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

The Programmer Salary Taboo

thurn.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 331 posts

Re: The Programmer Salary Taboo

#121

Post by kelnos »

michaelochurch wrote: post #112
run4yourlives wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Imagine what would happen if there were five $70k salaries and one $165k salary for six people doing the same work. People would suddenly get very uncomfortable. Isn't that the entire point of the first exercise however? If the 165k salary isn't completely obvious, then it should make people feel uncomfortable - they are being shafted.

If you're getting the $165k, you're not going to be very enthusiastic about this exercise. The modular-arithmetic alternative is better, at least in terms of political stability: they figure out that there's an average of $86k. Then the people making $70k all negotiate up to $90k and, even if getting shafted, people are happier.

> If you're getting the $165k, you're not going to be very enthusiastic about this exercise.

Why not? I'd be completely fine being the odd one out, especially if it helped to encourage my lower-paid co-workers to renegotiate their salaries.

The whole point of this exercise, IMO, is to determine if there's inequity, and how much. I'd want to know the full salary range, not just the average. Companies rely on you knowing very little about your peers' salaries; more information can only help you, even if it might make you feel a little bad.

Re: The Programmer Salary Taboo

#122

Post by michaelochurch »

jRoden wrote: post #114
michaelochurch wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is better because it determines the average but not distribution. Imagine what would happen if there were five $70k salaries and one $165k salary for six people doing the same work. People would suddenly get very uncomfortable. One technical gripe: you forgot that the arithmetic needs to be modular to guarantee anonymity. Let's just say the large random number is chosen between 0 and 9,999,999. (You need a range…

Umm...what? The first person just picks a number, there's no RNG involved, no need to tell anyone a range. I know we're taught to plan for edge cases, but I find this pretty silly. edit: Nevermind the second point, I basically echoed what run4yourlives said - I think the averaging somewhat defeats the purpose. "Political stability" is the whole reason they ask not to disclose salaries in the first place.

I'd be more comfortable with a real random (at least pseudorandom) number. Humans are terrible at generating random numbers and information could be given away on account of this. For example, people tend to favor 5s and 6s when generating "random" large numbers.

Re: The Programmer Salary Taboo

#123

Post by Tangaroa »

anon-e-moose wrote: post #76

I graduated with a CS degree and am making about $32k a year, before paying for insurance, at an IT job. Where can I sign up for one of these horribly low paying $45-75k/year programming jobs?

You need to buy insurance for your IT job? Please describe. I've never heard of this before. Are there different standards for employee fault in different states? Are there any notable court cases?

I did once work at a place where employees were financially liable for the cost to the company of any mistakes they made, but I assumed that was legally along the same lines as the company's policy of not sending employees 1099s until we threatened to report them to the IRS. We were all hourly, scheduled "independent contractors" too.

(And I hear you on the salaries since I'm making $0 a year and looking for one of those $32k a year jobs. I can understand kick-ass coders with experience making $80k and up, but to imply that I should expect that amount with my degree but no talent or experience? I'm not seeing it in the market.)

Re: The Programmer Salary Taboo

#124

Post by wh-uws »

jinushaun wrote: post #88

Reading all the replies on HN reminds me why companies like to outsource. Americans are expensive and have a strong sense of entitlement. This race to make more money for the sake of money just leads to accelerating inflation across the board. As far as I am concerned, salary is just a number and people can live just fine on $50,000 if they we weren't such a consumerist society.

And you must be in the class of "money isn't that important to me" programmer who will work 100 hours a week for $40,000 a year and years down the road wonder why you feel so slighted.

Its not about entitlement its about worth. If a company makes billions of dollars(or generates that much value for the pedantic) off of a fraction of that many people its stands to reason that at least some of those people are worth a substantial amount more than $50,000

Re: The Programmer Salary Taboo

#125

Post by r00fus »

techiferous wrote: post #105
wging wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$175/hour * 40 hours/week * 50 weeks/year = $350,000/year, for anyone else (like me) who can't immediately estimate equivalent yearly rates.

