Average V Median wage Ireland?

Benedict

stefanovich wrote: »

https://data.gov.ie/dataset/bution-of-income-tax-by-type-of-gross-income-range-of-gross-income-marital-status-year-and-statistic

Still don't see any figure for median wage for FT workers?

con___manx1

Larbre34 wrote: »

If that's what you really believe, that the particulars of jobs employers can't quickly fill, are an accurate portrayal of employment and salaries in Ireland, then I don't know where to begin with explaining how stupid your outlook is.

Do you have any concept of the number of jobs and sectors that never get near being advertised and the salaries that accompany them?

Good lord.

Legally company's have to advertise any positions that become available even if the job is already stitched up. My brother was offered a job and it was still advertised. People went for interviews that were just pointless. I seen a similar situation happen in my company.

stefanovich

Benedict wrote: »

Still don't see any figure for median wage for FT workers?

You can figure it out approximately.

What stood out in the figures for 2018 in bold below. Why so many in the 100 -> 150 range? Seems anomalous. Public sector management?

<10K 423,603
10 - 12K 82,422
12 - 15K. 127,400
15 - 17K 86,951
17 - 20K 131,840
20 - 25K 217,946
25 - 27K 87,782
27 - 30K 124,223
30 - 35K 190,572
35 - 40K 166,339
40 - 50K 237,937
50 - 60K 169,338
60 - 70K 122,512
70 - 75K 48,838
75 - 80K 41,232
80 - 90K 64,390
90 - 100K 47,650
100 - 150K 107,186
150 - 200K 30,096
200 - 275K 15,520
>275K 15,054

stefanovich

Using the numbers above I think the median would be in this range:

27 - 30K 124,223

stefanovich

Benedict wrote: »

Still don't see any figure for median wage for FT workers?

Ahh fulltime ahh ****

stefanovich

2013 68,858 3.21 8,186.24 10.12 1,924.1 16.38
2014 73,006 3.28 8,670.1 10.31 2,070.06 16.53
2015 78,949 3.43 9,388.27 10.43 2,209.15 16.04
2016 87,488 3.64 10,409.88 11.01 2,456.33 17.17
2017 95,613 3.88 11,394.24 11.45 2,690.34 17.49
2018 107,186 4.22 12,782.93 12.12 3,006.29 18.12

Who in the public sector gave themselves massive raises?

Bigfatmichael

It really needs to done a county level or Dublin and then the rest of Ireland.

I get 40K where I'm currently working but could easily get 60K if I moved to Dublin but would actually be worse off.

[Deleted User]

stefanovich wrote: »

You can figure it out approximately.

What stood out in the figures for 2018 in bold below. Why so many in the 100 -> 150 range? Seems anomalous. Public sector management?

<10K 423,603
10 - 12K 82,422
12 - 15K. 127,400
15 - 17K 86,951
17 - 20K 131,840
20 - 25K 217,946
25 - 27K 87,782
27 - 30K 124,223
30 - 35K 190,572
35 - 40K 166,339
40 - 50K 237,937
50 - 60K 169,338
60 - 70K 122,512
70 - 75K 48,838
75 - 80K 41,232
80 - 90K 64,390
90 - 100K 47,650
100 - 150K 107,186
150 - 200K 30,096
200 - 275K 15,520
>275K 15,054

stefanovich wrote: »

Using the numbers above I think the median would be in this range:

27 - 30K 124,223

Loads of those must be part timers.

Peregrinus

stefanovich wrote: »

You can figure it out approximately.

What stood out in the figures for 2018 in bold below. Why so many in the 100 -> 150 range? Seems anomalous. Public sector management?

The 100-150k range is five times bigger than the ranges which come before it so, naturally, it contains more people. My guess is that at the time the ranges were set 100k plus was serious money, with not that many people in the bracket, but due to wage inflation over time there are now many more. However the brackets remain unchanged because either (a) they can't be bothered or (b) it facilitates year-on-year comparisons, and the measurement of change over time, to have consistent brackets over time.

begbysback

I’m underpaid, don’t forget to calculate that in.

