161–170 of 206 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably based on an engaged managers evaluation of their work output
See above - it's strange to discount management techniques for promotions and pay rises, but still use it for firing people.
It’s interesting to see these salary levels. A senior developer (10+ years of experience) here in Sweden is paid less than their entry level salary. The difference in pay between Europe and the US seems huge. I wonder why.
Yes that is something that comes up on hackernews a lot, and I personally still struggle to accept it. According to the Daily level system I should be in their band 5, so $210K, but in England I am paid less than half their entry level salary (at current exchange rates). Americans don't have IQ scores, or any other metric to suggest being approximately 4-8 times the quality of other developed countries workers, so it…
Europeans are just as talented technically as Americans, that has never been the issue. As a broad generalization, European business culture is consistently poor at leveraging that talent to generate value, often treating it like factory work. Because American business culture is so efficient and effective at converting engineering talent into revenue, often on the scale of $1M revenue per engineer, they can easily afford to pay the higher wages while still making a fine profit. This has the side effect of making the market for engineering talent extremely competitive.
In short, European technical talent as a resource is often being wasted by poor business practices, which means there is much less money to go around. There is no reason in principle that European engineers could not earn much more in Europe but changing business culture is slow, though some companies are trying.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All of your points are valid. But here is the catch which many ICs might not realize. There are far more management positions than pure ICs. It's the unfortunate that you be disadvantaged if you stick to strict ICs path. The competition is also fierce. The talented ICs are so far above the rest (the 10x/100x engineers). It's a simple supply and demand problem. The company needs a lot more of above average managers/hy…
Just to clarify when you say IC you mean literally an IC as opposed to the leadership path in an IC vertical? Many companies expect hither level ICs to be leaders in one way or another, you don’t need to go down the management path.
I am not talking about whether there is a such a path for ICs. I am talking about the numbers problem. The unfortunate truth is that there are far more positions involves people management. Engineering manager is good example because ICs can wield their technical skills. But still, this roles still requires you to do substantial people management.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you truly believe this, then please reconsider. The tech industry doesn't reward people for technically challenging work. Consider how many large companies were/are built on what you'd consider to be terrible technology choices. Don't expect an "ultimately necessary transition" because it'll likely go in the opposite direction.
Please reconsider because I’ll do myself a disservice? Or please reconsider because I won’t take 1% of the marginal revenue I generate and we can’t have that kind of thinking going around?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
Telling or managing a player to kick the ball into the back of the net is a lot easier than actually kicking it in the back of the net. Telling or managing a team of 20 people to put products on shelves is a lot harder than putting products on shelves.
The company I’m with now makes promotions without salary increases. The salary increase comes in the next review cycle when you’ve proven that you can do the job. It seems very unusual to me, has anyone else seen this?
sure. usually more common in places where workers have low self confidence and don't think they could do better. if only they knew what opportunities were out there
It’s interesting to see these salary levels. A senior developer (10+ years of experience) here in Sweden is paid less than their entry level salary. The difference in pay between Europe and the US seems huge. I wonder why.
I am disappointed this comment does not receive more comments! I feel the same. From far away, it seems like Berlin is bursting with great technical talent, as well as Copenhagen, Stockholm, and Helsinki, yet the salaries are terribly low. (I see you Oslo, but not the same reputation!) Oh hey, please include France. They have such great, underrated technical universities... do amazing comp-sci research... but their c…
There is however a base pension that each senior citizen is entitled to. About 15% of the elderly only gets the minimal amount which in many cases doesn't cover basic expenses, like rent and food, so they need to be on social welfare as well.
But would I accept a 100% salary increase if it meant that social welfare had to be removed and people couldn't afford a place to live and to put food on the table? Of course not. Would I like if people that study hard and get well educated also get well paid jobs? Yes!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone with 20+ yoe this is true, I'm probably as good as a guy with 5 yoe and honestly I want to apply for jobs like that. Honestly tech has changed so much I'm skeptical anyone really has 20 years experience now. Its hard though when people see my work history they only let me interview for very senior roles which I usually aren't good enough to do.
I'm gonna be real with you here. You're not as good as a 5yoe employee, because people are expected to grow. Nobody hires a junior dev because they want a junior dev for 20 years. They hire a junior because they think the person has potential to grow into a senior dev over time. Over 20 years, you've not demonstrated that growth, and so it makes more sense for a prospective employer to assume that lack of growth will…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes that is something that comes up on hackernews a lot, and I personally still struggle to accept it. According to the Daily level system I should be in their band 5, so $210K, but in England I am paid less than half their entry level salary (at current exchange rates). Americans don't have IQ scores, or any other metric to suggest being approximately 4-8 times the quality of other developed countries workers, so it…
I am an American who has worked in Europe for many years at multiple companies, so I feel at least somewhat qualified to give some insight. Europeans are just as talented technically as Americans, that has never been the issue. As a broad generalization, European business culture is consistently poor at leveraging that talent to generate value, often treating it like factory work. Because American business culture is…
Strong disagree with basing salary on years of experience. I see almost no correlation between output, skill, and years of experience. I actually consider this an anti-pattern that actively encourages coasting.
Coasting can be compensated for by a "we're expecting you to be productive or we'll help you move on with our thanks & good will" policy. Make it easy for managers to fire and replace at market levels.
If the company has some metrics they’re using to evaluate performance for the purposes of moving on from low performers… why not just use those metrics to move people up/down instead of years of tenure?