6 ms·

Is it a case of only people making the most money are more apt to report their earnings?

smeyer 11y ago
There's obviously going to be a bias of some sort, but it would probably be worth looking at the distribution of the reported salaries to get a better sense of that. (The author may have already looked at the spread of salaries, I haven't read through the whole thing yet). You could also try comparing with visadoor.com or another source of H1B data for the same companies to try to see where they fit in. There may be a systematic difference between H1B salaries and the larger employee base at these companies, but at least you're not limited by self-reporting.
- khare_ashwini 11y ago
  The data you see on such sites is only the base salary component as they parse through LCA disclosure data. As highlighted above, much of the compensation comes from bonuses / stocks etc. I did some analysis on the above data as well: http://ashwinikhare.in/tech-firms-guest-visa/ http://ashwinikhare.in/tech-firms-guest-visa/
  - smeyer 11y ago
    Yeah, sorry if I came across as implying it to be an equivalent data set. I just meant that if someone is wondering how the distribution of salaries compares to everyone with a specific title at a specific company, they might want to compare the base salaries being collated here with the base salaries for H1Bs with the same title.
    - khare_ashwini 11y ago
      That would be a fair comparison, but a challenging given the data available by OFLC. Most of the companies just mention the "Software Engineer" title, and don't mention the level when applying for LCA, whose data is disclosed. Some companies do, but don't everyone. FWIW, I'm pretty sure it should be around the same number.
stepny 11y ago
We actually suspect that people who are paid less or are underpaid are more likely to report their salaries. For example, it seems like Glassdoor data skews low.
- tarr11 11y ago
  Do you have any data to support this?
  - stepny 11y ago
    No, we don't have hard data on this. We just notice that of the engineers on our platform, we find that the people who make more money generally don't seek out this kind of data. And the people who are more uncertain about what they should be making tend to be more curious and willing to share.
    - tarr11 11y ago
      If you are selling data, you will need to be extremely thoughtful, quantitative, and specific about the statements you put out, and be prepared to back them up. There is a market for doing user submitted comp analysis, but the real value is building trust, which takes a very long time and is expensive.
- overcast 11y ago
  Sure, because Glassdoor is a place for people to go air their dirty laundry. With this, you're surveying a very niche group of users, that are probably being well paid.
  - chris_wot 11y ago
    And potentially identifiable...
    - Phlarp 11y ago
      Good, let HR get a hold of it, figure out who all the people sharing numbers are and fire them. Surely scalping a ton of mid level engineers at major tech firms for sharing their salaries online will fix that pesky problem of soaring profits and thick margins...
wehadfun 11y ago
My thoughts exactly $400K? Could someone being paid this level of money please share your career path.
- rco8786 11y ago
  At GOOG/FB a large chunk of that comes from equity. 400k for a senior+ level engineering job at one of the "big" tech co's in the valley/SF isn't outrageous at all. Base salary ~200, bonus/equity another ~200.
  - drewg123 11y ago
    Being paid in equity is just plain annoying. It makes your taxes far more complex and, at least at Google) unless you set up an autosale program a year in advance, your money is tied up in company stock until the next trading window. The taxes on equity are a huge PITA when equity is a large fraction of your salary. This is because they withhold at only 25%, even if your tax bracket is higher. This means you have to file quarterly estimated tax payments or over-withhold from your salary. I much prefer Netflix, where I just get salary. I might even be able to do my own taxes again!
    - rco8786 11y ago
      I'm painfully aware :)
    - vasilipupkin 11y ago
      Perhaps I am missing something, but the idea behind getting paid partially in equity is that your total compensation is higher.
      - rco8786 11y ago
        As long as the company('s stock) is doing well, yes. But it's also a tax hassle...though it's hard to complain about it.
    - domdip 11y ago
luu 11y ago
The numbers don't seem obviously way off when compared to the numbers of folks I know. This is with the caveat that, for example, I don't know the compensation of that many people who are T6 at Google or at Amazon at any level. The only thing that looks off is that the numbers for Microsoft look low. Why would that be? I suspect that's more because the pool of people I know is biased than because the pool that posted is biased -- some orgs in Microsoft will match offers from other companies even though average compensation is relatively low, so if you're new and you know a lot other people who are new, the sample of people you know is probably biased high. To be clear, I think that's bad both for Microsoft and for Microsoft employees. I'm just trying to figure why the Microsoft data is anomalous relative to the numbers people have personally told me. The reason it's bad for employees is obvious. The reason it's bad for the company is that it's pretty common for people who have been here a long time to shop around, find out that they can make much more elsewhere, and then get a matching offer from MS. Once word gets around that the best way to get a fair raise is to interview elsewhere, people start interviewing elsewhere, and some of the people who interview are going to leave, even if that wasn't their original intent.
- loeg 11y ago
  > Once word gets around that the best way to get a fair raise is to interview elsewhere, people start interviewing elsewhere, and some of the people who interview are going to leave, even if that wasn't their original intent. Isn't that true pretty much everywhere?

