The one-salary experiment, ten years in • Hacker News Board

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#121

Post by kzisme » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 3:27 AM UTC

onion2k wrote: post #110

brianwawok wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies give raises. Have you or anyone you know never gotten a raise?

It's very common for companies to give a cost of living raise in line with inflation, which is effectively just maintaining your salary at the current "purchasing power". Actual real terms raises that mean you can buy more are quite rare, especially outside of tech. Usually the only way to get a real raise is by changing job, either through promotion or by moving to a different company.

This has been my experience as well - if you want to progress salary wise you are almost required to change jobs every ~3 years to get a meaningful bump in pay.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#122

Post by Aeolun » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 3:31 AM UTC

hopler wrote: post #77

readingnews wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying things like "I could make 50k more at blah" seems to be taken so lightly these days. I would party/panic/freak out like I won the lotto if you told me I could make 50k more somewhere else. 50k... do you have any idea what that does to your future earnings? Your 401k/retirement? Hell, even if you live the same as now, sticking 25K in the bank every year is worth a whole heaping spoonful of whatever hell they co…

The money isn't that great if you are miserable and your kids spend it after your funeral

That will happen to your money after your funeral regardless.

Not like you have any more use for it yourself.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#123

Post by BenMorganIO » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 3:32 AM UTC

rjp0008 wrote: post #98

wting wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe grandparent was referring to proactive raises. Reactive counter offer raises typically don't work because the employee's mind has been made up to leave. Compensation is usually only part of why someone decided to leave.

If you pay everyone more that gets expensive quick. Seems like it could be cost effective to give almost rock bottom raises and just replace the people who aren't 100% into it.

I wouldn't agree since that creates horror stories and high employee churn.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#124

Post by Aeolun » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 3:34 AM UTC

shhehebehdh wrote: post #33

sa46 wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Entirely non-surprising that devs are the ones who left because by hard capping their pay you are reducing their reluctance to go work somewhere else with higher pay. The surprising part is that their dev retention (article notes small sample size) of ~3 years matches Google at 3.1 years and surpasses Uber, Dropbox, Tesla, Facebook and Airbnb. [1] That suggests that the culture created by the one-salary experiment…

Well, maybe. Or it shows that they hired people who were relatively comp insensitive, possibly due to being unable to command higher wages elsewhere. Hard to know.

Isn’t that what was said?

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#125

Post by BenMorganIO » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 3:35 AM UTC

Aeolun wrote: post #117

ashtonian wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've worked for 5 companies and 3 of them had this behavior. Would get 5/5 on reviews, saved company hundreds of thousands, delivered a flagship multi million dollar in revenue product. Ask for more then 10k and was told to get an offer elsewhere and they would match. Got another job at 30k+ told them to screw off, if I have to apply and go get a job offer to prove my "worth" then I'm just going to go work for anothe…

Honestly, if my company would tell me this it’d become a game to interview and get higher and higher salaries.

Until you receive an offer which has larger benefits and perks. I can certainly see the gaming.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#126

Post by BenMorganIO » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 3:36 AM UTC

steven2012 wrote: post #64

Right now I'm struggling with whether or not to leave. I'm currently at a well-known company, and I'm uncharacteristically happy because my WLB is the best it's been in my career. However, I'm getting a bit bored and I also know I could make at least $50,000 a year more if I leave. Hell, even the new engineers joining my company at the same level are making more than I am. But the culture and pay at my company is jus…

I'd recommend a side project and see if you can start your own business. Sounds like a good time.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#127

Post by salty_biscuits » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 3:43 AM UTC

cannonedhamster wrote: post #111

war1025 wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Mexican fisherman story [1] is what it comes down to for me. You can work a little, play a little, and generally have a good time with life and get by (Mexican fisherman), or you can start a business, work long hours, build a fleet of boats that makes a ton of money, and then sell it all someday when you retire, at which point you can work a little, play a little, and generally have a good time. (American busines…

The addendum is the Mexican fisherman doesn't have money in the bank if his boat gets destroyed in a freak storm, nor does he have enough to cover the insurance. He's also not taking care of his family or prepared if some oil company drilling in the Gulf of Mexico has a spill that completely destroys his livelihood. In fact the fleet of boats could effectively gain enough money to lobby the local government to set li…

Or on the other side, the American businessman has ruined his health/personal relationships by overwork so that he can't enjoy the freedom he bought for himself. Or even more likely, can't bring himself to make the leap into the void and walk away from money, status and security and continues to burn away the little healthy youth he has left remaining working in the job he can't give up.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#128

Post by cnokleberg » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 4:00 AM UTC

sa46 wrote: post #29

ng12 wrote: post #8

People have written books on this stuff. There's an entire field of research on this subject and I think tech people discount it for being "too MBA". One of the most important findings is that pay generally will never motivate employees, but it will reduce their incentive to leave. Generally most job factors affect one of two separate but related scales: motivation to stay and reluctance to leave. Entirely non-surpri…

> Entirely non-surprising that devs are the ones who left because by hard capping their pay you are reducing their reluctance to go work somewhere else with higher pay. The surprising part is that their dev retention (article notes small sample size) of ~3 years matches Google at 3.1 years and surpasses Uber, Dropbox, Tesla, Facebook and Airbnb. [1] That suggests that the culture created by the one-salary experiment…

That BI article is confused.

The title says "here's how long the average employee stays at the biggest tech companies" (retention), but then it goes on to give stats about average tenure.

If your company doubles in size every year, then your average tenure is going to be very low--most people just started recently! You simply cannot use average tenure as a proxy for retention or turnover.

The OP makes the same mistake, which is where I stopped reading.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#129

Post by davidbanham » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 4:05 AM UTC

ui-explorer12 wrote: post #118

issa wrote: post #84

I've always found it strange that companies don't give raises to current employees. A team I am on just lost a good engineer to another company offering him a $30k+ raise. He would have stayed if our company had even given him half of that. Instead, they let him go, and how will have to hire someone else, probably at that higher salary. So weird, and seems to happen a lot.

The same thing happens when you've been with a mobile/telecom/etc company for a long time. They milk you for every penny they can get and give all the promo pricing to new customers. The pay sales higher commissions for new sign-ups and treat existing loyal clients like garbage. It really bugs me to have to waste the time to change providers for everything every ~2 years, but I'd feel like an idiot if I left thousand…

Many companies have done the sums on this and have dedicated churn teams. If you call and tell them you're planning to leave because you can get a better deal elsewhere they'll often match or better it in order to retain you.

It's a bit iffy since if everyone did this all the time the incentive to advertise low rates gets removed. As an individual bonus, though, it means you don't need to do all the paperwork it takes to change providers.

Re: The one-salary experiment, ten years in

#130

Post by jniedrauer » Mon, Apr 01, 2019, 4:12 AM UTC

user5994461 wrote: post #100

wting wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe grandparent was referring to proactive raises. Reactive counter offer raises typically don't work because the employee's mind has been made up to leave. Compensation is usually only part of why someone decided to leave.

It's a myth spread out by recruiters. They do not get paid when the developer doesn't change job. They'll say anything to get you to leave. Truth is, counter offers happen and work out. When it's about compensation, not toxic workplace/coworker, or relocating elsewhere to live with your wife/children.

I always heard horror stories about accepting counter offers. But I accepted one and it turned out to be a very good decision. I nearly doubled my salary over the next two years and made some fantastic professional connections.