State of the Market

[edison]

This is it. The Government can control Visas but they can't realistically stop outsourcing.

I had some success working with SME who probably couldn't make the economies of scale of outsourcing work for them, although I have been out since May last year. That said the interviews I have had have been in that space.

The economics of outsourcing can work at smaller scale now. I did a project a couple of years ago to outsource the service desk and application support plus a whole host of other IT capabilities to an Indian outsourcer and the client only had 600 users.

[SussexSeagull]

The economics of outsourcing can work at smaller scale now. I did a project a couple of years ago to outsource the service desk and application support plus a whole host of other IT capabilities to an Indian outsourcer and the client only had 600 users.

I am sure they can but below a certain level there is a case for contractors or some of the agents/consultancies that seem to exist.

All of this said, I am not convinced there is a huge amount of work going on full stop at the moment.

[Fraidycat]

I know jobserve is just one reference point, but currently the headline number is 13,900, using wayback machine the number this time last year was 41,500.

It was also over 40,000 at the end of August last year of all months, but after the Budget that bounce vanished (actually began to vanish in September when starmer gave notice that the budget was going to be 'painful').

Has not recovered since.

[willendure]

I know jobserve is just one reference point, but currently the headline number is 13,900, using wayback machine the number this time last year was 41,500.

It was also over 40,000 at the end of August last year of all months, but after the Budget that bounce vanished (actually began to vanish in September when starmer gave notice that the budget was going to be 'painful').

Has not recovered since.

You got me curious to check out the Jan numbers going back a couple of years to get a fuller picture:

2025 - 13,900
2024 - 41,572
2023 - 31,902
2022 - 51,589
2021 - 8,242
2020 - 14,593
2019 - 16,607
2018 - 12,248
2017 - 17,576
2016 - 15,225
2015 - 20,254

Not always on the same day in Jan, but I tried to find a snapshot from mid Jan each time, so the new years market is up and running.

In that longer view, 13,900 does not actually look too bad, I was not worried at all about finding a new contract in 2015 to 2020. Seems like its actually the last 3 years readings that are on the high side, I guess 2022/23 was the covid re-opening bounce, and 2021 the lockdown moment.

[Fraidycat]

In that longer view, 13,900 does not actually look too bad, I was not worried at all about finding a new contract in 2015 to 2020.

I think low numbers of vacancies are ok when there are no or very few contractors on the bench.

Back in 2018 an agent was telling me she was lucky to get 3 good CVs per role.

We need the benches cleared somehow, things will remain tough while so many people are chasing so few roles.

[SchumiStars]

You got me curious to check out the Jan numbers going back a couple of years to get a fuller picture:

2025 - 13,900
2024 - 41,572
2023 - 31,902
2022 - 51,589
2021 - 8,242
2020 - 14,593
2019 - 16,607
2018 - 12,248
2017 - 17,576
2016 - 15,225
2015 - 20,254

Not always on the same day in Jan, but I tried to find a snapshot from mid Jan each time, so the new years market is up and running.

In that longer view, 13,900 does not actually look too bad, I was not worried at all about finding a new contract in 2015 to 2020. Seems like its actually the last 3 years readings that are on the high side, I guess 2022/23 was the covid re-opening bounce, and 2021 the lockdown moment.

Thanks for this. However 2024 was terrible. 2023 was the last time I had a contract! Not sure what to make of it tbh.

Unfortunately JS does not report the contracts or openings which were filled positively, that would be an awesome statistic.

[SchumiStars]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crr05jykzkxo

No idea what the government is trying to achieve with this incentive but at least it's an acknowledgement that investment is required.

Perhaps they are trying to kickstart of a tech boom, 5yrs too late.

[avonleigh]

You got me curious to check out the Jan numbers going back a couple of years to get a fuller picture:

2025 - 13,900
2024 - 41,572
2023 - 31,902
2022 - 51,589
2021 - 8,242
2020 - 14,593
2019 - 16,607
2018 - 12,248
2017 - 17,576
2016 - 15,225
2015 - 20,254

Not always on the same day in Jan, but I tried to find a snapshot from mid Jan each time, so the new years market is up and running.

In that longer view, 13,900 does not actually look too bad, I was not worried at all about finding a new contract in 2015 to 2020. Seems like its actually the last 3 years readings that are on the high side, I guess 2022/23 was the covid re-opening bounce, and 2021 the lockdown moment.

Always went by 26,000 being a healthy market. That's just in general though and not January.

[dsc]

[...]We need the benches cleared somehow, things will remain tough while so many people are chasing so few roles.

Yeah best of luck bringing in investment considering the financial world isn't so sure the UK gov can even payback the money it owes. The gilt situation shows how the UK is between a rock and a hard place, they either tax more or cut more, both far from ideal (well you could tax the super rich more, but I don't it's anything the gov is even thinking about and there's nothing to cut anymore). Austerity here we come again.

[willendure]

Yeah best of luck bringing in investment considering the financial world isn't so sure the UK gov can even payback the money it owes. The gilt situation shows how the UK is between a rock and a hard place, they either tax more or cut more, both far from ideal (well you could tax the super rich more, but I don't it's anything the gov is even thinking about and there's nothing to cut anymore). Austerity here we come again.

How about taxing LESS? Or at least less in certain sectors to stimulate activity. Its worth remembering that the tax burden when the industrial revolution kicked off in the north east was only around 5%. I think taxing more is just going to crush the economy more and more.

Taxing the super rich is ideology, I'm not against it, but I also think it may not really move the needle. It never happens anyway, since the super rich always enveigle themselves with the government of the day. Always the middle that gets squeezed. For comparison, you don't get into higher tax band in the USA until you earn something like $250K, but our higher rate threshold is £43K and planned increases to it keep getting abandoned.

I think its ok to allow people to have... money.. and that is something that Labour seem ideologically opposed to. After all money in the bank or shares or used to buy a house, it all still exists and cycles back into the economy. Its not like a dragon sitting on a pile of gold that just sits there and does nothing.

One way our government can get money fairly, is by selling gilts. If the interest rate is attractive, people with money to invest will buy them. If the interest is high, our government will have to choose wisely and spend the money sensibly and not fritter it away on daft things like usual. If interest rates are tight, people won't be able to borrow massive amounts and inflate up the housing market to badly that no-one can afford one any more.

Overall, 5% is a pretty good rate. Just a shame there were no adults in the room for the last 15 years to put a stop to the massive borrowing that took place at super low rates.