Years of experience -> salary?

[RTVA]

The DW Simpson salary chart has number of exams and years of experience. The years of experience groupings are 1-2, 3-4, 5-6, etc... My question is, does "1" mean "in your first year" or "having completed one full year"? For example, I have been working for almost 3 years but not quite, so should I be comparing in the 1-2 or 3-4 group? (I know what I think it should be, but I'm wondering what others think, since I plan to go talk to my boss about it....)

[Boilermaker]

I've often wondered the same thing. As there is no 0 years listed I always assumed that you had to round up. So between 2 and 3 years would be the lower end of 3-4 years.

[RTVA]

That was my logic too. I am actually below BOTH (!) ranges for my # of exams, which is why I'm going to have a chat with my boss. (Which I guess means they are paying me for no experience, and one less exam than I have.) It seems to me that at the very minimum, I should make the low number on the 3-4 yrs scale.

[42]

Before you do, it might help to see how you compare to others in the company and/or city (if that's possible). Other reasons for being below the average would be: low COL location; company that doesn't pay very well (either because they are trying to cut costs, because there is little competition in the area, or because other benefits make up for the lower salary); poor performance relative to others in the department (even if your performance is good, if others in the department are excellent, and if there is only so much money to go around at raise time, you may get the short end of the money stick). Talking to the boss should help you understand the situation better, especially if you couch it as "what would I need to do to get to the middle of the DWSimpson survey salary range?" (Just be prepared to accept that the answer might be that you would have to move to another company that pays better! :( ) Good luck! :)

[RTVA]

Before you do, it might help to see how you compare to others in the company and/or city (if that's possible).

It is somewhat hard to compare, because most of the people are at varying levels, plus it's hard to get someone to share salary info with you. I do have a few pretty good ideas, and many of them are very underpaid also according to DWS, but hopefully a rising tide raises all boats... :-)

Other reasons for being below the average would be: low COL location;

Low COL is the pet answer given to anyone here who asks for a raise. There is some truth to it, but according to COL websites, my town is low-mid, so IMO that should be represented on the low end of the chart (definitely not 12% below it!).

company that doesn't pay very well (either because they are trying to cut costs, because there is little competition in the area, or because other benefits make up for the lower salary);

This is really the main reason. The company is cheap (even to the point where people bring their own pens to work, and we can't use the color printer. Reminds me of that commercial where the guys are taking notes on their arms....) It is also the only actuary-employing company within about a 2 hr radius. And while I would say the benefits like medical are very good, I think the 401K is only average, and there are essentially no bonuses.

poor performance relative to others in the department (even if your performance is good, if others in the department are excellent, and if there is only so much money to go around at raise time, you may get the short end of the money stick). Talking to the boss should help you understand the situation better, especially if you couch it as "what would I need to do to get to the middle of the DWSimpson survey salary range?" (Just be prepared to accept that the answer might be that you would have to move to another company that pays better! :( ) Good luck! :)

Thanks for the good advice...I'm still planning out my strategy for where, when and how to ask. I realize I may not get anything, but I am not worried that asking might hurt my career here. People are leaving a lot faster than they're coming, so they won't take any action to lose any more resources. Actually, that is what we need is for them to actually fill one of these vacant positions, because no one would come here for what they pay the rest of us, so then they would likely re-balance us too.

[42]

Ouch - it sounds like most of what you mentioned will be working against you (cheap company, relatively low COL, no competition). However, the "outflow > inflow" may be the leverage you need to make a change. Hopefully, your company will see the writing on the wall before it's too late. Good Luck!

[DW Simpson]

1-2 years is actually 0.5 - 2.5 , and 3-4 is 2.5 - 4.5, (and so on...).

Boilermaker, we do now have 0 - 0.5 entry level ranges.

They could certainly be labelled better. I'll fix it. Good point.

[RTVA]

Thanks, it is much more clear now...! :D