Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

forbes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 560 posts

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#91

Post by WalterSear »

FRex wrote: post #89
sverhagen wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Old joke, not mine: 90% of developers believes they're above average .

90% of a population can easily be above average in a real life scenario where most of the group is roughly equal with few elements dragging the average slightly below their level. Example: nine 11s and one 10, the average is 10.9 and 90% of the population is above it. If you want to split a group in half then you need to use the median.

I'm glad that someone is finally giving the 0.1x programmers like myself the credit the deserve.

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#92

Post by javabean22 »

sidlls wrote: post #34

There is a plateau as one reaches senior positions. As I went from "no" experience to my current position my job switches (every ~2 years) always were for 10%-25% (in one case, 100%, but that was Midwest to Bay Area so other factors are at play). I never got more than 5% merit increases otherwise. Most of my friends who have been at the same place for >10 years in engineering (not software) are just now reaching pari…

> Anything longer, especially if there is a lot of long-term stasis on a resume (e.g. "tech lead on product X" for more than a year or two), is an indication to me of someone who either isn't capable of stretching himself or doesn't want to.

That's retarded

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#93

Post by Bahamut »

throwaway7230 wrote: post #82
toomuchtodo wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Google

Apple has a frustrating system for individual contributors where you can get promoted pretty quickly up until level 4, but then it stops. In order to get any kind of raise beyond that (level 5) you need to be pretty much a wizard with godlike job performance. Basically there is no career path past level 4 for most mortals, unless you want to go into management, which is also a difficult chasm to jump. Basically once…

Wouldn't the pay be pretty good at level 4?

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#94

Post by Lewton »

WalterSear wrote: post #91
FRex wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

90% of a population can easily be above average in a real life scenario where most of the group is roughly equal with few elements dragging the average slightly below their level. Example: nine 11s and one 10, the average is 10.9 and 90% of the population is above it. If you want to split a group in half then you need to use the median.

I'm glad that someone is finally giving the 0.1x programmers like myself the credit the deserve.

0.1x could still be above average

http://wiki.c2.com/?NetNegativeProducingProgrammer

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#95

Post by hndamien »

FRex wrote: post #89
sverhagen wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Old joke, not mine: 90% of developers believes they're above average .

90% of a population can easily be above average in a real life scenario where most of the group is roughly equal with few elements dragging the average slightly below their level. Example: nine 11s and one 10, the average is 10.9 and 90% of the population is above it. If you want to split a group in half then you need to use the median.

Alternatively, you could have nine 5s and a 1 and you have an average of 4.6 with 90% above average.

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#96

Post by majkinetor »

methodover wrote: post #38
sidlls wrote: post #34

There is a plateau as one reaches senior positions. As I went from "no" experience to my current position my job switches (every ~2 years) always were for 10%-25% (in one case, 100%, but that was Midwest to Bay Area so other factors are at play). I never got more than 5% merit increases otherwise. Most of my friends who have been at the same place for >10 years in engineering (not software) are just now reaching pari…

> Anything longer, especially if there is a lot of long-term stasis on a resume (e.g. "tech lead on product X" for more than a year or two), is an indication to me of someone who either isn't capable of stretching himself or doesn't want to. That's insane. Someone who is the technical leader of a project for more than two years doesn't "stretch himself"? I see no reason to believe that's true. If anything, it takes y…

Great point.

I actually don't think the one has valuable experience until one spent 2+ years on the same project. All bigger projects get more chaotic and complicated over time and that needs specific set of skills to get managed in all directions. Until you experienced it first hand, you are really just a hello-world-on-steroids.

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#97

Post by fsloth »

sidlls wrote: post #34

There is a plateau as one reaches senior positions. As I went from "no" experience to my current position my job switches (every ~2 years) always were for 10%-25% (in one case, 100%, but that was Midwest to Bay Area so other factors are at play). I never got more than 5% merit increases otherwise. Most of my friends who have been at the same place for >10 years in engineering (not software) are just now reaching pari…

"Anything longer, especially if there is a lot of long-term stasis on a resume (e.g. "tech lead on product X" for more than a year or two), is an indication to me of someone who either isn't capable of stretching himself or doesn't want to. "

Or someone who's found a technologically complex niche they like and feel they can grow in. For example, two years is a really _short_ time to achieve anything in my niche (CAD, more or less).

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#98

Post by flukus »

manicdee wrote: post #52

My contrary opinion is that people who job hop every two years are the ones who come in, make enough progress that management thinknthey are pretty nifty, then leave before they have to domany maintenance on the technical debt they left behind. Sure, it is good to be highly paid, but the situation just reinforces the idea that people who wear suits are paid far too much. Though I find myself i the situation of wantin…

What about people that job hop because of that left behind technical debt? Often it's the long term employees that don't realize how much technical debt and other craziness they have, it's a kind of stockholm syndrome. The can also be woefully out of date on the industry and have likely reinvented many wheels out of ignorance.

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#99

Post by hamandcheese »

WalterSear wrote: post #91
FRex wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

90% of a population can easily be above average in a real life scenario where most of the group is roughly equal with few elements dragging the average slightly below their level. Example: nine 11s and one 10, the average is 10.9 and 90% of the population is above it. If you want to split a group in half then you need to use the median.

I'm glad that someone is finally giving the 0.1x programmers like myself the credit the deserve.

The wisdom I [like to] hear is that as long as you're above 0x, you're golden.

Re: Employees Who Stay in Companies Longer Than Two Years Get Paid 50% Less

#100

Post by willvarfar »

nilkn wrote: post #80

I think it's important to understand that there's a significant amount of selection bias possible here. In general, folks who switch jobs every two years are the folks who are not getting offered big raises by their current companies. The ones who are getting offered big raises may still choose to leave due to other reasons, but they often will choose to stay instead. And they won't be making a big fuss about it onli…

> selection bias possible here. In general, folks who switch jobs every two years are the folks who are not getting offered big raises by their current companies.

The article is saying that those who stay don't get offered big raises. The article says that if you stay you get 3% or less. There's even a pretty chart to make this point.

Employees aren't paid what they are worth, they are paid as little as the company can get away with. The delta is profit to the company, which is the whole purpose of the company's existence. Employees who stay are demonstrating they can put up with flatter wage development, and they are being taken advantage of by the employers.

Post reply on HN