accounintg firms- cadetships (3 Viewers)

[turtleface]

Did the surname Korda or Mentha give it away? lol

Do you have a link to the different levels (with years after graduation taken to get there, salary ranges, etc.) there turtleface?

1.Yeah lol thats how I guessed originally.
2.Unfortunately not, I've got that through all the salary surveys I've collected (including the BRW one you (i think) posted a while back), and also through just asking the people during work experience. The main problem so far is Partner remuneration, its extremely difficult to guess. The only confirmed cases I have is the PwC tax partner who accused some male partners of sexual harrassment and she was on "more than $900,000" (whether pre or post bonuses I have no idea). Other than that, the only partner info I have is the BRW salary guide but that is very vague, its groupings were questionable too.
For salaries on non partner level staff, these are the direct links to some of the more reputable ones but a few may be last years so a bit old: (they may take a while to load):

They usually group in the headings e.g. it'll say "Managers - min 5 years: xxxxx" etc.
http://www.michaelpage.com.au/pdfstore?src=2005_Finance_Salary_Survey.pdf
http://www.jcu.edu.au/fac1/public/business/salaries_for_accountants_2006.pdf^= the CPA one, I couldn't find the CPA link
http://www.careerone.com.au/webdav/site/jobs/shared/Salary%20Survey06/Accountancy.pdf
^= the Hays one, I like the first few pages cause its all 6 figures lol.
http://www.olivier.com.au/misc/Salary_Survey_2006_website_version.pdf
^= not very pretty, but good nonetheless, it gives figures for Cadets, Senior Cadets (Undergrad 2 I think) and Co-ops (called Undergrads 1 I think) as well, so thats useful. Not sure which undergrad refers to cadets and co-ops, only guessing.

I like to average them out cause one may be more conservative or exaggerated than another

This one is the best, and shouldn't even be available for download lol (ur supposed to register before they send you a copy), but unfortunately its in USD, and is for the United States. Ironically, even without converting to AUD, they get paid more. e.g. USD 43-52K for grads at big 4 (even more now, USD 45-55K according to wetfeet.com):
http://www.roberthalffinance.com/html/downloads/financials2006sg.pdf (warning: its very big and takes ages (about 1.5mb))

____
random quote:
lol whilst looking for those links I found this quote which is quite interesting:

One of these is an accountant with three years' experience, working in a big four firm, and earning about $49,000 a year, including super. Mr Movsowitz said he could place this candidate in a financialaccounting or trust accounting role in the commercial sector for $75,000, before a bonus

Thats quite old, as now no big 4 firm would pay 49K for a 3rd yr Acc lol...but it shows we've come a looooonggg way. i guess it shows why everyone was leaving big 4 at like 40% T/O every year, few years ago.
____



ok...thats that...omg I really should be studying for exams. You won't see me (hopefully) until next week. Adieu, though I probably won't be able to resist and will come back before then.

 

[turtleface]

BDO have cadetship recruitments each year.

I think they have already had it.

Hey, not wishing to disturb you, but welcome back for the first time since last year. I don't think you know me but I remember you from the old CA Achiever posts I browsed last year when I was trying to apply.

Secondly BDO lol. what a missed opportunity, if the merger had of been successful merged with PKF...sheesh...almost big 5 in Australia...almost. Damn it would have been good though, it would of had almost as much revenue as Andersen (ok not quite, about 70%?) before it got screwed

On National firms: I had a look at the Nexia website from the poster a few posts ago, it actually made me want to go to mid tier a bit, cause all their partners and stuff had RCA's and RTA's and all sorts of other experiences. At big 4, you don't get RCA till you're at least a Director/Partner.

 

[Malazn Pleasure]

thanks mate

sorry i dont remember u

yeah too bad the merger didnt go thru, would hv been good if it did.

 

[seremify007]

Hey Seremify is secondments an award at pwc too?

lol before I did my work experience I though secondments were like compulsory, so I was asking my CM: "Do we HAVE to go on secondment?" (Cause I'm scared of flying) and he's like wtf? They're special rewards for high achievers.
I made it sound like a burden lol

Secondment is more of an opportunity which you have to apply for with your manager/partner. Not meaning to put a knock at you but I think secondment is a valuable experience which I'm under the impression, pretty much every partner has undertaken.

Do you have a link to the different levels (with years after graduation taken to get there, salary ranges, etc.) there turtleface?

