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

CIA Labs

cia.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 141 posts

Re: CIA Labs

#111

Post by delfinom »

jdm2212 wrote: post #25
daniel-cussen wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You absolutely don't take all the risk of creating a new technology. You get paid an excellent defense sector salary unconditionally, with all the defense sector benefits, some very exclusive. Plus you get tons of resources and the inside track to talk to "the client", you're not working out of your garage.

> You get paid an excellent defense sector salary unconditionally I would imagine CIA officers get a regular civil service salary, which is emphatically not the high salaries that contractors earn.

I also assure you the only people working for defense contractors with high salaries are the executives. Engineers are high but majority are nowhere even near tech industry high.

Re: CIA Labs

#112

Post by mattnewton »

bumby wrote: post #99
jdm2212 wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Federal civil service is all on the same scale, and it tops out below what new grad engineers typically make at defense contractors, to say nothing of FAANG.

True, but the CoL translates quite a bit. For example, I was offered a position that looked not-so-great on paper but once you looked at cost-of-living was competitive (comparable to $400-$500k/yr in SV) plus had other things I valued like little commute etc.

It sounds like you are using a CoL in ratios, not in terms of real dollar adjustments (salary minus costs). If you buy things online, or save to move to another area, cost of living adjustments as a ratio don’t make as much sense. Unless the area is extremely cheap, you have lots more costs than me for things like childcare and housing, and you were paid above the GS payscale, that is. Back of the envelope calculations for me seem to show you can comfortably save over 200k, or more than an entire GS salary at 500k in the Bay Area a year in real dollar terms. I don’t know how to weight for pension value or stability but that’s a lot.

That being said, it’s hard to put a number on an area and commute you like.

Re: CIA Labs

#113

Post by eganist »

bllguo wrote: post #84

it feels like the scopes of our government agencies are overly broad. why exactly does the CIA need to do research and invent things _itself_? so what exactly are groups like DARPA or the NSA for?

NSA is signals and electronics. DARPA is defense. CIA is intel, though not the only one. (e.g. DIA within DoD may work with DARPA, as might NSA, despite both being intel agencies)

Different niche needs for which the funding is specifically tailored, that's all.

Re: CIA Labs

#114

Post by nataz »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #66
jdm2212 wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The federal government pays a comfortable six figures Nope, it doesn't. Cracking 100k in the civil service requires being very very senior (equivalent of at least a colonel in the military). It is a cool opportunity, but it does not pay well. Even the civil service salary PLUS the maximum $150k patent royalties is less than what a 27 year old at a FAANG earns.

This is immediately falsifiable with public documents from OPM: https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries... A mid-grade GS-12 in SF/DC/NY makes 100k+ which would be a non supervisory Individual Contributor with a BS. Colonel equivalent (GS-15) is indeed rare and would be closer to $150k+

To be fair, GS-12 isn't that common in some agencies. Because of hiring wickets, you'll see a lot more GS-11 or 13.

I don't know any GS-12s that don't have a Masters. Most would have come in as an 11 with a Masters, then promoted to 12. Extra skills would have earned additional extra steps (steps are 12 different levels of compensation between grades). Of course it's possible, but in my agency unlikely.

Also a GS-13 would be equivalent to a half bird Colonel. 14/15 would be full bird. SES levels would be equivalent to the different general levels.

Re: CIA Labs

#115

Post by nataz »

daniel-cussen wrote: post #47
balls187 wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...with all the defense sector benefits, some very exclusive. Could you elaborate on that?

The federal government pays a comfortable six figures (if I were offered this kind of job without being told the salary, I would value that opportunity estimating the salary to be $150,000). Plus you retire really early (I'm not certain whether CIA lets you retire after 20 years, but many fed roles do, with full salary), plus you have access to really hard to find information (valuable from the point of view of sheer…

Federal civil service does not let you retire with full salary. With 20 years of service (plus minimum age requirement) you'll get about 25% of the average salary of your top three years.

Re: CIA Labs

#117

Post by nataz »

tingletech wrote: post #95
bumby wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain? I thought they were compressed pay “bands” still limited ton the GS pay scale? E.g., DB pay band still tops out at the equivalent of GS15

the federal government is not the employer of anyone I've ever met from a Department of Energy Lab. LBNL you work for the University of California. LLNL and LANL used to be the same, but UC lost the contract to run LLNL and LANL in 2006. Bectel and UC formed a partnership that still has LLNL but got fired from LANL.

National Labs (and sites, e.g. Y-12) are either DOE or NNSA facilities. The government uses a government owned, contractor operated M&O (management and operations) contract to run the labs. M&O contractors are usually public/private consortiums or one of a few private contractors (see:Bechtel). M&O contractors are responsible for staff and operations, and are paid a fee based on a percentage (based o performance) of business the lab did over that FY. National Lab (and site) employees are employees of the M&O contractor, not the federal government.

Re: CIA Labs

#118

Post by emmelaich »

cameldrv wrote: post #51
throwaway894345 wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would imagine CIA officers get a regular civil service salary What is a "regular civil service salary"? Presumably CIA officers are better paid than the clerk behind the DMV counter? Perhaps a CIA officer salary is still "excellent" if not on par with defense contractors?

It would be on the GS scale [1]. The GS scale has a set of levels and steps. If you're promoted, you generally go up a GS level. You go up steps with more time in service. There are a number of adjustments, including an adjustment for cost of living. Generally if you only have a bachelor's, you're limited to GS-9. Of course, the federal government provides excellent job security and good benefits, but the salary is n…

I suspect places that require particular expertise have some mechanism to pay above the scale.

That's the case in Australia, anyway.

Re: CIA Labs

#119

Post by emmelaich »

JackFr wrote: post #48
AWildC182 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think that's a perk you don't belong doing that work. It's not the james bond life you think it is and the people who think of it that way are insufferable. Try living in a windowless box for 8 hours a day and having no resume.

And on top of that you can't read HN at work from your air-gapped locked-down PC!

and you have to leave your mobile phone at the door!

Re: CIA Labs

#120

Post by bumby »

mattnewton wrote: post #112
bumby wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True, but the CoL translates quite a bit. For example, I was offered a position that looked not-so-great on paper but once you looked at cost-of-living was competitive (comparable to $400-$500k/yr in SV) plus had other things I valued like little commute etc.

It sounds like you are using a CoL in ratios, not in terms of real dollar adjustments (salary minus costs). If you buy things online, or save to move to another area, cost of living adjustments as a ratio don’t make as much sense. Unless the area is extremely cheap, you have lots more costs than me for things like childcare and housing, and you were paid above the GS payscale, that is. Back of the envelope calculatio…

The numbers I used were direct costs across a number of categories. Much of the discrepancy is housing costs. Others like transportation and healthcare factor in, but are not nearly as big. Pension is a bit more difficult to compare because defined benefit pensions are hard to compare to direct stock or 401k due to volatility of the latter, but a rough rule of thumb is they are worth roughly 8%-10% of equivalent annual salary. They also depend widely on when you join the govt.
Post reply on HN