Interested Observer

stefanovich wrote: »

Using the numbers above I think the median would be in this range:

27 - 30K 124,223

Minimum wage is about a tenner an hour which comes to 18-20k a year for a full time worker. So almost by definition anyone on less than that is not working full time, so shouldn't be used to work out the median full time wage.

As for the 100-150k bracket, when the rest of the brackets are increments of 5k or 10k and that one is an increment of 50k, it is going to capture more people.

Peregrinus

Benedict wrote: »

Yes, my mistake, I meant most people (I reckon) listening to Leo's statement think 49k is the median - and there seems to be no available evidence to support that.

Incidentally, surely in order to establish the average, enough data must be available to also establish the median!

No. You need much more data to calculate the median than the mean.

You can calculate the mean knowing just (a) total amount of earned income and (b) total number of earners. You don't have to know what any individual earned. But to calculate the median you need - at least in principle - to know what every individual earned. That's a huge dataset.

This is one of the main reasons that we use means so much and medians so little. It's not a desire to mislead anyone; it's just the mean is much more accessible.

Benedict wrote: »

It seems to me that the public is being sold the message that 49k is the median which gives the impression that the country is doing really well.
And those who don't think impressions matter should remember the days when Bertie was prating on about how brilliantly Ireland was doing when in fact Ireland was drowning but didn't realise it.

The question "what is the ft worker median wage". This question is central to this thread and nobody can answer it.

For that, you not only have to know what each individual earns, but whether each individual is full-time or not - data which (a) doesn't turn up in tax returns, and (b) frequently isn't available for the self-employed, whose earnings aren't calculated by the amount of time they work or are committed to work.

The surprising thing to me is not that Ireland doesn't have a figure for median full-time earnings, but that the UK does. I'd love to know how they calculate it.

crossman47

Benedict wrote: »

Still don't see any figure for median wage for FT workers?

I've posted a few times that its not there and can't be there given the data sets we now use. If other countries have it, they must carry out a survey of individual workers and distinguish between full and part time. We had one (the Structure of Earnings) but this has now been replaced by data from revenue files that do not distinguish full/part time.

Let it go. The median will be about 20 per cent below the mean.

stefanovich

Interested Observer wrote: »

Minimum wage is about a tenner an hour which comes to 18-20k a year for a full time worker. So almost by definition anyone on less than that is not working full time, so shouldn't be used to work out the median full time wage.

As for the 100-150k bracket, when the rest of the brackets are increments of 5k or 10k and that one is an increment of 50k, it is going to capture more people.

17 - 20K 131,840
20 - 25K 217,946
25 - 27K 87,782
27 - 30K 124,223
30 - 35K 190,572
35 - 40K 166,339
40 - 50K 237,937
50 - 60K 169,338
60 - 70K 122,512
70 - 75K 48,838
75 - 80K 41,232
80 - 90K 64,390
90 - 100K 47,650
100 - 150K 107,186
150 - 200K 30,096
200 - 275K 15,520
>275K 15,054

Should be 35->40K range excluding under 17K

Interested Observer

stefanovich wrote: »

Should be 35->40K range excluding under 17K

I'd say this is fairly reasonable, would imagine it's in this bracket or marginally over 40k.

Benedict

crossman47 wrote: »

I've posted a few times that its not there and can't be there given the data sets we now use. If other countries have it, they must carry out a survey of individual workers and distinguish between full and part time. We had one (the Structure of Earnings) but this has now been replaced by data from revenue files that do not distinguish full/part time.

Let it go. The median will be about 20 per cent below the mean.

If the CSO is able to calculate the average FT wage (which they are), then they must be able to distinguish between FT and PT workers.
If they can say John is FT and Mary is PT then John's details must represent a separate unit for calculation purposes. John is a separate unit on a data sheet, they know who he is and that he is FT - and they have access to his income data and should be able to use it in calculating the median from taking all the "Johns" together.