I've also got the BRW survey on my other PC if you want me to upload it. It's not too bad; reasonably accurate I think; but then, they do have weird groupings which make it ambiguous as to whether they refer to people with certain qualifications or not.

 

[Meads]

Secondment is more of an opportunity which you have to apply for with your manager/partner. Not meaning to put a knock at you but I think secondment is a valuable experience which I'm under the impression, pretty much every partner has undertaken.



I've also got the BRW survey on my other PC if you want me to upload it. It's not too bad; reasonably accurate I think; but then, they do have weird groupings which make it ambiguous as to whether they refer to people with certain qualifications or not.

I have spoken to partners/principals/senior managers at work about this BRW table and some of the other more popular ones, and they all claim they are rubbish, particularly in respect to partners earning over $1 million each. From what i can gather, a first year partner will be earning about $250k-$300k, and partners higher up (group leaders, managing partners, etc) will be earning around the $1 million mark.

Now while it may be thought that this does not sound much for people who are 'at the top' of the firm (if comparing to CFO's or CEO's) it is important to realise that there are roughly at least 250 people earning over $300k at each of the big four firms, and you are not going to find that in many industries (no matter how much your going to try and tell me that you can). On top of this, the benefits that partners receive are quite extraordinary im led to believe. Two words...Corporate AMEX.

 

[turtleface]

I have spoken to partners/principals/senior managers at work about this BRW table and some of the other more popular ones, and they all claim they are rubbish, particularly in respect to partners earning over $1 million each. From what i can gather, a first year partner will be earning about $250k-$300k, and partners higher up (group leaders, managing partners, etc) will be earning around the $1 million mark.

Now while it may be thought that this does not sound much for people who are 'at the top' of the firm (if comparing to CFO's or CEO's) it is important to realise that there are roughly at least 250 people earning over $300k at each of the big four firms, and you are not going to find that in many industries (no matter how much your going to try and tell me that you can). On top of this, the benefits that partners receive are quite extraordinary im led to believe. Two words...Corporate AMEX.

...

but doesn't what you have just said support the BRW survey?

Ok lets take this one at a time:

From what i can gather, a first year partner will be earning about $250k-$300k

That is what the BRW survey says. It doesnt say all Partners earn $1 million +, it quite specifically lists Staff Partners (i.e. the first year partners you refer to, at your range). Note that when we say $500,000-$600,000 for a Junior Partner (Staff Partner), it includes Bonus. Without bonus, it is in the 250-350K range, as you say.

partners higher up (group leaders, managing partners, etc) will be earning around the $1 million mark.

yeah. as the BRW survey says. (Equity Partners: 1-1.55 million)

On top of this, the benefits that partners receive are quite extraordinary im led to believe. Two words...Corporate AMEX.

As the salary states, such benefits are included in their bonuses and sometimes base salary. Hence why Equity Partner bonuses are 100-200% their salary.

So yeah, the BRW survey says EXACTLY what you say, so I don't know what the people you were talking to were on about. I had doubts about the BRW survey too, cause I've only ever heard of 1 partner's salary and that was $ 900,000. But what you have said has just helped me understand that the BRW survey is 100% accurate.

 

[seremify007]

*nods with turtleface* Although what I'm wondering about is with the BRW survey ranges- are they saying that's the bottom and top limits, or just the averages of the companies surveyed form those limits. I'm pretty sure some partners would earn above and beyond what they claim as the top; and same applies to the ASX100 companies.

Two words...Corporate AMEX.

I just filled out my application for one of them Apparently it's for employees/owners of firms/companies with $200m+ turnover . As perky as it sounds, there's actually a pretty good reason (or two) as to why everyone in our firm gets one.

 

[turtleface]

lol DODGED!
at my firm its Ass Managers and above only...:mad1: :mad1: :mad1:
...actually maybe its cause I was a work experience student
oh yeah I did notice one dodgy thing with the BRW one. One category was Senior Managers/Directors at 250K-300K(?) base. I think it was incorrect to list Senior Managers in there, as they are usually 120-160 (base) only I think. And I also question the "Senior Associate" rank. 10+ years without getting to Senior Manager? WTF? lol.

Although what I'm wondering about is with the BRW survey ranges- are they saying that's the bottom and top limits, or just the averages of the companies surveyed form those limits

yeah its a bit vague, not sure about that. Yeah I've only heard of the PwC partner on 900K. Thats the only "real" evidence I know. There was the Andersen partner in U.S. doing Enron (he had 3 yrs partner experience, so a Senior staffer, or a Junior equity partner, and he was on USD 700K for the Enron job only lol. (prob about aus 1.2 million in today's money)

 

[seremify007]

Every firm has different titles and the ranks/progression vary so that survey should be taken purely as a guide with a pinch of salt and nothing which may be accurate or reflective of how you (the reader/individual) will actually perform.

