Some people do actually end up at that kind of a multiple of their initial salary. It’s not that such growth is impossible it’s just really really uncommon and generally takes regularly changing roles.
It doesn't just require changing roles. People making 140,000,000 annually are basically only the founders of the very largest tech companies. CEOs of the very largest tech companies will get stock grants in the nine figures on occasion, but not annually. No staff engineer who changed jobs every three years for three decades is making nine figures. So yes, if you start as a junior engineer and end your career as a CE…
I agree, anyone who thinks 9 figures is likely would have to be smoking something. But, failing to reach the absolute top number possible is hardly failure. Last year over 4,000 Americans made 10+ million in direct W-2 compensation Aka not stock options or capital gains etc.
A job can be fun and fulfilling and better paying. Most former FAANG employees do seem to like working in up and coming startups better with more control over the company vision.
> A job can be fun and fulfilling and better paying. I agree, but I was replying to a comment that suggests people quit extremely well paying jobs because they can earn more elsewhere, and not because of culture etc.
But the comment you replied also didn't imply that people switching were sacrificing anything in terms of culture and so on. Everything else being equal, more money is better.
Of course you choose between staying at a place you know and trying a new place with better pay and some unknowns, so there's some risk involved, but in a lot of cases this risk is rather small.
As long as you are classified as an at will employee you should give your employer at will loyalty. They don't owe you anything and you don't owe them anything either beyond the responsibilities of your job in exchange for whatever they're paying you. It's up to them to make sticking around your best option. But when I'm on interview panels and someone brings up that the person in question is a job hopper, rather tha…
No reason to downvote you. However, if someone has generally changed jobs every year or two and I wouldn't hire someone who I knew with certainty would only stay that long, I might think I'm special enough that I can keep them around. But I'd probably be wrong.
I can only speak for myself but so much of my job hopping is geared towards both getting more money but just as importantly trying to find an environment I really like. I want to find work that is fulfilling and that does not make me dread Mondays. I have reached a level financially where while I can always use more I make more than I ever reasonably expected to make and I am making far far less than many on here. My years are precious I want to spend them somewhere that I like both the people I work with and the work I do.
As long as you are classified as an at will employee you should give your employer at will loyalty. They don't owe you anything and you don't owe them anything either beyond the responsibilities of your job in exchange for whatever they're paying you. It's up to them to make sticking around your best option. But when I'm on interview panels and someone brings up that the person in question is a job hopper, rather tha…
Is "at will" the right term here? What's the alternative, granting you tenure at their little company or something? If you are an at-will employee who is kept around, then might that demonstrate actual loyalty (and probably higher pay) versus being at a place that is prohibited by law from laying you off without good cause? Perhaps you mean if they treat employees like a commodity. They can do that withoug laying peo…
If I have to sign an agreement that gives my employer permission to terminate me at any time for any reason with or without cause, they should not be surprised that it also grants me the right to quit at any time for any reason with or without cause.
And yet, all that fuss about these job hoppers. How about creating an environment and culture where sticking around beats job hopping instead?
As for the alternative? Check out the severance packages that executives and TLAs get. Try scaling that down to the employee level. Not going to happen.
I was able to negotiate a 45k pay raise at my current company. After clearly proving my value for about 2 years. I made it obvious that I would accept a role at my friends company if they couldn’t come up. I explained to them nicely that I would rather stay, but I can’t without a large raise. It can be done, but it would have never happened without me pushing them. No company is going to willingly throw out raises th…
As long as you're willing to walk if this fails. Also, be aware that your card will be marked and considered somebody who will try this again in the future. I'd expect most companies would reduce the risk of such by making sure what you do has overlap with others. Come the time I expect you'll be managed or re-org'd out the door.
" card will be marked and considered somebody who will try this again in the future" Not sure this is such a terrible thing. He got far more money than he would have originally if he just said nothing and stayed and if going forward he just gets 3 - 5% it is still a % of a much larger number. Worst case is if for some reason the company gets vindictive they just get a new job and a new raise. Optimally though if the employee is pleasant and up front about a new offer, then the company treats it as strictly business. They decide if the requested salary is worth what the developer delivers, if yes they make the offer, if no they wish the employee well with their new job.
