Forum Home → Discussion → Access to justice and advice sector issues → Thread
Jobs in the advice sector
Just a reflection on the jobs being advertised in the advice sector.
Is it me or are the jobs now demanding more experience whilst not reflecting this in the pay scale. Given that it is the ‘voluntary sector’ I find this more than disappointing and bordering on an abuse of the current situation.
I realise that obtaining grants and money is tough but so is doing a stressful job.
As an example Shelter, have placed an advertisement on Rightsnet that is asking for a lot but for not much money.
At this moment I am fortunate that I in employment (although given funding streams this could quickly change) but I would have to apply for this if I wasn’t. I also don’t think I would get it as I don’t have the housing specialist level needed.
I used to run and manage a first tier advice project and we all offered benefit/debt advice, as well as tribunal representation.
As a manager who used to be a rep in my role as well as a CPAG trained adviser I never earned anywhere near what shelter are offering
Not a criticism of the organisation in question at all. Funding is so hard to come by.
It is what it is. Unfortunately
Unfortunately is the right word. I think that just supports what I was saying. You were underpaid for what was a high level involved job.
Sadly Shelter reduced pay for new advisors in 2014. This was argued on the basis that the existing pay scales were higher than other organisations in the sector and that cutting pay would allow them to bid more competitively for the ever shrinking pots of funding. The new scale is supposed to be based on the median salaries in the sector.
Interesting thread on this in relation to debt advice being run by @richardmholland on Twitter. It’s pretty stark stuff.
Here’s Richard’s Twitter thread:
https://twitter.com/richardmholland/status/973184240186724353
https://twitter.com/richardmholland/status/972222916153741313
Surprised there’s not been more contributions to this.
Interesting in this context to read back https://www.rightsnet.org.uk/forum-archive/index2098.html#145 and some of the pressures driving down numbers and salaries.
<offtopic> I started that thread in 2005. This organisation has been through a couple of mergers and name changes since then, that’s for sure, and that baby I’d just had is now a teen taller then me *sob* </offtopic>
<offtopic> I started that thread in 2005. This organisation has been through a couple of mergers and name changes since then, that’s for sure, and that baby I’d just had is now a teen taller then me *sob* </offtopic>
And has the salary kept up with the cost of living?
There’s some interesting points here to be resurrected:
1) Has partnership working; co-location etc. been of any benefit? Has it pushed salaries down?
2) To what extent are we more reliant on external funders with fixed pots who pay what they can rather than an appropriate rate?
And so on…
There’s two things at play at the very least aren’t there.
One, the slow-down or drop in average wages:
According to the Resolution Foundation, average annual earnings are still almost £800 a year lower than they were 10 years ago, while the gains have been unequal across different sectors of the economy. Real pay has been rising by almost 2.8% for those in finance for the past year and 1.5% for those in construction, but there has been a continued squeeze in the public sector.
And following the squeeze on public sector pay, caused by huge reductions in local authority budgets more generally, and combined with the loss of legal aid funding from 2013, there’s the undeniable fact that the advice sector has been absolutely hammered. Less funding, less jobs, and lower levels of job stability and security than I can probably ever remember.
And following the squeeze on public sector pay, caused by huge reductions in local authority budgets more generally, and combined with the loss of legal aid funding from 2013, there’s the undeniable fact that the advice sector has been absolutely hammered. Less funding, less jobs, and lower levels of job stability and security than I can probably ever remember.
and with that comes a reduction in the number of advisers trained (paid or voluntary) so the pool of (experienced) advisers is gradually reducing? - just in time for ‘managed migration’!
Thanks to everyone who has taken the time to view this and to reply. Some really interesting feelings and ideas out there.
I hope we can carry on viewing the jobs available and the salaries attached and have an opinion on the reasons.
With so many organisations tendering for the same funds I hope it is not of case of under cutting each other by stating someone can do more, for less with the same results.
I need to make it clear that these are my thoughts as an individual.