Posted By 9-Ship
Just taken a call from a recruitment consultant - as part of the conversation she said she couldn't believe how low safety management salaries are.....

She thought (and I agree) that mid £30ks is low.

Thank goodness I got out of just doing safety

Obviously maybe a bit of recruitment gloss here...


Discuss - again...

Posted By emma jane
Salaries are very low. You would be lucky to get over 35k unless you have vast years of experience and are lucky enough to work for a company who really values, credits & supports H&S in their organization.

Posted By Bob Youel

That's one of the problems with giving free information away it dilutes the professionalism of the occupation and affects costs

The government giving free info etc to SME's does not help - those same SME's do NOT get lower costs/free info from barristers, accountants etc

Posted By Richie H
I agree with the posts above however how does this reflect salaries for Business / HR / management consultants? There is a large amount of info out there for SME's yet these consultants are paid well...

Perhaps the problem is deeper than 'there is too much free info out there'....

I believe everyone thinks that H&S is a money making machine and is jumping on the band wagon of NEBOSH Gen Cert gives you the competence to be a H&S advisor / manager etc...

The unfortunate situation is that sometimes employers do not know what they want and are ill advised. Maybe employment agencies / professional bodies and the government should go further to ensure a more suitable structure and competence guidelines are implemented - and accept some responsibilities for the future of the profession.

We are expected to be lawyers, doctors, teachers and managers - so why do we as H&S professionals accept the lesser salaries? Supply and demand?

I suggest those competent H&S professionals don't accept anything less than their worth, this should drive the salaries to where they belong.

Sorry, off my soap box now!

Cheers

Posted By Pete Longworth
Bob says

"The government giving free info etc to SME's does not help - those same SME's do NOT get lower costs/free info from barristers, accountants etc"

There's a big difference here, a lack of information on employment legislation or standards isn't likely to affect an employee's safety, whereas a lack of information on health and safety standards / legislation is. I can't see how withholding safety info from an SME just to inflate health and safety salaries can be justified.

Posted By ITK
Paul, from one northerner to another.

I was ridiculed on these forums recently for suggesting a NGC holder would expect to earn £18K to £20K.

However skimming through the job pages in SHP this morning I have seen at least four diploma level jobs offering starting salaries of £20K £22K £23K and £25K.

I often wonder who takes these jobs and more importantly question what kind of employers put such a low price on health and safety.

ITK

Posted By Brando
The simple answer is that most organisations do not put a very high priority or value on health and safety - hence the low salary.

Even companies who make a lot of noise about health and safety can be seen to pay their health and safey managers much less than their other more valued managers.

Solution - beats me - but it won't come in the short term.

Some temp jobs pay well if you can stand the uncertaintity of not knowing where your next contract is coming from.

Brando

Posted By Mark Farrell
I have supported another depot in my organisation recently as it was a start up project. They have tried to recruit someone for a H&S Manager/Officer role at 24-27k. That may sound reasonable for the size of the site, but the expectation is that the person starts at zero and developes a culture from the ground upwards.
They are still looking for the right candidate and have spend several thousand on advertising etc.
I am sure it would have made more sense to offer a salary that would attract the right person.

Posted By micklecats
Also, my assistant who is GradIOSH, NGC and NVQ4 would dearly love to be complaining about ONLY geting 30K a year - he gets less than 20K at the moment - but it was less than 14k when I started here, so I am doing my best for him!Count yourselves lucky those of us on 30K+ because these jobs don't grow on trees.
Thank you UK H&S you provide me with a good lifestyle!

Posted By John Forbes
I only hold a NGC and am 19 - Im started as a trainee advisor on £18k a year. I dont know how much i get paid for full advisor but surely if a trainee gets 18, a full advisor must get over the 30 mark.

Anyway the reason i even got into this industry is because my brother is a self employed safety advisor raking in £400 per day.

Posted By Guderian
Get out of general safety - the market is swamped with 'consultants' qualified or not and not respected by general industry.

Nuclear/petro chem technical/engineering jobs with large elements of safety are where the better salaries are.

The region of £50k is easily achievable as an entry level job.

The minor fly in the ointment, is that IOSH/NEBOSH qualifications alone are not enough - some form of science/engineering degree is required and time on the job too.

Your all in the wrong sector - unless you really are 'raking it in' as a sole trader/independent consultant.

