Employment

Employment Law Laws That Protect Employees In The Workplace

Posted on by blogger

In the nineteenth century and parts of the twentieth century, employees and employers were largely left to themselves to arrange a working agreement, including payment, work conditions, and so on. Employees had to trust that their employers would treat them fairly, and employers knew that if they didn’t treat their workers well, they might leave to work somewhere else. Although this arrangement worked well for many, during the industrial revolution, employees began to lose their leverage of leaving that kept employers in check.

During the industrial revolution, large factories rose up, employing workers by the thousands. Employers rarely had direct contact with their employees, and people akin to task masters oversaw the workers. Working conditions were harsh. If a worker showed up late to work, was in any way disorderly, or tried to unionize, he or she could be fired. Even children were hired and forced to work long hours in unhealthy environments.

And despite poor working conditions, long hours of arduous labor, and low wages, factory employees had nowhere else to go because most places of employment were the same. These difficulties were most often experienced by immigrants and the poor, and because they had no way to improve their situation, these workers had no choice but to work in these factories and other similar places.

Eventually, in the early twentieth century, the government passed a series of labor laws that helped rectify the poor working situation. These laws established minimum wages, work environment regulations, and union rights. And throughout the century, more laws were periodically passed that made illegal any discrimination (based on gender, religion, age, and so on) against employees.

Because of the sufferings of thousands in those prior years, employees today enjoy the benefits of being guaranteed certain rights. Unfortunately, some employers are still found guilty of disobeying these employee-protection laws.

Today, the most common breach of employee rights is discrimination. Some employers may even inadvertently discriminate against employees based on age, gender, race, religion, or disability. But inadvertent or not, discrimination in the workplace is illegal. One of the only exceptions is discriminating against disability. If a job cannot be performed with reasonable accommodation by a person with a disability, the employer retains the right to not hire that person. Of course what is considered “reasonable” is something of a gray area, but the exception is meant to ensure that employers aren’t forced to hire someone who can’t perform the job.

Another common type of discrimination is based on age. Many have the misconception that someone who is older may not be as good a worker as someone who is young. However, if an elderly person meets all of the requirements of job, he or she must be seriously considered on equal footing with other candidates.

In regards to the payroll, gender discrimination is quite common. In general, women are still paid less than men for performing the same jobs. Although this disparity in pay is becoming smaller and is not as bad as it was just a few decades ago, in general, women are still paid less. The problem in detecting this type of discrimination is that people are often prohibited from discussing income with their coworkers, and many people don’t know what is considered fair pay for their jobs.

Another all-to-common illegal occurrence in the workplace is sexual harassment, particularly toward women. Sexual harassment can range from derogatory or sexual comments to receiving promotions based on sexuality to unwanted forceful actions. And sexual harassment is illegal not only if it comes from an employer but from a coworker as well. Unfortunately, in many cases of sexual harassment, the victims are either too embarrassed or scared to come forward and take legal action against the guilty party.

And although discrimination and harassment are illegal, when people take legal action against their employers on the basis of discrimination, feelings of tension or anger may exist between the two parties. And although there may not be much a person can do to resolve the tense atmosphere, employees can rest assured that if an employer attempts to discharge our fire them because they filed a charge of discrimination, the employer will face additional legal charges.

Employers also cannot legally retaliate against those who take protected leave under the Family Medical Leave Act or who file a workers’ compensation claim. Such retaliation is illegal so that employees will not be threatened or discouraged from filing legal charges.

Sometimes employees find it difficult to prove that they are being discriminated against or they may not be entirely sure what legally qualifies as discrimination or unfair treatment. In these cases, an employment attorney can be helpful. Employment attorneys specialize in labor laws and are familiar with past employment law cases, which can help you better understand your rights and determine if you should take legal action against an employer. And whether you’re looking for a Houston employment attorney or one elsewhere, you should research the attorney’s qualifications and experience before hiring one to advise or represent you.

Labor and employment laws were created after years of worker oppression and in response to employees’ demands for fair and equal treatment. Because of these laws, employees are no longer required to work obscenely long hours for little pay, work in unsafe environments, or suffer from harassment and other abuses. Because of these laws, working conditions have drastically improved, and with the current legal system, employees have a means to constantly evaluate, analyze, and continue to improve working conditions in a way that ensures they can do their best work without fear of oppression or discrimination.

