6 ms·
I admire Buffer for being so transparent with their salaries, but I don't think I would ever decide to work for a company that mandated it. In my (admittedly l
by dsacco 10y ago
I admire Buffer for being so transparent with their salaries, but I don't think I would ever decide to work for a company that mandated it.
In my (admittedly limited) experience, mandating salary transparency tends to increase the salaries of low performers and reduce the salaries of high performers. It usually eliminates the potential for negotiating raises and poses difficult questions about paying some employees more than others in the same band.
Case in point: according to Buffer's salary calculator[1], a "master" (their highest rank) backend developer living in San Francisco and optimizing for salary over equity would earn about $155,000/year. I can't think of any definition of "master" developer that could be competitive for. Friends of mine at AmaGooBookSoft and even other startups have earned nearly double that for being merely "senior" (L5).
[1]: https://buffer.com/salary?r=1&l=10&e=3&q=1 https://buffer.com/salary?r=1&l=10&e=3&q=1
- nilkn 10y agoThe $155k salary might be due to the transparency, but could it also be due to a simple inability to pay developers $300k+? That's well over double the CEO's salary. I think it's clear they simply don't have the revenue and cash reserves to pay developers that kind of money. I suspect you'll find this to be true at a lot of smaller startups that rely on actually making money instead of fundraising.
- jsprogrammer 10y agoThe latest model I have seen showed founders making about one-third of top-level employees.
- bduerst 10y agoIn take-home income right? They still have sizeable ownership of the company and vesting.
- jsprogrammer 10y agoYes, they are willing to forego significant salary because they will control most of the profits.
- a13n 10y agoThe salary is peanuts compared to what that CEO gets compensated.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- bambax 10y agoAlso, Buffer is entirely remote. I bet many people are willing to take a big pay cut if they don't have to commute to an office building every day (and of course, other people like office life -- but remote positions are rare, so it's normal that they're more "expensive" for employees who really want them).
- s_kilk 10y agoAlso, if you're working remotely from a more affordable location you may not need as much salary in order to live a very comfortable life. I think our expectations are skewed by the crippling cost of living in SF, New York, London, etc.
- RussianCow 10y agoBuffer actually adjusts the salary based on location, so this is (at least partially) taken into account.
- vox_mollis 10y ago$155k is already pretty obscene, let alone double. Around here, $50k entry and $90k 10y+ senior for developers is fairly standard.
- rdoherty 10y agoSalaries in the San Francisco Bay Area are very high compared to the rest of the world due to high housing costs and extreme demand for engineers. $155k is average for 5-10 years of experience at a non-startup. You can certainly go much higher or lower depending on the company, your experience and your negotiation skills.
- vox_mollis 10y agoI'm comparing to Southern California; I doubt the Bay Area has 65% higher cost of living.
- mikeklaas 10y ago> extreme demand for engineers
- rdoherty 10y agoI'm not sure if it does or doesn't, but the salary of $155k is normal in the SF area. Check out AngelList's salary tool: https://angel.co/salaries https://angel.co/salaries . Median salary for 'Developer' is about $120k. More for a backend developer. GlassDoor gives an average salary of $120k for the same area: https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/san-francisco-engineer-salary-SRCH_IL.0,13_IM759_KO14,22.htm https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/san-francisco-engineer-sa...
- bagels 10y agoCost of living is at least that much higher. Compare rent in San Diego (say, clairemont) vs Rent on the peninsula at equivalent house size. Easily 100% more.
- ryanSrich 10y ago
- dave2000 10y agoI think you're going to get perfectly good developers for $150,000. Are you going to get twice as good ones if you pay twice that, or just greedy ones? Have transparency and let someone else pay the darlings. You'll still get your work done.
- zenlikethat 10y agoThis exact "greed" rhetoric is what helps businesses keep dev salaries down. You don't get greedy people for that much, you get smart business people (they know their worth and charge for it).
- chrisabrams 10y agoI do not understand devs who justify low salaries this way. Why make 50% of your potential?
- zenlikethat 10y agoExactly. If you are just greedy then programming is not the right field. Much more reliable to make a boatload of cash through other means if that's all you care about.
- UK-AL 10y agoI think you're misunderstanding what he is saying.
- dave2000 10y agoI'm not justifying low salaries; i'm saying that $155,000 is plenty.
- thedufer 10y ago"plenty" by what metric? It seems to be less than market rate (for good experienced developers). What other metric should we use?
- rco8786 10y ago> earned nearly double that for being merely "senior" Not as a base salary. No way. They earn that, but ~50% comes from equity.
- aianus 10y agoWhat's the difference? Equity in a public company is cash. You can even lock in what your RSUs will be worth when they vest with some options contracts.
- rco8786 10y agoBecause it's apples to oranges. You take a larger chunk of illiquid stocks/options at a private company in exchange for the risk that it won't go public one day. That's an active tradeoff people are making whether they know it or not, so you can't compare salaries at a private company and illiquid equity to salaries + liquid equity at a public company.
- blablablame 10y agoSo if I enter a casino with 100 bucks set on betting on number 23, it means I actually own 1000 bucks? (or whatever that gives you?) Giving stock on a public company you can sell the moment that vests is valuable. Owning stock on a private company that you can't sell, can't probably cash in unless they IPO, etc is not.
- rco8786 10y agoYes that is the description of an illiquid potential future asset and a liquid current asset. both things that were addressed in my above comment.
- mahyarm 10y agoIt's definitely a great business case study. Most people don't get exposed to this kind of stuff.
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]