6 ms·

I know three people (2 immigrants on H1b) of the top of my head that are getting paid 200k + inclusive of year end bonus in NC and they have 10 + years of exper

I know three people (2 immigrants on H1b) of the top of my head that are getting paid 200k + inclusive of year end bonus in NC and they have 10 + years of experience in the industry. My old company tried to find a Big Data and Analytics lead for 6 months before giving up. They simply could not find anyone good. This was back in 2014-15. They were willing to go upto 200k to pay for it. To pay anything more than that would not be worth it for them as the ROI just does not make sense at that point. My role is of a Sr.Associate which requires 2-4 years of experience and I am a 27 year old guy. Would you really pay 200k plus for a person with my level of experience? Hiring a person with more experience for my position and paying 200k plus does not make sense because they would be over qualified for what I do. Also, there are not enough local developers with 2-4 years of exp with my skill set. At my old firm, I personally mentored 2 american fresh grads because they could not find Jr.developers with Big Data skills. I am pretty sure that I can make more than 180k in NC by the time I turn 32-33 but I will need to upgrade my skills at that point. I am already looking at Blockchain instead of waiting for my company to train me. I believe that it will be in demand 2-3 years down the line. I support the increase in wages but you also need to consider what ROI you are bringing to the company if you are commanding a 200k + salary in a place like NC. Are you brining a 3-4x annual return? Then yes, command that salary by all means. If not, you do not deserve such a hefty pay check.

TuringNYC 10y ago
I'm running a startup right now, and you are absolutely correct -- I would not pay $200k for an analytics person. Our company's unit economics cannot support that type of wage. However, i'll be honest and say we cannot afford the market wage, so we make development decisions accordingly. It would be dishonest for me to claim a shortage when I'm clearly not paying market wages. Not wanting to pay market wages is not evidence of a shortage. You get what you pay for. I drive a Hyundai because I am not willing to pay $80,000 for a car. I'll be honest and say I'm unwilling to purchase a Corvette. There is no shortage of Corvettes, i'm just not willing to pay for one. If I try to pay $27,000 for a Corvette, that is not a shortage, that is just nonsensical.
- capRidiculous 10y ago
  Interesting perspective. But what determines market wage? If my company is going to make 500-700k on me per annum, I think a 150k salary inclusive of bonuses + health care + very generous PTO + 5% 401k matching is a very good pay. Which is what I am getting right now. In the end, my company will spend about 200k on me per annum not including my visa expenses. So would that mean the market wage for this position is some where close to what I am getting paid? I think yes. However, if the company is making 2-3 million on me but only pays me my current salary, there is a lot of room for market wage increase. In the end, I think market wage is also based on the ROI you bring to the company. In my case, if a local appears and commands a 200k base, why should the company pay him/her? In the local's eyes, s/he is worth 200k + but the company does not generate enough value of of them to pay that salary. So, I do not think I am displacing anyone here. In fact, as I said, I helped mentor two americans and I would gladly teach my skills to the locals if the govt had certain programs where immigrants can teach the locals and get some sort of benefit from it( May be a faster track for a green card? ). I don't know, just a thought :)
  - TuringNYC 10y ago
    Dear @capRidiculous -- regarding your other question, "what determines market wage" -- market wages are whatever wages attract sufficient people to meet demand. That might be $15/hr in the case of flipping burgers, or $275k in the case of machine learning. It has nothing to do with the ROI of the company. It is the salary that will convince someone from giving up a competing job elsewhere and join an unfilled position. There are some things that can reduce market wages -- you can make the job more attractive such that people are willing to fill a spot for less salary. It happens all the time, here are some ways to do so: - Federal government jobs pay much less yet attract people because of long-term job security and tax-free earnings in many cases - Municipal government jobs pay much less yet attract people because of easy hours - Some startups pay much less yet attract people because of exciting products or growth opportunity - Hedge funds can pay much less yet attract people with the promise of a share of investment returns Workers are smart though. If there is a position going unfilled, it is because it is not an attractive position. It either needs to pay market wage, or offer some of the above attributes to help reduce market wages for the position.
