31–40 of 86 posts
The average starting salary for a senior Ruby developer has climbed to $94,000 ($107,000 in Silicon Valley). Compare that with the average salary for a junior Ruby developer, $70,000, ($80,000 in Silicone Valley). These numbers strike me as wildly below current market rates in the Valley, based on my discussions with people in it trying to hire. I'm willing to be wrong on that.
The average starting salary for a senior Ruby developer has climbed to $94,000 ($107,000 in Silicon Valley). Compare that with the average salary for a junior Ruby developer, $70,000, ($80,000 in Silicone Valley). These numbers strike me as wildly below current market rates in the Valley, based on my discussions with people in it trying to hire. I'm willing to be wrong on that.
Seriously guys, ninjas were criminals! They were outlaws that killed mainly via indirect confrontation, OCD-like planning, and typically poison. They deserve no praise or idolization for that. Just like I wouldn't hire a diplomat-rockstar programmer either...
There are certainly some important take-aways in this article. What certainly hit home was the reference to high turnover. In my experience, attracting and retaining (perceived) top 1% developers is no small feat. It's damaging to a project when a "rockstar" developer builds out a product set in her chosen (often bleeding edge) framework / language, and then departs at the sign of another "fun" opportunity elsewhere.…
Since I'm in the DC area too, with clearance, the number you're throwing around are a bit of a stretch. We've got junior developers in the high $30K range and senior in the mid $60K range.
Do remember that Google has hired away pretty much all the top engineers already. You won't be able to get good people for cheap prices anymore.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personally, I think "short-term'ism" is a disease that plagues business (if not society as a whole) in America these days. I also think taking more a of a long-term view can be an advantage on many levels, and I have often said that - when we get to a point where we can hire employees - one thing we will do at Fogbeam Labs is focus on hiring younger, less experienced folks and provide training, education, and mentors…
It won't work. you won't do the promote from within step, or you will promote one guy, or you won't pay enough money with the promotions. It will take your employees 2-3 review cycles to learn what's up. At that point your (now experienced) people will leave for places that pay more for experience.
I worked for a company that gave me raises to bring me up to what I was worth for a few years. Then they stopped, and 2-3 review cycles is exactly how long it took me to catch on. By the time I left, my new job paid me 40% more than the old one.
And even before I got my first standard programming job, I knew that proper raises only come from changes jobs in this industry, and I was prepared for it.
I would have loved to pick a company and stay put, but companies just don't keep up their end of things.
In the end, it works out, though. I get an exciting new job every few years, and the fact that everyone is doing this makes sure there are plenty of job openings all the time.
I've yet to figure out what the companies get out of it, other than a temporary cost cut. (They end up spending the money to train the new guy.)
Are they really talking about Ninja-Rockstar engineers, or "only" developers at the 10x end of the Mythical Man Month spectrum? Because you can hire a junior engineer close to that end of the spectrum. It's just harder to know whether they are really that good without seeing a track record. From the article: >The rationale you'll typically hear is along the lines of "a great developer is 10x as productive as a medioc…
The best developers all just have jobs and aren't looking most of the time. Sounds like another good reason to focus on hiring recent grads, career changers, etc., to me. You just have to figure out a way to predict - better than chance - which ones will become great developers. Whether or not that's doable is, I suppose, an open question.
In fact, I don't know that productivity goes up a lot after that point. Experience does, which certainly improves your OVERALL productivity, but I know that I was much faster at cranking out code as a new college graduate than I am now, so it might balance out.
Or maybe I'm just too old to be in the trenches, but too stubborn to leave them. ;)
The average starting salary for a senior Ruby developer has climbed to $94,000 ($107,000 in Silicon Valley). Compare that with the average salary for a junior Ruby developer, $70,000, ($80,000 in Silicone Valley). These numbers strike me as wildly below current market rates in the Valley, based on my discussions with people in it trying to hire. I'm willing to be wrong on that.
Here in the DC area tech talent is cheap. You can get senior developers for around $60K.
There are certainly some important take-aways in this article. What certainly hit home was the reference to high turnover. In my experience, attracting and retaining (perceived) top 1% developers is no small feat. It's damaging to a project when a "rockstar" developer builds out a product set in her chosen (often bleeding edge) framework / language, and then departs at the sign of another "fun" opportunity elsewhere.…
Personnel retention is easy - just demonstrate on any level that the contributions of the workforce is appreciated. Since I'm in the DC area too, with clearance, the number you're throwing around are a bit of a stretch. We've got junior developers in the high $30K range and senior in the mid $60K range.
That seems incredibly low, especially for a major metropolitan area. You must give great benefits.