Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

daily.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 206 posts

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#81

Post by Mezzie »

jawns wrote: post #35

My career path was 10 years in journalism, during which I was also programming as part of my responsibilities, and now 11 years in full-time software development. Under Daily's levels system, I'd have 11 years of "direct" experience and 5 years of "indirect" experience, for a total of 16 years of experience, putting me in their highest band (Level 7) with a salary of $270K. But as I've told every employer who's hired…

Yes, the years of experience metric greatly underestimates the value brought by rare synergies.

I'm a decent programmer/developer, but that isn't my primary worth to a company. My primary worth to a company is that I'm a competent developer with additional specializations in both high-level research and media relations/communications.

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#83

Post by mnsc »

lmilcin wrote: post #33

Salary based on your "experience" as measured by the number of years you survived sitting by the computer. This is absolutely, fucking dumbest idea I ever heard. Say you have two engineers that both have 10 years of experience, one is barely scraping by and one is working his ass off and significant contributor to the team. They earn the same money and, more importantly, they both know it. And the team knows it. And…

> Ambitious people like achieving goals.

Like coming in, making the biggest impact they can eg. do a large spectacular redesign, leave for 10% pay jump immediately and never sticking around for that maintenance nightmare that were hidden in the details?

Incentives will always be a tradeoff because you can't measure skill.

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#84

Post by cindarin »

benreesman wrote: post #64
cindarin wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may be right about many things you said, but this comes off as though you've got a complex about something.

I’ll extend you the benefit of the doubt and assume your intention is to be helpful. Can you be a little more specific and thus potentially actionable?

Unfortunately, I have neither the proper information nor interest to dig into that specifically. My best recommendation is to look into why I might have said that, and decide if you care at all what I thought. If so, take actions to change what things that you have a desire to change.

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#85

Post by SloopJon »

My company has four IC titles, the description of which includes typical experience, with credit for graduate degrees. When we went from two titles to four, I was assigned the highest title, and joked that it was another way of saying "old".

I would be level 7 under Daily's system, making more than I do now, but then what's my monetary incentive to improve? Younger, less experienced colleagues can literally set a countdown timer to their next promotion/raise.

It feels a bit lazy, to be honest. Some people have commented that it will lead to coasting. The alternative that I anticipate is up or out: you're a level 5 performer at a level 7 salary. You might be happy at a level 5.5 salary, but sorry, you're out.

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#86

Post by benreesman »

cindarin wrote: post #84
benreesman wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll extend you the benefit of the doubt and assume your intention is to be helpful. Can you be a little more specific and thus potentially actionable?

Unfortunately, I have neither the proper information nor interest to dig into that specifically. My best recommendation is to look into why I might have said that, and decide if you care at all what I thought. If so, take actions to change what things that you have a desire to change.

Maybe keep it to yourself if the game plan is to half-ass psychoanalyze someone and then bail when asked a follow up question?

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#87

Post by sofixa »

rr808 wrote: post #46
parkingrift wrote: post #18

Strong disagree with basing salary on years of experience. I see almost no correlation between output, skill, and years of experience. I actually consider this an anti-pattern that actively encourages coasting.

As someone with 20+ yoe this is true, I'm probably as good as a guy with 5 yoe and honestly I want to apply for jobs like that. Honestly tech has changed so much I'm skeptical anyone really has 20 years experience now. Its hard though when people see my work history they only let me interview for very senior roles which I usually aren't good enough to do.

Do you need to divulge your whole work experience? You can just share the last 5-10 years ( most relevant), and then you wouldn't be put up for jobs you don't feel up to.

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#88

Post by Cthulhu_ »

soco wrote: post #79
humanrebar wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you felt you were underpaid, leaving is fair. I don't really understand the requirement that all bosses are paid more than those they supervise, though. I mean, emotionally I can understand feeling that way. But I don't think it's a rule of nature or something. For instance, coaches often make less than their star players. Directors and producers often make less than star actors. Hospital directors seem to make le…

Here in Switzerland, most of the non-IT people I'm talking with are genuinely surprised that for instance project managers are paid less that developers. For them just hearing the word "manager" = big buck.

Supply and demand at work I guess; if it's easier to get project managers than developers it becomes obvious which one should be paid more.

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#89

Post by cindarin »

benreesman wrote: post #86
cindarin wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, I have neither the proper information nor interest to dig into that specifically. My best recommendation is to look into why I might have said that, and decide if you care at all what I thought. If so, take actions to change what things that you have a desire to change.

Maybe keep it to yourself if the game plan is to half-ass psychoanalyze someone and then bail when asked a follow up question?

Just because it's obvious to many that you need therapy doesn't mean that any who notice are capable or willing to give it.

Re: Rethinking Levels, Promotions and Salaries

#90

Post by odiroot »

angarg12 wrote: post #50

I worked for a very old fashioned company in Germany that used a similar system to pay employees. After about a year I became the lead of my team. But since some of my colleagues had been in the company about 10 years, they were getting paid more than me. Frustrated, I left for a better (and better paying) job. I believe these systems produce a "dead sea effect". High performer will leave, being able to get better de…

Experienced a very similar situation in Berlin. I assume it may actually be a norm. Loyalty to the company > experience/skills.
Post reply on HN