Employment Rises For London Business School Mim Graduates

Posted on by blogger

A London Business School degree will give you the edge in today’s competitive world. Located in the heart of London, London Business School offers access to the world’s top recruiters and provides a head-start in forging a successful career in business. Strong relationships have been developed with major recruiters. London Business School’s Career Services team works in partnership with potential employers to identify candidates who are the best match for their job opportunities.

A dedicated team is on hand to support all Masters in Management students to enhance career prospects. The Masters in Management programme is taught by a range of the London Business School faculty, all of whom work at the forefront of global business and produce high-quality research that impacts positively on business all over the world. While a rate of 95% was recorded among last year’s class of 100, the 2011 class of 140 has achieved a rate of 96% – these figures are based on the full-time employment status of students three months after they originally graduate from the course.

Compared to the median salary among graduates in the UK as a whole, the wages of London Business School graduates of this year’s MiM course are around 9,500 higher at 35,000. Breaking down the statistics further, there was a total of 36 corporate sector recruiters, perhaps giving the strongest indication yet of the value of the MiM course across sectors outside of the normal consulting and finance fields. In addition, a grand sum of 22 different recruiters have hired from the programme consistently (i.e. at least one student from each of the last two years).

The release of the 2011 MiM job statistics follows the publication of the School’s MBA employment report last week. It found that within three months of leaving this course, 93% of MBA graduates had found a job. London Business School is consistently ranked as one of the world’s top business schools, and is currently ranked as number one in the world in the Financial Times (Global MBA rankings, 2011). Over 34,000 alumni lead big organisations, run governments, transform communities and start new businesses in over 120 countries. The Masters in Management is a one year programme for recent graduates who are looking to embark on a management-oriented career, but who have limited business knowledge and less than one year of full time, relevant work experience. This programme has been designed following extensive consultation with top graduate recruiters, and provides students with the skills and knowledge to perform in all areas of management across a number of core courses in both academic study and professional development.

Pre-employment Background Checks 5 Reasons Why Smbs Should Conduct Them

Posted on by blogger

Labor experts tell us that 8 out of 10 hiring professionals do some form of pre-employment background screening. Yet many medium and small businesses and are still dependent on traditional methods of pre-employment background screening, such as checking up on references. This article explores why many SMBs avoid professional employment background checks, and the risks and dangers of doing so.

Why Many SMBs Don’t Do Pre-Employment Background Screening

Lack of concern. Some SMB managers believe that only cops, teachers, and doctors should be subject to employment background checks. That point of view is outdated. Nowadays, many private companies are consistently performing pre-employment background screening, for the reasons listed in the second half of this article.

Lack of Internal Support and Expert Knowledge. Many SMB leaders assume that any pre-employment background screening they do must be done in-house. The prospect of training an employee to carry out background checks is intimidating to most managers, especially since it could very well take a person months to research the best background check procedures. However, partnering with pre-employment background screening outsourcing firms allows all companies quick, convenient access to employment background checks.

Overestimation of Cost. Many SMB leaders hold a misconception about pre-employment background screening, namely that it’s exorbitantly expensive. If you’re open to the possibility of outsourcing your employment background checks, you can typically conduct pre-employment background screening for no more than $50 per job candidate.

Top 5 Reasons Why SMBs should Conduct Employment Background Checks

1. Decreased Costs. You’ll find better job candidates if you conduct pre-employment background screening. Improved hiring means that you’ll spend less money counteracting negative PR, lose less money to negligent hiring lawsuits, and see fewer employee-generated losses, such as embezzlement. Finally, it’s typically much less expensive to outsource employment background checks, rather than doing them in-house.

2. Fewer legal trip-ups. Each state has its own law in place regarding negligent hiring. These laws are intended to protect the public by preventing dangerous individuals from being hired for delicate positions. As an example, many states’ alcohol laws require that employees have three years of felony-free history before they can be hired for a job that involves serving alcohol. Failing to check out candidates backgrounds through pre-employment background screening opens you to the risk of being sued or fined for failing to do your due diligence on new hires.

