Forum menu
@DT78 I maybe just hit £100k FTE if I include employers pension contributions as well.
I know how my sister (a solicitor), my brother-in-law (engineering firm executive), and my brother and sister-in-law (management consultants) work compared to me. All with equivalent qualifications to me, some of which were *much* easier than a medical degree and post graduate exams.
They're not making critical decisions at the rate that I do, they're not dealing with the amount of complaints that I am, they work in a better supported system than I am, they have better perks and bonuses than I do, they mostly have shorter days, and they all get paid more than me, some of them considerably so, and they don't deal with the amount of abuse that I do.
Full disclosure - I am a teacher....
I always think it's worth making comparisons to other jobs in other industries to get a feel for if a role is under or over paid.
To get the job you needed a degree and a post graduate qualification.
A good, but not exceptional, teacher in England can expect to be on £49K after 8 years in the role. That's without having any management responsibility or extra qualification in special needs or being a lead practitioner.
On top of that there is the leave which is enhanced over most other careers, and a defined benefits pension with is costing your employer 28% of your salary as well as relative job security.
Against all that.....you are a teacher! With the stresses (and sadly increasing abuse) that involves and the out of hours preparation.
So, looked at in totality of the whole 'package'; what job should mine be graded against as broadly equivalent? Some of the comps and bens might be a bit different - I might have more job security and more paid leave, but that job might have less stress. I might not have the skillset to do that job and they might not have mine - but they have been graded similarly.
An electrician?
An HR manager?
An IT manager?
A train driver?
For the record.....I 'think' the whole package for a teacher is just about where it should be.
never said the job of a GP was easy, I'm saying I know its hard, but, it is also well paid.
the 'pension trap' consultants keep referring to means they are getting more than £40k pa paid into their pension (or has that changed to 60k now?). Think about it. Thats more than the national average salary just on their pension.....
comparing to other similar roles isn't helpful. you can't just walk into those jobs, they can't just walk into yours, no matter how bright you are.
you are stuck with medicine unless you want to take a big risk / drop.
btw I had the grades for medicine, the time to study and cost (as self funded) put me off, so I did law - then ended up in tech. I look back at that decision and wish I'd done medicine. You cannot underestimate the value of a guaranteed job for life. Despite all the doom and gloom I'll be encouraging my boys to move into medicine
the ‘pension trap’ consultants keep referring to means they are getting more than £40k pa paid into their pension (or has that changed to 60k now?). Think about it. Thats more than the national average salary just on their pension…..
It's not as simple as that - it's not the amount paid in, but a number calculated from final salary (for the 1998 scheme) or CARE (for subsequent schemes) and the number of years paid in, and inflation. And the annual allowance tapers once you get above a certain income threshold, which is where people get in trouble - a relatively small amount of extra income can then result in a tax bill of thousands of pounds on top of PAYE.
They've put the thresholds up so most people won't be affected, and I suspect (with complacency) that the people who are now likely to get caught are those doing a lot of private practice, which is of course voluntary.
@DT78 my point is that my consultant colleagues are making *much* more than me, even more so now that they've got their extra 14% on top of their already (relatively compared to GPs) favourable pay structure.
I'm not sure what their pension trap has to do with me, as I'm not on their pay structure.
And yes, comparing to other similar roles is helpful, that's the sort of role that we're competing with to recruit and retain young doctors and get them to become GPs. Yes I'd have to take a pay cut, but more and more trainees are dropping out and going into other professions at earlier stages in their career.
I may also make the point that those people in my family are about a decade behind me in their careers and still enjoying progression, whereas I am not. And they're already getting paid more for me.
the same argument for retention can be made all across the public sector
And the private sector.
The problem is two fold, the cost of living is too high (house prices and energy costs being the obvious culprits), they need to come down, pushing up wages whether public or private makes us less competitive with the rest of the world, we need a decent standard of living for a reasonable wage. High house prices don't reflect the cost of building them, it's just making a small number of people a lot richer.
Second issue is workforce attitude and management failings. Not everyone can manage the business, people need to recognise they are doing a role, often vital for the organisation, but they are not individually the most important thing in that organisation. Conversely a lot of managers could do with waking up to the fact their precious human resources are actually people who want to feel included and valued at work.
When i actually find Nirvana / Narnia I'll let you all know.
High house prices don’t reflect the cost of building them, it’s just making a small number of people a lot richer.