TuringNYC 10y ago
By the way, since you mention "deserve" - the paycheck is not about what someone deserves. People at McDonalds work hard, I personally know two such people. They deserve a lot more. Unfortunately the market does not support the wages they deserve. Do you and I deserve what we earn? Sadly, markets decide wages, we do not. The only real control you and I have is the ability to walk away if we feel we deserve more. People do walk away from $200k salaries. I know lots of people who would absolutely walk away from a $200k salary. Here are some reasons: - Programmers are highly exposed to market cycles, so you need to earn more in good years to make up for bad years. Since you are 27, you have never seen bad years. They do come. People end up unemployed or underemployed for 1 or 2yrs. Some never recover. - Programmers are like athletes, your earning ability goes down rapidly over time due to age-discrimination. So you need to earn $250 or $300k/yr to make up for future down years. Note this is unlike medicine or law where there isnt as much age discrimination. - Programmers need to constantly retrain themselves, often on their own time. For these three reasons, one might argue that programmers deserve more money. However, they dont get more money because they deserve it, they get more because: A. Many tech workers see the above 3 issues B. ...they move into other, better paying or more stable jobs or more long-term sustainable jobs C. ......they reduce supply D. .........market wages go up. If tech jobs were more stable or long-term oriented people would expect lesser wages.
- capRidiculous 10y ago
  Again, supply and demand aside, I would argue that the amount you get paid is based on the amount of ROI you are bringing in. Your average McDonald's employee works hard for 10 hours a day at an $8/hr rate. Assuming each employ generates $300-$400 in the end, in order to justify their wage increase, they need to generate more than that. I do not know how much value they generate but if generate more than 4x of pay, then I would fully support a pay raise. This can happen if we are willing to pay more than $1 for a McChicken. Are you really willing to pay more than that? Hard work is not equal to more money. Yes, programming is a tough profession and we often have shorter professional lives. But, I chose this path because I love coding and intend to move to a more managerial role in the future. That does not mean we should be paid 300k/year. An NFL athlete can easily command 1 mil/year because their franchise is easily generating more than that off of the athlete's name. Are you as a developer generating more than 1.2 mil/year for your company to get paid 300k?
st3v3r 10y ago
"I support the increase in wages but you also need to consider what ROI you are bringing to the company if you are commanding a 200k + salary in a place like NC." At the same time, the company also needs to consider what the companies next door are paying. If I'm currently over next door at the bank getting paid over $200k, I honestly do not care that your company doesn't think paying over $200k is not worth the ROI. Neither is anyone else who's looking for work in the area.
- TuringNYC 10y ago
  There is another point I missed -- NOT accepting market wages can carry real consequences. In the tech-heavy markets like NY and SF, home prices closely track a constant multiple of market wages overall (tech and non-tech.) As market wages go up, so do home prices. People are often pushed to their breaking points in terms of what % of their income they give up to a mortgage. These seem like silly details for those in their 20s. I had a roommate. Having a roommate doesnt really work when you are married with children. You start competing with your peers for homes. Making less money than your peers puts you at a disadvantage. I was pretty lax on salary when I was young, optimizing on growth and experience over salary. That was a good decision. In my late 30s now, i negotiate to get market rate. Not doing so translates into serious consequences for me and my family. So to answer the parent's post -- absolutely...if the company next door is paying more, i'd work there all else being equal. Also, dont forget medical expenses. Once you have a family, you eat through those deductibles like crazy. One complicated pregnancy will set you back $20k+ depending on your health plan. At that point, some prospective employer's ROI is of little consequence to your very immediate needs like co-pays and the collection notices which roll in daily.

