Hi guys,
I am relatively new in the sector as entry level but if my median salary is high from junior roles can it qualify?
You command a high salary or other remuneration for your services, as evidenced by commercial or employment contracts and history of earnings, clearly stating base salary information, separate ‘paid’ bonuses and ‘vested’ options. Note that salary or remuneration information alone is insufficient, you will have to demonstrate how you have made a significant impact in the sector beyond your day-to-day activities.
Also does it mean the evidence I use of Optional criteria where i display day to day contribution outside of my work wont be used here it should be a different evidence in this block correct? Can someone give some examples for this
Note that salary or remuneration information alone is insufficient, you will have to demonstrate how you have made a significant impact in the sector beyond your day-to-day activities
@shantanu_gupta
This can be dicey because, from recent feedback, it’s safe to say that regardless of how much one earns, salary alone is insufficient. Also, using evidence from OC2 will appear as if you’re reusing evidence, since each piece of evidence is expected to be unique.
You see, I believe that statement is like saying regardless of your salary, we will still check that you have had impact on the sector outside your paid job. I also don’t think they are expecting applicants to provide OC2 evidence with salary, because not everyone will choose OC2.
The best approach is to use salary as complementary evidence, ideally as your last MC, and clearly state how you have impacted the sector beyond your day to day activities.
An example can be:
The evidence below shows proof of earnings, bonuses, and stock options. My salary is 65% higher than peers in my region. Beyond salary and my daily job, my contributions to the sector have had significant impact as listed below, which is also supported by my evidence in OC2 (if you chose it)
Now, the question becomes: “what if an applicant is not using the OC2 criterion?” In that case, you still don’t want to mix OC2 evidence with salary, because the assessor will evaluate them under MC standards, and they won’t align correctly.
All the best.
ok so in a way what you are saying is i can use the salary and for the second point i can say I have done abc which is also supported by OC2 criterion correct? @Raphael
Yes, that is if you chose OC2. But regardless, salary should be used as complementary and should come last in the MC listings. You don’t want to show what is insufficient first in a must have criterion.
1 Like
A few things worth clarifying here, because this comes up often and there’s consistent confusion around it.
High salary sits under Mandatory Criteria, not OC3. The MC is asking you to demonstrate you are recognised as having the potential to be a leading talent in digital technology. A high salary is one way to evidence that recognition - alongside things like media coverage, speaking engagements, or prizes. If you are going for salary as your MC angle, that is what you are claiming: your compensation is a signal that the market recognises you as exceptional.
Salary alone will not get you through. The Official Guide is unambiguous: “salary or remuneration information alone is insufficient, you will have to demonstrate how you have made a significant impact in the sector beyond your day-to-day activities.” Having helped dozens of applicants through this process, I have seen rejections where assessors wrote words to the effect of “we see a competent engineer compensated for their job, but this is not sufficient to meet the criterion.” The salary is the headline, not the full story.
The narrative matters as much as the number. The strong evidence documents I have reviewed pair the salary benchmarking with a concrete explanation - backed by verifiable third-party proof - of why the employer paid this. A reference from a senior leader explaining what impact specifically drove the offer will be awesome here!
Structure it as: benchmark data first → employment contract and pay evidence → verifiable proof of the impact that justified the salary. Without that third layer, your evidence is likely to be rejected.