And that a lot of 'wealth' in the UK is tied up in property and not actually contributing to the economy is an argument for property taxes.
And we need to fund councils properly so that, among other things, they can start building adequate amounts of social housing.
But this is a tangent.
Clearly, the vast majority of public service roles are undervalued and overloaded, in numerous and often unpleasant ways.
As a career civil servant, gradually approaching retirement, I have experienced huge pay erosion in various stages and guises over the last 35+ years; pay rises only come at promotion, otherwise it's stagnation at best and usually, a pay freeze meaning a backward slide. So, it's been around a lot longer than just the last 14 years.
The figures above on the chart, comparing medical career pay erosion, is a joke to any long term civil servant who might have stayed in one grade throughout, they're looking at erosion of around 35%. For me, that's well over £20k annually; a massive reduction in income. So last year, when private sector pay was struggling to catch up with CPI at over 10%, we got the square root of hee-haw. This year, just under 4.5%, supposedly to help with the prior backslide last year. Of course, it doesn't get close; this been happening for ever. And yet, I'm actually one of the more fortunate ones.
Lowest grade staff have the worst situation, where the most basic work of an admin assistant has had to be scrapped as the pay rate has been overtaken by the minimum wage. The next grade is now joining it in the firing line and will need uplifts now to stay above the legal minimum rate. That's despicable, governments undervaluing the admin officers who answer DWP calls from confused public, or the tax officers trying to help resolve your PAYE, income tax, corporation tax and Vat issues... And thousands of them, across most departments. They're so poorly paid, most need to claim tax credits, just to live.
The grass is always greener...
And always has been... or is imagined to be.
I left school in 1985. My plan was to complete my RAF twin-trade apprenticeship, serve the minimum time, then go to Saudi where the pay was probably 3x what it was in the UK. It didn't pan out that way though!
Other friends have emigrated for economic and non-economic reason. Most have ended up returning to the UK.
It's difficult working in the public sector as you have little immediate control over pay and conditions; and that has to be accepted when we sign up. If people have "enough" money, then that's great. If they want more, then there are always options. No point getting all wound up because someone else earns more!
I can't complain. My partner is an NHS worker, and we have a joint account.
2.8% is likely going to be slightly over the annual inflation rate for 2024, and the rises and bonuses given in the last few years have been meaningful.
More money is more money, few would complain, but I have to try to be stoic. National debt is very high, budgets are very tight and spending a lot more money on salaries in the NHS isn't going to fix the issues that NHS staff have. More staff, more facilities, more patients being seen, shorter, more manageable waiting lists. Actually, offering care and support to keep help more people live better lives, rather than just juggling waiting lists and swimming against the tide. To give an example, my partner is upset today because they only had time for 3 appointments this morning. Two didn't arrive because they died. It's sad because they died, it's sad because they died in pain and discomfort because they couldn't be seen (they were always going to die soon) and sad because those two slots were wasted because two of the admin roles are unfilled because their department is on a recruitment freeze due to budget issues.
They’re not making critical decisions at the rate that I do, they’re not dealing with the amount of complaints that I am, they work in a better supported system than I am, they have better perks and bonuses than I do, they <em style="box-sizing: border-box; --tw-border-spacing-x: 0; --tw-border-spacing-y: 0; --tw-translate-x: 0; --tw-translate-y: 0; --tw-rotate: 0; --tw-skew-x: 0; --tw-skew-y: 0; --tw-scale-x: 1; --tw-scale-y: 1; --tw-scroll-snap-strictness: proximity; --tw-ring-offset-width: 0px; --tw-ring-offset-color: #fff; --tw-ring-color: rgb(59 130 246/0.5); --tw-ring-offset-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-ring-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow: 0 0 #0000; --tw-shadow-colored: 0 0 #0000; caret-color: #000000; color: #000000; font-family: Roboto, 'Helvetica Neue', Arial, 'Noto Sans', sans-serif, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Segoe UI', 'Apple Color Emoji', 'Segoe UI Emoji', 'Segoe UI Symbol', 'Noto Color Emoji'; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(0, 0, 0, 0); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">mostly have shorter days, and they all get paid more than me, some of them considerably so, and they don’t deal with the amount of abuse that I do.
You are way out of touch if you think high pay in the private sector is a comparative walk in park. If medicine is so hard why not have a go at something else given it’s comparatively easier to earn more money? You might be surprised at how competitive, precarious and cut throat the real world is.