3. Safer Employees. Human Resource gurus estimate that 1 out of 10 job applicants have a criminal history. If you don’t carry do employment background checks, it’s more likely that you’ll hire a dangerous individual who could hurt your employees, your customers, and your business’ reputation.

4. Accelerated hiring. The majority of pre-employment background screening companies offer results in 48 hours. In this sense, outsourcing employee background checks can mean speedier hiring. In just a day or two, you can get the information you need to determine if that seemingly perfect candidate has any skeletons lurking in his or her closet.

5. Discover dishonesty in applications. Here’s another scary HR statistic for you: researchers calculate that approximately 4 out of 10 resumes feature deceitful omissions, if not total lies. Employment background checks reveal such dishonesty so that you can avoid hiring mendacious individuals.

As we’ve seen, there are many reasons why owners of small and medium-sized businesses should arrange employee background checks.

After 1 Year, Obama Vs. Reagan

Posted on by blogger

As we approach the end of the year, we are also approaching the end of President Obamas first year in office. You might be wondering how he is doing, based on actual numbers (rather than political spin).

Obama clearly inherited a difficult situation economically. Only two others in the modern era came even remotely close. One, of course, was FDR, but unfortunately the data from then is rather sparse, and mostly available on just an annual basis, or at best quarterly (good economic data was one of the by-products of the New Deal).

The other who inherited a difficult economic situation was President Reagan. Granted, the type of difficulty was very different under Reagan, and presidents — like quarterbacks — get too much of both the praise for a good economy and the blame for a bad economy.

Still, I think comparing the numbers for the two during their first “year in office could be instructive. The data I used for the comparison are all available monthly (at least, and if more frequently, I used the monthly data). The source of all data is the St. Louis Fed (except for the S&P 500).

The two presidents offered very different prescriptions for the economy. Reagan was all about cutting taxes and less government involvement in the economy. While most of the really big moves of government into the economy in response to the recent economic crisis actually took place under President George W. Bush, Candidate Obama saw them as needed. The Bush Administration was the one that bought the stakes in American International Group (AIG – Snapshot Report), Fannie Mae (FNM – Snapshot Report), Freddie Mac (FRE – Analyst Report) and the banks, while Obamas support for a prepackaged bankruptcy resulted in large government stakes in the Auto industry.

There were no comparable big investments by the government into the private sector late in the Carter Administration, and certainly Reagan did not initiate any. Reagan did not have to deal with a financial meltdown when he took office, but on the other hand, Obama did not have to deal with runaway inflation. Both are serious diseases, but think of it this way: both cancer and heart disease can kill you, but you would not want to give chemotherapy drugs to a heart attack patient. Thus, perhaps it is appropriate that the prescriptions be different.

If one only looks at the unemployment rate (U-3), both did a poor job in their first year, and Obama was significantly worse. The unemployment rate in January 2009 was 7.6% and by November it had climbed to 10.0%. In January 1981, when Reagan took office, the unemployment rate was almost identical at 7.5%, and by November of 1981 it had climbed to only 8.3%.

Private employment actually rose during the first 11 months of 1981 by 0.55%, from 74.671 million to 75.084 million. Under Obamas tenure so far, private payrolls have dropped by 2.95% to 108.495 million from 111.793 million.

So on the employment front, Reagan is the clear winner so far. However, over the course of 1982 and 1983 the employment situation deteriorated significantly. We do not know what unemployment will do in 2010 and 2011, and thus can only judge based on what we have seen so far and in the comparable period under Reagan.

Advantage: Reagan

Reagan also wins when it comes to real disposable personal income, which expanded by 2.3% in the first 11 months Reagan was in office, while it has only increased by 1.0% so far under Obama.

Advantage: Reagan

The dollar was also much stronger during the first 11 months of Reagan, although I am not sure if that is a positive or a negative. During the first 11 months of Reagan, the dollar relative to an index of major currencies gained 9.88%, while under Obama, the dollar has lost 9.70% relative to the same index.

Given that we are running chronic trade deficits now, but really were not back then, I would argue that today a weak dollar is good for the economy today since it will help out on the net export side of things. Inflation is not a big problem today, but was the number one problem with the economy when Reagan took office. The downside of a weak dollar is that it contributes to inflation, so back then having the dollar strengthening was a good thing.

