The Student Room Group

What is considered a good graduate salary?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Doonesbury
But you love your job :smile:

And I think creative industry jobs are underreported anyway. Tagging @PQ for thoughts...

Posted from TSR Mobile


That’s true.
Original post by PQ
That data only shows PAYE earnings - so all the self employed creatives and artists (which is a good 1/4 to 1/3 if not more) are completely ignored (or only included for their part time job that they use as a backup or to keep busy or to teach etc).


That makes complete sense.
Original post by ckfeister
Depends on which one you go into for STEM


Courtesy of @Doonesbury's slightly incomplete graph (quoted below) which only works off PAYE; unless you're going into Medicine/Dentistry, there is actually very little difference. But then, through the powers of find all posts, it's fairly easy to see you're not a graduate as well as probably not even close to being one. So, as far as this goes you're not really in a position to be making unsubstantiated vague claims of hypothetical salaries for graduates.

Original post by Doonesbury
How does complementary medicine get on that... gah.

Try this:

Grad earnings by subject - median after 5 years.jpg

NB. *NOT* starting salaries.
Original post by JustPadz
Hello fellow members of TSR, I was wondering what you would consider to be a good graduate salary.

I’ve read that the average graduate salary is 21k. So what would you consider to be good. 25k ? 28k ? 30k? 40k?


It depends on the qualification you have gained and also on the company or organisation you are going to be working with as there mey be a difference in the hours pay they offer you.
What degree did you graduate with?
Reply 24
Original post by PQ
That data only shows PAYE earnings - so all the self employed creatives and artists (which is a good 1/4 to 1/3 if not more) are completely ignored (or only included for their part time job that they use as a backup or to keep busy or to teach etc).


Ah yes - knew it was something like that :smile: - now edited the post to mention that.
Does anyone know if you need cover letters for these companies?

Evercore
Lazard
Fidelity
Original post by iainvg
Courtesy of @Doonesbury's slightly incomplete graph (quoted below) which only works off PAYE; unless you're going into Medicine/Dentistry, there is actually very little difference. But then, through the powers of find all posts, it's fairly easy to see you're not a graduate as well as probably not even close to being one. So, as far as this goes you're not really in a position to be making unsubstantiated vague claims of hypothetical salaries for graduates.


Some are short of workers, others are competitive.
Original post by ckfeister
Some are short of workers, others are competitive.


That doesnt really mean anything without context.
Original post by Doonesbury
How does complementary medicine get on that... gah.

Try this:

Grad earnings by subject - median after 5 years.jpg

NB. *NOT* starting salaries.

Edit: This data only shows PAYE earnings - so self-employed (e.g. creatives and artists) are largely ignored


I think maybe the graph needs to be given some context. So for the subjects that arent vocational (ie most of those shown) the range of careers people go into varies massively meaning that an average salary can be somewhat meaningless. Take physics for example, someone that goes into investment banking will earn a lot more than someone who chooses to be a physics teacher, hence the average salary is pointless when listed by subject imo.

Though for vocational courses like medicine, engineering etc it is a better indicator of future salary as most people who do a degree in those subjects go into that sector of work.
Reply 29
Original post by madmadmax321
I think maybe the graph needs to be given some context. So for the subjects that arent vocational (ie most of those shown) the range of careers people go into varies massively meaning that an average salary can be somewhat meaningless. Take physics for example, someone that goes into investment banking will earn a lot more than someone who chooses to be a physics teacher, hence the average salary is pointless when listed by subject imo.

Though for vocational courses like medicine, engineering etc it is a better indicator of future salary as most people who do a degree in those subjects go into that sector of work.


True, but even within, say, investment banking I understand there's a huge range of salaries between front & back office.

But yes if OP wants to drill in they can see career progression salaries by sector/job title on sites like glassdoor.
Original post by Doonesbury
True, but even within, say, investment banking I understand there's a huge range of salaries between front & back office.

But yes if OP wants to drill in they can see career progression salaries by sector/job title on sites like glassdoor.


very true, my example was to show more that salary varies heavily depending on the career path taken rather than subject chosen when talking about non vocational subjects
Reply 31
Original post by JustPadz
Hello fellow members of TSR, I was wondering what you would consider to be a good graduate salary.

I’ve read that the average graduate salary is 21k. So what would you consider to be good. 25k ? 28k ? 30k? 40k?


no, my mum makes 54k a year for stripping and nutella related activities. however choosing such a career path can be quite dangerous, on many occasions my mother has slipped on nuttela and fallen onto my boyfriends ****. woops.
Original post by madmadmax321
That doesnt really mean anything without context.


Some subjects such as maths graduates are in short supply, whereas biological sciences/biology is in oversupply, engineering is short (some) ie. electrical engineering while others are difficult to get in ie. civil engineering.
Original post by ckfeister
Some subjects such as maths graduates are in short supply, whereas biological sciences/biology is in oversupply, engineering is short (some) ie. electrical engineering while others are difficult to get in ie. civil engineering.


That is way too general, entry level positions are in general not in short supply for engineering etc, it is more specialised roles that may be in shorter supply and these take many years to reach.

Maths/biology/non-vocational subject grads arent in short supply there are plenty of them but that doesnt matter as there arent many positions that just ask for maths or just biology outside of academia, they tend to go for careers that take many different degrees so have plenty of applicants per place for each position.
Original post by J-SP
Good for me would be anything above the general market value for the job that you have applied to.

Someone working in HR for a charity will be paid less than someone in HR for an investment bank.

Someone working as an accountant in Hull will be paid less than an accountant working in the city of London.

An mechanical engineer will be paid more than a nurse, and yet both (generally) need a degree.

If you want to talk generically, then that means anything over £21k is a good figure to earn when compared to every other graduate, you are earning above the average rate.


This^

Market rate of a particular job in a particular industry/firm in a particular locale is what people should benchmark against.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by farmflyblues
Forget salary, it's not important.

When you start your career, gaining relevant experience in your field is the most important thing.

What good is it earning £25k on a finance grad scheme when you would rather work in media?

That's the decision I faced when I graduated, so I turned it down and took something offering £18k instead.

While I don't earn as much, the smaller company let me take charge of some monthly digital media workshops where I teach fairly large companies (turnover of £100m +) about social media, copywriting and video production.

To me, that experience is worth far more than just coming out of uni on £25k+.


Also agree with this

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by madmadmax321
very true, my example was to show more that salary varies heavily depending on the career path taken rather than subject chosen when talking about non vocational subjects


this needs to be stressed a lot more to kids when talking about uni and careers tbh. so many people have misconceptions of their prospects after their degree because of poor careers guidance.

Posted from TSR Mobile
(edited 6 years ago)
Reply 37
Just as a thought on medic/dentistry salaries...

From starting a degree to being 5 years post graduation is a 10 year journey for a dentist/medic. So it seems more reasonable to compare them to a graduate who is also 10 years since starting their degree i.e. 7 years post graduation for most other degrees. They are lucrative jobs, but perhaps not quite to the extent they are made out to be when viewed in that light.
Reply 38
Original post by josh_v
Just as a thought on medic/dentistry salaries...

From starting a degree to being 5 years post graduation is a 10 year journey for a dentist/medic. So it seems more reasonable to compare them to a graduate who is also 10 years since starting their degree i.e. 7 years post graduation for most other degrees. They are lucrative jobs, but perhaps not quite to the extent they are made out to be when viewed in that light.


Hmmm, but couldnt this theory be applied to many things i.e. if you did a 4 year MSci degree, or went on to do a masters, or took a gap year or two ?
Google give £120,000 a friend got a job offer

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending