Under the principle that the squire / knight is always training and has little free time you could remove some of the 5 free/cheap skill points. Conversely, unless there is a huge supply of recently dead people... an embalmer probably has time to learn more of those type of skills and gets more then 5 points.
This sounds perfectly reasonable.
Maybe the proffessions that the designers knew would have more scruntity (knight, merc, pilot) had more thought and effort during the rule development process to prevent the WTF scenerio, while the less likely professions got a bit less attention.
For my own system, I tried to break down the total experience from working/training in an profession to the set of applied skills, which seemed to be quite fair at a first glace. Then, invest the time spent with each skill to raise its level.
This may mean, that for some professions considerable amounts of "training" is spent on activities covered by no skill --- the time is lost --- while other Professions are well-covered by appropriate skills (all the time is a good investment).
Otherwise, if you assign all the time to some skill, you get highly "unreasonable" skill profiles --- the worse the less skills are assigned to a profession.
Also, the skills are not tailored in a consistent way. Some skills are highly specilized, other bluntly general. But do we really want hundreds of subskills and/or difficulty classes for skills?
So, we are in some kind of dilemma: You cannot easily model profession with a limited skill set.
My advise is to use the tables as guidelines and develop character skills during a pregame session, rather than blindly using the occupation skill table.