If medicine is so hard why not have a go at something else given it’s comparatively easier to earn more money?
I enjoy being a GP, I find it rewarding, and that's what keeps me going.
Have you practiced medicine as a GP if you're so sure that it's not comparatively hard?
More and more colleagues are leaving to go into other careers. A few come back.
The private sector on average gets better pay than the public sector, even more so when you correct for qualification level.
my point is that my consultant colleagues are making *much* more than me, even more so now that they’ve got their extra 14% on top of their already (relatively compared to GPs) favourable pay structure.
i think that depends on the practice. I used to see the accounts for about 20 practices until changing jobs 5 years ago. They had no shortage of cash to share amongst partners as dividends. They also did practice based commissioning schemes to increase revenue but not workload because they saw the patients during normal clinics so effectively reducing the number of gp appointments they offered. All perfectly within the rules.
The advantage many GPs have that their consultant colleagues don’t is that they are also the owners of the practice/ company. As a result they are able to pay themselves outside of paye and use the dividends rates and various other allowances to reduce their personal taxation rates v being employees.
A good, but not exceptional, teacher in England can expect to be on £49K after 8 years in the role.
Is that right, 6 years on main scale and then another 6 on upper scale going up every other year? Which will get you to ups 3 which will be £49k when the pay rise promised in the summer lands and mine hasn't yet. Granted you can skip a few pay scales etc if you move around schools and play the game.
If you want to compare it to another jump a teacher in the private sector is a great comparison. My partner gets about £10k more than me for a similar role, gets more holiday but the pension isn't as good anymore.
In society, we really don’t value meaningful jobs like medicine, nursing and teaching. Medicine especially requires a huge amount of sacrifice and demands that not many people could deal with. It’s really not easy to get there or continue to cope with it.
The private sector can be cut throat and demanding but from my groups of friends and family across multiple industries, I can’t see how you’d begin to compare them to medicine from the demands they place on you. The people I know who get paid the most, quite frankly astonishing amounts, add the least value to society, especially from a health perspective. Saying that, a lot of things need to improve in the UK work culture, but at least we are ahead of the US in that respect.
If you have to sacrifice a lot and spend a huge proportion of your life to get a particular job, you should be rewarded appropriately. And sacrificing a lot isn’t just doing a degree or two.
Kramer, something keeps you there - do you want doctors to be people who are motivated by money or medicine? You could earn more as a doctor, but it might come with other downsides. You could probably find a particularly cushy number where you earn more and have less hassle - perhaps you regret your choices that got you here, perhaps you feel an obligation to stay. Your family members may have made particularly “smart” decisions (not every solicitor gets rich) or sold their soul to the devil (management consultancy!) or have to manage people and ensure some of the dullest meetings on the planet whilst pretending to care which executives swap for £. It’s not good for the country if there is an exodus of good people from key public sector roles but that’s not really a good reason for an individual to stay. The real issue will be when the supply of straight A students fighting to get into medicine starts to dry up.
Is that right, 6 years on main scale and then another 6 on upper scale going up every other year? Which will get you to ups 3 which will be £49k when the pay rise promised in the summer lands and mine hasn’t yet. Granted you can skip a few pay scales etc if you move around schools and play the game.
Whether it takes 8 yrs or 12, is the quality of the output of the experienced 49K a year teacher (with no additional responsibilities) that different to one with say 4 years earning on over £10k less? My gut feel is that’s just because it’s always been that way. (My cynical parent view is that whilst fresh out of training teachers can be clueless, very experienced ones can be jaded/cynical/burnedout/chasing promotion/rehashing old material).
i guess the other anomaly would be that we pay all subjects the same (except for perhaps some initial incentives to get people in for shortage subjects). If schools struggle for say maths, physics, computing teachers etc - should they attract a premium helping them compete in the job market and perhaps reducing the incentive for those teachers to be promoted out the classroom?
However I am sure I read recently annual wage growth across UK was 6%.
Between pre-pandemic and now my wage has gone down 10% while I'm working 20% more so you think I'd be bitter about others getting rises but in the case of NHS and teachers I think it's about right. Above inflation, so starting to correct the insulting ones from the previous govts, and hopefully a sign that the attitude from Westminster towards these jobs is different now. The big test will be what happens in the next pay talks and how it relates to the state of the national finances then.
i guess the other anomaly would be that we pay all subjects the same (except for perhaps some initial incentives to get people in for shortage subjects). If schools struggle for say maths, physics, computing teachers etc – should they attract a premium helping them compete in the job market and perhaps reducing the incentive for those teachers to be promoted out the classroom?