There's obviously going to be a bias of some sort, but it would probably be worth looking at the distribution of the reported salaries to get a better sense of that. (The author may have already looked at the spread of salaries, I haven't read through the whole thing yet). You could also try comparing with visadoor.com or another source of H1B data for the same companies to try to see where they fit in. There may be a systematic difference between H1B salaries and the larger employee base at these companies, but at least you're not limited by self-reporting.

khare_ashwini 11y ago
The data you see on such sites is only the base salary component as they parse through LCA disclosure data. As highlighted above, much of the compensation comes from bonuses / stocks etc. I did some analysis on the above data as well: http://ashwinikhare.in/tech-firms-guest-visa/ http://ashwinikhare.in/tech-firms-guest-visa/
- smeyer 11y ago
  Yeah, sorry if I came across as implying it to be an equivalent data set. I just meant that if someone is wondering how the distribution of salaries compares to everyone with a specific title at a specific company, they might want to compare the base salaries being collated here with the base salaries for H1Bs with the same title.
  - khare_ashwini 11y ago
    That would be a fair comparison, but a challenging given the data available by OFLC. Most of the companies just mention the "Software Engineer" title, and don't mention the level when applying for LCA, whose data is disclosed. Some companies do, but don't everyone. FWIW, I'm pretty sure it should be around the same number.

stepny 11y ago

We actually suspect that people who are paid less or are underpaid are more likely to report their salaries. For example, it seems like Glassdoor data skews low.

tarr11 11y ago
Do you have any data to support this?
- stepny 11y ago
  No, we don't have hard data on this. We just notice that of the engineers on our platform, we find that the people who make more money generally don't seek out this kind of data. And the people who are more uncertain about what they should be making tend to be more curious and willing to share.
  - tarr11 11y ago
    If you are selling data, you will need to be extremely thoughtful, quantitative, and specific about the statements you put out, and be prepared to back them up. There is a market for doing user submitted comp analysis, but the real value is building trust, which takes a very long time and is expensive.
overcast 11y ago
Sure, because Glassdoor is a place for people to go air their dirty laundry. With this, you're surveying a very niche group of users, that are probably being well paid.
- chris_wot 11y ago
  And potentially identifiable...
  - Phlarp 11y ago
    Good, let HR get a hold of it, figure out who all the people sharing numbers are and fire them. Surely scalping a ton of mid level engineers at major tech firms for sharing their salaries online will fix that pesky problem of soaring profits and thick margins...

wehadfun 11y ago

My thoughts exactly $400K? Could someone being paid this level of money please share your career path.

rco8786 11y ago
At GOOG/FB a large chunk of that comes from equity. 400k for a senior+ level engineering job at one of the "big" tech co's in the valley/SF isn't outrageous at all. Base salary ~200, bonus/equity another ~200.
- drewg123 11y ago
  Being paid in equity is just plain annoying. It makes your taxes far more complex and, at least at Google) unless you set up an autosale program a year in advance, your money is tied up in company stock until the next trading window. The taxes on equity are a huge PITA when equity is a large fraction of your salary. This is because they withhold at only 25%, even if your tax bracket is higher. This means you have to file quarterly estimated tax payments or over-withhold from your salary. I much prefer Netflix, where I just get salary. I might even be able to do my own taxes again!
  - rco8786 11y ago
    I'm painfully aware :)
  - vasilipupkin 11y ago
    Perhaps I am missing something, but the idea behind getting paid partially in equity is that your total compensation is higher.
    - rco8786 11y ago
      As long as the company('s stock) is doing well, yes. But it's also a tax hassle...though it's hard to complain about it.
  - domdip 11y ago

luu 11y ago

The numbers don't seem obviously way off when compared to the numbers of folks I know. This is with the caveat that, for example, I don't know the compensation of that many people who are T6 at Google or at Amazon at any level. The only thing that looks off is that the numbers for Microsoft look low. Why would that be? I suspect that's more because the pool of people I know is biased than because the pool that posted is biased -- some orgs in Microsoft will match offers from other companies even though average compensation is relatively low, so if you're new and you know a lot other people who are new, the sample of people you know is probably biased high. To be clear, I think that's bad both for Microsoft and for Microsoft employees. I'm just trying to figure why the Microsoft data is anomalous relative to the numbers people have personally told me. The reason it's bad for employees is obvious. The reason it's bad for the company is that it's pretty common for people who have been here a long time to shop around, find out that they can make much more elsewhere, and then get a matching offer from MS. Once word gets around that the best way to get a fair raise is to interview elsewhere, people start interviewing elsewhere, and some of the people who interview are going to leave, even if that wasn't their original intent.

loeg 11y ago
> Once word gets around that the best way to get a fair raise is to interview elsewhere, people start interviewing elsewhere, and some of the people who interview are going to leave, even if that wasn't their original intent. Isn't that true pretty much everywhere?