My company recently had a series of townhalls related to a re-org that included a few different open Q&A sessions. I'd estimate that 70-80% of the questions related to what the company was going to do to address current salaries, particularly vis-a-vis inflation. The questions were largely deflected (which is probably okay given the context) but there is very little urgency to do anything outside of the normal review…
In none of these job changes have I seen any serious plans by the companies to address salaries with a broad brush. Because it's cheaper to do nothing and grit your teeth and hope that the employees don't revolt. What's really awful are the companies that proceed to do nothing while bragging that they had an excellent year revenue-wise. It's like they think employees don't actually pay attention to the company press…
What do you mean by revolt? As long as the attrition rate remains stable and not out of the ordinary, why should companies change this?
As long as you are classified as an at will employee you should give your employer at will loyalty. They don't owe you anything and you don't owe them anything either beyond the responsibilities of your job in exchange for whatever they're paying you. It's up to them to make sticking around your best option. But when I'm on interview panels and someone brings up that the person in question is a job hopper, rather tha…
No reason to downvote you. However, if someone has generally changed jobs every year or two and I wouldn't hire someone who I knew with certainty would only stay that long, I might think I'm special enough that I can keep them around. But I'd probably be wrong.
I was able to negotiate a 45k pay raise at my current company. After clearly proving my value for about 2 years. I made it obvious that I would accept a role at my friends company if they couldn’t come up. I explained to them nicely that I would rather stay, but I can’t without a large raise. It can be done, but it would have never happened without me pushing them. No company is going to willingly throw out raises th…
In effect, you threatened them into giving you a raise. And I'll say congrats on getting it, but are you at all concerned about your ongoing relationship with management? Do they think "he's good for a few years at least now" in terms of comp adjustment, and/or do you expect a raise again next year? At my company, I understand (but have not seen first hand) that anyone who tries this (either comes to the table with a…
Its really no risk at all as they were going to leave for a better offer anyway. the absolute worst case is that management says best of luck and they take a higher paying job. I have gotten a job offer before that included a 15% raise, told my current employer that the new company offered me a 30% raise becuase I really did not want to stay and figured small risk of them offering a match. My current employer unexpectedly matched the made up 30% and I stayed another year. If they did not think I was worth the 30% bump they would not have matched. Then I got an offer for a 55% raise from another company, current employer could not match that one and wished me well. No harm no foul. If the business was doing poorly management would absolutely cut heads, that is the reality of the US based at will employment system. Companies (not managers) have no real loyalty to employees so why have loyalty to them. No need to be aggressive or mean, just taking care of the best interests of one's self and family.
A huge problem with this industry is the inflexibility to pay current engineers LARGELY increasing comp each year. The thought is that there is a market rate for an engineer and that pay can increase with the market rate, but this is a fallacy. An engineer that has been at a largish company for 1 year is worth 20-30% more than the year they were hired because they have specific knowledge of the tech stack. Yet that e…
Is the problem that people are hopping jobs (this was always the case), or that they're exiting the industry? I thought we're talking about the latter. I see a lot of software people quitting to take sabbaticals, to work on a project that might turn into a company, or going small and retiring. To my eye, you can't pay those people a 40% raise to retain them.
I think the people that can afford a sabbatical are a limited set. I think the difference lately is that so much of the economy is software focused so there is a need for developers that has not existed before.
it's amazing to see the silicon valley effect on people's' thoughts of programmers salaries... $300,000 at age 30?
Yes, $300k at age 30. I'm remote too. Go read Blind posts. You do have to be pretty good, but it's about where I'm at, and there are plenty others like me.
I'm aware that people make it. I'm aware that there's a "plenty", in a law of large numbers way that make it seems common even when it isn't. I guess my concern is that people talk about it like it should be the norm.