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

Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

open.bufferapp.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 352 posts

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#271

Post by wpietri »

nsxwolf wrote: post #219
wpietri wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% agreed. I absolutely hate salary systems that give an advantage to people who are pushy, jerky, entitled, or privileged. Some of the best developers I know are pleasant, friendly, modest, don't like confrontation, and pay more attention to the work and the team than how much they're pocketing. Those people shouldn't be paid less.

Is asking for what you want pushy? I'm not sure we want to be praising people for being good little doormats. Learn to defend your work and ask for what you deserve.

Asking for what you want isn't necessarily pushy. And yes, people should learn to ask for what they deserve.

But knowing what you deserve is a complicated art that involves measuring yourself against your coworkers and your industry, and having a good working knowledge of the current market. For the people who don't know what they want, some of them are going to err on the side of asking for too little, and some will ask for too much. I would much rather spend my time bringing the shy up than battering the arrogant down to something reasonable.

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#272

Post by wpietri »

umsm wrote: post #224
wpietri wrote: post #211

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a boss I'd love this. It's my job making sure everybody is paid fairly. If Niel came to me and told me about a competitive offer, I'd say, "well, let's look at the market; maybe we've fallen behind." And then we'd sit down and refresh the data that drove our current pay levels. If things had changed significantly, then it would be time for raises. If not, then we'd talk about why a company might be paying well abo…

I don't think that many bosses think like that. What if the company is not that profitable, can you still stay competitive? Are you willing to risk the future of the company?

You're giving me a choice between risking the company's failure and rooking some of the employees out of pay they could get if they were more self-serving?

I deny the choice. I think most companies that make a habit out of underpaying good people to stay barely in the black don't survive in the long haul. If I were faced with that choice, I'd be honest with everybody about the financials and we'd work something out. Either we're pursing something pretty lucrative, in which case it's a temporary deviation from market rates, or we're barking up the wrong tree, in which case the company isn't worth doing.

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#273

Post by wpietri »

loomio wrote: post #242
nsxwolf wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is asking for what you want pushy? I'm not sure we want to be praising people for being good little doormats. Learn to defend your work and ask for what you deserve.

There is so, so much more to this story that I don't even know where to begin. People "asking for what they want" takes on completely different contexts depending on their situation, background, gender. The system you are advocating will always pay more to the privileged, encourage a competitive, low-trust culture, and disadvantage many skilled people for reasons out of their control. Ultimately, it's the company tha…

Yes, exactly.

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#274

Post by joelgascoigne »

icambron wrote: post #93

I actually love the radical transparency here, even after reading all the warnings in the HN comments. What I like less is the salary formula. What's going to happen is that all of the negotiation is going to get packed into the experience and seniority multipliers. It creates the illusion of rigor and possibly does more harm than good.

This is a really great point. We don't see as much negotiation as might be expected, however what you say is definitely true to an extent.

How do you think we could improve that aspect?

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#275

Post by [deleted] »

grecy wrote: post #250
jakejake wrote: post #248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose it is true that when we turn 40 our brains rot. All we care about is keeping kids off of our lawn and catching the early-bird special. Many people don't like to share their salary - not because they wouldn't "dare" as if they are cowardly or not as enlightened as you. Some people find talking about personal salary or wealth to be distasteful - like a braggart yammering on about his expensive possessions. If…

My apologies, I wasn't trying to imply people are cowardly or I'm more enlightened, or anything like that. The word I was looking for is taboo. I believe that the baby boomers find talking about money to be a social taboo, while younger generations do not. It's not about any group or generation being better, I think it's just a change in what society finds acceptable. (To be honest, I'm not sure Gen Y'ers find anythi…

[deleted]

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#276

Post by silverlake »

ra3 wrote: post #9

Can't say a lot of good things about a company that pays a "Chief Happiness Officer" more than most of its engineers. I know plenty of startups that seem to be doing alright in the customer service department without an overpaid exec heading it. Does she really contribute more to the bottom line than any of the other 4 underpaid engineers?