I've often thought about this a little bit. Those with Stem degrees that are much more marketable across a range of industries paid the same as say...drama grads.
But (even though I am one of the ones with a Stem degree) I'd be against it. First, what it would do to the staff body as a cohesive team would be huge. It only (just about) works because you have each other's back. It would be so divisive. Secondly....once you've been doing it a while you begin to appreciate the degree subject is a tiny fraction of what makes a good teacher. By a country mile the most important skills are the soft people management ones. The pastoral ones. The charisma ones. The dweeb in chemistry the teaches dull lessons, has no classroom control, with classes that achieve poor results who gets paid more than the English teacher who is the polar opposite but keeps his job because even though he's paid £10K more you'd still struggle to get a replacement. That staff room discontent would cost you more in re-recruitment than struggle employing Stem teachers in the current model.
Finally - you couldn't pay the 'cheap' subject teachers any less and get anyone to do the job. So that would mean paying more to the 'expensive' ones....and that's never going to happen.
I agree, however as the designated biology teacher who has had to switch to physics, which wasn't and still isn't easy I think a bump for teaching out of specialism would be appropriate. But then I would wouldn't I ?
If I got a pay rise every time I was expected to pick up something I had no knowledge of and no support with I'd have long since retired. That's just normal in the private sector when you start to get senior.
My eldest daughter is a junior doctor on £35K after 5 years of medical school and corresponding massive debt that amounts to an extra 10% tax for decades whilst my youngest at 19 is applying for an apprenticeship for National Grid which pays 41K after year 3 and will have no debt. Crazy way of valuing jobs in society.
Convert - interesting, I’m not convinced that the current system doesn’t reward mediocrity which must mean there’s great teachers (in any subject) who resent colleagues who are coasting but getting paid more just because they have been there longer?
A_A - absolutely, it seems that if you’ve stepped up to cover shortage subjects that should be rewarded. My experience is somewhat different from stumpjon’s in other worlds: when there’s a job nobody else wants to do and your existing staff can help, you either incentivise them upfront or reward them after - if you don’t, someone else will treat them better, but the national salary levels mean natural “market forces” are eliminated in most public sector roles.
If I got a pay rise every time I was expected to pick up something I had no knowledge of and no support with I’d have long since retired. That’s just normal in the private sector when you start to get senior.
Picking up something is not the same as teaching others something you have no expertise in. Picking things up to fill gaps elsewhere is just as ubiquitous in teaching as the privare sector.
If I got a pay rise every time I was expected to pick up something I had no knowledge of and no support with I’d have long since retired. That’s just normal in the private sector when you start to get senior.
When that happens in private sector it adds to your CV which then enables you to move jobs for a pay rise. I'm not sure that option exists in the public sector, in the same way.
That’s just normal in the private sector when you start to get senior.
I am not senior, in fact I am right at the bottom
When that happens in private sector it adds to your CV which then enables you to move jobs for a pay rise. I’m not sure that option exists in the public sector, in the same way.
Yeah it woul make moving jobs easier but I wouldn't get a pay rise. I could maybe negotiate a 3 year rise for a golden hello but it wouldn't be much.
Have you practiced medicine as a GP if you’re so sure that it’s not comparatively hard?
Go back and actually read what I said. No one is saying it’s not hard being a GP but it’s not always easy in the private sector conversely.
The private sector on average gets better pay than the public sector, even more so when you correct for qualification level.
We are both outliers of average pay so let’s not go there. I know and recognise I’m in a privileged position pay scale wise. What I’m not doing is constantly referring to my pay scale because being a GP means I deserve to be paid more when you correct for qualification.
I leave my job in the NHS today after 16 years, currently mid-band seven, and due to go to the top of band in March.
Despite that, I have chosen to leave while taking a pay cut, due to the years of chronic underfunding and the race to the bottom with cost improvement programs, frankly there is nothing left to cut without effecting patient care directly in some way.
Rather than have my hat nailed on to save money (and I take my financial responsibilities seriously, given it's tax payers money), than do the job properly and spend sensibly where needed , I'd prefer be able to sleep at night and earn a bit less each month.
