Buffer’s Salary Formula 3.0

#1

Post by abhij89 » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 10:44 AM UTC

Buffer’s Salary Formula 3.0
open.buffer.com

Re: Buffer’s Salary Formula 3.0

#2

Post by moxious » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 11:27 AM UTC

I applaud transparency in general and the intent here is noble. One of my companies considered adopting the old model for a time.

However:

> The new formula now includes an elastic part that adjusts to the cost of living and market influence of salaries for different roles.

The transparency and simplicity of the old model was its key value. The more complex and hard to assess terms you put in, the more you lose transparency and make salary assignment something that can be "massaged" to fit the circumstances. And I think having a formula is supposed to be the antithesis of that.

But this is a really hard damn problem. Markets aren't the same, and people's egos are real. Algorithms don't tend to do well when one of the things in the balance is "people's perception of fairness" since fairness is an emotional and non-quantitative concept.

Re: Buffer’s Salary Formula 3.0

#3

Post by StavrosK » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 11:32 AM UTC

I really dislike adjusting salaries of remote employees by location. Oh, you live in San Francisco, where everything costs a lot because it's trivial to network and get a multitude of job offers the minute you change your LinkedIn status? Let us pay you for the privilege double what we pay someone in Kenya who has none of these opportunities!

Or, alternatively, "You don't live in SF so we don't have to compete with a bunch of other companies for your salary? Haha, sucker, here's less money for the same job."

Re: Buffer’s Salary Formula 3.0

#4

Post by tallanvor » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 11:36 AM UTC

Good luck attracting and retaining qualified support people with that type of salary disparity.

Re: Buffer’s Salary Formula 3.0

#5

Post by mxstbr » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 11:39 AM UTC

(2016)

The formula in that post is outdated, they recently changed it again, this is the blogpost from December about the changes: https://open.buffer.com/salary-formula/

Re: Buffer’s Salary Formula 3.0

#6

Post by pablolmiranda » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 11:44 AM UTC

Based on all the parameters, It’s funny that Andy lives in SF and is with the company longer than Sunil CTO that lives in Boston, and makes less than Sunil. Something doesn’t look so transparent.

Re: Buffer’s Salary Formula 3.0

#7

Post by ploggingdev » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 11:45 AM UTC

StavrosK wrote: post #3

I really dislike adjusting salaries of remote employees by location. Oh, you live in San Francisco, where everything costs a lot because it's trivial to network and get a multitude of job offers the minute you change your LinkedIn status? Let us pay you for the privilege double what we pay someone in Kenya who has none of these opportunities! Or, alternatively, "You don't live in SF so we don't have to compete with a…

Basecamp recently started paying all employees SF salaries : https://m.signalvnoise.com/basecamp-doesnt-employ-anyone-in-... They are a class act, I'm not aware of any other company that does this.

Re: Buffer’s Salary Formula 3.0

#8

Post by chrisan » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 11:48 AM UTC

StavrosK wrote: post #3

I really dislike adjusting salaries of remote employees by location. Oh, you live in San Francisco, where everything costs a lot because it's trivial to network and get a multitude of job offers the minute you change your LinkedIn status? Let us pay you for the privilege double what we pay someone in Kenya who has none of these opportunities! Or, alternatively, "You don't live in SF so we don't have to compete with a…

Ya.. I don't get how they can call this a "remote-first" approach or adheres to "Do the Right Thing" for the employees

The reason these high cost of living places exist is because they are in high demand due to all the benefits. Someone living in North Dakota (sorry anyone who is, I'm sure it is great!) won't have all the culture, food, weather, entertainment, night life, etc of someone living in the bay area.

A "Do the Right Thing" would be to truly embrace "remote-first" and realize you are paying someone for the work they do, not where they live. We are paying $x for job y and what you do with the value you bring to the company is up to you: live some place nice or some place cheap.

Our company is 100% remote (most live in bay area anyways) and we don't have pay scales by area.

Re: Buffer’s Salary Formula 3.0

#9

Post by joeblau » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 11:49 AM UTC

tallanvor wrote: post #4

Good luck attracting and retaining qualified support people with that type of salary disparity.

  If your engineers are this good
  You don't need support
  :roll-safe:

But seriously. I don't know too much about support salaries. Most of the salaries seem in a good range. The only one that stands out for me is maybe the Android engineer — that seems a bit low especially for Toronto.

Re: Buffer’s Salary Formula 3.0

#10

Post by kawera » Thu, Jan 04, 2018, 12:00 PM UTC

StavrosK wrote: post #3

I really dislike adjusting salaries of remote employees by location. Oh, you live in San Francisco, where everything costs a lot because it's trivial to network and get a multitude of job offers the minute you change your LinkedIn status? Let us pay you for the privilege double what we pay someone in Kenya who has none of these opportunities! Or, alternatively, "You don't live in SF so we don't have to compete with a…

Exactly. Plus, are their services priced differently according to the client's location? Obviously not.