Metropol

My toilet has been playing up lately, so I called out the plumber to fix my drains as there was starting to be a very bad odour about the place - not good for bringing people back.

Anyway, I got a plumber out - friendly guy, and he was telling me that the trade was lucrative and there was a total shortage of plumbers, meaning that he was swamped with work. "I could do with an extra man and van", he said.

As you know here, I have my own little business and it's paying the bills quite nicely. But I got to thinking how much money I and my brother had taken out the business for the last 4 years, and I wished that money was still in there as I would loads of flexibility.

I did some research into plumbing and these guys can earn anywhere between £30-100K per annum, so I am really thinking about doing it as a part-time thing after getting some training.

Are these figures about plumbers accurate? Or can you point me in the direction of any trades I can train in quickly and do part time?

johnnyboy wrote:My toilet has been playing up lately, so I called out the plumber to fix my drains as there was starting to be a very bad odour about the place - not good for bringing people back.

Anyway, I got a plumber out - friendly guy, and he was telling me that the trade was lucrative and there was a total shortage of plumbers, meaning that he was swamped with work. "I could do with an extra man and van", he said.

As you know here, I have my own little business and it's paying the bills quite nicely. But I got to thinking how much money I and my brother had taken out the business for the last 4 years, and I wished that money was still in there as I would loads of flexibility.

I did some research into plumbing and these guys can earn anywhere between £30-100K per annum, so I am really thinking about doing it as a part-time thing after getting some training.

Are these figures about plumbers accurate? Or can you point me in the direction of any trades I can train in quickly and do part time?

Deadly accurate. Plumbers earn a shedload of money to put it bluntly.

But the thing is you can't just take it up as a part-time thing or walk in and out of the job. It takes a number of years in the job and training to become a fully fledged plumber, and to earn those figures. You have to go through the initial training and then spend a fair bit of time as a plumber's mate.

If only finding a quick, simple and well paid part-time job were that easy...!

Plumbers are probably one of those most underated occupations out there and yes there is a real shortage. We were told that such is the crisis with plumbers in the South East, we would have to wait a couple of weeks in an emergency for a plumber!

Giving it some thought, they are not the only underated occupation out there. You also have Refuse collectors (Garbage men to you and me) that will earn in excess of £24,000 per annum. We of course all know the deal with Train Drivers and Station attendants on excess of £60k between them.

I tell you, the Civil Service and my £18k leaves a lot to be desired in comparison.

Snu wrote:I tell you, the Civil Service and my £18k leaves a lot to be desired in comparison.

That's the average starting wage for a paramedic, going through all that medical training - yet a refuse disposal technician or whatever they call themselves will start out with more. It's ridiculous when you think about it.

DAS wrote:That's the average starting wage for a paramedic, going through all that medical training - yet a refuse disposal technician or whatever they call themselves will start out with more. It's ridiculous when you think about it.

I don't know why people think paramedics have a lot of medical training - it's only a twelve week course.

tillyoshea wrote:

DAS wrote:That's the average starting wage for a paramedic, going through all that medical training - yet a refuse disposal technician or whatever they call themselves will start out with more. It's ridiculous when you think about it.

I don't know why people think paramedics have a lot of medical training - it's only a twelve week course.

Errrrr... nowhere near.

To qualify as an ambulance paramedic, you need at least two years operational training. In essence, it's not a 12 week textbook reading course as you seem to think.

Even to become an ambulance technician is more thorough than a twelve week training course. In order to become a paramedic, you are shadowed and tested on different elements at various different stages. And even after your initial induction, there are tiers and you must undergo regular assessments to renew your status.

And to get on to the training course in the first place you need to show medical proficiency. I don't think you'd be allowed to provide intravenous infusion and the like after 12 weeks training! I know some people perceive paramedics as first aiders, glorified minibus drivers or people carriers, but to be one you do need to have quite a complex knowledge of biology and medicine - more so than you'd imagine.

(I've just typed up a paramedic training document for somebody - that's complicated enough, and it's only a performance assessment).

Now compare to a dustman.

DAS wrote:To qualify as an ambulance paramedic, you need at least two years operational training. In essence, it's not a 12 week textbook reading course as you seem to think.

You're quite right, I'm sorry... I read something out of context - it was explaining that it was a twelve-week course for Allied Health Professionals (and, actually, it turns out that this is misleading, too, because they already have to have passed the IHCD qualifications).

The only reason I thought it could be reasonable is that I have just done my BLS for Clinical Staff last week - the only formal training in it that I'll get in it before I qualify - and that only took two hours. I think a lot of people would be surprised at how little practice doctors have in various practical skills before they are released into the public (albeit with supervision).

I think paramedic could be categorized as a 'vocation', giving the employers a nifty reason not to load the salary as an incentive to fill the position. There are people who simply have a desire to have a job where they help people in this way. It doesn't ring my bells I have to say, but there you go.

Compare with: Dustman.

Gavin Scott wrote:I think paramedic could be categorized as a 'vocation', giving the employers a nifty reason not to load the salary as an incentive to fill the position. There are people who simply have a desire to have a job where they help people in this way. It doesn't ring my bells I have to say, but there you go.

Compare with: Dustman.

Certainly makes sense what you say: over the years they have tightened the requirements you need even to qualify for ambulance training, let alone get the job at the end of it. Yet, as with practically everything now, there is a growing shortage of staff. It takes years to train, but the ambulance service has a high turnover rate - mainly because the wage is so bloody rubbish. They increase the requirements of paramedics but freeze the wages!

The thing to do now is for public paramedics to go private (as has my father), when you can potentially earn double for a slightly different job. It's all odd.

Anyway.

Dustman.

Apparently there is a national shortage, and as they only do one off call outs they rake it in! The figures you are given are very realistic, when a plumber came round to our house last year to fix a tap he said that he did some work in London and raked it in, even though he hiked up the price slightly, it was still cheap at London standards!

Though it requires like a 4 year course or something, but if you have very little choice or want to make a bit of cash, it is seriously worth considering.

I have got paid a total of 138 pounds in 4 days, spent 15 of it for doing the worst job known to man.

Maybe I should be a plumber's apprentice. Naw.