Posted By Jim-F yea your right Iain, there is such a variance in what is being paid for what in some cases is masive responsabilities and then others with little the salary is much higher, strange

Posted By Calum R Cameron I agree, its a big disapointment what some employers pay for that level of qual's. Perhaps IOSH could do something to assist in the regulating of packages etc advertised in the SHP and online. Perhaps IOSH would like to comment......over to you Hazel......

Posted By Heather Aston Sadly Geoff is right about market forces. I have a friend in IT who ten years ago earned two thirds of what I earned. Since then he has had 10% pay rises most years (I have been lucky to see inflation pay rises). He has had 15% salary bonuses most years. Mine have been nothing like that. He now earns twice what I earn and I am not poorly paid by the standards of this profession. We are in a technical profession. It is poorly paid by comparision with many others, especially in the commercial or telecoms fields. If money is your motivator get out now and go and do something in the City or in the IT industry. Sad but true. Heather

Posted By Stuart Nagle Personally I tend to disagree with some of the comments made above. I do not believe that low pay is all that we are worth, and I do not believe that it is market forces that create low pay within the profession. I am of the opinion that it is employers opinions of the job and a thorough lack of their understanding that creates a position, where, in essence most employers advertising (or so it appears) simply do not know what the pay structure should be, and test the market with lower pay structures to see what they can gain by way of applicants. After all, if they can get someone reasonably well experienced and qualified for 20K to 25K, they are not going to pay 30K to 35K, are they!! When you consider many of the aspects of the profession, legally driven and governed by regulations, requirments to have competent health and safety advice etc, I wonder, as has been touched on above, if the profession and its leading bodies are doing enough behind the scenes to gain the proper recognition of health and safety professionals. There are not too many health and safety professionals, compared with say experienced and qualified Chartered Engineers, Incorporated Enginer and Enginering Technicians, and in general, believe it or not, Chartered Engineers salaries are not in general particularly high.... But there are many more of them than there are of us, and so market forces may well drive lower salaries in that profession, simply by weight of numbers... When however you consider the number of employers in the UK, the number of projects going on at any one time, the number of contractors etc etc... there should in essence be a huge demand for competent health and safety professionals in all avenues of workplaces, and thus the salary scales should reflect this need. The fact that it may not l;eads me to believe that there is not enough 'marketing done by professional bodies, nor is there a sufficient push by professionals to make employers aware. It is true however, that whilst there is a steady stream of posts advertised (such as in SHP each month), the vast majority of salaries advertised are on the low side and the discrepancy in employers requirements and the obvious misunderstanding over qualification levels often shows without doubt that employers are confused and unaware of the value of members of the profession and their worth. I agree wholeheartedly with comments made above that the leading profesional bodies should make more effort to educate employers and improve the standing of all health and safety professionals. But I disagree that the hugely expensive, and rapidly becoming less popular NEBOSH qualifications should be the principal standard qualification to set. Like all professions, we need to look forward, not backward, and I think it speaks for itself that the vast majority of qualifying members of IOSH now gain their professional status via a higher educational qualification route (i.e. a Degree qualification) I am NOT saying that qualifications other than higher education should be snubbed or disregarded by any means, but as we move onwards and upwards as a profession, we should expect the professional bodies not only to set standards applicable, but to do something that makes those standards known and appreciated, particularly by employers. Lets hope that with the onset of Chartered professional status for individual professional members, which I personally regard as an achievement worth having, our professional body will put as much effort into promoting their professional members as they do in other areas. Soapbox now stepped off!! Regards... Stuart

Posted By Roger Know exactly what you mean Iain W - and market forces is a load of tosh. Had a call only yesterday from a quality assurrance consultant wanted me to give HIM a quote for a client of his - made a visit and discovered he requires a FULL H&S Management system in place, Policy, RA's COSHH, procedures etc etc, etc, you know the full gambit. Well I thought SME (7) and estimated about 10 to 12 days work so quoted £2.5k and thought that was cheap - so I asked him how quick did his client want the job doing? Oh pdq as he is having a visit from the HSE but he can only afford £800!!!!!!!!!! Now I wonder if he was going to charge the client that? Words like away and go were then uttered. Roger

Posted By Karen Todd Oops - meant to write Stuart, not Stewart. K.

