Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level • Hacker News Board

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#521

Post by enitihas » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 9:25 PM UTC

peripitea wrote: post #174

nixgeek wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I kinda disagree, Oracle/HP (personal experience) and Google/IBM (extremely good friends) both have career tracks for IC which go up to ‘Distinguished Engineer’ level, and where compensation can be equivalent to a VP on the management track. What you might be trying to say is there are more available positions at VP than DE, so your chances of making it are better? Or that being promoted to VP is easier than to DE? I…

Yes, that's exactly what he's saying -- the "just as well" part is key. Sure, there's an IC track that goes up to the SVP level at many companies, but it's statistically much harder to climb pretty much everywhere.

I think most companies do not even have IC roles analogous to SVP. Google has two Senior fellows, and those are two guys who are far too famous and responsible for too much of the Google backbone infrastructure.

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#522

Post by twblalock » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 9:30 PM UTC

hodder wrote: post #461

twblalock wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Go on Zillow or Redfin and look at Bay Area housing prices near major tech companies (Cupertino, Mountain View, Palo Alto, San Francisco) and you'll see that 1 million dollars is entry level for a single-family home, and ~700k is entry-level for a condo that has HOA payments ~400-500 per month. That's the bottom line -- cost of living is so high the salaries need to be high too, or people won't accept them.

You're implying high housing prices cause higher salaries when it is almost certainly the other way around. High salaries and limited supply seem to be the key causal factors in high housing prices.

It's a vicious cycle. People are still coming to the area and they demand high salaries because housing prices are high, and housing prices are high because of the high salaries of people already living in the area.

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#523

Post by mabbo » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 9:33 PM UTC

ab_testing wrote: post #440

esoterica wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Presumably the ones who wanted to move already have so you’ve never met them.

Exactly, most of the people that I know and moved to Amazon Canada did so,because they got stuck in a visa limbo in the US

But after a year or two in the Canadian offices, they usually qualify for an L-1 if they wanted to go back.

And yet, here we all are.

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#524

Post by senordevnyc » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 9:40 PM UTC

softawre wrote: post #512

senordevnyc wrote: post #478

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here's a 2 bedroom less than 10 mins away from Google for $1.2M: https://streeteasy.com/building/marais-coop/10b

900sqft. I like my space.

I like my city. I don't need more space.

The point is, buying a place for $1.2M in walking distance isn't crazy.

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#525

Post by senordevnyc » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 9:42 PM UTC

paxys wrote: post #495

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…

Since you had no big tech company on your resume, what do you think was the biggest factor in getting you the job? Interview performance? Project portfolio? Or something else?

I can't be sure, but probably specializing in iOS. I also had a few "name brand" Fortune 1000 clients on the resume, though I hadn't worked on those projects for years and didn't discuss them. But maybe helped get me to phone screen stage.

From there, it's all about interview performance.

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#526

Post by rationalfaith » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 9:50 PM UTC

These studies are annoying and just smell like envy by the most average parasites in this industry. How about you focus on adding value and setting the right price for yourself.

Some are grateful with 100k and others 500k. You can negotiate your price because you're an adult.

If you can't, then grow up.

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#527

Post by subsubzero » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 10:00 PM UTC

monoideism wrote: post #323

bovermyer wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is fascinating to me since I've never worked (since graduating, anyway) outside of the Upper Midwest. I worked for a startup here once, but that was bar none the worst job I've ever had. Job offers have never been anything but a straight salary and a 401k, sometimes with matching, sometimes not. No bonuses or stock ever. Raises have usually been just below inflation rates. Vacation peaked for me at 3 weeks. For…

> I make $130k right now. If you're in a reasonable COL area, you're probably closer to FAANG salaries than you think. I make about that in a relatively low COL city in the south. After receiving some recruitment emails, I thought about FAANGs but ran the numbers and decided against it. $400000 is not nearly as awesome as it sounds if you're living in the Bay area or similar tech mecca. Note: it's an immense salary,…

As a parent and engineer in the bay area COL is more extreme than other higher cost areas in the country, My company gives a 15% paycut from the sf bay area to say Colorado front range and these were a few things I noticed (having lived in both, colorado on left sfbay on right): - Housing, 3000 sqft house vs. 1500 sqft (sfbay house double the cost) - Taxes(state) - ~4.8% vs ~10% - Property taxes - $6k vs. $17k yearly - Gas ~$2.2 per gal vs. ~$3.40 a gal - Childcare, 12k vs 24k

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#528

Post by whiskyant » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 10:03 PM UTC

overcast wrote: post #396

esoterica wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He’s not “stuck” renting, he’s choosing to rent because he wants to save money and doesn’t mind having roommates. You can absolutely afford your own apartment on far less than 400k/year in the Bay Area.

So he's still renting then?

I'm not planning to buy a house until after I'm married.

Also, houses here tend to all be over $1M, good ones well over $1.5M. The average sold house price last month in Palo Alto was $2.76M with an average ~1900k sqft: https://www.redfin.com/city/14325/CA/Palo-Alto/housing-marke....

Additionally, I'm slightly concerned about a possible real estate bubble + I'm not sure if I plan to live in South Bay for 5+ years (the usual amount of time needed to keep your house for it to be worth it financially).

It's not that I can't afford a house, I can; I'd just rather have my money in an index fund and rent instead right now.

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#529

Post by john_petrucci » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 10:06 PM UTC

Just wondering if there was a way to get more data for non-US locations. For example, according to my knowledge, most of Canada's "senior" position salaries (in CAD) are not even near the "entry-level" salaries (is USD). If you convert the CAD salary to USD then it becomes even more pathetic. Canada has "free" healthcare but the taxes are higher than California/Seattle. Granted, you don't have to spend 2-3M for houses (only California), but the housing markets around Toronto, Vancouver, Ottawa are also anything but "affordable" (around 700k-1.5M mark). I wonder why there is such a huge pay disparity between two neighbor countries with sort of similar "standards" of living. Just house prices and "free medical" (which is covered by your job anyways) cannot justify the 5-7 times salary difference. Wondering if anyone else had other opinions?

Re: Top Paying Tech Companies by SWE Level

#530

Post by gok » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 10:17 PM UTC

TomVDB wrote: post #165

gok wrote: post #131

I still don't understand how they're defining total compensation. Federal taxable wages, like what shows up on your W-2? Or the amount you're promised including RSUs, regardless of vesting schedule?

Salary (W2 before tax) + bonus + promised RSUs. It's not an unreasonable way to calculate it, and given the way the economy has been going in the past 10 years, it's lowballing the real taxable compensation.

A W2 includes bonus and RSU vest though...