to ask if most people openly share salaries with friends (and families?) in the UK?

[polka6]

I know it often comes up on MN how much people earn etc, are people in the UK anywhere near as open in real life? what about with close friends - do you share when you have a promotion etc? Is it more standard to do that with family?

Personally, I more or less share the details with parents and friends in the same line of work (who earn similar or previous have done or will do in the future) but not so much with friends not in the same career circles and probably downplay it whereas the general consensus on MN seems to be people inflate the figures?

@TedMullins is it common to have people do the exact same job?
When I was in a B4 accountancy firm there were clear ranking and corporate grades. Very easy.

But now working in technology. In ‘theory’ we’re members of the same team but we all have different skills, backgrounds and projects. There’s a lot of fuss about the ‘gender pay gap’ but most of the women aren’t in highly skilled technical roles. The few, like me are paid as much, if not more than the men.

i dont share it with anyone but my bestfriends who i know their husband is earns as much as me. I earn six figures i can easily say here because its anonymous. But definitely not with other people.

No, it's considered vulgar

I work in an industry where someone could be paid double the amount as someone else doing the same job. It’s common and normal. Basically, starting salaries haven’t really changed in 20 years, so a new starter will earn a lot less than an old-timer doing the same job.

I've revealed how much when asked, usually it's people in simialr job as me who are wanting to gauge salaries etc

My mum and dad know how much I earn but that's it.

I have no issues telling people what my salary is.
I really don't understand why the need to keep it quiet. And think that culture is odd.

The only people that serves are businesses who can underpay people because they create a culture where talking about salaries is taboo.

Yes salaries are mentioned, there's no angst about it whatsoever and we have gaps of tens of thousands as well.

Well I can only speak from my own experience but at the BBC yes, it would be common to have people doing the same job, and the team I’m in now has three of us doing the same job. When I was offered I asked for more money, and was told no because of the banding system and new hires all came in at 55k. Then there are personal and company wide pay reviews. Turns out people who started before this policy was implemented were hired on less, so they’re in the process of having their salaries raised to match the new hires. As much as I’d have liked 60k I’m happy with this system and think it’s fairer overall.

I think it would be far better for women if it was an open topic, especially when they talk an industry that requires negotiation.

How can you know what to pitch for otherwise. So offer women undersell themselves and men oversell.

It's not a grubby topic and should be discussed, especially internally within people working in similar roles.

I think the problem is though that SOME people want to push their careers and this can hold them back.

And I am not convinced the banding system works across the board. DH has often been technically one level but paid above band because of his skill set. He doesn't do more hours, but his knowledge means he can add more value for the same amount of time (either in knowledge or the sheer amount he can do within the same timeframe).

You can only move upwards via promotion when an opening appears, so the higher you get the less opportunities for this there are. That doesn't mean you should remain stuck at a particular pay band if you are outperforming everyone else at it.

He has always taken on new jobs at the upper end of the band salary because of his skill set for a reason. Not because he's cutthroat but because he's exceptional.

He's more valuable in a technical role than a management level role, which is more focused on people management. But the side effect of that means he doesn't fit neatly into a hierachy pyramid either which almost always puts management above technical.

He adds value and effectively brings in the money in a way management doesn't.

So I'm minded to say that bands only work at a general lower level across a large number of people and not higher up where there are less promotion opportunities and less employees. At that point individual skill sets actually make a massive difference.

I'd be inclined to say bands lower down. But with more flexibility at the top. But with a cap on max pay relating to the ratio of pay of the lowest paid worker is the way to go...

I think it would be better for women if loyalty bonuses after a period of service were thought about more because women save on recruitment fees as they are more loyal employees - but this isn't taken into consideration. This is also one reason tend to be paid less as pay rises aren't where they should be and the best way to improve your income is by changing jobs.

Of course recruitment firms are the leeches in all this...

A couple of my close friends know as they were v supportive after I was made redundant and looking for my job. Not family.

I see what you’re saying here and could see the merits of that system. I do agree management shouldn’t be the only way to progress, either - there should definitely be paths to move up without having to manage people which is a specialist skill in itself that not everyone can or should do.

Although I don’t think moving jobs every few years for a higher salary is necessarily a bad thing? I’d say that keeps market rates competitive. The days of a job for life are long gone.

I don't think any of my friends or family know my salary, though they would probably get a reasonably accurate estimate if they googled it.

In the early days of our careers after university I remember openly discussing salaries with friends and family, but after a couple of years as promotions `and company moves happened (and some decided to take career breaks to have children) everybody stopped talking! I would be quite interested to have an open discussion about it - however, maybe ignorance is bliss as at present I'm very happy with my salary even though I don't know if I could/should be expecting more.

My parents never discussed their salaries with us - they have careers that most people associate with earning good money and it was fairly apparent that we were 'comfortable' financially, so there wasn't really a need to ever discuss money. The only people I know who are completely open about their salaries work in the NHS, which makes sense.

The only financial matter I share with others is having no mortgage and owning my property, nothing else.

‘Bands’ and ‘jobs’ are 2 different things though. What @TedMullins said is fair for the same job.
However like your husband I’m also a technical staff and encountered the same issue in orgs with bands = corporate grades.

The issue isn’t with the band itself but the rigidity. Say for example it goes Analyst, Associate, Junior Manager, Senior Manager. However my skills command a premium in the market, so in order to pay me what I’m worth I have to be a ‘Senior Manager’. Paid at the top of the band. This annoys Joe Bloggs who’s been there longer and is only a junior manager grade.
However his skill set isn’t as valuable as mine, although on paper he’s also a technical staff.

Also ‘lowest paid’ ratios don’t make sense because a company will just outsource their admin, HR etc. That’s what the famed ‘70K base pay’ Gravity Payments did. Of course you can pay everyone equally… if your only permanent staff are the high value ones!

It’s very hard to get a raise in the same Company I’ve found.
Even moving away, then coming back.Reason is because for a new hire. HR allows benchmarking against the ‘external market’ for the same role.

For internal staff it’s compared to everyone else in the company/internal bandings blah2.

No. The only thing I know is my friend has a cleaning business and roughly what she charges an hour. This came up in general conversation talking about cleaners etc.
Generally it's none of people's business. I don't ask any questions and nobody asks me. It's rude and nosy.

I have and would if it was relevant. I wouldn't just declare- I earn x, but it has come up in conversation with friends so I wouldn't not share.

Lots of my friends are like me business owners, sole traders, employers, etc. General conversations sometimes begin with how's business?
Most will then talk openly about turnover, income, etc.

In fact, an acquaintance and I along with a sales rep had a long conversation about sales and markups.

No, because my parents would ask me for money.

Friends, yes. Older family, no. They can't be trusted.

With friends (colleagues) in the same field, I think especially for women it's important for equal pay etc. Having said that lot of my friends are Europeans where it's more acceptable to discuss money.

The only person who knows my salary is a friend that I worked with for 15 years doing a similar job. We have both moved on to different firms and would still compare as we are still doing the same type of job for different companies.

Finland also publish all taxable income, over 100,000 euros. Norway and Sweden I believe you can check anyone's details, but they are notified of it.

www.huffpost.com/entry/finland-taxable-income-salary-transparency_n_5bdc520fe4b01ffb1d0170ec/amp

I think it's good, no-one has that ridiculous salaries in Finland, and keeps politicians on their toes as well. Whether someone is on the list (or isn't). It does get ridiculous for few days in the press.

Nope, never mentioned it to friends or family. They probably guess I earn much less than I actually do. DH knows though.