Earlier quoted context omitted.
> - Some FAANGs have a 1 year cliff. Some do not (eg Google, FB). ?? I joined Google in 2014 and had a 1 year cliff. Have they removed it now?
Yes. As of -2 years ago.
What you mean with 1year cliff?
Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level
291–300 of 614 posts
Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level
#292I have never worked in the valley, so the answer to this question might be obvious to the people working there. What happens to all the experienced engineers? According to this, the Senior, Staff, or Principal titles are generally for people with 5+ year experience? Those roles make up 30%, 10%, and 3% of companies respectively. That leaves 57% of engineers in positions listed are usually for people with 0-5 years ex…
what struct me actually is this: > Typically 2-5+ years of experience. (...) Possibly lead a small team or project. Ability to mentor engineers (...) WHAT? I don't know a profession with high knowledge requirements where after 2 years you can and are expected as a job req to manage a team. This speaks to me two things: a. a lot of staff is young and unexperienced b. rotation in segment <5 is big
There is another thread from yesterday, somewhat related:
Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level
#293Earlier quoted context omitted.
Many companies hope that engineers don't know their value or that they simply aren't willing to relocate near one of the tech hubs. A trick of startups is to woo you with stock options which almost never amount to any value. You also have to watch out for REMOTE work where many companies seem to place an excessive $ on the "privilege" of working from home.
I'm willing to relocate for better pay so that I can afford nice things. I want to have a place where I have room for a chicken coop (30 chickens) and a 1-acre fish pond. I'm willing to commute by car for a maximum of 15 minutes. A slightly longer commute might be OK if I can afford to commute by horse and the employer doesn't mind. Which tech hub should I move to?
In Berlin (not exactly a techhub so about 100k for a good engineer), they are currently selling a plot of about 2 acres (8500sqm) for 1.5M (plus cost of a good new house ~= 300k). About 30min by public transport to city center. 40min to the new Tesla factory by car...
(in german) https://www.immobilienscout24.de/expose/108629168
(Though even if serious, I would not do that as you can get more land further out much cheaper and why do you need a pond directly at your house, having it within 1 hour reach for the weekend should be enough)
Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level
#294As a FAANG engineer going on 9 years now, let me address the usual rebuttals: - There is a selection bias. Nope, this is pretty much accurate. - These aren't real. Yes, yes they are. - Self-reporters are lying. Maybe some do but these numbers are pretty accurate. If anything, I question Lyft and Airbnb as such outliers. I wonder if this factored in Lyft's post-IPO stock performance and makes unrealistic valuations of…
Just to add to your awesome comment, many of these companies have compensation policies that discourage retaining talent. I'll give an example of a certain FAANG.
- Initial offer sets your comp for your first 4 years.
- If stock outperforms the expectations (as it has historically done) you get no refreshers.
- If your comp is at the top of your band, you get no/nominal raise.
- Newly promoted engineers get paid the bottom of the new band. If they are already earn that much or more (via stock growth) they get nothing.
And then the truly key points.
- The company stack ranks employees every year. Only top performers (a tiny fraction) get raises to the top of their band. If they are already at the top or above (via stock growth) they get nothing.
- Most other employees get no/nominal raises.
- Employees must be 'consistently performing at the next level' in order to get promoted. This avoids the Peter principle [1].
Why do I say this discourage retaining talent? Let's consider the following scenario:
- You are a good engineer, and get hired for your level at top of your band.
- Because you are at the top of the band, no matter how hard you work, you won't get any raises. Being rated top performer, which is quite difficult, gets you nothing (other than an ego boost).
- You need to consistently perform at the next level to get a promotion. This might take a few cycles in the best case scenario. If you are doing well, essentially you are doing L+1 work for L salary.
- When you finally get promoted, you go to the bottom of the band. Including stock appreciation, you will still probably not get a raise.
- You need to be a top performer at the next level to get a raise.
Also once your initial grant runs out, you rely on stock appreciation and top performer ratings to get more money.
This model incentives behaviours like these:
- Get hired at the top of the band. Use competing offers between top companies to get there.
- Work just hard enough to not get fired in your first 4 years.
- After your initial grant expires, interview somewhere else.
