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

Leaked Microsoft pay guidelines – salary, hiring bonus, stock awards by level

businessinsider.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 224 posts

Re: Leaked Microsoft pay guidelines – salary, hiring bonus, stock awards by level

#31

Post by hellweaver666 »

pgeorgi wrote: post #21
m0rissette wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn’t all the companies then just conspire to pay everyone lower wages?

There are already companies collecting such information and making them available for their customers (who supposedly provide some collated data set to them in exchange). That's what all the "paying top of market rate" talk in various companies is based on. So: the potential for collusion already exists, but unless regular folks can get access to the analysts' data sets as well, it's a very one-sided deal.

Yup... HR call it "benchmarking"

Re: Leaked Microsoft pay guidelines – salary, hiring bonus, stock awards by level

#32

Post by dataking »

dom96 wrote: post #6

At this point is there any disadvantage to legislating that all companies should share a transparency report where they list their levels + avg, min, max, median salaries for each level?

Lots or reporting requirements only take effect once a firm reaches a certain size. This makes a lot of sense given that tiny firms (say less than 10 employees) may not have formalized wage scales, in-house administrative staff, and have a harder time amortizing compliance costs. So yes, there are disadvantages to consider.

Re: Leaked Microsoft pay guidelines – salary, hiring bonus, stock awards by level

#33

Post by az226 »

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #12
eganist wrote: post #5

From the article: --- Level 70: Base pay: $231,700 to $361,500 On-hire stock awards: $310,000 default to $1.2 million with approval Annual stock award range: $0 to $945,000 Level 69: Base pay: $202,400 to $316,000 On-hire stock awards: $235,000 default to $1.1 million with approval Annual stock award range: $0 to $750,000 Level 68: Base pay: $186,200 to $291,000 On-hire stock awards: $177,000 default to $1 million wi…

I started off at MSFT over a decade ago and though I haven't worked there in quite a while I'll say that these numbers look very old to me - there's no way Level 59's base salary range is 74-110k today (e.g. about 3 years ago, a new-hire Lvl 59 friend of mine said he was on $115k base and he said he felt he was in the middle) The publicly disclosed numbers on Levels.fyi are much closer to reality, IMO.

74k is definitely too low. In 2019, 59 was 98k. Usually goes up 1-2% each year. 115k sounds high. Each level technically has a 20% range up and down from the compa mid-point, but most offers are made dead-center. Intern return offers tend to be the juiciest 59s. In some cases college grads returning from their internships make more than those with 15-20 years of experience at 64. It's wild.

Re: Leaked Microsoft pay guidelines – salary, hiring bonus, stock awards by level

#34

Post by velcrovan »

xvector wrote: post #28
dom96 wrote: post #6

At this point is there any disadvantage to legislating that all companies should share a transparency report where they list their levels + avg, min, max, median salaries for each level?

Every company I've talked to with "transparent" comp has offered absolutely terrible comp, even for their highest possible offer. In reality "transparent comp" becomes an excuse for companies to not negotiate.

If it is legislated that everyone has to do it, then people looking to sell their labor can do so with perfect knowledge of where the market is at, reducing the negotiating strength of these shitty companies.

This is how it already works in Norway. https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-40669239

Re: Leaked Microsoft pay guidelines – salary, hiring bonus, stock awards by level

#35

Post by velcrovan »

m0rissette wrote: post #11
dom96 wrote: post #6

At this point is there any disadvantage to legislating that all companies should share a transparency report where they list their levels + avg, min, max, median salaries for each level?

Wouldn’t all the companies then just conspire to pay everyone lower wages?

Wait till you find out what they do under the current system where wages are secret information

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...

Re: Leaked Microsoft pay guidelines – salary, hiring bonus, stock awards by level

#36

Post by OsrsNeedsf2P »

sokoloff wrote: post #29
dom96 wrote: post #6

At this point is there any disadvantage to legislating that all companies should share a transparency report where they list their levels + avg, min, max, median salaries for each level?

I’m opposed to disclosure laws that would be prone to expose the income of individual people. If Alice is the only SWEPR5 at a company, that proposal publishes her salary. If Bob is clearly the best SWEPR4, Cathy the middle, and Dave just barely got promoted to that level, their salaries are also individually published. I don’t object to good faith ranges being required in job listings, but I oppose anything that wou…

Why would it matter if Alice was the only one or not? Disclosure laws inherently expose the income of everyone

Re: Leaked Microsoft pay guidelines – salary, hiring bonus, stock awards by level

#37

Post by quickthrower2 »

sokoloff wrote: post #29
dom96 wrote: post #6

At this point is there any disadvantage to legislating that all companies should share a transparency report where they list their levels + avg, min, max, median salaries for each level?

I’m opposed to disclosure laws that would be prone to expose the income of individual people. If Alice is the only SWEPR5 at a company, that proposal publishes her salary. If Bob is clearly the best SWEPR4, Cathy the middle, and Dave just barely got promoted to that level, their salaries are also individually published. I don’t object to good faith ranges being required in job listings, but I oppose anything that wou…

I get more accurate date about Alice but levels.fyi already gave me a good ballpark

Re: Leaked Microsoft pay guidelines – salary, hiring bonus, stock awards by level

#38

Post by prepend »

joecasson wrote: post #8
Dudester230602 wrote: post #2

It's pay-walled, bruh.

You can usually look for archive links in the comments that will get you past the paywall. Someone else posted this: https://archive.ph/k58ID

The archive post was after GP’s question.

Re: Leaked Microsoft pay guidelines – salary, hiring bonus, stock awards by level

#39

Post by sokoloff »

OsrsNeedsf2P wrote: post #36
sokoloff wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’m opposed to disclosure laws that would be prone to expose the income of individual people. If Alice is the only SWEPR5 at a company, that proposal publishes her salary. If Bob is clearly the best SWEPR4, Cathy the middle, and Dave just barely got promoted to that level, their salaries are also individually published. I don’t object to good faith ranges being required in job listings, but I oppose anything that wou…

Why would it matter if Alice was the only one or not? Disclosure laws inherently expose the income of everyone

If there are 100 SWEPR5s in the proposal above, Alice's nosy co-worker or neighbor only learns the range of Alice's salary.

If Alice is the only one, they learn the precise value.

Re: Leaked Microsoft pay guidelines – salary, hiring bonus, stock awards by level

#40

Post by barrysteve »

m0rissette wrote: post #11
dom96 wrote: post #6

At this point is there any disadvantage to legislating that all companies should share a transparency report where they list their levels + avg, min, max, median salaries for each level?

Wouldn’t all the companies then just conspire to pay everyone lower wages?

Wouldn't all the employees then just conspire to unionize around the highest paid employee?

EDIT: forgot to mention I'm not advocating for it.

Post reply on HN