No Advantage to Either

On the inflation front, however, things are far better under Obama. On a headline basis, prices have gone up by 2.39% so far under Obama, while they rose 7.57% during the first 11 months that Reagan was in office. On a core basis (ex-food and energy) the difference is even more stark, rising 8.31% under Reagan and up just 1.51% under Obama so far. Later in the Reagan Administration, inflation fell much more, but even when he left office in 1989 inflation was far higher than it is today.

Advantage: Obama

Industrial production fell slightly more during the first 11 months of Reagan (1.07%) than it has under the first 11 months of Obama (0.68%). Capacity Utilization started out at a much lower level when Obama took the oath than the Reagan did, at 71.1% (an all-time record low at the time) vs. 80.7% when Reagan took office. However, by November of 1981, the total capacity utilization rate had fallen to 77.9%. Under Obama, capacity utilization has actually risen to 71.3%, although it remains at a historically low level.

Advantage: Obama

Interest rates can tell a lot about the state of the economy. For example, the spread between the rate that gilt-edged companies have to pay on their bonds and what normal companies have to pay on their bonds tells a lot about how much bond investors fear companies going belly up. The former is measured by the Moodys (MCO – Analyst Report) Aaa rate and the later by the Baa rate (not to be confused with “junk bond” rates; Baa is still investment grade).

In January of 1981, the best credits in America had to pay 12.81% on their bonds, while normal companies had to pay 15.03%, for a spread of 2.22% (or as a ratio, normal companies had to pay 17.3% more than the gilt-edged ones). By November of 1981, both the best and the ordinary had to pay more — the Aaa rate had surged to 14.22% while the Baa rate had risen to 16.39%, so the spread had fallen ever-so-slightly to 2.17. The ratio had come down a bit more, and the ordinary firms were paying 15.3% more than the best firms.

When Obama took office, the Baa rate was 8.14% while the Aaa rate was 5.05%, for a spread of 3.09. In other words, ordinary firms had to pay 61.2% more for money than the best firms did. Investors were very afraid that companies would go bankrupt, and so demanded a higher rate from normal companies than from firms that seemed to have very little risk of writing a new chapter (the eleventh) in their corporate histories.

Since then, the rate the highest-rated firms have to pay has actually increased slightly to 5.19% while the rate that normal firms have to pay has plunged to 6.32%, bringing the spread down to 1.13% and the ratio down to the point where normal companies are paying 21.8% more for their money than the Aaa firms.

(Given the huge difference in the overall level of interest rates between the two eras, it is important to look at both the spreads and the ratios. Clearly a spread of 2% has a very different meaning and significance if it is between 1% and 3% than if it is between 13% and 15%).

Advantage: Obama

Another important signal that comes from interest rates is the yield curve, or the difference between long-term and short-term interest rates. The curve is measured using Treasury notes or bills, since you only want to be looking at the differences due to maturity, not due to quality (the opposite of the Aaa-Baa spread, which is only looking at quality differences, not maturity differences).

While there are many different measures of the curve, the one that is used the most is the difference between the 2-year note and the 10-year note. Generally speaking, the steeper the yield curve, the better. An inverted yield curve is very bad news, and is probably the best single indicator that the economy is about to go into a recession.

When Reagan entered office, the 10-2 curve was inverted, with the yield on a 2-year note at 13.26% and the yield on the 10-year at 12.57%, for a spread of -0.69. On a ratio basis, the 10-year was providing only 0.95 of the 2-year. By the time November of 1981 rolled around, the curve had returned to normal but was still pretty flat. The yield on the 2-year had fallen to 12.88%, while the yield on the 10-year had increased to 13.39, resulting in a positive curve of 0.51. On a ratio basis, the 10-year was 1.08 of the 2-year.

When Obama entered office, the 2-year was at a very low 0.81% while the 10-year was 2.52%, for a positive spread of 1.71%. On a ratio basis, the 10-year was yielding over three times as much as the 2-year (3.11x to be exact). By the end of November, the curve had expanded even further, with the 2-year virtually unchanged at 0.80%, while the yield on the 10-year had risen to 3.40%, for a spread of 2.60% and a ratio of 4.25x. Again, given the vastly different overall levels of rates, it is important to consider both the spreads and the ratios when making the comparisons.