I remember COVID when the front line nurses in ICU ended up with sores from long term FFP3 mask use, then the government encouraged people to clap for them, and didn't give them any financial recognition.
I imagine most if not all public services are in a similar state.
They also did practice based commissioning schemes to increase revenue but not workload because they saw the patients during normal clinics so effectively reducing the number of gp appointments they offered. All perfectly within the rules.
As a practice manager of a GP surgery...Eh?
Get housing costs under control and most of these issues could be alleviated significantly.
There's always been (and hopefully always will be) a decent cohort of people who want to be teachers, nurses, care workers etc. The difference between now and 30 years ago is that to make that choice wasn't a compromise that could ruin your chances of a 'normal' life.
I live in a completely ordinary town in the South. Just checked right move, a pokey 3 bed terrace (not very nice, no garden) on the next street down is £1,800pm to rent. Stick utilities and council tax on that you need to earn nearly £45k JUST to pay the rent on a small house.
The issue isn't asking people to do the job, the issue is asking them to do the job and live with the consequences.
No one is saying it’s not hard being a GP but it’s not always easy in the private sector conversely.
I'm going to guess that you haven't had many 10 minute private sector meetings where making a wrong decision could kill someone - I know I haven't.
Those who think that work in the private sector is as hard as working in medicine, genuinely don’t have a clue. My private sector job is well paid and stressful, but when I compare my issues at work to those of my partner (who is a dr), it makes me ashamed to think that I’m stressing over what are really inconsequential issues in the grand scheme of things.
Like I said up there, it is not helpful to compare as they are completely different, but people keep doing it
There is a level of arrogance associated with just assuming because you are a doctor you can walk into others professions because they are 'easy'. Thinking about this thread has made me realise that is what riles me , I've heard it from several doctors
you may be bright but you can't just easily walk into a similar paid job in another industry, lets say IT without some level of retraining and salary drop so as an argument for 'more' money its invalid. (I am aware of some consultancy based roles for insurance companies that do pay similar so there are limited exceptions)
I think if doctors were serious about sorting care they would be saying, nope don't give us large payrises, use the funding to ensure medicine is free to study (paid off by government during NHS service). That removes a huge barrier to some of the best and brightest who don't have means, will increase diversity and the pool of new junior doctors. That would start to alleviate capacity issues, meaning less pressure on services. It would mean the levels of stress due to overload could be tackled. It would mean more doctors 'staying' because they aren't getting burnout from workload etc etc....
OR we could just keep conditions the same, increase the packages of doctors more, so they can moan about the tax they pay and go part time or retire.
There is a level of arrogance associated with just assuming because you are a doctor you can walk into others professions because they are ‘easy’.
No not at all. It’s a decision made a lot of the time at GCSEs to give their life to a vocation. Mrs FD knows she couldn’t do another job now, but she does know that she couldn’t have chosen career paths that would have allowed her to earn considerably more money. Money isn’t the main driver for Mrs FD but when she started in that career journey , consultants still earned similar money to high performers in other industries
I think if doctors were serious about sorting care they would be saying, nope don’t give us large payrises, use the funding to ensure medicine is free to study
Again although pay is not the ultimate driver for many consultants , pay shit wages and you won’t get people to do the job.
Mrs FD tells multiple people a week that their life is going to be cut short. She then tells them she can cut their leg off to extend their life a little longer . She will then operate on someone and cut their tumour out and take the leg off, making the decision to cut enough leg off to catch the tumour but not take too much leg off, the or cut the wrong bit of anatomy making them bleed to death .
I’ve passed through one of her clinic waiting rooms seeing some of the people waiting. I wouldn’t have the ability to even tell them they are going to die then let alone operate on them .
IMO that type of work should be valued in society and paid accordingly. They are exceptional people doing an exceptional job, it’s not a race to the bottom
OR we could just keep conditions the same, increase the packages of doctors more, so they can moan about the tax they pay and go part time or retire.