I coincidentally signed up for Buffer today in part because the customer service has been excellent during my trial. So she earned my business.

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#277

Post by Jemaclus »

CodeMage wrote: post #129
rcoder wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Three things: First, most recruiters/hiring managers ask for current comp (or at least a salary range) early in the discussion, so it should be easy for them to offer well over someone's current pay. This simply removes one bargaining tools (lying about current comp) for an employee considering a move elsewhere. Second, matching outside offers very quickly becomes a slippery slope. Anyone who figures out that such a…

> First, most recruiters/hiring managers ask for current comp (or at least a salary range) early in the discussion, so it should be easy for them to offer well over someone's current pay. This simply removes one bargaining tools (lying about current comp) for an employee considering a move elsewhere. "Lying about current comp" is not the only tool for an employee considering a move elsewhere. Nor is it, in my opinion…

Serious question: I've never quite understood the "what if you have a kid" argument. Is it the company's fault you had a kid? Why are they obligated to pay you more because you had a kid? If you were worth $100K and you negotiated for that, then that's what you make -- a kid has nothing to do with it.

Put another way, let's say we both make 100K in salary, and then, all other things being equal, you have a kid. Do you get a raise to 120K just because you had a kid? I didn't have a kid. Don't I get a raise too?

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#278

Post by judk »

steveklabnik wrote: post #166
mrjatx wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree completely. You should, as the potential employee, be well aware of the market pay and what you are willing to be paid to perform the job that you're applying for. Not to mention their job postings actually list a salary window ($88-110k for Backend/Frontend). What the person sitting next to you is paid should bear absolutely no impact on your life or your work ethic. If you're happy to make $88k and the g…

How can you determine market pay when salaries are private? You end up with what we have now: looking at what companies post publicly for salary offers. Some companies don't publish those numbers publicly, and that's only 'new hire' salaries. So it's inaccurate.

Resarch firms buy and sell salary data in bulk.

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#279

Post by ignostic »

swombat wrote: post #65
bjpless wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seconded. Hard to imagine all employees signing off on this release for the sake of a HN article. But I hope that they did. I would be very upset if my salary were published unbeknownst to me.

You would only be upset because you currently work in a company with a culture that doesn't value transparency as a core value. If you worked in a company like Buffer or GrantTree, you'd be wondering why others are so secretive about their salaries, and find yourself more and more disliking the idea of working for a company which is not transparent. Habit is a powerful thing. Change your surroundings and you'll chang…

> "You would only be upset because you currently work in a company with a culture that doesn't value transparency as a core value."

You don't have anywhere near the information necessary to make that claim. Honestly that came across as pretty arrogant.

I'd also argue that a company can be transparent and still understand that some people more private than others. Whether YOU would share your salary with the world isn't material - your employer shouldn't do it unless you've signed off (and I'm sure these people have if anyone involved has a shred of common sense).

I wouldn't want all my love letters and emails published. I wouldn't want my thoughts tapped and broadcast to the world. There's a line somewhere where transparency for the sake of it is either not helpful to the company or a simple invasion of privacy.

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#280

Post by coldEye »

grecy wrote: post #202
tikhonj wrote: post #134

I've always felt the culture of hiding salaries was doing a significant disservice to employees. It creates a significant and largely artificial information disparity, giving a major market advantage to the employer. In turn, this makes the entire labor market less efficient for the employee. This also makes the employer less accountable to the employees. The employer can easily pay somebody significantly more or les…

> It creates a significant and largely artificial information disparity, giving a major market advantage to the employer. Absolutely. Having employees not discuss salary is all about the employer having more power/control, and the employees having less. I've always thought it's a little like an adult giving candy to a child and then say "Now, don't tell anyone I gave you this!". Why doesn't the adult want anyone to k…

Actually, under the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938, it's illegal for an employer to prevent employees from discussing their salaries. Not that the laws on the books are ever applied to corporations nowadays, but in a legal sense this is true.
Post reply on HN