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

Why Don't Tech Companies Pay Their Engineers to Stay?

goethena.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 294 posts

Re: Why Don't Tech Companies Pay Their Engineers to Stay?

#231

Post by dzonga »

lainga wrote: post #80
gregfjohnson wrote: post #78

A person close to me works at a law firm. She was feeling a bit stagnant, so she connected with a recruiter. She got a very solid offer with a significant pay bump. She gave her two weeks' notice to her firm, including appointments with the partners. One of the partners asked her for a half hour. They came back with a massive pay raise, and a promotion to partner if she would stay. She was in a state of shock, but th…

What prevents engineering firms from acting like law firms?

in a law firm, the lawyers are partners or very important people to the firm even if they're not partners.

i.e they're not cogs in a wheel that can be replaced by 'management'.

in as much engineers here, would like to believe otherwise -- most engineers at most firms are treated as replaceable / disposable resources.

Re: Why Don't Tech Companies Pay Their Engineers to Stay?

#232

Post by goalieca »

icedchai wrote: post #41
BadHumans wrote: post #9

This entire piece starts from the conclusion that engineers leave because they aren't paid enough then works backwards from there. This is wrong from my experience. Anecdotally, I have never left a job because of money. Sure, I left jobs and got ones that ended up paying more money but the reason I started looking in the first place wasn't money. It was for other reasons that usually included frustrations with manage…

Same. Over the past ~25 years, I've had 10 jobs, everything from junior engineer to a (failed) startup CTO. I've never left a job due to compensation. Poor morale, stubborn leadership, dysfunctional teams, uninteresting work, obviously bad business models, managerial incompetence and nepotism, have all been reasons. I even left jobs to take a pay cut to get out of these bad situations.

It’s because you’ve never stayed lo my enough for your salary to get stale. Around year 5-7 you’ll get tired of the less than inflation amounts of raise if you even get that. Every time I’ve switched jobs I get a title bump and a big raise.

Re: Why Don't Tech Companies Pay Their Engineers to Stay?

#233

Post by dzonga »

whitehexagon wrote: post #209
linotype wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you think the UK could do to make the situation better aside from increasing pay? Or is that the only issue?

IR35 was enough for me to leave the UK and never look back. Doesn't matter how much they pay if you have tax/legal uncertainty.

where did you go to if you don't mind ?

Re: Why Don't Tech Companies Pay Their Engineers to Stay?

#234

Post by BadHumans »

Am4TIfIsER0ppos wrote: post #212
sokoloff wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Money isn’t everything, but the math behind retirement saving is compelling. https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-si...

Soon to have 25% skimmed off every year and that's assuming you get to live long enough to spend it.

I assume you're talking about the proposed tax on unrealized gains that only applies on holdings over 100 million. 100 million dollar threshold being a critical piece of information you conveniently left out.

Re: Why Don't Tech Companies Pay Their Engineers to Stay?

#235

Post by sumedh »

kaba0 wrote: post #137
atleastoptimal wrote: post #52

Hiring people is like gambling for companies, as in most tech companies hire some person on the off chance they're a 10x developer, though expect them to be a 1.5x one on average. Even if you're a 2x developer, you haven't lived up to the hypothetical 10x ideal to your employer, so they aren't willing to put in the extra money and effort to convince you to stay, there's more incentive to put that money into hiring th…

Frankly, this 10x dev myth should just die. There are only at most 2x developers, and most ordinary people are just below the 1x factor.

> this 10x dev myth should just die.

How would you rate someone like John Carmack?

Re: Why Don't Tech Companies Pay Their Engineers to Stay?

#236

Post by pledg »

ralferoo wrote: post #125

I worked in the UK at a FAANG, so I was on a different bonus system, but my US colleagues had a very significant lock-in. Both your starting bonus and annual bonuses were implemented in terms of share grants that vested at 25% each year. I heard from several of these colleagues that the annual bonuses were often about the same as the base salary, so for some of these guys it was around $200k. So, at any given time th…

Which FAANG in the UK doesn't follow the same long term incentives with RSU as their US offices? All that I am aware of do for engineers.

Re: Why Don't Tech Companies Pay Their Engineers to Stay?

#237

Post by Am4TIfIsER0ppos »

BadHumans wrote: post #234
Am4TIfIsER0ppos wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Soon to have 25% skimmed off every year and that's assuming you get to live long enough to spend it.

I assume you're talking about the proposed tax on unrealized gains that only applies on holdings over 100 million. 100 million dollar threshold being a critical piece of information you conveniently left out.

How many people did the original income tax apply to?

Re: Why Don't Tech Companies Pay Their Engineers to Stay?

#239

Post by BadHumans »

Am4TIfIsER0ppos wrote: post #237
BadHumans wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume you're talking about the proposed tax on unrealized gains that only applies on holdings over 100 million. 100 million dollar threshold being a critical piece of information you conveniently left out.

How many people did the original income tax apply to?

I don't think it matters. I'm in favor of the tax as proposed. If it changes I'll adjust my stance accordingly.

Re: Why Don't Tech Companies Pay Their Engineers to Stay?

#240

Post by kcplate »

Corrado wrote: post #196
red_admiral wrote: post #148

As a regular reader of Rachelbythebay - I agree with the sentiment of a lot of other posters here, it's not the money that makes people quit. A classic story here is the "Sodas are no longer free" one: https://steveblank.com/2009/12/21/the-elves-leave-middle-ear... The total cost of free sodas for engineers is probably small compared to their salaries, and for the individual engineer, the new $0.50 per soda cost is p…

Holy carp! When they took away the free soda at KFC I started updating my resume. I worked at the KFC headquarters for over 10 years and for most of that time they had free soda in the lobby. Then the cafeteria management got turned over to a 3rd party, I'm guessing as a way to save money. Setting aside a food company not managing their corporate cafeteria, this 3rd party wanted to sell sodas and that's really hard w…

I was in the break room at a former company when one of the warehouse workers who had been with the company for nearly 30 years and who had been through multiple ownership changes, made this comment to me: “well, the company is for sale again, the are buying Maxwell house coffee”.

Within a week I was answering due diligence type questions from “consultant” who turned out to be the CTO of the company that acquired us, and became my boss a few months later.

That was 20 years ago. Ever since through the 4 companies I have been through in that time frame, I have always used the break room as the barometer for corporate change.

Post reply on HN