The CSO already distinguish between FT and PT.

Peregrinus

Googling finds this, which is from the CSO, saying that in 2018 median annual earnings were €36,095. That's for all workers who worked at least 50 weeks in the year; median annual earnings for full-time workers would be higher, but we don't know by how much. Also, I notice that the subjects are referred to as "employees"; it's possible that this is acually the median earnings from employment, and that the median earnings for all workers, including the self-employed, would be different.

Geuze

Benedict wrote: »

Look Geuze, Leo is able to give a figure and say this is the average. He doesn't present us with a litany of "income by age" "income by sex" blah blah.

It's a single figure just below 49k

As far as you are aware:


(a) is there a figure for a median salary/wages for FT worker?
(b) do you know what it is?
(c) If you know, can you just say what it is ple-e-ease?
(d) If you don't know, then thanks anyway - but please say so.

Here I have a figure for median FT earnings, but it is from 2014:

41,829

that is in the sector: Industry, construction and services (except public administration, defense, compulsory social security)

That seems to be my best figure: 41,829 in 2014 for median annual earnings of FT workers.

Note: Ireland is blank for 2018.

crossman47

Benedict wrote: »

If the CSO is able to calculate the average FT wage (which they are), then they must be able to distinguish between FT and PT workers.
If they can say John is FT and Mary is PT then John's details must represent a separate unit for calculation purposes. John is a separate unit on a data sheet, they know who he is and that he is FT - and they have access to his income data and should be able to use it in calculating the median from taking all the "Johns" together.

The CSO already distinguish between FT and PT.

No. Please read what I posted. CSO do not get details for John and Mary. They get an aggregate for all f/t and all p/t from employers in their survey. They get individual data from Revenue but these do not distinguish full and part time.

Benedict

crossman47 wrote: »

No. Please read what I posted. CSO do not get details for John and Mary. They get an aggregate for all f/t and all p/t from employers in their survey. They get individual data from Revenue but these do not distinguish full and part time.

I understand what you are saying. But the fact that CSO don't "get" things doesn't mean the can't "get" them.


And perhaps they should "get" them because they must exist.


In order to calculate the average wage for FT workers, the following data must be available:
(1) The number of FT workers and (2) what each FT worker earned.


If the CSO doesn't have these details then some other body does and they handed the results of their calculations to CSO.


But (1) and (2) have to exist on a spreadsheet somewhere for and average FT wage to have been arrived at. And therefore the median could be established with the click of a mouse.


(1) and (2) will provide sufficient data to calculate median.

crossman47

Benedict wrote: »

I understand what you are saying. But the fact that CSO don't "get" things doesn't mean the can't "get" them.


And perhaps they should "get" them because they must exist.


In order to calculate the average wage for FT workers, the following data must be available:
(1) The number of FT workers and (2) what each FT worker earned.


If the CSO doesn't have these details then some other body does and they handed the results of their calculations to CSO.


But (1) and (2) have to exist on a spreadsheet somewhere for and average FT wage to have been arrived at. And therefore the median could be established with the click of a mouse.


(1) and (2) will provide sufficient data to calculate median.

I give up. I said CSO get aggregates from employers. They do not get individual details. Thats it - I'm not coming back on this as its like hitting my head off a wall.

Benedict

crossman47 wrote: »

I give up. I said CSO get aggregates from employers. They do not get individual details. Thats it - I'm not coming back on this as its like hitting my head off a wall.

I know exactly what you said - it's you, I'm afraid, who haven't understood what I've said. I know what the CSO "gets" - but the figures have to be available somewhere down the line.


Can you not get your head around the fact that although CSO don't seem to "get" the figures doesn't mean they don't exist?


The employers aggregate the figures but they don't aggregate them from thin air! The raw data exists and should be available to the CSO - even if only for verification purposes.



If you relax and think about it for a while, I reckon you'll see that you just may have misunderstood some points.