At least try and understand the situation rather than respond in a way that shows complete lack of understanding or just pure financial jealousy
My cousin is a similar high achiever. He looked at medicine when he was young, but blood wasn’t a thing he could handle. Very similar background to Mrs FD ie state school. He went down an ICI graduate route after getting a first at Oxford . He’s now retired mid 50’s and a multi millionaire . He talks quite a lot to Mrs FD about their work paths. He’s always said his path was the easier one
Taking the example of working in IT, you can gain access without any formal qualifications, work your way up, and when at a senior level you can exist without needing to do anything particularly technical or hands on; senior roles will generally be surfing from meeting to meeting. Compare and contrast to medicine where the barriers to entry are very high and you remain “technical” even when in very senior positions. Add in the fact that the stress in medicine is due to effectively playing god with people’s lives, whereas in IT (or many other senior roles) the stress is about getting shouted at by some corporate ****** because something doesn’t work, you can’t really compare those levels of responsibility.
You are right that you can’t easily jump from one senior level to another across industries, but people in the private sector often are guilty of believing their own hype in terms of importance
There is a level of arrogance associated with just assuming because you are a doctor you can walk into others professions because they are ‘easy’.
Where has that assumption been made?
I was with you till that bit. It is not shit pay.
it is shit compared to what they can earn in comparable industries and people of similar calibre (again it’s not a race to the bottom)
Not one doctor will argue they are on poor salary value when you compare it to the national avg, although I think many probably fall below the avg when you work out an hourly rate for hours worked.
The fact is they are not average people, they are more qualified, trained and skilled than most, but don’t get paid accordingly
what they can earn
comparing again, no they can't. The arguement if different decisions were made many years / decades ago for a different career choice is a not a logical one, I can't see how clever people keep trotting it out.
Its like me in my end of year review saying, you know I could have studied medicine and be earning alot more now - look at how much those consultants earn. I should get a bigger pay rise. Imagine how that would go down.
Anyway my point was spend the money on sorting out the system, keeping the stresses and strains the same but paying more will not improve things overall. If consultants get a 50% rise that would do nothing to improve the system. Reduce the (financial) barriers to entry first, if we need doctors why is training not funded?
For other roles, such as nurses / teachers etc... I do think they need proper rises, because they need the money to be able to afford basics such as rent, food, child care and they can, with much less relative difficulty find roles that pay close, as their pay is at a level where there are many roles at a similar level.
Anyway I'm in danger of turning into one of those posters
I agree this could end up going no where
The arguement if different decisions were made many years / decades ago for a different career choice is a not a logical one, I can’t see how clever people keep trotting it out.
The best people coming through are now deciding not to become doctors as pay and the NHS is so bad. Paying them more towards the avg pay would make it even worse.
There have been many post above about Uk trainees going to work abroad , as I posted above my wife can’t recruit to a prestigious consultant job with a UK trainee .
Mrs FD was offered a 7 figure salary to go and wrk in Canada for less hours, more pleasent environment. If it wasn’t for family reasons we would have been off like a shot.
This isn’t about the existing workforce it’s about attracting the best future workforce. You don’t get the best paying avg wages.
Now if you want someone to make a decision based on Google or a hunch then we can go down the average person. Let’s hope you don’t end up dead
personally I know I’m not intelligent enough or committed enough to be a doc therefore I don’t expect to earn the same money as one
it is shit compared to what they can earn in comparable industries and people of similar calibre (again it’s not a race to the bottom)
Same with most folk in the NHS
Same with most folk in the NHS
agree, I think this is something really badly effecting NHS management. Good people earn more privately , so on the whole the NHS is run by mediocre managers
so on the whole the NHS is run by mediocre managers
I spent two years in a local trust on a FTC and the standard of leadership there was woeful, to grade in my old careers parlance, a great many (too many) would be bottom third leaders.
But when all you've got to do is bluff a 40 minute interview you can't expect much more surely?
my sister (a solicitor), my brother-in-law (engineering firm executive), and my brother and sister-in-law (management consultants) ...all get paid more than me, some of them considerably so
Solicitor average salary = £62k in 2018 so probably £80k now but significantly less outside London
https://www.lawsociety.org.uk/career-advice/becoming-a-solicitor/how-much-do-solicitors-earn
Engineering firm executive - engineering is not well paid in the UK, average for senior engineer is £50k-60k or thereabouts depending on the branch and experience level
Management consultant is very broad but the below puts the top end of the senior bracket at £80k
https://www.prospects.ac.uk/job-profiles/management-consultant#salary
These all seem lower than GP pay to me, as well as being less rewarding and far less secure with much worse pension provision.
Is it the case that your family members have moved above these roles into management positions, which for a fair comparison you'd need to compare with NHS management positions?