Posted By Iain W Diane, Well said, I agree totally with you. I often look at the jobs advertised and am surprised by some which obviously have no idea what they are talking about I'm glad to see that my first thread has produced so many valid and good discussion points. Thanks all for being gentle with me !!

Posted By Iain W Easy Geoff, Getting a bit hot under the collar there, It is a discussion, people may have different opinions - no need to respond so defensively because Roger didn't agree with you Personally I thought his thread was more constructive than your last one - sorry but true !!

Posted By Pat Burns MIOSH, RSP - SpDipEM - AMIQA If market forces does impact on H&S salaries then with the current trend by the HSE to prosecute individuals for Corporate Manslaughter and the future trend will be towards H&S Advisors/Managers/Officers etc as well as Lne Managers and Directors surely the trend should be moving our salary up significantly. I attended a H&S Update this week run by the Law Society of Scotland. It appears that there is a growing trend of prosecutions against H&S Professionals in England & Wales although not always clearly reported. In listening to one of the speakers he reported that the H&S Profession is now a high category risk area and that a lot of people are moving on from it to something carrying less risk of prosecution. Bearing all this in mind we Professionals should be paid far above any other Manager's salary for ensuring a safe & healthy workforce/environment whilst reducing risks of prosecutions against Companies and Managers.

Posted By Ron Young I don't believe Geof is getting personal. what he is doing is asking someone to explain the reasoning for a statement that was made. The trouble is that far too often, people place comments on this forum without proper thought about what they are saying and when challenged they take it personally. Regarding the initial post, from experience, I do believe that our salaries are driven by market forces, thats one reason why there is such diversity of salary throughout the country. Here in Scotland, my experience is that our salaries tend to be significantly lower than our English counterparts. This is partly due to there being less jobs to be had and quite a large number of safety specialists. This is market forces.

Posted By GeoffB Thank you Ron, my thoughts exactly. Roger you've just said - companies/indivudals pay what they can get away with THAT'S what market forces is/are! Believe me I was not being personal. I would have treated any similar comment just the same. But a discussion is just that. If you are prepared to ridicule someone's opinion you should/must be prepared to support your point of view. Simple really

Posted By GeoffB My my Roger, you are a bit touchy! Can we not debate this rationally?

Posted By Roger OK GeoffB and Ron as you see fit - I know what I and other colleagues do - charge what we can get away with.... if you think that that is in essence the market forcing the price and not plain old 'trying it on' then fine. Nuff said, I'm off to play golf.... have a good week-end. Roger

Posted By GeoffB Yes Roger, that is exactly what market forces are. You employ someone as cheaply as you can get them or get away with, and you charge as much as you can get for a service. Whether you like it or not that is the way the whole world works. I do despair at the number of 'professionals' on this forum who seem not to appreciate that fact.

Posted By Ron Young I'm MIOSH, RSP and will be working till 1700 not fore P.S. Whats MISOH?

Posted By GeoffB I'll have some of that as well. A good end to a good day eh Roger. All you need now is to lose a ball and it will be perfect.

Posted By garyh Salaries are often derisory, however we claim to be a Profession yet allow anyone to practice Health & Safety. We need IOSH to assist in raising standards. The Mandatory CPD scheme is an excellent start. The market does set rates to some extent - jobs for the lower rungs of the Profession are teeming with would be applicants amd people wanting to "get into Health and Safety". This allows supply to exceed demand, lowering "prices". What would also help, is smarter HSE enforcement, for instance of the Legal requirment, NEVER enforced, to appoint DGSA's.