411–418 of 418 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just in the states? What about in Europe? FB, Google and others have headquarters in Dublin. I don't think they pay anything like that, do they?
For a BigCo the Dublin pay is going to be roughly 50-70% of the US pay for the same job.
Tangential to this article, but >pay outside of the US is often much lower for reasons that don’t really make sense to me). Can someone explain why salaries in for example Europe are so much less? Out of uni salary for example seems to be around 38k in Europe, whereas in US everything under 90k seems very low. Just the difference in purchase power and costs?
In Europe we lack software companies of such scale. Why? Not too long ago going global from the middle of nowhere was not an option. Companies would saturate their local market and fail to grow across borders. I'd venture to say this is due to the (1) lack of international sales experience, (2) different laws / work practices elsewhere, and (3) language barriers.
I know 3 companies doing accounting software in Estonia with a population of 1.4 million. These companies know the business better then anybody else and the market is too small for any of the big players to consider. Similar patterns can be seen across industries.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Consulting without long hours? Does that exist?
For my case, in a consulting company headquartered in a relatively 3rd world country, it is not allowed to work after 6pm. Because of family issues that employers value.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For a BigCo the Dublin pay is going to be roughly 50-70% of the US pay for the same job.
Do you base this on something?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You were probably down leveled based on the interview. The comp will max out lower (and therefore the offer won't be able to budge significantly higher) than you may achieve somewhere that did not downlevel you.
I don't think so - I am pretty certain I aced both technical phone screens, answered the questions fast, and explained everything clearly with a high level understanding of everything asked (including all the nuances) while remaining calm & jovial the whole way. The technical screens were some of the easiest interviews I've ever had. I should note that I didn't get to the in-person interview, and that was because sal…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The more correct rule is that you should try to find companies that have closely aligned business and technology objectives (which I haven't found outside of finance and the usual SV companies in the F500), but I have my doubts even that is the case because I'm working for a large organization that meets this criteria and I'd never think of advising a young, ambitious recent graduate to even reply to a recruiter for…
I have an offer to do data science work for a large, public insurer. I will work inside an "innovation lab", and was promised lots of freedom and authority during the interview process. They say they want the "innovation labs" to run like startups, trying out new products and ideas at a fast clip. Do you have any thoughts about what the general environment will be like, and is there any chance the place will be mired…
Look for a deep culture of respected and accomplished leaders in software up and down the hierarchy. If nobody in a position of authority has delivered software successfully before that you can recognize as an engineer, pass because culture and experience among executives is massively important and their priorities should focus on long term growth (Amazon was ridiculed by enterprise vendors while I screamed that they will eat their business in a decade - they don't care because they'll go somewhere else while I have to deal with the very expensive consequences of bad software). There are too many great companies around today to waste time on mediocre companies - it is better to be jobless for months or years waiting for a great company to accept you for your talents than to waste some of the best years on companies where your best efforts will result in second rate winnings. It's a huge risk to work for mediocre companies that will not put the work you will have to put in themselves.
My e-mail is djk29a on Google's e-mail service. Not sure how the first part of your e-mail works out and I'm several days late so hopefully this is relevant advice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm a senior programmer at a smallish company (30 programmers around 150 people total) where I've been for 5 years and I make 60k. Funny part is I bill out at 140 per hour and am 95% billable.
I think this community is frankly out of touch on compensation expectations for the bulk of the population, but you are definitely underpaid and should find another job elsewhere.
Company 1 (~25 employees, entertainment industry. No benefits. No stock.)
1997-2000 $30,757.56 (entry level)
2001-2002 $98,944.97 (junior)
2003 $128,986.96 (senior)
Company 2 (post dot-com crash brought salaries way down, ~150 employees, software company. Ok benefits. No stock.)
2003-2005 $66,838.10 (mid-level)
2006 $77,699.29 (senior)
Company 3 (non-tech startup, 5 full-time employees. OK benefits. Small amount of stock.)
2007 $114,465.95 (senior)
2008-2012 $77,529.03 (senior, pay cut after investments were cut)
Company 4 (~120 employees, ad firm. Goodish benefits. No stock.)
2013 $100,000 (mid-level)
2014 $110,000 (senior)
Not only do company sizes, upward trajectories, educational background, company industry, etc. impact earnings, but where you are in relation to business cycles and booms/busts really matter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's completely accurate - hence the location part. If you sought to add clarification, the first sentence was unneccessary. Let's confine this to "they won't hire in most of the Continental United States". Even for exceptional candidates, remote is also completely out of the question for them. That's obviously their right and I don't hold them against them. (But it's worth contrasting with someone like Red Hat, who…
> Facebook is often avoided by some very sharp kernel (and other) folks, because they greatly insist on a boot camp and can't guarantee what department you are going to work for. They lost some brilliant folks as a result. I wouldn't work for them for that reason, as I think the team and the manager are the most important parts of the hiring decision. That sounds better than Google's "work on what we tell you to" app…
I don't know how much preference you can have.
As such, I think it's possibly very similar, though I thought with Google you did get to apply for specific groups.