Shocking news this morning. On the tv and in the papers.

Barleyfields

I went to grammar school at the beginning of the 60s Allira. Although not an independent school, the atmosphere was very elitist and a lot of the girls came from professional families. Pupils were expected to go to university unless they were in the virtually written off DS stream. I’m sure many enjoyed their time there. I hated it.

I went in the 1950s.
So the difference shows.

Barleyfields

What might those professions be, David? In my experience a profession requires capacity for independent thought. Maybe we have different definitions of a profession as opposed to a job?

Accountant unless creative
Nurse you follow the script
Teacher the curriculum dictates what you do
Bankers decisions are taken at the top now not branch

The all follow instructions from above, lawyers are different they create work as the go along to extract the most from clients, if you let them

I disagree David. The people you mention need to be able to think! They don’t simply blindly follow instructions. There will be some people from these professions coming along soon to tell you how wrong you are but in the meantime I hope your life never depends on a nurse ‘following the script’.

What an unpleasant and untrue remark about lawyers too.

Is carpentry a profession or a job?
Many would say a job.

I think it's a profession, watching them at work in my house.
One has a degree too.

I think anyone who does a job well, whatever it is, deserves respect.

I would class it as a trade Allira. It requires training, practice and skill, with a practical application. Are extra categories allowed?

Casdon

I would class it as a trade Allira. It requires training, practice and skill, with a practical application. Are extra categories allowed?

Yes. What if they own the businesses?

We need these people. They're not training enough trades people.

You’re right, there aren’t enough tradesman. I don’t know if it’s that not enough are being trained, or that when they are some do a different job. Anybody running a business, even if they are a one man band needs to be able to think. I can’t think of many jobs without at least a certain degree of independent decision making in fact, I don’t think there are many production line type roles available now.

I'm not sure that the old classifications apply, eg needing (as opposed to having) a degree and a further professional qualification to be allowed to practise, having a professional body that sets the standards for registered members, being subject to being 'struck off' the register if standards are not met, and so on. The professional body should allow autonomy for the members, and have a higher authority than an employer.

These days, 'professional' seems to be a term for anyone who is working, or at any rate working in an office or similar setting, and it is fair to say that a lot of people who would see themselves as professionals don't have the autonomy they once did. Doctors can only prescribe what NICE allows, for instance, and teachers have to follow both the demands of the HT and government policies.

I completely agree that anyone who does a job well deserves respect, but that is altogether different. I respect people regardless of what their job title or 'category' might be.

I mix with business people of all kinds, chatting generally I ask what “trade” are you in, it might be banking, property, accountant, many others. A lot would be business owners who started at the bottom as a tradesman or a clerk.

The reality is that a good manual tradesman will earn as much as a so called “professional”, most are self employed, working with, not employing others.

It rather depends what a ‘so called “professional“’ is, doesn’t it? Presumably not a member of the traditional professions - chartered accountant, doctor, solicitor etc.

Casdon

I would class it as a trade Allira. It requires training, practice and skill, with a practical application. Are extra categories allowed?

OK so professionals don’t need training or practical application of what they do.

Barleyfields

It rather depends what a ‘so called “professional“’ is, doesn’t it? Presumably not a member of the traditional professions - chartered accountant, doctor, solicitor etc.

I would bet the average doctor, professional in a solicitors office or accountants office, earns less than a skilled plumber or electrician.
Top Consultants earn a lot, but so do many comparable small business owners

I don’t know what ‘the average doctor, professional in a solicitor’s office or accountant’s office’ might be. A full time GP can earn up to £150k a year. I assume the ‘professionals in solicitor’s or accountant’s offices’ are not qualified and experienced solicitors or chartered accountants.

I’m not sure how a small business owner can be compared with a ‘top consultant’.

Barleyfields

I don’t know what ‘the average doctor, professional in a solicitor’s office or accountant’s office’ might be. A full time GP can earn up to £150k a year. I assume the ‘professionals in solicitor’s or accountant’s offices’ are not qualified and experienced solicitors or chartered accountants.

I’m not sure how a small business owner can be compared with a ‘top consultant’.

Maximum for a salaried GP is £110 before deductions according to BMA

Salaried - not a self employed partner in the practice.

