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

Compare career levels across companies

levels.fyi

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 428 posts

Re: Compare career levels across companies

#361

Post by Pfhreak »

Zaheer wrote: post #360
Pfhreak wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Consider adding non-binary genders to the comp reporting. Something as simple as 'other' or 'non-binary' would be nice. The challenges that non-binary folks face can sometimes be different, and it might be nice to see that reflected in the comp tool. Edit: I wouldn't ask, except that the tool already asks for gender. If you are already asking for a gender, you should consider include options beyond male/female. Curio…

Good feedback, we'll get this added shortly. We added gender recently based on feedback to highlight the gender wage gap. Agree that non-binary folks may experience another set of challenges and will be good to see the data.

Thanks, who knows if enough non-binary folks will report, but I appreciate you taking the feedback!

Re: Compare career levels across companies

#362

Post by Bahamut »

twoquestions wrote: post #342
unionemployee wrote: post #338

As an average potential software engineer in the Midwest, it's at first exciting to see these salaries, but I also feel the need to check myself and realize that, in some ways, this is another universe to which I probably don't have access.

It seems getting access to this world requires either superlative ability, a network of people who can teach you the lingo, or university pedigree. Probably a matter of time until programming is another power-law career like music or law is, where only the top hundred or thousand in the world can get by.

FWIW, I don’t think FAANG necessarily care about what degree you have vs. what can you do. Mine certainly doesn’t, and I know a number of people at these companies who are college dropouts.

Re: Compare career levels across companies

#363

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

twoquestions wrote: post #342
unionemployee wrote: post #338

As an average potential software engineer in the Midwest, it's at first exciting to see these salaries, but I also feel the need to check myself and realize that, in some ways, this is another universe to which I probably don't have access.

It seems getting access to this world requires either superlative ability, a network of people who can teach you the lingo, or university pedigree. Probably a matter of time until programming is another power-law career like music or law is, where only the top hundred or thousand in the world can get by.

> where only the top hundred or thousand in the world can get by.

I don't think that's correct - music or law employs a ton of working professionals at all levels. If working at one of the big companies is the measure of "getting by" that means if you're a lawyer in a small town you're probably not getting by, which is absolutely not the case.

Re: Compare career levels across companies

#364

Post by sverhagen »

cco wrote: post #277
sverhagen wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I moved to the Pacific Northwest from the Netherlands, and I'm obviously observing the world around me with similar questions. First, you need to factor a cost of living adjustment. Oregon seems a bit more expensive than the Netherlands. Bay Area is a lot more expensive than Oregon. I think the big kicker is still the bigger range of salaries. People in the proverbial mail room make a lot less here than they do in th…

>First, you need to factor a cost of living adjustment. Oregon seems a bit more expensive than the Netherlands. Bay Area is a lot more expensive than Oregon. This doesn't gel with my experience at all and the numbers don't bear that out either[1]. Cost of living in Portland is significantly cheaper than the Amsterdam, granted that San Francisco is quite a bit more expensive than Amsterdam. From my experience it's sti…

I didn't live in Amsterdam. Unfortunately that site doesn't let me take the average for the Netherlands. Amsterdam is the capital, perhaps fairer to compare it with New York. If you compare Eindhoven with Portland, the numbers seem more in support of what I was saying. But I should have specified that better. Nice site, I'll be using that in the future. "Anecdotally", it's attractive to compare Eindhoven and Portland, because they're both "small big cities" (relevant in their own right, without being the large token cities that define their respective countries).

Re: Compare career levels across companies

#365

Post by lucb1e »

domlebo70 wrote: post #225
sjg007 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reach out to them? I’m sure they can work something out..

Thanks! I think I will

I've often thought about whether I'd work for a company like Google or Facebook, where the pay and culture and everything is great, but at the same time you're part of an organisation which makes some ethically questionable products. How do you feel about that now that the decision is somewhat imminent?