Or, if you have a very good shot at a promotion.
- Get hired at level L.
- Do good work to get promoted to L+1 within your first 4 years.
- Shortly after the promotion, look for L+1 positions in other companies. Chances are that a new hire offer elsewhere will be much higher than your current comp.
Anecdotally a good number of people leave after a promo, and this is probably one of the reasons why.
EDIT: Fixed formatting.
Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level
#295As a FAANG engineer going on 9 years now, let me address the usual rebuttals: - There is a selection bias. Nope, this is pretty much accurate. - These aren't real. Yes, yes they are. - Self-reporters are lying. Maybe some do but these numbers are pretty accurate. If anything, I question Lyft and Airbnb as such outliers. I wonder if this factored in Lyft's post-IPO stock performance and makes unrealistic valuations of…
> Some FAANGs have caps on 401k matches. Some don't.
Federal contributing limits at 19.5, no?
Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level
#296Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes. As of -2 years ago.
What you mean with 1year cliff?
It means that your normal vest schedule doesn’t start for one year, so if your initial stock grant vests quarterly, none vests at all for the first year and then 25% vests all at once after year one, then the other 75% of it vests quarterly over the following three years. Essentially it’s a small, localized version of golden handcuffs for the rank-and-fils, since it means if you leave the company within the first year you get no stock.
Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level
#297Now imagine having one of these incomes but having a spouse who is hellbent on moving back to the southeastern U.S. in a year. It’s driving me nuts; I can’t find any company in the south that pays anywhere near my current compensation, and a rough calculation indicates that leaving FANG will bump my retirement age from 38 to 65 (never mind the amazing health insurance I’ll be giving up too). It’s like throwing a winn…
See if you can negotiate a remote work position. I work for one of the companies in this report in a fairly senior position and even though they don't advertise it, they do allow some folks to go remote after a lengthy HR process. If not your current company, figure out which companies will allow it and get a different job, then work there for a year or two to establish a great reputation and then ask for a transfer.
Please don't consider commuting daily by plane. The CO2 impact is immense. Heck, even flying 8x or 10x a year or so is a huge impact that requires significant lifestyle adjustment to mitigate.
Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level
#298As a FAANG engineer going on 9 years now, let me address the usual rebuttals: - There is a selection bias. Nope, this is pretty much accurate. - These aren't real. Yes, yes they are. - Self-reporters are lying. Maybe some do but these numbers are pretty accurate. If anything, I question Lyft and Airbnb as such outliers. I wonder if this factored in Lyft's post-IPO stock performance and makes unrealistic valuations of…
Just to add to your awesome comment, many of these companies have compensation policies that discourage retaining talent. I'll give an example of a certain FAANG. - Initial offer sets your comp for your first 4 years. - If stock outperforms the expectations (as it has historically done) you get no refreshers. - If your comp is at the top of your band, you get no/nominal raise. - Newly promoted engineers get paid the…
Getting promoted only makes sense if you can't get interviews for L+1 without the promo. Otherwise it only makes sense to do the minimum required to not get fired, and prepare for interviews elsewhere.
Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level
#299Earlier quoted context omitted.
5% is not a safe withdrawal rate for "in perpetuity". 3% is much more realistic if you want to be conservative.
That's assuming you want to leave the whole 2 million principal in your will to your children. I don't see why - if you want to retire, you can consume the whole principal while you live.
You can't plan to spend your last dollar on your deathbed unless you can predict every expense, the market, and the day you'll die, especially over a retirement that long (potentially 50+ years). Planning to leave something behind is really your only chance, unless you're comfortable with a very high chance of bankruptcy along the way.
Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level
#300As a FAANG engineer going on 9 years now, let me address the usual rebuttals: - There is a selection bias. Nope, this is pretty much accurate. - These aren't real. Yes, yes they are. - Self-reporters are lying. Maybe some do but these numbers are pretty accurate. If anything, I question Lyft and Airbnb as such outliers. I wonder if this factored in Lyft's post-IPO stock performance and makes unrealistic valuations of…
> Some FAANGs have caps on 401k matches. Some don't. Federal contributing limits at 19.5, no?
That’s the individual contributor cap, contributor + company is $57k.