Hays email blunder exposes high RBS contractor pay rates
computerworlduk.com
computerworlduk.com
The article doesn't say who is getting those rates, but if it's the software guys then I'm guessing we're talking about a very small number of isolated cases, where probably either someone had them over a barrel with knowledge of a critical project that was otherwise going to be lost or someone knew where the skeletons were buried. Either way, management made the expensive screw up a long time ago...
This is not a pleasant combination.
Sounds like the people implementing them don't deserve £200/day, never mind £2,000! :-)
Seriously, though, nothing you wrote there sounds particularly impressive when you look at what plenty of very smart, very skilled, very well trained contractors do for daily rates in three figures.
I'd guess that in the UK today, the middle of the bell curve for software contracting rates is probably in the £30-£50/hour or £250-400/day region. With specialist skills/relevant experience you can get higher, and in London you generally shift everything upwards a bit as well, so for something like banking in the City you might be looking at £600-800/day. Even in London, in a generally high-paid industry, with specialist skills and experience, you're still an outlier if you're approach £1,000/day though.
I know absolutely nothing about Hyperion HFM rules, but I find it hard to believe anything could be so difficult to learn and work with that you couldn't get someone capable of doing those other jobs to learn it and do it for half the rate we're talking about. Is there some sort of artificial barrier that stops otherwise capable software contractors from moving into the field?
[Edit: The PCG's benchmark report from June this year had the middle of the curve around £300-500/day or £60k-100k turnover, with the middle of the respondents curve around ages 35-55 and IT making up the majority of responses and fitting the turnover curve pretty well when isolated. That's based on self-selected respondents who are members of a professional organisation, and certainly tending to the more experienced age ranges, so I think it's fairly consistent with my guess above. They did indicate a small number of responses with turnover above £200k, and even some with turnover in the £300k-500k range. There is no way to tell whether those correspond to the respondents whose businesses had more than one fee earner (10% of the total).]
I think the main barrier is that you need to be a competent developer (mod working in VBScript) and know a hell of a lot about financial consolidation and know about how Hyperion is typically implemented in organisations.
It's those combination of skills that I suspect is pretty rare and if you don't have the domain and application knowledge then no amount of technical skills is likely to compensate.
Believe me - my respect for accountants has gone way up since I've been involved in integrating with HFM. I wouldn't dream of working on the guts of it - although we did build a reporting engine on top of the beast that is orders of magnitude better than what it comes with!
Is there some business or legal necessity for making statements like this? When I've got my geek hat on, this seems like an incredibly stupid statement that betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of data. What am I missing?
At RBS this is particularly significant as they have some of the best non-financial employee benefits in the financial sector.
The ability to hire/fire contractors at will makes the 20% premium well worth it for companies, especially when those skills are only need for a short time period or for particular projects.
Firstly, the options appraisal around whether to increase headcount or to get in a "temporary" consultant are highly sensitive to estimates about how long a piece of work will take to do and how much ongoing support would be required afterwards. If the estimates are optimistic then it might actually have made more sense to hire a permanent employee.
Secondly, there is often a motivation hit when contractors are brought in. If the contractor is brought in solely to increase a team's capacity (rather than to bring in skills that a team lacks) then the permanent members of staff will be all too aware that the person sitting at the next desk is making twice as much (or more!) for doing the exact same job.
I've worked at a few companies with mixed contractor/employee teams where it hasn't been an issue, after all there's nothing stopping the employees from becoming contractors if they prefer that lifestyle and it aligns with their long term goals.
How exactly do you recover emailed data?
I'm not saying it isn't a stupid comment but there's probably a bit of a reason for why they said that.
Is it regulation?
1) The skill set is rare enough that the only choice for the company is to hire a contractor
2) The company only needs the skill-set for a short period of time, i.e it doesn't make sense to hire someone who'll cost 300k/year when you only really need them for three months
That's not inconceivable, especially for a non-technical business contractor.