Posted By Karen Todd
Lee Mac - mean total earnings for a chartered engineer in 2007 was £58,668 and the median (to take the fat cats into account) was £50,000...

http://www.engc.org.uk/d...gistered%20Engineers.pdf

KT

Posted By Karen Todd
I know, but we can all dream!

I think one of the issues being raised, is that the pay for chartered safety practioners doesn't compare favourably with the other chartered professions, e.g. chartered engineer, chartered accountant, etc.

Karen

Posted By ClaireL
Guderian,

We don't all have engineering or science related degrees!!

To be honest if I could afford to I would get out the profession all together but sometimes you just have stick to what you know. I'd have to take a massive salary cut to re-train and I'm not prepared to do that.

Posted By Forbez3
Claire,

My brother has no specialism as such, only 4 years experiance in different areas of the oil and gas industry.

I agree there is a large benefit to regulating the profession in the sense of wages and opportunities for employment, and appreciation. However the negative factors are far greater.

Many highly experianced personnel do not hold any certificates and would most likely not be qualified under regulated status.

The requirements of regulating the profession would lead to a large decrease in available personnel (as many would not meet the regulation requirements), this would also have the effect of discouraging young people (such as myself)from venturing into a Health and Safety Career. Furthermore Advisors would be unavailable to smaller companies as only major companies would be able to afford the salarys.

Can we really argue that, A smaller amount of well paid - regulated advisors only working for big companies is better than many skilled un-regulated advisors getting paid a decent salary, covering all sizes and types of companies?

Regulation will be nothing more than an expensive course and a difficult set of requirements used to block normal people from pursueing a career in health and safety. It will only make it harder to become an advisor - it will not make you a better advisor. You can have diplomas and masters coming out of every crevice in your body, but unless you have the knowledge to go with it, they are about as much use as a chocolate fireguard.

At the end of the day 30k per year is a good wage, i believe that those supporting regulation are more motivated by greed and self-importance than the collective good of our profession and the need to provide a safe working enviroment to all employees in all industries in the UK

Don't get me wrong I want to be paid as much as I can get also, but i dont believe regulating the profession is the best way to go about it.

Regards

Posted By Brando
30k is not a good salary for what we have to do and are expected to know.

I know people who work in warehouses and make close to this ( and sometimes more ). They don't have to use too many grey cells and they have not had to spend years studying.

Brando

Posted By Pete Longworth
Forbsey
That is one of the best arguments against regulation I have heard for ages. And spot on with your observation that many proponents of regulation are probably motivated by greed and self importance. I couldn't agree more. So many health and safety "professionals" (that self imposed term says it all) are so far up their own crevices (as you put it) about CMIOSH and what it is supposed to signify. In the end you can have the longest signature in the world but if all those qualifications are not backed up by experience and a healthy dose of common sense then they aren't worth all those inflated salaries that go with their inflated egos.

Posted By micklecats
I think you make a very valid point there:

If anyone is regulating H&S, it is possibly at this stage the recruitment industry in that it is they that filter the applicants for most of the available jobs, based upon which letters candidates have after their name.
It is also they who dictate, or at least advise on how much our salaries are.
The annoying bit is, how many of these know much at all regarding our work? Let alone their own - most can't even plan interview appointments or tell the truth about pay and benefits! (harsh but pretty accurate?)
But remember, this is not the kind of job that we do for the money - its a noble profession!

Posted By Christopher Long
Hi all,

A very interesting discussion this, at times when the economy is slowing down and pay it at the forefront of our minds. My view on this subject is quite simple and reflects my personal experience of working as a safety, health and environmental manager for a group of companies. You have to justify the salary you are asking for by looking at the business value that your work will have on the company. Try and look at, and calculate, potential costs savings from risk control methods, and look at these from every conceivable angle. A good system may identify reduction in costs through, from a real example, replacing dangerous and expensive chemicals with a novel manufacturing method which reduces time, resources, risk and of course money. There are of course legal and moral reasons for tackling H&S and these should form part of your argument, but the bottom line is that as an individual, if you want a higher salary, then you have to add value to the business- its as simple as that. You may wish to add further personal value by combing roles, as I did, and become the champion for environmental management. This will give you even greater leverage. I hope that this helps a little.

Chris

Posted By ClaireL
What makes me laugh about the whole CMIOSH debate is that most HSE inspectors are not CMIOSH (why would they waste their money, they have all the credibilty they need) but more startlingly is how many wouldn't meet the requirements for CMIOSH!!(large numbers don't have enough experience)

Food for thought that. To be seen as a competent consultant people are required to be CMIOSH yet the enforcers aren't!