Re: Compare career levels across companies

#366

Post by illumin8 »

slivym wrote: post #327
whiskyant wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To answer your question, yes, pay in SF/CA/USA definitely outweighs the increased cost of living. Software engineers here are paid more than anywhere else in the world. It makes sense though since the wealthiest tech companies in the world are here, the most talented engineers gather here for that reason, and companies can afford to pay high compensation packages in order to get the best talent. I don't expect other…

The reason it doesn't make sense to me is that there are clearly engineers in the UK who are as talented as the average engineer in silicon valley and are unwilling to move to the other side of the world. There are also many many many companies in the US that have offices in the UK. Given that UK engineers appear to earn no where near their US equivalent I would have thought there would be a strong incentive to hire…

Clearly, a talented engineer in the UK might be just as smart and experienced as a principal engineer at a big tech company in the US.

But, this doesn't have to make sense for it to be true. It's simple supply and demand economics. There is a greater demand for top-tier talent in the SF Bay Area because most of the technical leadership is there and they want their best engineers working closely with them. It's not hard to understand.

I read once that the single most significant indicator of where a large company will locate its headquarters is the CEO's home address. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to know that if the CEO lives in the bay area, so will his top leadership, and so will their top employees.

Re: Compare career levels across companies

#368

Post by sl8r »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #304
Bahamut wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The California tax rate is off - you get taxed certain percentages up to a certain amount (progressive tax). The effective tax rate for $500k in California should be about 9.44% pre-deductions (should be effectively lower than this). Should be roughly 42% pre-deductions/writeoffs. ...But in truth, if you're making around the $500k ballpark, you're doing pretty well financially.

People not understanding marginal tax need to get educated and not spread misinformation like claiming you pay nearly 45% taxes. You pay that on the top half of your income. Also yes; just pay the tax, and then some. It helps everyone. If the country is sane in terms of politics of course, and doesn't have the military as its biggest expense. That makes it clear they're more concerned with international affairs than…

I mean... the parent post is right, the site I linked seems to be calculating CA state tax incorrectly.

But: 42% is the effective tax rate (not marginal, average). And this is pretty close to 45%. For a hypothetical person making $500k or more as regular income in CA (as many of the posted salaries above would be), they would indeed pay about $210k in taxes plus Medicare plus Social Security.

Re: Compare career levels across companies

#369

Post by JimboOmega »

mav3rick wrote: post #324
JimboOmega wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right now, Google wants to interview me as a front end dev (I have an on site in a couple weeks). Thing is, I'm not; I'm a backend/ infrastructure person. But of their languages I knew Javascript the best. So they gave me a phone screen in that, which I passed; but can I handle an on site in something I haven't really touched in 5 years? Will I read as senior even if I pass?

The hiring committee will not hold JS as the reason to keep you from being hired as a senior. Language is not a factor in hiring let alone level calibration.

It does sound like, per the other poster, I'll get asked a lot of front end dev questions , the kind that will be hard to answer since I have no recent front end experience (and the experience I did have was full stack anyway)

Re: Compare career levels across companies

#370

Post by illumin8 »

vonmoltke wrote: post #63
Zaheer wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Keep in mind that new hire salaries at the same level are typically higher than folks internally who have been at that level for some time. The market rate has actually gone up significantly in last 1-2 years.

I have 16 years of engineering experience and Google has made me two offers (original and revised) for a T4 position in NY that are well below the numbers reported on Levels (in fact, below the average on the site). So, either I am getting low balled like hell or there is skew in the numbers. Edit: there is skew in the numbers, not some in the numbers.

Please keep in mind, the compensation numbers are from employees that have typically worked for a couple years, have stock grants that have appreciated significantly, and that is a significant portion of their total compensation.

If you want to compare your offer, look at GOOG, AAPL, FB and what their stock value was in 2016. Use that share price to figure out what the employees that were hired in 2016 were offered in terms of stock, and compare your offer.

There is no magic to it. HR is just taking what they think they need to offer to be competitive, assuming a 10-20% annual increase in stock value, and making the offer. The primary reason why you see such high total compensation numbers is that tech stocks have done extremely well recently, which has put employees above their target compensation.

Post reply on HN