Some firms have principals, some firms have directors, and then it varies when people will reach such titles. I know some people who chose not to become a Senior Manager and just maintain their existing role- whether it be for family reasons or just no desire to get an increased work load/responsibility is upto the individual.

 

[Meads]

...

but doesn't what you have just said support the BRW survey?

Ok lets take this one at a time:

That is what the BRW survey says. It doesnt say all Partners earn $1 million +, it quite specifically lists Staff Partners (i.e. the first year partners you refer to, at your range). Note that when we say $500,000-$600,000 for a Junior Partner (Staff Partner), it includes Bonus. Without bonus, it is in the 250-350K range, as you say.


yeah. as the BRW survey says. (Equity Partners: 1-1.55 million)

As the salary states, such benefits are included in their bonuses and sometimes base salary. Hence why Equity Partner bonuses are 100-200% their salary.

So yeah, the BRW survey says EXACTLY what you say, so I don't know what the people you were talking to were on about. I had doubts about the BRW survey too, cause I've only ever heard of 1 partner's salary and that was $ 900,000. But what you have said has just helped me understand that the BRW survey is 100% accurate.

Ok this is where the ambiguity of positions/titles gets in the way of understanding. Which is evident in the fact that you have completely misunderstood what I have said.

At big 4 firms (all of them to my understanding) a 'partner' is an equity partner, they just share different percentages. The 'staff partner' your referring to is actually known as a 'principal'. When I said first year 'partners' i mean partners, not principals, and i mean they earn 250-300k all up, bonus and all. Certainly not 600k.

Equity partners do not earn over a $1 million, maybe the top ones do, and i mean a small minority.

When you really think about the figures in the article, they are rather large when you consider that EY has over 280 partners in australia, thousands of employees, and massive costs to cover (they spend alot on alcohol, and yes we all get corporate AMEX's, and they pay for alot of our expenses too). It is unlikely that those figures can be true.

The partner, principal and senior manager I talked to about all of this said that often this survey's are conducted just in order to stir the pot, and get everyone kicking up a stink about how much people get payed. From the top, right to the bottom.

 

[jpr333]

oh really? You know Matt Broadfoot?

His bro, I saw Matt for the 1st time the other day.

My mate works at nexiacourt, says its ok..

 

[aileenli]

Nexia Court & Co.

http://www.nexiacourt.com.au/

my brother works there... he got a cadetship last year...

was he at the Chartered accountants night at Martin Place?????

 

[¬_¬]

At big 4 firms (all of them to my understanding) a 'partner' is an equity partner, they just share different percentages. The 'staff partner' your referring to is actually known as a 'principal'. When I said first year 'partners' i mean partners, not principals, and i mean they earn 250-300k all up, bonus and all. Certainly not 600k.

Don't some firms also have 'group partners' as well? There are so many different titles it's hard to compare directly between firms.

What you said is right Meads, it doesn't seem possible that they earn that much... but when you consider the amount of revenue on a per-partner basis; it does give some indication as to the maximum (on average) a partner could ever take home (in the sense they can't be taking home more than what they bring to the partnership. Nonetheless, when you also take into account how much of our chargeout rate goes to the firm (as opposed to the employee), it doesn't seem all that unrealistic that they can end up with a huge take home amount.

 

[turtleface]

Ok this is where the ambiguity of positions/titles gets in the way of understanding. Which is evident in the fact that you have completely misunderstood what I have said.

At big 4 firms (all of them to my understanding) a 'partner' is an equity partner, they just share different percentages. The 'staff partner' your referring to is actually known as a 'principal'. When I said first year 'partners' i mean partners, not principals, and i mean they earn 250-300k all up, bonus and all. Certainly not 600k.

No, maybe for your firm theres no such thing as Salaried/Staff Partner, but at KPMG there are no such things as Principals or Directors in Audit. It goes straight from Senior Manager to Partner (though they don't distinguish btw staff and equity to employees). Oh btw are you talking about audit, cause its true they are paid less, and 300K sounds about right...which is confirmed by the BRW survey...

Equity partners do not earn over a $1 million, maybe the top ones do, and i mean a small minority.

