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

281–290 of 352 posts

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#281

Post by grecy »

jakejake wrote: post #257
grecy wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Hehe, no worries. It probably is somewhat due to our generations, but it may also be that as you age your salaries naturally will begin to diverge. And with a certain amount of success it's not exactly smart to go around broadcasting your wealth. I personally am self conscious about coming off as a rich jackass when I go to my hometown and visit my high school friends who are working for minimum wage. For a venture f…

>I personally am self conscious about coming off as a rich jackass when I go to my hometown and visit my high school friends who are working for minimum wage.

I agree 100%. There is a fine line to be walked between "sharing" your salary and "bragging" about your salary.

For me, I find it easy to share with people in a similar-ish scenario/career/position in life. It's not so easy to share with someone in a very different life situation, like working a minimum wage job, as you say.

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#282

Post by VexXtreme »

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…

At my company discussing salary is grounds for instant termination. It's specified in our contracts. People still talk though.

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#283

Post by zmitri »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #217
zmitri wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. For less than that amount I had a floor of a brownstone in Brooklyn, 20-30 minute commute via subway, paid off 10 year student loans in It's that's "only" middle class, the world is in serious trouble.

What does the term of a loan have to do with anything? It's a meaningless metric in your context.

That's just what we call the loan where I'm from.

It's the loan I took out to pay for my 4 year undergraduate university education in it's entirety.

Is that better?

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#284

Post by bmelton »

jakejake wrote: post #257
grecy wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Hehe, no worries. It probably is somewhat due to our generations, but it may also be that as you age your salaries naturally will begin to diverge. And with a certain amount of success it's not exactly smart to go around broadcasting your wealth. I personally am self conscious about coming off as a rich jackass when I go to my hometown and visit my high school friends who are working for minimum wage. For a venture f…

> It probably is somewhat due to our generations, but it may also be that as you age your salaries naturally will begin to diverge.

That right there. I'm nearer forty than 20, and I remember a time when I freely discussed my salary, or the price of anything I'd purchased with anyone who'd asked. Now, not so much.

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#285

Post by laureny »

grecy wrote: post #249
laureny wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Having employees not discuss salary is all about the employer having more power/control, and the employees having less. You seem to imply that just because the employees know all the salaries, they have more control. This is not accurate. They have more knowledge but certainly not more control. If anything, the fact that the salaries are the result of a simple equation means that the employees have close to no cont…

> You seem to imply that just because the employees know all the salaries, they have more control. This is not accurate. No. I'm saying that because the employees know all the salaries, the employer has less control. The employer can no longer dictate terms and make secret differing deals with different parties.

> No. I'm saying that because the employees know all the salaries, the employer has less control.

How does the employer have less control when he is unilaterally deciding what the formula is and he can stonewall any request to discuss salary by hiding behind that formula?

"You know what, Dave, I know you want more money but I just decided to add a negative 'is disrepectful of superiors' factor' and your salary just went down $5k. Isn't transparency great?".

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#286

Post by gaadd33 »

walshemj wrote: post #27
carsongross wrote: post #7

I like this idea, but with a few modifications: * Names should be anonymous. Everyone knows where they are within the group and can determine if its fair without knowing exactly who makes what. * It should include options and bonuses. In some companies non-salary compensation dwarfs salaries, and it's dishonest to point to a CEO salary and say "Look, he only makes 1.something X what regular people do." * Keep it inte…

And what equity do you get for giving up 10k - Whats the cap table look like I know that one FTSE 100 co's basic share option scheme is going to turn out >£60k tax free next year (its a 5 year scheme so say 10k pa) so it had better beat that.

Aren't share save scheme's more like employee stock option programs? Most large companies offer them and they are usually pure profit for the employee since you buy the stock at a discount.

If its like equity/option grants in tech companies, I assume it can vary significantly on how much you are given and is pretty customized to your compensation package? i.e. junior dev only gets $10K in shares (over 4 years) vs a senior dev that gets $50K.

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#287

Post by gaadd33 »

scotty79 wrote: post #245
sytelus wrote: post #205

Things I learned today: * Buffer is not somebody's weekend project * It needs 16 (yes, SIXTEEN) people to run that thing * They actually have revenue. In millions. $2.3 Millions! * Their company values are based on How to win friends and influence people. Aside from that, open salaries are pretty naive idea, if not completely dumb and dangerous. The lives you live everyday is in effect a game (as in "game theory" gam…

> Aside from that, open salaries are pretty naive idea, if not completely dumb and dangerous. In Sweden all salaries are public, look how awful they are doing.

How does that work if you are a consultant for example? Or, not sure how common they are in Sweden, a salesperson paid only on commission?

I guess I'm curious how it deals with extremely variable salaries or is it just last year's that's public?

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#288

Post by nilkn »

laureny wrote: post #221
grecy wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> Having employees not discuss salary is all about the employer having more power/control, and the employees having less. You seem to imply that just because the employees know all the salaries, they have more control. This is not accurate. They have more knowledge but certainly not more control. If anything, the fact that the salaries are the result of a simple equation means that the employees have close to no cont…

This isn't true. In the posted numbers, there aren't any major discrepancies between people doing the same job. But imagine if you saw two programmers with roughly the same background and experience with a $20k+ difference in salary. The reason you don't see that is precisely because the salaries are public.

Your error is assuming that the same formula would be used if the salaries weren't public. The employer is forced to use a simple, consistent formula. They would be under no such pressure if all salaries were secret.

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#289

Post by fleitz »

7Figures2Commas wrote: post #34
fleitz wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, you talk about transparency, fairness, etc. If you're sticking to that salary structure you're not going to win on price in this market. Warm fuzzies are important to a lot of people, look at how non-profits retain people. Also, there are a lot of people who don't know how to negotiate that would probably benefit from something like this. I know a few devs who stick around at places because they like the people…

> I know a lot of devs who stick around at places because they like the people, etc, despite having had multiple offers for more money. Sure, but that's not the only consideration here. Employees don't always have the option of sticking around at a company. Not all startups make it, and people are terminated or laid off from jobs they love all the time. If and when the time comes to find another job, a public record…

If you're not employed you have a very poor BATNA.

Re: Introducing Open Salaries at Buffer

#290

Post by nickonline »

Jemaclus wrote: post #277
CodeMage wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 yo…

I think you're looking at this wrong. The kid is an example for why the budget gets tight, it could be anything (buying a house, deciding to pay off your credit card), you're correct the company has no obligation. Hence why you're asking, not informing that they'll pay you $20k more.

"If you were worth $100K and you negotiated for that, then that's what you make" was true at the time of the initial negotiation. This is a separate negotiation, with a source "hey, company X will pay me 20% more"

No, you don't deserve $20k more as you didn't ask for it, you might if you reopened negotiations.

Post reply on HN