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

Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

daily.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 206 posts

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#101

Post by gwbas1c »

humanrebar wrote: post #74
angarg12 wrote: post #50

I worked for a very old fashioned company in Germany that used a similar system to pay employees. After about a year I became the lead of my team. But since some of my colleagues had been in the company about 10 years, they were getting paid more than me. Frustrated, I left for a better (and better paying) job. I believe these systems produce a "dead sea effect". High performer will leave, being able to get better de…

If you felt you were underpaid, leaving is fair. I don't really understand the requirement that all bosses are paid more than those they supervise, though. I mean, emotionally I can understand feeling that way. But I don't think it's a rule of nature or something. For instance, coaches often make less than their star players. Directors and producers often make less than star actors. Hospital directors seem to make le…

> lead of my team

A lead isn't a manager or boos.

That being said, a lead is frequently more valuable than the followers.

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#102

Post by Mezzie »

david_allison wrote: post #4

> We start counting years after formal schooling (high school or college). Grad school often counts as indirect experience. As someone who worked in software development during High School, and took time off before University to work in software, this somewhat frustrates me. Alyssa Rosenzweig has 0 years of experience under this model.

Yup. I started web development when I was 5. There's a lot of very good, important things that you won't learn working as a kid (conflict resolution, dealing with bad business requests/requirements, etc), but at the same time, it's not like that experience is completely inapplicable either. If nothing else, 29 years of perspective on how web development has evolved and developer discussions means I have a radically different perspective than an 18 year old who decided to start learning to code last year.

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#103

Post by pumpkinprog »

david_allison wrote: post #4

> We start counting years after formal schooling (high school or college). Grad school often counts as indirect experience. As someone who worked in software development during High School, and took time off before University to work in software, this somewhat frustrates me. Alyssa Rosenzweig has 0 years of experience under this model.

Strongly agree. In some countries (for example, most of Eastern Europe), formal CS education is compatible with a full-time developer job during masters and even the last years of bachelor's studies. Therefore, some highly motivated guys can get 2-4 years of production experience upon graduation. Paying them a minimum wage is a great idea to distract talents!

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#104

Post by gwbas1c »

I suspect that, for most locales, they're beating the market. There's a good chance I'd count for 15+ years of experience, and thus they'd pay me much more than my local market normally pays me.

On the other hand, I had a company with a similar salary structure approach me. They were based in a distant country with a much lower cost of living. I pointed out that their salary was about half of what I normally earn.

They didn't "get" it that they were out of their game trying to recruit me.

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#105

Post by [deleted] »

benreesman wrote: post #42

This is sort of well-articulated and someone thought about it a lot. The salaries seem fine, as long as there’s 1MM in liquid equity to go with the L7 one like Google does. But it doesn’t seem to address the real issue (to which I also don’t have a final answer): the jock/nerd thing is still playing out. If, as I believe is mostly true, A16 is pretty on the money with the software eats the world thing: hackers “shoul…

[deleted]

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#107

Post by bluGill »

humanrebar wrote: post #74
angarg12 wrote: post #50

I worked for a very old fashioned company in Germany that used a similar system to pay employees. After about a year I became the lead of my team. But since some of my colleagues had been in the company about 10 years, they were getting paid more than me. Frustrated, I left for a better (and better paying) job. I believe these systems produce a "dead sea effect". High performer will leave, being able to get better de…

If you felt you were underpaid, leaving is fair. I don't really understand the requirement that all bosses are paid more than those they supervise, though. I mean, emotionally I can understand feeling that way. But I don't think it's a rule of nature or something. For instance, coaches often make less than their star players. Directors and producers often make less than star actors. Hospital directors seem to make le…

Traditional companies paid manager more, but supply and demand of engineers vs managers means that more and more middle management is making less than engineers.

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#108

Post by codechad »

benreesman wrote: post #42

This is sort of well-articulated and someone thought about it a lot. The salaries seem fine, as long as there’s 1MM in liquid equity to go with the L7 one like Google does. But it doesn’t seem to address the real issue (to which I also don’t have a final answer): the jock/nerd thing is still playing out. If, as I believe is mostly true, A16 is pretty on the money with the software eats the world thing: hackers “shoul…

> But it doesn’t seem to address the real issue (to which I also don’t have a final answer): the jock/nerd thing is still playing out.

I think you have some unresolved emotions regarding the "nerd/jock thing".

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#109

Post by cindarin »

benreesman wrote: post #99
cindarin wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because it's obvious to many that you need therapy doesn't mean that any who notice are capable or willing to give it.

If it’s not obvious to anyone from the recently deceased kid brother thing that therapy is indicated, I’d be curious how. I’ve been getting therapy since way before that happened, most people could probably benefit from a little mental health checkup now and again. What did I do to get your knickers so twisted that you’re banging on a recently-bereaved guy with thus far zero productive suggestions?

I'm sorry for your loss. I'm not trying to hammer on you for that. I hope you feel better soon.

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#110

Post by pc86 »

sokoloff wrote: post #71
cindarin wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amusingly to me, I think the opposite.

That’s fascinating to me. I’d love to chat more deeply about that, but I can’t see a way to get at the essence of the difference in an HN thread.

I tend toward your side of things. In your first 0-n years of experience, you're growing extremely quickly (hopefully). You're working with a lot of new tech, new people, if n is greater than 4 or 5, hopefully at least two companies if not three. But by the time you have n-teen years of experience, it's much more like you've been repeating the same year of experience over and over again.

Growth, especially if you have a decade of experience (and not one year ten times), is hard. I think especially at the upper end it takes dedicated effort.

Post reply on HN