Do you think I am underpaid? PhD from Cambridge

[Ramphamosa]

I’m 29. I’ve got a PhD from Cambridge in a STEM subject. 1st class undergraduate from Oxford.

I work for one of the big four. I earn about £58k a year in London. I work 9am-8pm most days. Get very little bonus.

I know it sounds like a decent salary, but I honestly thought I’d earn a lot more than I do. Big 4 was my fall back choice.

A PhD is if anything a disadvantage in the job market unless it happens to be specific to a highly profitable technical area.

Also, what matters in Big4 consulting isn't technical insight. It's client management, project management, sales and billing. Technical ability is assumed and more of it doesn't mean more money.

In your 20s and 30s I was told "earn your age" is a good maxim. So by that you're doing very well to be on twice the national average wage.

I was going to say this too. Doubt anyone outside academia cares about the PhD, sorry. However your salary does sound lower end for a highly qualified person working in the big four. I’d put the hours in and work to prove yourself worthy of a raise if you want to stay, otherwise have a think about a move?

https://theprogressionplaybook.com/big-4-audit-salary-and-travel-information/

This applies to the audit field but is in line with other Big Four areas. It’s not dated but it looks broadly right to me for starting salaries at each stage.

That's a good salary for a normal 9-5, but I would consider that low based on the hours your work. I have no degree and have a better salary for a flexible 9-5

Consultancy is still all about results though.

No one cares about your PhD in stem cells or nanotechnology if you don’t generate revenue now.

Your PhD and Oxford first aren’t really relevant- you’ve gone for a career with a set progression and you’ll progress within that. Are you happy with your job and prospects?

If not, what else could you do? This is where the academics might make a difference but without knowing more about your specialism it’s hard to offer specific advice.

If the extra education not required … you are likely paid same as “new masters” hire.

Experience in work is what gets you more money. Prove that the PhD makes you more valuable, and you’ll get paid more.

Similar in that an MBA, plus several years work experience PRIOR to MBA is more valuable than MBA straight from undergrad. MBA with NO work experience is basically worth same as BS/BA in graduate job market.

Absolutely. I couldn’t tell you what university my colleagues went to, what degree they did. It’s irrelevant. Just assessing the questions about whether the OP was qualified as it may not be relevant to them.

I know plenty of people with PhDs earning less. It's no guarantee. You are earning a lot for your age.

No idea

Don't know what you do so how can we comment?

Are you actually qualified yet for the role.you are in? Or are you still being supported through a training contract.

If you are qualified or training to be an ACA have you considered your next career move? If not, stop moaning, get qualified for the industry you are working in and then you will have choices.

When I was first qualified, many went into industry as it was better paid. Assuming you are training for the ACA, which I guess you may not be.

Of the colleagues that I'm friendly with i know what and where they studied. And various other bits of their lives. Some of it is relevant to the work they/we do, some isn't (mine, for eg)

When i worked at something very similar to the Big 4, the career progression was clear, everyone had a masters, anyone with a PhD on the same level (senior consultant, manager, senior manager etc etc) were in the same pay band. That's how these things work, you have to demonstrate aptitude, ability but more than anything you have to bill as much of your time as possible.

Cambridge PhD will have absolutely no bearing on your pay at Big4. Or at most other places tbh (other than academia, which isn’t famed for its great pay).

On £58k in London I assume you’re recently qualified - so maybe 4 or 5 years into your career? Keep working and seeking promotion and it’ll increase in no time. It took me ten years from graduating to earn £100k in the Big 4 in the North. I think you’d get to that a grade earlier in London, so you could feasibly shave off 2 years.

In my profession, which also requires a PhD, the class only matters at application/interview. It's a highly completive field and the undergraduate degree result also gets weighed heavily. The place of study doesn't matter as much. Once in a job neither of these matter at all, and moving up is based on performance in the job and opportunity, i.e. if there isn't a job available one won't be created just to enable someone to move up.

I don’t think PhDs generally add much to salaries in the city.

If you have a PhD and are 29 then you probably only have about 4 years work experience. I would assume your salary will go up as your experience grows. In academia, there are thousands of people with your qualifications on less.

Same as comment above. Big 4 have strict pay bands and your degree doesn't mean much within the confines of those bands - need to work your way up if you're fresh out of uni. When I started with Big 4 I had a doctorate and starting pay was £42k out of uni. I've been with Big 4 for 16 years now and am on £250k base (and I'm not an equity partner). You need to put in your years and work your way up. Your degree got you in the door, but you have to put in the work (and hours).

Edited to say I'm London-based.

OP the choice may be made for you if you work for a big management consultancy in the UK. This new UK govt has pledged to cut outsourcing to consultancy firms. I think it will take 2-3 years to start to see the full effects of this (because contracting pipelines are quite long as you will know) but according to media reports (check the FT) Big 4 etc are making some cuts already.

There is also another factor to consider in your perception of how much you get paid, which someone (writing in I think in the Guardian) recently described as "the have-not yachts".
This is a way of describing how people in higher-earning jobs who rub up a lot against more wealthy people, feel about their earnings, which I thought hit the nail on the head.
So there are the "haves" - wealthy people
The "have-nots" - people with much less income
And a group who work in management consultancies, law firms and the like, who might have good wages compared to the "have-nots" and the average wage, but faced with dealing with much wealthier people (senior colleagues, clients or in an industry with a lot of money sloshing around) feel themselves to be the "have-not yachts".

Could you be suffering from "have-not yacht"-itis??

Who are the Big 4?

What use is a STEM Phd to working presumably in accounting/ finance?

PWC/ Deloitte/ EY/ KPMG

It's definitely hard to feel you're earning less than your peers, and as many of us have said, the myth that you are on big bucks the minute you walk into one of these firms is pervasive and can colour your own expectations. MN is full of people whose children appear to have walked into jobs with 80k starting salaries.

Having one of the big four on a CV really does make it easier to get other jobs, in smaller firms that may pay more and promote more quickly. So in part it can be an investment even if you're not looking to spend 15/20 years building to partner.

I know a few teachers with firsts from Oxbridge and phds...they earn less than you. I don't know much about your field but surely the issue is whether your salary is comparable to colleagues with similar years experience in the job or similar responsibilities.

I have essentially the same qualifications as you OP. Five years ago I earned £38k with little prospect of promotion, then I changed fields and now earn £75k. Both jobs required my PhD. Which is to illustrate, as other posters have pointed out, that salary is at least as linked to the type of job as the level of qualification required.