advisory, but overtime and expense claiming in audit is your best friend if you're a sad mother****er who wants a £5k bonus to their basic salary.


Posted from TSR Mobile
http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/showthread.php?t=4199713

Guys going to get a lot of hate, but he has somewhat of a point... its just a point that he has phrased awfully..

Should have said:

"Why would men who want a more old-fashioned/traditional ideal of a women, marry western women?"

People on the thread are going to get butt hurt, whilst ignoring those crazy divorce rates that keep on rising and rising.

Western society either needs to change its current values, or change its current idea of marriage, as culturally they are now a century apart, and barely compatible any more.


FML - you lose all credibility when trying to use a daily mail article to back up a point tbh.

Marriages lasted longer in the past because women were meant to be seen and not heard - it's easy to maintain a relationship if both of you do what one person wants (since you can never have any disagreement). It's harder to have a relationship where both people are equal and both are willing to compromise to make a relationship work.

Interestingly I think the article actually points out why marriages/relationships fail more now - people are more selfish now. In the past, a man could be selfish whether he had faults, alcohol problems, never home/always at work/at the pub, cheated etc and a woman was expected to just live with it and not talk about it openly. Now you can have both sexes be more selfish and today's generation all think about "me me me". The article just keeps referring to a man's wealth and how he shouldn't have to share it or pay towards children/maintenance.

It's difficult to have two people live and compromise together for 5, 10, 25, 50 years but since there is no longer any stigma about splitting up, it's easier to give up/not compromise and find someone else who makes you happy/you don't have to compromise with.

tl;dr? Compromise is a dirty word these days and it's easier to move on to a new relationship than try to fix one.
Original post by Zerforax
FML - you lose all credibility when trying to use a daily mail article to back up a point tbh.

Marriages lasted longer in the past because women were meant to be seen and not heard - it's easy to maintain a relationship if both of you do what one person wants (since you can never have any disagreement). It's harder to have a relationship where both people are equal and both are willing to compromise to make a relationship work.

Interestingly I think the article actually points out why marriages/relationships fail more now - people are more selfish now. In the past, a man could be selfish whether he had faults, alcohol problems, never home/always at work/at the pub, cheated etc and a woman was expected to just live with it and not talk about it openly. Now you can have both sexes be more selfish and today's generation all think about "me me me". The article just keeps referring to a man's wealth and how he shouldn't have to share it or pay towards children/maintenance.

It's difficult to have two people live and compromise together for 5, 10, 25, 50 years but since there is no longer any stigma about splitting up, it's easier to give up/not compromise and find someone else who makes you happy/you don't have to compromise with.

tl;dr? Compromise is a dirty word these days and it's easier to move on to a new relationship than try to fix one.


can always count on you to give me a decent reply!

Spoiler

Original post by fallen_acorns
can always count on you to give me a decent reply!

Spoiler



But aren't you just describing any relationship and people setting their own parameters? Or the idea that relationships (as decided between the parties) all should be recognised by the state?
@Dirtybit thoughts on the prophecy in Shrek?

'A princess locked in a tower, and beset my a dragon, is rescued my a brave night and then they share true love's first kiss. By night one way, by day another, thus shall be the norm till you receive true love's kiss then, take love's true form'

Levels:colondollar:
Original post by Zerforax
But aren't you just describing any relationship and people setting their own parameters? Or the idea that relationships (as decided between the parties) all should be recognised by the state?


The second, but in a framework of options/limmits. I am not sure a completly open system would function, as it would seem far to open to abuse.

To be honest I dont even think its about the benfits of state-recognition, not for most people atleast.. sure there are financial reasons to marry, but mostly its a societal/cultrual thing, living up to our expectations of our lives.

I still want people to be able to have the idea of marriage, the wedding, the commitment, but in a way that suits them. It would be nice to be able to scrap marriage, and have these ideals dirrectly conferred onto any relationship, but I dont see that happening.. so the beset scenario for me would be a system that is more open the our current failing one, but one that still has limmits + regulations + rules.
Original post by swirly
@Dirtybit thoughts on the prophecy in Shrek?

'A princess locked in a tower, and beset my a dragon, is rescued my a brave night and then they share true love's first kiss. By night one way, by day another, thus shall be the norm till you receive true love's kiss then, take love's true form'

Levels:colondollar:


This has got to be the weirdest thing you've asked me all year :colonhash:

Latest