But remember that there is non-billable work (accounting, etc.) and a 15.3% self-employment tax. And also remember that there are probably not 50 weeks of 40 hours/week at this company but rather short-term or part-time work. And you are paying for your own benefits. I've found a good (albeit a bit conservative) rule-of-thumb is to convert the hourly wage into the yearly salary. Working as a consultant for $175/hour…

Keep in mind that there are many tax tricks you can play here too, like paying yourself dividends and writing off a lot of expenses (speak to an accountant before doing so).

Also the overhead of running a corporation (including lawyer, accountant, payroll, and general insurance) is not much if you're making over $100/hr. It is certainly less than 26.7% (ie, $75 of every $175 minus 15.3%) worth. Most of these costs are fixed, not variable.

Re: The Programmer Salary Taboo

#126

Post by fourk »

euroclydon wrote: post #87
harryh wrote: post #29

Consider a hypothetical scenario for the person on the other side of the table: You are hiring up an engineering team and hope to hire up a team of 10 engineers paying 100k/yr each. So far you've hired 9 people at 100k and are working on filling that last slot. You find someone perfect but he has a competing job offer and is asking for 110k/yr instead of just 100. He's no better than the other 9 people you have alrea…

Here's what I though you were going to say: You're hiring up an engineering team. You have five slots. Four are filled at market salaries. The four people range in productivity from marginal to good-at-stuff-no-one-else-likes, but none of them are that great. You almost have to keep the four folks, because they're entrenched in deliverables and plus, they've shown their dedication to the company. In walks a candidate…

Hiring him for $55k is, in all likelihood, going to result in him quitting when he realizes that he's been unfairly exploited. It's just a matter of time until he discovers his true worth.

Re: The Programmer Salary Taboo

#127

Post by billpaetzke »

MrFoof wrote: post #62

Salaries never stay secrets forever. Hiding them only delays the inevitable. Last year we were having a discussion at lunch. Coworker was building a new house, and when it came to the numbers it was let loose that it was going to cost about $700K. This didn't seem like much, except to a young guy that joined the previous year and had done nothing but kick ass and take names. The new guy was arguably the most talented…

and his bonus nearly matched the new guy's salary, which was an insulting $60K

Is it common to get ~$60k yearly bonus as a programmer? Was this for a finance-industry job? All I've seen (either myself or others) so far is a few hundred dollars to a few thousand.

Re: The Programmer Salary Taboo

#128

Post by gaustin »

I avoid all of the fuss.* I work for a State agency in a low population state. There's a published ceiling and floor on salaries (based on pay band). All salaries are public record.

* Tongue firmly in cheek.

Re: The Programmer Salary Taboo

#129

Post by olalonde »

You know what would really solve the problem? If employers publicly announced the salary they are aiming for in job ads. That way, you wouldn't feel like you got ripped off because of bad negotiation skills.

Re: The Programmer Salary Taboo

#130

Post by kelnos »

lukev wrote: post #61
michaelochurch wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree. First of all, workplace social conflicts develop very fast and are often irrational in nature. If salaries are public knowledge, then people have time to accept that there's just that one incompetent guy making 20% more than he should and within a few hours they forget about it. It's mildly annoying, but as long as people are happy with what they're making and with their own job security, they aren't goin…

>people have time to accept that there's just that one incompetent guy making 20% more than he should and within a few hours they forget about it. Really? I'm not sure about that. >My contention is that people discover a lot of this information anyway and get more angry in a private-salary system. I've never personally heard of a person getting upset upon discovering someone else's private salary. I know lots of peop…

I've never personally heard of a person getting upset upon discovering someone else's private salary.

I have, on several occasions. I've been that upset person once, even.

I know lots of people who are dissatisfied because they're obviously far more valuable than a peer at the same level, and lots of people who are resented because of their parasitism at a higher-level job. (This is in the government system, where salaries are pretty transparent.)

And that's exactly how it should be. If you're far more valuable than a peer but are being paid the same or less, you should be dissatisfied. Ignorance may be bliss, but I'd rather know I'm getting shafted so I can either renegotiate or look for a better opportunity.

Post reply on HN