In the BRW survey, it chucks Principals into the Directors category I'm assuming. I find it difficult to believe ALL partners at EY are equity. Also remember the BRW takes into consideration ALL benefits, including car parking allowance and AMEX charge etc. I still don't see how the BRW survey is incorrect, unless you are saying Equity Partners earn less than say 750,000K (with the balance being AMEX charges, car parking, computers etc) a year take home. In which case I'll quit Accounting right now and go work at an Investment Bank. But again, if you are talking about Audit. Audit is traditionally lower than Tax and Corporate Finance

When you really think about the figures in the article, they are rather large when you consider that EY has over 280 partners in australia, thousands of employees, and massive costs to cover (they spend alot on alcohol, and yes we all get corporate AMEX's, and they pay for alot of our expenses too). It is unlikely that those figures can be true.

The thing is, you charge out expenses to clients. I agree, but thats why juniors get paid so shit. Partners only represent less than 8% maybe of staff. So for every 1 partner you get about 4-5 juniors to subsidise. If avg rev per staff = about 180K, and expenses including wages PER staff member are say 80K on average, thats still 100K per junior staff member. Thats 500K right there for salary.

The partner, principal and senior manager I talked to about all of this said that often this survey's are conducted just in order to stir the pot, and get everyone kicking up a stink about how much people get payed. From the top, right to the bottom.

True, but your CEO James Millar (? forgot his name, but its Brian Shwartz's successor) was interviewed in the article attached to the survey so it suggests some sort of connection... maybe.

What you said is right Meads, it doesn't seem possible that they earn that much... but when you consider the amount of revenue on a per-partner basis; it does give some indication as to the maximum (on average) a partner could ever take home (in the sense they can't be taking home more than what they bring to the partnership. Nonetheless, when you also take into account how much of our chargeout rate goes to the firm (as opposed to the employee), it doesn't seem all that unrealistic that they can end up with a huge take home amount.

Well if charge out rates for partners are about $750-800 per hour, tahts your 1.5 million right there. Admittedly some of that would go to expenses and firm investment, so about 1 million seems right.

 

[seremify007]

Also remember the BRW takes into consideration ALL benefits, including car parking allowance and AMEX charge etc. I still don't see how the BRW survey is incorrect, unless you are saying Equity Partners earn less than say 750,000K (with the balance being AMEX charges, car parking, computers etc) a year take home.

Are you sure about that? I was under the impression that those sorts of things would be considered expenses to the firm and would deduct from total revenue as opposed to the base salary/incentives.

After all, PwC doesn't actually provide the Corporate AMEX just for the perk you realise. It's provided both for convenience when claiming expenses as well as for independence reasons.

 

[turtleface]

nah thats just my interpretation, I shoulda said so sorry. That whole exp thing is a bit hazy too me.

It was quite amusing what the firms charge to clients too. I remember I wanted some software installed, and you have to charge the that portion of the license cost to a client lol..

 

[seremify007]

Ahh fair enough. I don't think it would be classified as part of the salary, after all, not everyone will necessarily take up on some/all of the offers/fringe benefits, and like I said earlier, certain things which we regard as perks, are actually provided because it benefits the firm as much as it benefits us (and hence would be more likely classified as an expense to the firm).

Mind you, you could very well be right. And if we find it ambiguous to interpret this data, I wouldn't be surprised if the people filling out the survey forms for BRW also were a bit puzzled as to what to include either.

EDIT: LOL @ charging things to the client. The thing I look forward to the most is when they pay for food. Yum!

 

[Meads]

Well I am just telling you what people in those positions have told me...and they don't have any reason to talk down their pay, after all they are trying to make us stay there. I have even had salaries quoted, and they are by no means the figures shown in the survey. None the less, it is quite a personal topic, and I am sure the bottom line is by the time you reach partnership, you are earning enough.

The figures are very large when you think about the massive number of employees at big 4 firms especially.

I never said all the partners at EY are equity...we have principals, ie staff partners on a salary.

 

[turtleface]

Hey Meads do you know how longs Partners and Principals usually work for? I've heard rumours of regular 10pm nights. Is that common?

And how about you?

I've always wondered what working hours are like at Big Four. I've heard that those on Big clients often have 12am nights in the days/weeks leading up to the conclusion of the audit

 

[Minai]

To me, its just like cramming/staying up late the night before a uni assessment is due/exam. I mean, at uni, you don't just turn up to class and thats it - you gotta put in some extra effort outside those hours - and I guess it should be the same for work
(unless im completely off track!)