This morning I read the news on how 1 in 5 graduates expect a starting pay of $4,000. It took me by surprise, because hidden in the middle of the article is the fact that 70% believe they should be paid up to $4,000.
It took me by surprise, because my starting pay was only $2,500 when I graduated a few years ago. After CPF deductions, my take-home pay was only $1,999 back then.
I read on to see what these graduates had to say in order to justify their expected remuneration, and these were some of their defenses:
I started working a part-time job related to my industry when I was 18. Thus, you could fairly say that what these people claim they have, I had them as well. So why did I accept a starting pay that was almost half of what they expect?
Because in your first job, it is more important to learn than to earn a high salary.
The experience and demands from a part-time job may be valuable, but they are not quite the same as a full-time job. In addition, office politics is a whole new different ballgame altogether. So here's a word of advice to my juniors and anyone reading this:
It is better to start with a lower-paid job which teaches you more, rather than going into a higher-paid job where you learn less.I strongly believe that if you are as good as you believe yourself to be, then sooner or later your abilities will be recognized and be paid fair value. I felt I was worth at least $3,000 for my starting pay, but accepted the lower pay anyway. Less than a year later, my skills and achievements had been noticed and a competitor offered me my due value together with a promotion.
If I had insisted on a role that paid me my expected salary in the beginning, all of these might not have happened. Today, I'm doing far better than most of my peers (and probably earning more).
On that note, take a look at the results of CNA's latest survey of how much the class of 2014 is earning at the workplace. While many people are questioning if the numbers are truly reflective, I was far more interested in the comments this article was receiving.
There were a number of older folks leaving surprised comments that the income has not risen since the early 2000s. Take a look.
According to this Robin Low, an engineering graduate was paid $3,000 - $3,500 back in 1999. While I don't have friends who can attest to that, I do have friends who are engineers today and earned a starting pay in that same range too. But between 1999 - 2015, our cost of living has shot up much higher.
Obviously, salaries are not catching up.
But before you start complaining, think about what else has gone up.
(Read What Do We Really Need?)
Back in the 1990s, our parents were happy enough to have a roof over their head, enough food to eat without worry, and earning enough to pay the bills. Today's teenagers and young working adults, however, want so much more. We want to travel the world (I'm equally guilty), follow the latest fashion trends, own branded items and go cafe-hopping where we can take Instagram photos to show everyone what a good life we have.
Am I the only one who sees a problem here?
Cost of living goes up. Societal expectations go up, along with our own expectations of what constitutes a decent life. We need increasingly more money to survive, but our earnings are not catching up fast enough.
If salaries haven't changed much in the last 16 years, what makes these graduates think it'll hit $4,000 in the next few years?
This is why I'm not content enough to simply save, but am also actively investing. And why I think you should, too. But hey, that's a post for another day.
Till then, be realistic.