Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level • Hacker News Board

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#441

Post by thorwasdfasdf » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 5:40 PM UTC

cletus wrote: post #180

thatsenough wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The top firms have gotten themselves into an insane bidding war. That may be true, but there's more to it than that. The first wave of successful IPOs (Facebook, Amazon, Google, Twitter, etc.) caused a spike in housing prices as employees purchased houses. On top of that, companies have added tens of thousands of new jobs, without proportional growth in the housing supply. So housing prices are now absurd, and thes…

Yeah I think this part is a stretch. Just look at Vancouver as a far more extreme example of how local property prices can be out of whack with wages. House prices are a function of wages (or, more accurately, have a floor set by wages if land is constrained) not the other way around. Also, the level of entitlement by a lot of such engineers I find to be borderline disgusting. Why do you think you're entitled to a $1…

No, COL definately is a large reason. Even the same engineers at Google will get paid different amounts based on where they are located. I believe the Bay area is x1.5 more than other cities, for google.

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#442

Post by ng7j5d9 » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 5:41 PM UTC

mlthoughts2018 wrote: post #354

notacoward wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any evidence for that claim? I don't have anything broad-based, but I work remotely for one of these companies and make exactly what I would if I worked at HQ. And it's not because I'm some super-awesome negotiator.

Gitlab famously publishes a bizarrely micromanaged & comprehensive policy on how they will reduce your salary based on where you choose to move, and they are a fully remote company. It never ceases to amaze me how companies try to argue they shouldn’t pay their top wage everywhere, and how workers are willing to accept this. Especially for a remote-only company where your salary should literally not be based on costs…

I've looked at Gitlab's calculator and decided not to apply for a job there as a result. As a potential employee it does feel quite unfair that someone else doing the same job might make twice as much money.

If you put yourself in Gitlab's shoes and imagine hiring people, it does make some sense. A couple years back I remember reading articles about the oil boom in North Dakota. People were flooding into a remote area that was lacking all sort of services, so next thing you know rates shot up, even for mundane stuff like barbers or auto mechanics. Of course, I don't want to pay twice as much for a haircut or oil change just because some folks in a boomtown a thousand miles away are charging those rates.

Of course, my hair can't be cut and my oil can't be changed remotely, but a REST service sure can be implemented from a thousand miles away. It'll be interesting to see if GitLab sticks with their approach long-term, as I do believe (anecdotally) they are missing out on good talent in second-tier cities.

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#443

Post by RickS » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 5:43 PM UTC

corporateslave5 wrote: post #4

For everyone who doesn’t know, you’re getting shafted at that medium size startup/company. Most of these FAANG engineers are not geniuses, they just studied for the interviews

No comment on the "shafted" aspect, but the "not geniuses" thing is exactly correct, and I wish I had realized it sooner.

I didn't apply for google when I left college because I didn't feel like I would "meet the bar". ~4 years later, feeling like I was a much stronger candidate, I interviewed, hoping to barely scrape by and be the dumbest guy in the room to keep leveling up.

I was dumbstruck by just how totally normal everyone was. Everyone I met at google struck me as being in the 50-75th percentile of my peers in startup land. They're not some high-powered cohort of elite intellectual supermutants. They're regular people. I was ready at graduation, and sold myself short for no good reason.

Now that I work at a BigCo, I feel even more strongly that the bar is, if anything, on the low side, simply because an org that big needs a constant influx of warm bodies. We hire more people in a month than some of my past employers would hire in the lifetime of the company. It's flat out impossible to staff 5,000 people while demanding that they all be in the top 10%.

There are weird and arguably arbitrary hoops to jump through, but you can do it. Interview prep was radically simpler than EG buying a house (in terms of prep, context gathering, etc.)

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#444

Post by thorwasdfasdf » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 5:44 PM UTC

opportune wrote: post #76

It makes me feel bad how many people see these figures and immediately start trying to find ways to rationalize why they must be overstated. Aside from some of these companies not being public (so those RSUs are not very liquid) or backloading vesting, they’re pretty accurate IME. The main thing I would point out is that the years of experience guideline is a bit optimistic. Many engineers get downleveled moving into…

some of it could be jealousy and envy since most SWE won't get to ever work at a FAANG. FAANGs higher the best, and if you've failed at getting highered by a FANG then you probably won't like seeing all these great figures.

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#445

Post by thorwasdfasdf » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 5:46 PM UTC

senordevnyc wrote: post #322

Reposting from previous comment of mine [1]: I can't speak to the actual work yet as I haven't started, but I just accepted an offer as a senior / staff level engineer in NYC at one of the smaller public tech companies (think Dropbox, Lyft, Pinterest, Snap, etc) after 10+ years of being self-employed. I had two startups offer me $170k plus some (probably worthless) options. When the offer I ultimately accepted came i…

this is really awesome. I've worked at a SWE for over 15 years and never made anything close to that amount, even in a super high COL area.