Advantage: Obama

Mortgage rates were both far higher and moving in the wrong direction early in the Reagan presidency. When he took office they were at 14.90%, and by November they had risen to 17.83%. When Obama took office, the rate on a 30-year fixed mortgage was 5.06% and has since fallen to 4.88%.

Not surprisingly, then, the housing market was far worse under Reagan than it has been under Obama (at least if measured by direction, not levels). In January of 1981, housing starts were running at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1.547 million, and by November of that year they had plunged to 837,000, a decline of 45.9%. Since January of 2009, housing starts have risen from an annualized rate of 488,000 to a rate of 574,000 in November, an increase of 17.6%.

Advantage: Obama

Similarly, single family new home sales plunged by 25.2% early in the Reagan years to a rate of 382,000. Since Obama came into office, new single family home sales have risen by 22.2% to an annualized rate of 402,000. Existing home sales are not particularly important to the economy (just like used car sales are not very important).

Auto sales also fared worse under the early part of the Reagan Administration than they have so far under Obama (at least as measured point-to-point). When Reagan took office, auto and light truck sales were running at an annualized rate of 11.03 million and had fallen to 9.21 million, a decline of 16.5%. Under Obama, auto and light truck sales have risen from an annualized rate of 9.59 million in January to a rate of 10.89 million in November, an increase of 13.6%.

Advantage: Obama

Finally, while people sometimes make too much of the day-to-day fluctuations in the stock market, it is a good reflection of the overall health of the economy when you look at longer time periods — and almost a year is long enough to qualify there. On that metric, there is simply no contest. Between inauguration day and Christmas Eve in 1981, the S&P 500 lost 7.65%. Since Obama took office, the S&P 500 has gained 39.9%.

Advantage: Obama

Weighing these different economic indicators is inherently subjective, and thus I am not sure that one can come to a clear-cut case that one has done a better job than the other — at least so far. This is also far from a complete list of economic indicators and I focused on only those that were available at least monthly, and many of the most important economic numbers come out quarterly.

Arguably, the economic mess that Obama inherited was worse than the one that Reagan inherited, although both were pretty nasty — yet very different. The U.S. economy is more of an oil tanker than a speedboat, and does not turn around on a dime, so it really is too early to tell how Obama is doing.

However, the indicators that are most forward-looking and leading for the economy (stock market, yield curve and quality spreads, housing starts) are the ones that favor Obama over Reagan. Overall, 11 months in, one must conclude that Obama is doing at least as good a job on the economy as Reagan did in his first 11 months.

Employment Prospects For Accountants And Cpas

Posted on by blogger

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) website, “Accountants and auditors held about 1.3 million jobs in 2008.” (As of December 17, 2009, these were the latest statistics available.)

As with many other careers, accountants and auditors worked throughout private industry and government. Of these, about 24% worked for payroll service firms, tax preparation, accounting, and bookkeeping firms. Another 8% were self-employed. Among the larger set of management accountants, internal auditors, or government accountants and auditors, there is a subset who are licensed CPAs. Most CPAs work in urban areas because that’s where the jobs are–most corporate regional or central offices and government offices are in urban areas.

A small percent of accounting professionals are employed as full-time college and university faculty; others teach part-time while working as self-employed accountants or as accountants for private industry or government.

Job growth in the accounting sector is expected to grow faster than the average growth rate for all industries during the decade of 2008-2018. Within that group, CPAs should have the best prospects for employment and expected growth rate higher than those accountants and auditors without the CPA professional designation.

Very strong growth (22%) in the number of accountants and auditor jobs (an increase of 279,400 jobs) over the 2008-18 decade is expected because of several factors. We will discuss the factors tomorrow.

1.IF the economy expands, the number of businesses will increase which means that new jobs will be created in the accounting sector to set up the books, prepare taxes, and provide management advice. As these new businesses grow, the quantity and complexity of financial information reviewed by accountants and auditors on the costs, expenditures, taxes and corporate internal controls will increase as well. As the globalization of business accelerates, there will be an increased demand for accounting expertise and services regarding international trade and accounting rules as well as international mergers and acquisitions.