Galaxy

Some of the people I know in childrens services would be terrible managers but are excellent practioners. We need to value those skills as well, in my experience some managers (and I was a manager for a long time) do not have the skills necessary to be frontline workers. We need to treat people at all levels with decency and ensure that they are rewarded for their particular skills

👏👏👏👏👏

Barleyfields Solicitors are not the only professionals in a law practice.

A number of staff will be trained Legal Executives, which means thay have taken a vocational route into the legal profession, open to those without a university degree or equivalent qualification.

More broadly these days I think a 'profession' would be defined as an occupation that requires a degree or equivalent qualification to enter, followed by further job specific training and where there is a recognised professional body that regulates the conduct and practice of the occupation - although membership may not always be compulsory.

They undertake the same work as solicitors but are qualified to practise solely in their chosen area of specialism.

I know about legal executives MOnica. They have their uses, but you contradict yourself - you say they are not the only professionals in a law practice but go on to say that a profession would be defined as one which requires degree or equivalent qualification. I would rather use a solicitor, who has undergone a far wider legal education than a legal executive.

David49

Barleyfields

What might those professions be, David? In my experience a profession requires capacity for independent thought. Maybe we have different definitions of a profession as opposed to a job?

Accountant unless creative
Nurse you follow the script
Teacher the curriculum dictates what you do
Bankers decisions are taken at the top now not branch

The all follow instructions from above, lawyers are different they create work as the go along to extract the most from clients, if you let them

When I worked as a CPN I was autonomous in the sense that
I was entirely responsible for the decisions I made.. I was certainly a professional

Barleyfields

I know about legal executives MOnica. They have their uses, but you contradict yourself - you say they are not the only professionals in a law practice but go on to say that a profession would be defined as one which requires degree or equivalent qualification. I would rather use a solicitor, who has undergone a far wider legal education than a legal executive.

Yes, I agree I contradicted myself but Legal Executives but by the time they finish their training Legal Executives would be considered eductae dto degree level, despite not having a degree and many professions are again introducing non degree entry, but this usually includes effectively giving them a degree level education by having longer or more intensive training.

One of the downsides of this modern obsession wth getting degrees is to exclude many people from poorer backgrounds from the legal and other professions.

When I left school in the early 1960s, with the intention (later ditched) to become a Chartered Accountant, I chose the university route, 3 years getting the officially approved degree, plus 3 years training and exams. But the minimum requirement to become a Chartered Accountant was O levels - and 5 years training and extra exams or if you had Alevels 4 years training and exams. The same for becoming a solicitor.

I had friends in both professions, where family problems or teenage rebellion meant they left school after O levels and came back to education and studying for a profession several years later. The solicitor rose through the profession and became a judge. Her pension alone well excedes any salary I earned - and I too had a career where I earned well over the minimum wage

But before members display their "anger" we need to know if there is any truth in the OP some seem to find so easy to believe.

To make this even worth discussing we need:

To be able to review the source by checking the original article from the Telegraph to understand the context, methodology, and credibility of the data presented.

To understand the data collection methods and investigate how Thames Water, if this was the source data, collected this and what specific metrics were used to arrive at the figure of over one million migrants. This seems well outside their usual purview. Thames Water primarily focuses on water supply and management, so it's unclear how they would have access to accurate data on immigration status or numbers.

We would also need to know that the OP has looked for additional context not just presented a one-sided view as fact. Research on immigration trends, government statistics, or studies from reputable organisations would provide a more comprehensive view of the situation.

Critical analysis which evaluates the broader implications of the claims made would also help. Knowing exactly what this means for public policy, social cohesion, and perspectives on immigration is far more useful than someone's personal temper tantrum.

This information could help us to have a more informed discussion about migration and its effects on society and the economy in the UK. It seems the OP does not set out to have an informed discussion but simply to trigger emotions rather than reasoning.

The great thing about GN is that there are always some who do try to bring reasoning into such threads.

This is what FullFact has to say about the article:

fullfact.org/immigration/illegal-migrant-london-population/

Thank you growstuff.

You're welcome. I have absolutely no idea how anybody (especially a water company) can differentiate between illegal immigrants, students and tourists in London.

Goodness. The FullFact article is pretty damming isn't it?