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#446

Post by zeroonetwothree » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 5:47 PM UTC

rb808 wrote: post #382

Can anyone reconcile the difference between $227k median wage in SV and the fact that even entry level jobs listed pay more than than? Is it just the most SV jobs are not in FANG companies.

The Bay Area has around ~900k "tech jobs". FANG is a small fraction of that. Also "tech" may include other roles (non-engineer) which earn less.

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#447

Post by zeroonetwothree » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 5:51 PM UTC

shrimpx wrote: post #343

Presumably you have to pay income tax on base+rsu so shave off >50% from these figures if you live in California? Then rent can run you 35-50k a year or more in the bay, and then other expenses? So 600k a year can be more like <200k savings at the end of the day? Someone debunk this.

It would actually be something like this: Gross: $600k Federal Tax: $142k CA Tax: $45k Net: $413k Effective Tax Rate: 31%

Of course your savings rate depends on how much you spend, you could easily spend >$200k/yr, especially if you have a family and want to live near good schools or pay for private school.

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#448

Post by city41 » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 5:56 PM UTC

zerr wrote: post #432

city41 wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Netflix is a little different from other companies. Netflix pays entirely in cash plus a small stock option bonus on top. You can opt to get any amount of your salary as stock options if you choose. There are no vesting schedules, you get everything immediately (including 401k). Netflix has unlimited vacation.

I wonder how unlimited is that - how common is that people take e.g. 60+ days off (not including sick leaves of course)? I guess most self-impose 30 days limit (or 15, considering US culture).

It varies a lot from team to team and person to person. In general I would say that Netflix encourages healthy work/life balance and people do use vacation a good amount.

And just to be clear, I currently work at Netflix.

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#449

Post by robrenaud » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 5:56 PM UTC

monoideism wrote: post #377

qqwaabb wrote: post #345

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only thing that’s significantly more expensive in the Bay Area is housing. Even with the housing prices, you will still probably come out ahead. Remember that if you own, you are building up equity in a huge asset. CoL calculators online are not accurate at all. I personally work remotely for a FAANG from the upper Midwest, but if this arrangement ever runs out I’d move to California or Seattle before I took a 30…

> I personally work remotely for a FAANG from the upper Midwest Which FAANGs hire remotely, please? And why do you think online COL calculators are inaccurate? They're relatively close to government reimbursement tables, which are pretty well-researched. Edit: Also, once again, I'm not arguing that I wouldn't come out ahead, only that you have to consider COL. So many new grads I know have moved to CA for a junior po…

You need to account for savings. A dollar saved in a high COL area is as good as one saved in a low COL area. If compensation triples and cost of living triples, your savings also triples.

If you are saving 100k/year in a place that is very expensive, and are happy to live in a place with low COL, work for 10 years in the high earning/high cost of living area and retire in the low COL area.

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#450

Post by nostrademons » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 5:57 PM UTC

abalone wrote: post #338

cletus wrote: post #171

As a FAANG engineer going on 9 years now, let me address the usual rebuttals: - There is a selection bias. Nope, this is pretty much accurate. - These aren't real. Yes, yes they are. - Self-reporters are lying. Maybe some do but these numbers are pretty accurate. If anything, I question Lyft and Airbnb as such outliers. I wonder if this factored in Lyft's post-IPO stock performance and makes unrealistic valuations of…

> The gold standard is probably Kaiser for CA residents. I love your post but I almost shat myself when I read this. Kaiser is convenient but not top ranked in much. The gold standard is a PPO that lets you go anywhere (else) you like incl. top specialists + a membership primary care network like OneMedical for convenience. (By the way, I support Medicare4All. Good healthcare shouldn’t just be for wealthy FAANG engin…

Kaiser varies significantly based on which center you end up in. I've heard very good things about the Redwood City location and very bad things about Santa Clara. There're probably similar variations among its other hospitals. YMMV.

I've been on various Anthem PPOs of varying quality (Google's covered basically everything with zero copay or deductible, their individual plan wouldn't even cover my PCP, my wife's plan was in the middle but getting progressively worse). There's a convenience/flexibility tradeoff. With Kaiser you know that they'll take care of you but you don't have a lot of flexibility or recourse if your particular needs don't meet what they offer. With a PPO you have a lot of flexibility to choose the best providers available, but you have to fight with the health insurance company for a lot of things, and the administrative hassles can be a huge burden.