TuringNYC 10y ago

I'm running a startup right now, and you are absolutely correct -- I would not pay $200k for an analytics person. Our company's unit economics cannot support that type of wage. However, i'll be honest and say we cannot afford the market wage, so we make development decisions accordingly. It would be dishonest for me to claim a shortage when I'm clearly not paying market wages. Not wanting to pay market wages is not evidence of a shortage. You get what you pay for. I drive a Hyundai because I am not willing to pay $80,000 for a car. I'll be honest and say I'm unwilling to purchase a Corvette. There is no shortage of Corvettes, i'm just not willing to pay for one. If I try to pay $27,000 for a Corvette, that is not a shortage, that is just nonsensical.

capRidiculous 10y ago
Interesting perspective. But what determines market wage? If my company is going to make 500-700k on me per annum, I think a 150k salary inclusive of bonuses + health care + very generous PTO + 5% 401k matching is a very good pay. Which is what I am getting right now. In the end, my company will spend about 200k on me per annum not including my visa expenses. So would that mean the market wage for this position is some where close to what I am getting paid? I think yes. However, if the company is making 2-3 million on me but only pays me my current salary, there is a lot of room for market wage increase. In the end, I think market wage is also based on the ROI you bring to the company. In my case, if a local appears and commands a 200k base, why should the company pay him/her? In the local's eyes, s/he is worth 200k + but the company does not generate enough value of of them to pay that salary. So, I do not think I am displacing anyone here. In fact, as I said, I helped mentor two americans and I would gladly teach my skills to the locals if the govt had certain programs where immigrants can teach the locals and get some sort of benefit from it( May be a faster track for a green card? ). I don't know, just a thought :)
- TuringNYC 10y ago
  Dear @capRidiculous -- regarding your other question, "what determines market wage" -- market wages are whatever wages attract sufficient people to meet demand. That might be $15/hr in the case of flipping burgers, or $275k in the case of machine learning. It has nothing to do with the ROI of the company. It is the salary that will convince someone from giving up a competing job elsewhere and join an unfilled position. There are some things that can reduce market wages -- you can make the job more attractive such that people are willing to fill a spot for less salary. It happens all the time, here are some ways to do so: - Federal government jobs pay much less yet attract people because of long-term job security and tax-free earnings in many cases - Municipal government jobs pay much less yet attract people because of easy hours - Some startups pay much less yet attract people because of exciting products or growth opportunity - Hedge funds can pay much less yet attract people with the promise of a share of investment returns Workers are smart though. If there is a position going unfilled, it is because it is not an attractive position. It either needs to pay market wage, or offer some of the above attributes to help reduce market wages for the position.

TuringNYC 10y ago

By the way, since you mention "deserve" - the paycheck is not about what someone deserves. People at McDonalds work hard, I personally know two such people. They deserve a lot more. Unfortunately the market does not support the wages they deserve. Do you and I deserve what we earn? Sadly, markets decide wages, we do not. The only real control you and I have is the ability to walk away if we feel we deserve more. People do walk away from $200k salaries. I know lots of people who would absolutely walk away from a $200k salary. Here are some reasons: - Programmers are highly exposed to market cycles, so you need to earn more in good years to make up for bad years. Since you are 27, you have never seen bad years. They do come. People end up unemployed or underemployed for 1 or 2yrs. Some never recover. - Programmers are like athletes, your earning ability goes down rapidly over time due to age-discrimination. So you need to earn $250 or $300k/yr to make up for future down years. Note this is unlike medicine or law where there isnt as much age discrimination. - Programmers need to constantly retrain themselves, often on their own time. For these three reasons, one might argue that programmers deserve more money. However, they dont get more money because they deserve it, they get more because: A. Many tech workers see the above 3 issues B. ...they move into other, better paying or more stable jobs or more long-term sustainable jobs C. ......they reduce supply D. .........market wages go up. If tech jobs were more stable or long-term oriented people would expect lesser wages.

capRidiculous 10y ago
Again, supply and demand aside, I would argue that the amount you get paid is based on the amount of ROI you are bringing in. Your average McDonald's employee works hard for 10 hours a day at an $8/hr rate. Assuming each employ generates $300-$400 in the end, in order to justify their wage increase, they need to generate more than that. I do not know how much value they generate but if generate more than 4x of pay, then I would fully support a pay raise. This can happen if we are willing to pay more than $1 for a McChicken. Are you really willing to pay more than that? Hard work is not equal to more money. Yes, programming is a tough profession and we often have shorter professional lives. But, I chose this path because I love coding and intend to move to a more managerial role in the future. That does not mean we should be paid 300k/year. An NFL athlete can easily command 1 mil/year because their franchise is easily generating more than that off of the athlete's name. Are you as a developer generating more than 1.2 mil/year for your company to get paid 300k?

st3v3r 10y ago

"I support the increase in wages but you also need to consider what ROI you are bringing to the company if you are commanding a 200k + salary in a place like NC." At the same time, the company also needs to consider what the companies next door are paying. If I'm currently over next door at the bank getting paid over $200k, I honestly do not care that your company doesn't think paying over $200k is not worth the ROI. Neither is anyone else who's looking for work in the area.

TuringNYC 10y ago
There is another point I missed -- NOT accepting market wages can carry real consequences. In the tech-heavy markets like NY and SF, home prices closely track a constant multiple of market wages overall (tech and non-tech.) As market wages go up, so do home prices. People are often pushed to their breaking points in terms of what % of their income they give up to a mortgage. These seem like silly details for those in their 20s. I had a roommate. Having a roommate doesnt really work when you are married with children. You start competing with your peers for homes. Making less money than your peers puts you at a disadvantage. I was pretty lax on salary when I was young, optimizing on growth and experience over salary. That was a good decision. In my late 30s now, i negotiate to get market rate. Not doing so translates into serious consequences for me and my family. So to answer the parent's post -- absolutely...if the company next door is paying more, i'd work there all else being equal. Also, dont forget medical expenses. Once you have a family, you eat through those deductibles like crazy. One complicated pregnancy will set you back $20k+ depending on your health plan. At that point, some prospective employer's ROI is of little consequence to your very immediate needs like co-pays and the collection notices which roll in daily.