2.Because of financial scandals, investors will be demanding increased accountability for protecting an organization’s stakeholders. The need for these “accounting watchdogs” will spur job growth in the accounting sector.

3.Forensic accountants who can detect illegal financial activity will be even more in demand as the number of financial crimes increases. Crimes such as embezzlement, bribery, and securities fraud by individuals, by corporations, and by organized crime networks are increasing because computer technology has made these crimes even easier to commit and even harder to uncover. But the “good guys” have weapons as well: the development of new computer software and advanced electronic surveillance technology has made detecting financial crimes easier which increases the likelihood of discovery, investigation, prosecution and conviction. As the success rates of the “good guys” rise, the demand for forensic accountants will rise as well.

4.Opportunities for CPAs who are forensic accountants who support the work of attorneys in family law, bankruptcy and business law are increasing as well. For example, the recent high profile divorce of Sir Paul McCartney and Heather Mills included a dispute over how much the former Beatle, Sir Paul, was actually worth. His side claimed he was worth around USD $785 million while the ex-wife thought he was worth around $1.6 billion. Enter her team of forensic accountants who delved into the situation. As of June 2008, the accountants had not found any evidence which would have compelled the judge to award Ms. Mills more moola than her initial divorce settlement.

5.Changes in laws regarding taxes, financial reporting standards, business investments, mergers and other financial matters will lead to an increased need for accountants and auditors.

6.Changes in financial laws to curb corporate accounting fraud will create more jobs in the accounting sector. With the passage of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in 2002 (also known as ‘Public Company Accounting Reform and Investor Protection Act’ in the Senate and ‘Corporate and Auditing Accountability and Responsibility Act’ in the House), a new layer of accounting oversight was created to thwart the tide of corporate financial misfeasance. Prior to passage, there were a multitude of corporate and accounting scandals (e.g., Enron, Tyco International, Adelphia, Peregrine Systems and WorldCom) which cost investors billions of dollars. When the share prices of these corporations collapsed, the confidence of the public was shaken and the US securities markets trembled. The act established new or enhanced standards for all US public company boards, management, and for public accounting firms.

By creating a new public agency, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (or PCAOB), the act created a number of jobs in the accounting sector for overseers, regulators, inspectors, and those who would discipline accounting firms who were auditing public firms. In addition, another government agency, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) implemented the adoption of dozens of new rules to comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. It is estimated that the growth in the accounting sector will be seen in new jobs being created in:

1.Public Company Accounting Oversight Board will expand to hire more accountants and CPAs to provide independent oversight of public accounting firms which audit their corporate clients. The central oversight board will register auditors as well as setting up the procedural framework for compliance audits, inspections and policing conduct, quality control, and enforcing compliance with specific elements of Sarbanes-Oxley Act (SOX Act).

2.Because the SOX Act prohibits auditing companies from providing services such as consulting and management advice to their clients, it is expected that there will be job growth in accounting companies which provide consulting and other non-auditing advice to their clients.

3.Since Sarbanes-Oxley requires that senior executives of a company (such as the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer) take individual responsibility for the completeness and accuracy of the corporate financial reports, it is likely that those who are rise to C-level will have to have more familiarity with accounting than a manager’s passing glance. This opens a career path for CPAs into the CEO chair as well as the CFO chair. (Since the CEO is asked to sign the company’s tax return, this is all the more reason for the person to be a CPA as well as a manager.)

7.Since 2002, funding for the SEC has nearly doubled. The SEC hires accountants who can censure or bar from practice stock brokers, advisors, or dealers. In addition, SEC hires CPAs and accountants in Washington, D.C., *Division of Corporation Finance, *Division of Enforcement, and the *Office of the Chief Accountant. For SEC jobs examining financial statements in public filings, resolving controversial accounting issues, and in rule writing, there are openings in Atlanta, Boston, Chicago, Denver, Fort Worth, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, Philadelphia, Salt Lake City and San Francisco in the offices of: *Division of Trading and Markets, *Division of Investment Management and the *Office of Compliance, Inspections and Examinations.