Enjoy your evening.

moon2

Benedict wrote: »

Can you not get your head around the fact that although CSO don't seem to "get" the figures doesn't mean they don't exist?.

Just because it's possible to create such a list does not mean such a list exists.

In fact, were there to be such a list I'm sure it would be used to compute the median salary figure you're asking for.

There's been a lot of back and forth around this and it seems like you're ignoring the answers which are saying that employers currently don't provide lists with individualised salaries.

Do you have reason to disbelieve this statement?

Laura2021

Eric Cartman wrote: »

There are a lot on under 50k, it doesn't mean 50k is high and should incur the higher bracket tax though. Even by your own figures somebody on 70k vs 50 is only 200 a week better off , somebody on 70k a year should be coming home with 1100 + a week

True the difference doesn't seem much when you break it down it's only 200 a week more.
So would you say someone on 1100 a week to be a high earner ?

Laura2021

https://www.thejournal.ie/irelands-high-earners-insecure-with-28-finding-difficulty-making-end-meets-study-finds-5212187-Sep2020/?section=comment#comments

Ireland high earners from the journal

Eric Cartman

Laura2021 wrote: »

True the difference doesn't seem much when you break it down it's only 200 a week more.
So would you say someone on 1100 a week to be a high earner ?

Absolutely not, 100k is where ‘high earner’ starts.

Peregrinus

Benedict wrote: »

Can you not get your head around the fact that although CSO don't seem to "get" the figures doesn't mean they don't exist?

The employers aggregate the figures but they don't aggregate them from thin air! The raw data exists and should be available to the CSO - even if only for verification purposes.

The fact that data exists doesn't mean that it should be available to the CSO. Lots of data exists to which the CSO has no access.

For what it's worth, my impression is that where median earnings figures are calculated, it's not done by getting individualised employee hours and earnings data from employers. Rather, they collect data from a stratified sample of earners via household surveys, by-passing employers completely, and then extrapolate from that to the population at large.

stefanovich

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Absolutely not, 100k is where ‘high earner’ starts.

If you are supporting a family even that's not going to go far.

Benedict

Fri 26 June 20 Irish Times (using CSO 2019 figures) stated the following: "average annual earnings for full-time employees was €48,946".

In order to calculate this figure, they had to have been supplied with the number of FTW and the total amount paid to them.

So a small employer declares total payment of, say, 100k pa to his FTW. CSO are aware of a litany of features relating to the FT staff - such as age, sex, marital status, nationality etc. But are we to believe that the carve-up of the 100k is kept top secret? So CSO is prevented from, for example, statistically linking education to income level?

Are we to believe that "ready processed" FTW totals are simply dropped into the CSO system without the CSO having the ability to verify the data or to use the data from which the totals were constructed in the first place?

This cannot be true. If it were true, one can imagine how over a range of say 10,000 business an vast gap could open between average and median figures - you could have wealth and poverty existing side by side without any statistical reference to it.

Clearly, there must be sufficient data available to support a median figure for FTW.

Interested Observer

Benedict wrote: »

Fri 26 June 20 Irish Times (using CSO 2019 figures) stated the following: "average annual earnings for full-time employees was €48,946".

In order to calculate this figure, they had to have been supplied with the number of FTW and the total amount paid to them.

So a small employer declares total payment of, say, 100k pa to his FTW. CSO are aware of a litany of features relating to the FT staff - such as age, sex, marital status, nationality etc. But are we to believe that the carve-up of the 100k is kept top secret? So CSO is prevented from, for example, statistically linking education to income level?

Are we to believe that "ready processed" FTW totals are simply dropped into the CSO system without the CSO having the ability to verify the data or to use the data from which the totals were constructed in the first place?

This cannot be true. If it were true, one can imagine how over a range of say 10,000 business an vast gap could open between average and median figures - you could have wealth and poverty existing side by side without any statistical reference to it.

Clearly, there must be sufficient data available to support a median figure for FTW.

You've made a version of this post over and over again, who are you talking to?