One of the most commonly recurring phone calls from PE readers into the editorial office involves a request for the whereabouts of the survey results that outline engineers’ salaries. The information, it transpires, is often required for benchmarking purposes – presumably in advance of appraisals or pay negotiations.
With interest in average wage data ever high, PE is glad to see that the Engineering Council has again updated its survey of professionally registered engineers, producing a set of relevant figures that will no doubt be put to good use.
The headline figures suggest that chartered engineers are paid an average of £63,000 a year, with the median total earnings average, inclusive of bonuses, overtime and commission payments, representing a 14.5% increase since 2010, the last time the research was carried out. Incorporated engineers, meanwhile, can expect to earn £45,500, while engineering technicians get £40,000. These figures are up 5.1% and 8.1% respectively compared with 2010.
The figures are controversial – provoking the obligatory flurry of letters from readers, most arguing that the salaries reported are too high (see page 21 for a sample of such correspondence). But the Engineering Council is unrepentant. It insists that the findings are highly reliable, being gleaned by a respected market research organisation using tried-and-trusted techniques. No one can argue that the survey isn’t quantitative – the results were based on the responses of 6,321 registered engineers and technicians, resident in the UK and below the age of 65.
So if we accept that the data is meaningful, then it is worth assessing the findings in greater depth. While average salaries produce headline-grabbing figures, underlying questions allow us to draw some other interesting conclusions about the profession.
The first is that gender inequality in terms of wages remains prevalent. Professionally registered male engineers and technicians have a far higher median and mean basic income than females. The median basic income for male registered engineers and technicians is £55,000, while for females it is £45,941, a difference 19.7%. Additional questions show that female registered engineers and technicians consistently demonstrate a lower median basic income than their male counterparts across all age groups. This gap is the narrowest for those aged 20 to 34, and is at its widest for those aged 55 and over.
The reasons for the inequality are complex and historical. But acceptance surely isn’t enough. The disparity does the profession no favours, particularly when so much effort is being spent on top-level initiatives aimed at attracting women to careers in engineering.
Putting historical influences aside, Jon Prichard, chief executive of the Engineering Council, says that one reason for the gender gap in pay might be the sorts of roles that male and female engineers tend to prefer. As a personal reflection, he suggests that many females prefer more environmentally friendly positions, and such roles tend to be less rewarding than those with a more commercial focus, particularly those that involve management of contracts. Whatever the reason, Prichard agrees that the gender imbalance remains a problem for the profession.
Gender isn’t the only area of disparity. The Engineering Council survey also reveals a big difference in wages by sector. The data shows that registered engineers and technicians working in the private sector have the highest median basic income in comparison to those working in the not-for-profit and public sectors. The median basic income was £57,000 for registered engineers and technicians in the private sector, £50,000 in the not-for-profit sector and £49,000 for those working in the public sector. The median basic income for registered engineers and technicians in the private sector was 14% higher than those working in the not-for-profit sector and 16.3% higher than those working in the public sector.
And there are also wage disparities across individual areas of specialisation. The survey shows that registered engineers and technicians working in the energy industry, including oil and gas, have the highest median (£82,000) and mean (£92,022) basic income. In the middle of the scale come engineers and technicians in the construction, government and defence, professional, scientific and technical, utilities and transport and storage industries, with median basic incomes from £50,000 to £55,000. The lowest paid was education, with the median basic income recorded at £49,888.
This isn’t perhaps entirely unsurprising, with some obvious factors coming into play. At the upper end of the scale, oil and gas engineers have global opportunities and are often in high demand. Their work frequently requires location in far-flung, inaccessible parts of the world, working demanding shift patterns. These are circumstances that can deliver attractive bonuses. And let’s face it, many of the oil and gas majors are hugely profitable. Education, meanwhile, might pay less, but a career within academia provides its own benefits – many of which relate to job satisfaction and a sense of social worth.
Then there are regional differences, with median and mean incomes varying as a result of location of place of work. Registered engineers and technicians whose primary place of work is abroad have the highest mean (£105,914) and median (£100,000) basic income. The next highest median basic income is for professionals who work in multiple locations in the UK (£70,000), followed by registered engineers and technicians who work in England and Scotland (£55,000). Registered engineers and technicians whose primary place of work is in Northern Ireland had the lowest median income of £40,000.
Overseas work has always paid well. Often this comes down to the generous tax regimes enjoyed in some parts of the world. And some countries, such as the oil-rich states in the Middle East, have a huge demand for engineers, relative to their size, and realise that they have to offer lucrative salaries to attract the numbers of staff they need.
At the bottom end of the scale, meanwhile, Northern ireland has relatively few large-scale engineering-related employers – bar some notable exceptions such as aerospace firm Bombardier and vehicle maker Wrightbus – so there are fewer employment opportunities, and the lower pay would seem to reflect that.
Pay wasn’t the only area of questioning in the Engineering Council survey. The research also attempted to tease out the views of engineers on the benefits of professional registration, and methods of fee payment. The research showed a steady increase in the proportion of registered engineers and technicians who have their institution membership subscriptions paid by their employer. While employers appear to be realising the value of paying professional registration fees for their staff, the report also indicated that a number of registrants still felt unsure about the extent to which registration was valued by their employers.
When asked how they first became aware of professional registration, those who attended higher education were most likely to have been informed about chartered engineer status during their time at university. But this was not the case for incorporated engineers, demonstrating a continued lack of awareness of this title among influencers in the higher education sector. There was a slight increase seen in awareness coming from professional engineering institutions or employers since 2010.
The factors underpinning the decision to seek registration were also revealed. Offered a list of variables provided in the question, respondents were asked to indicate all the significant factors that applied to them in their decision to seek professional registration. Comparisons between the 2010 and 2013 data indicate that the results followed a similar pattern.
The responses showed that the most important reason for seeking registration was “I felt it would be helpful in my career development”, selected by 78% of respondents, up from 75% in 2010. The next most popular was “I felt it would give me greater professional status”, with 73%, up from 68%. And the third most popular was “I wanted my professional skills and experience to be recognised”, with 67%, up from 62%.
The latest survey, carried out in 2013, included an additional question that was not asked in 2010. This was “I was hoping registration would lead to a salary increase”. It produced a 21% positive response rate.
Prichard says the responses show that registration matters. “We can see from the steady increase reported in employers funding institution membership and professional registration for their engineering staff, that many organisations are realising the value in doing so,” he says.
But he says that the report highlights that there is still a long way to go to really impress upon them that employing registered engineers and technicians does bring tangible benefits. “This we are tackling with the assistance of our colleagues in the institutions, many of whom already have close and successful working relationships with employers across the profession.”
The report contains many other findings that we are prevented from publishing because of space constraints. If you want to read the full survey, it can be found at www.engc.org.uk.
Prichard says the Engineering Council thinks that the data provides a valuable and statistically valid snapshot of the profession, and the work will be carried out again in three years’ time. “The data will help us in informing our strategy, ensuring that we are able to promote and support professionally registered engineers and technicians,” he says.