The SEC prefers to hire experienced CPAs with three to eight years of public accounting experience in the securities industry. Desirable previous experience would include audit work involving SEC financial reporting, complex internal audit work involving multi-national corporations, or mergers and acquisitions related work. Typically, these accountants enter at the mid- and senior staff accountant positions–in the SK-13 through 17 levels. The grade at which the person starts their SEC career is based on a combination of the amount of relevant work experience and of graduate education in accounting, finance, or related fields.

In looking at the entire market, the best job prospects will be for CPAs while the prospects for accountants and auditors who have a college degree or any certification are good.

Wages for Accountants and Auditors May 2008 BLS Statistics: Median Income: $59,430 Top 10%: $102,380+ “According to a salary survey conducted by the National Association of Colleges and Employers, bachelor’s degree candidates in accounting received starting offers averaging $48,993 a year in July 2009; master’s degree candidates in accounting were offered $49,786 initially.

Accounting Employment Rate of Change In the decade from 2008 to 2018, employment opportunities for accountants and auditors are expected to grow by 22% (or 279,400 new jobs), which is faster than the average for all occupations. As previously mentioned, job growth will be driven by a projected increase in the number of businesses/expansion of the economy, changing financial laws, and corporate governance regulations, and increased accountability for protecting an organization’s stakeholders.

Opportunities for CPAs should increase markedly because their oversight is needed to focus increased scrutiny on corporate finances and accounting procedures. Those CPAs who are management accountants and internal auditors will be needed to uncover and eliminate fraud before audits and to make sure that critical processes and procedures are documented completely and accurately. The need for CPAs who are government accountants will increase because of an effort to make government agencies more efficient and accountable.

Job opportunities for CPAs will increase rapidly while opportunities for accountants and auditors will increase but at a slower rate than for CPAs. The need for accounting clerks will increase as consumers opt for storefront tax preparers such as Liberty and H & R Block, rather than hiring a CPA firm. The shift to tax preparation software will take some business away from CPAs who handled the uncomplicated returns of individuals. This will make a very minor adjustment in employment opportunities while increasing opportunities for clerks.

Job Prospects Across the public and private sectors, job opportunities for CPAs will be excellent while those who are accountants and auditors will be favorable. (Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics). Enrollment in CPA preparation courses is now growing as more students are attracted to the profession because of its job growth, increased compensation, stability-and in answer to corporate accounting scandals.

In the wake of the Enron and Tyco accounting scandals, the public views professional certification as even more necessary because it ensures that the accountant’s ethics are sound and his/her knowledge and credentials are up-to-date.

Regardless of specialty, accountants and auditors who have earned professional recognition through certification or licensure should have the best job prospects. Applicants with a master’s degree in accounting or a master’s degree in business administration with a concentration in accounting also will have an advantage.

Individuals who are proficient in accounting and auditing computer software or have expertise in specialized areas-such as international business, specific industries, or current legislation-may have an advantage in getting some accounting and auditing jobs. In addition, employers increasingly seek applicants with strong interpersonal and communication skills. Many accountants work on teams with others who have different backgrounds, so they must be able to communicate accounting and financial information clearly and concisely. Regardless of qualifications, however, competition will remain keen for the most prestigious jobs in major accounting and business firms.

In addition to openings from job growth, the need to replace accountants and auditors who retire or transfer to other occupations will produce numerous job openings in this large occupation. —US Bureau of Labor Statistics For accountants, the career path upwards requires that of becoming a CPA, a Certified Public Accountant. Progressing from being an accountant to becoming a CPA offers greater opportunities for promotion to management and higher salaries.

In California, the requirements to sit for the CPA Exam are: *A bachelor’s degree; *24 semester units in accounting-related subjects; *24 semester units in business-related subjects; *150 semester units (or 225 quarter units) of education; *Passing the Uniform CPA Exam; *One year of general accounting experience supervised by a CPA with an active license; and *Passing an ethics course.– Logging 500 hours of attest or auditing experience will allow you to obtain the authority to sign attest reports. In many firms having a CPA license is the only way one is promoted into upper management. Becoming a CPA increases your opportunity for promotions and a higher salary.