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

Poll: Full-time software engineers in the Bay Area, what's your annual salary?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 349 posts

Re: Poll: Full-time software engineers in the Bay Area, what's your annual salary?

#271

Post by davidjnelson »

signifiers wrote: post #183
sliverstorm wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There was an article just recently, average SF house price just hit $1M

I hear this argument all the time, but let's get real. A million dollars in Berkeley isn't exactly a dump: http://www.ziprealty.com/property/6905-NORFOLK-RD-BERKELEY-C... this isn't too shabby either: http://www.ziprealty.com/property/42-MAIN-ST-SAN-QUENTIN-CA-... Now, I'll grant you, Palo Alto and San Mateo have a fair number of unexceptional ranch homes in this region, but it's bullshit to claim that you have to sp…

Not true.

San Mateo, 3 bedroom, 2 bathroom, greater than 1,200 sq. feet house, greater than 2,000 sq. feet yard, built after 1980, not a foreclosure, sold in last 90 days, least expensive home... $900,000.

http://www.zillow.com/homes/for_sale/San-Mateo-CA/fsba,fsbo,...

Re: Poll: Full-time software engineers in the Bay Area, what's your annual salary?

#275

Post by riquito »

samatman wrote: post #228
larrys wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"all of you looking for higher salaries" I would add also that a higher salary which is not sustainable for some reason and results in a lifestyle that you can't support (once you lose that salary) can be quite a problem. Not to mention the psychological impact of thinking you are a 250k a year person and having to drop to being an 80k a year person.

A higher salary cannot result in a lifestyle you can't support. That requires two things: more money, and the decision to spend more money just because you have it. The psychological impact is quite real; I've ridden that yo-yo a couple times already.

If you buy expensive taxable objects like houses/cars you can't afford to keep them and you must get rid of them quickly, probably at less then they're worth

Re: Poll: Full-time software engineers in the Bay Area, what's your annual salary?

#276

Post by mturmon »

jimmaswell wrote: post #270
mturmon wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't worry. The comment that surprised you is not really true. The 81k figure is for "overtime-exempt" employees (often just shortened to "exempt"). I.e., if you make less than that, you are considered "overtime-eligible" (opposite of exempt), and in that case, if you work more than 40 hours per week, you have to be paid overtime. Also, the 81k figure pertains only to software people. There is a figure for other occ…

>they cannot redistribute their hours between work days the way salaried employees can. As far as I can tell, they can, they just have to get compensated for it ie the employer can't abuse it.

I believe the driver for day-to-day recording of work hours is that if they work beyond a certain limit (could even be 8 hours) on a given day, they get OT for that. Thus, you can't work 12 hours one day and 4 the next day without pay consequences.

There are other workplace rules for OTE employees as well, which in some cases include mandatory lunchtimes and breaks (but I'm not sure how widely this applies to software people). I think supervisors and organizations look the other way on some fine points, but I'm describing the letter of the law.

I have one OTE employee, and I'm desperately trying to get them promoted beyond this threshold so we don't have to deal with the hassle. Because I've already learned more about CA labor law than I want.

Re: Poll: Full-time software engineers in the Bay Area, what's your annual salary?

#277

Post by wpietri »

WalterSear wrote: post #267
larrys wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"all of you looking for higher salaries" I would add also that a higher salary which is not sustainable for some reason and results in a lifestyle that you can't support (once you lose that salary) can be quite a problem. Not to mention the psychological impact of thinking you are a 250k a year person and having to drop to being an 80k a year person.

That's a really stupid way to manage your finances. And your self esteem.

But very human. Desires are numberless; salary never is. People also tend to assume that what's going on now is what will keep going on.

And that's not even counting the trillion dollars spent each year trying to get people to spend their money.

Re: Poll: Full-time software engineers in the Bay Area, what's your annual salary?

#278

Post by wizardhat »

Graph:

   Less than 80k.: ============================= - 90 points
          80k-89k: =================== - 60 points
          90k-99k: ========================== - 82 points
        100k-109k: ========================================== - 131 points
        110k-119k: ============================ - 87 points
        120k-129k: ================================================== - 154 points
        130k-139k: ===================================== - 115 points
        140k-149k: ======================= - 73 points
        150k-159k: =================== - 60 points
        160k-169k: ============= - 42 points
        170k-179k: ======= - 24 points
        180k-189k: ==== - 14 points
        190k-199k: === - 12 points
        200k-209k: ====== - 21 points
        210k-219k: === - 12 points
        220k-229k: === - 10 points
        230k-239k: === - 10 points
        240k-249k: === - 10 points
        250k-259k: == - 8 points
        260k-269k: == - 7 points
        270k-279k: === - 10 points
        280k-289k: === - 12 points
        290k-299k: === - 10 points
   At least 300k.: ============================= - 92 points

Re: Poll: Full-time software engineers in the Bay Area, what's your annual salary?

#279

Post by lefthander3 »

lefthander wrote: post #12

It seems silly to ignore stock and bonuses. My base salary is only ~$150k, but with stock and bonuses I'll make over $260k this year (Google). Would this compare with a job that also gives a $150k salary but nothing else?

Disclaimer: I created this account just to post this comment.

I'm a Google Software Engineer III (one level below lefthander and presumably two or three levels below lefthander2) and I haven't been at the company a long time (no stock refreshes or pay rises since joining).

My base salary is ~$130k but I conservatively expect that my salary+stock+bonuses for this year will total to be above $190k.

This makes me believe lefthander and lefthander2's numbers, taking into account their seniority.

Re: Poll: Full-time software engineers in the Bay Area, what's your annual salary?

#280

Post by jimmaswell »

mturmon wrote: post #276
jimmaswell wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>they cannot redistribute their hours between work days the way salaried employees can. As far as I can tell, they can, they just have to get compensated for it ie the employer can't abuse it.

I believe the driver for day-to-day recording of work hours is that if they work beyond a certain limit (could even be 8 hours) on a given day, they get OT for that. Thus, you can't work 12 hours one day and 4 the next day without pay consequences. There are other workplace rules for OTE employees as well, which in some cases include mandatory lunchtimes and breaks (but I'm not sure how widely this applies to softwar…

>I believe the driver for day-to-day recording of work hours is that if they work beyond a certain limit (could even be 8 hours) on a given day, they get OT for that. Thus, you can't work 12 hours one day and 4 the next day without pay consequences.

Yeah, I knew that when I wrote the post. Seems to make sense to me as it is. So if this person gets promoted, they won't get more pay than otherwise when they're doing overtime a certain day? Or do you count it by hours in a week, month?

Post reply on HN