71–80 of 224 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Smaller companies can just report whatever they're paying each employee that year, then?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So things that are happening regardless?
Sure but it would be worse. You see this all the time when the minimum wage is increased by say 10% then there is a general inflation of 1%. General inflation lags wage increases although at a reduced effect.
It’s closer to 0.4% for every 10% increase and the inflation happens almost immediately.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
Am a manager at Microsoft so I can see where the policy-based midpoints are once regional adjustments are made. The base numbers look low by a rough 20% compared to what a Redmond HQ dev would get paid at the given level number. Bonuses are based on a level-dependent target percentage which you can find if you search for it. And yeah, the Levels.fyi base pay distributions are closer to the truth.
Are you on a cool product team and hiring? I'm considering rejoining the mothership
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…
Did you know there are some countries where you can look up anyone's income?
Stuff like addresses and so on is also public information in Sweden, for what it's worth. This always makes me feel a bit strange when hearing people considering releasing someone's address to be doxxing and something horrible - like you can just look up any person in Sweden, and the societal consequence is that literally nothing happens. Same with the incomes, nothing whatsoever happens from having this be public.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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
And how is tech compensation in Norway compared to the US? That's what I thought...
You're not going to be able to, because it's impossible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.