8 ms·

I mean, it's pretty simple, but it took a long time to internalize: If you don't have anyone else making you an offer, then you're worth that amount. In this c

I mean, it's pretty simple, but it took a long time to internalize: If you don't have anyone else making you an offer, then you're worth that amount. In this case, you were worth $42k and $56k respectively. If you'd shopped around, you'd have been worth more. But you didn't, so you weren't. That's not a bad thing, either. Security is nice, and interviews are a pain. But it really is that simple. If you don't like your current pay, don't bother with negotiating for a raise. That's how you keep getting paid the same amount plus inflation. Go to the market. That feeling you're talking about -- where the company rakes in millions and you're the reason why, yet you're paid table scraps -- it's because that's what you're worth. There's no greed. The company is just that valuable, and no one is making you a better offer, so that's how valuable you are. There's not much sense in comparing notes or seeing how much everybody else is making, except as a way to incentivize you to do something about it (leave). If you like your security, then enjoy it. If you like your money, go talk to companies. EDIT: Time to bust out one of the best comments of all time: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2439478 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2439478 Turns out he was a doormat in negotiating, though his salary history was cringeworthy. It pained everyone to hear it, considering how nice of a guy he was. In all honestly, $60K was a big step up for him. [...] He spent the next day in non-stop meetings with HR, his manager and the CTO. That Friday he simply handed in his badge without a word, walked out and never came back. Until 3 months later. As a consultant. At $175/hour. (The most-popular comment list is interesting in general: https://hn.algolia.com/?query=&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page=0&dateRange=all&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?query=&sort=byPopularity&prefix&page... Too bad when the scores were hidden, the list stopped working.)

paulcole 9y ago
>If you don't have anyone else making you an offer, then you're worth that amount. If you have money saved you always have another offer. The biggest leverage you have as an employee is saying "no thanks" and leaving. As long as you're willing to do that you can demand whatever you want.
BurningFrog 9y ago
> "that's what you're worth" Your argument is sound, but this is really unfortunate phrasing. It's actually what your work is worth. Not what you as a person is worth, and it's important to keep those things separate, both for sanity and rigor.
- purple-again 9y ago
  Your value to society is the value of your work which in everyone else's context is your value. No one cares if your apartment is clean which is why no one pays you to clean your apartment.
  - jacalata 9y ago
    Ah, so Steve jobs was worth $1/year.
    - purple-again 9y ago
      Sigh. In what version of the world do you believe Steve Jobs ever went a year of making $1? Even if his tax return showed income of $1 for that year (it never did) the net worth of his assets increased significantly during the year and the value of that would be captured eventually.
      - jacalata 9y ago
        I don't, but people who believe one silly thing often believe others so I thought you might. Let's go with some other examples: open source software. Breastfeeding. Ooh, how about literally every person in America under 10 years old? They're all worthless and society wouldn't be negatively affected if they disappeared out of existence? After all, close enough to 0 of them are being paid by anyone.
      - AstralStorm 9y ago
        Her got paid by stock dividend. Had a pretty important share in Apple Inc.
    - 9y ago
plaguuuuuu 9y ago
>If you'd shopped around, you'd have been worth more. But you didn't, so you weren't. Isn't that circular logic? By that logic, nothing can ever be undervalued, because its fair value is defined by how much it's sold for. If you want to go all supply-and-demand, an employee's value is still not what they request, it's what it would cost to replace them, on average
- rubber_duck 9y ago
  You are correct - to the company he's worth the amount it would take to replace him. Plenty of people can negotiate to get closer to that so negotiating a raise isn't pointless - but lateral moves are often easier. Although you can be more valuable in a different company - for eg. if your current company isn't good at utilizing your specializations.
- emsy 9y ago
  Not circular logic, it's excactly how it works. Someone offers you money for your time and if both parties find an agreement on how much that time is worth, they've determined a value that is acceptable for both parties. No one is forced to employ or be employed.
  - komali2 9y ago
    >no one is forced to be employed Er, can you clarify? If you don't work, you don't eat.
    - danielharrison 9y ago
      Like the thousands of unemployed people? Some haven't eaten for years. That's not what he means, just like that's not what you mean.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - EGreg 9y ago
    "No one is forced to employ or be employed" Pretty sure most people who live paycheck to paycheck would disagree.
taeric 9y ago
While this is a simplistic view that might help you feel good about taking advantage of someone, it is ridiculously easily abused. And, quite frankly, scares me if I think about it for too long. I don't want a society where there are people left behind simply because they did not make a job out of making more money. Nor do I want a society where services performed by folks leads to a massive wealth imbalance in workforces that don't have people specifically tasked with keeping this from happening. Especially with how anti union/similar setup current cultures are. And to be clear, I realize that that ship has somewhat sailed. Nobody was specifically tasked with making sure women/minorities were paid fairly. As a result, we have an obvious problem. One where the incentives have aligned such that many companies do not have an incentive to fix it. (There has to be a term for the occurrence where virtue signaling is high, but actual virtue is punished. Anyone know it?) That is, you are absolutely right in many senses. But I worry that as long as not all companies are paying more fair wages, than there is little incentive to be the one company paying fair wages. (There are incentives to pay above normal pay, but that can still be below fair. See again current women's pay gap.) So, can you reduce it down to folks are ultimately paid what they are worth. And if they simply shopped themselves around they could get more, but they didn't so they have accepted their low worth, so they are, ipso facto, worth less. Great. I just think we have plenty of evidence that shows that doesn't actually work.
- meric 9y ago
  virtue signaling is high, but actual virtue is punished Hypocrisy?
  - taeric 9y ago
    I worded it wrong. I meant the incentives are high for the signaling, but actually inverted for the acts. My example was supposed to be that you are rewarded for looking fair, but it would actually be detrimental to be so. Deception and hypocrisy, I think, are related to this, but I feel they are a little different, too. Don't know if I can explain why. So perhaps I'm just wrong on that feeling?
- acchow 9y ago
kartan 9y ago
> If you don't have anyone else making you an offer, then you're worth that amount. You are confused about cost and value. I have seen a lot of people with high salaries that are more of a problem than a solution for the company. As an example, you can look at the executive that fired Salesforce red team at the DefCon. Companies and upper management are usually bad at evaluating the value of employees. In some cases even punishing good employees while rewarding more ass-kisser types. So you can be worth a lot, but be paid quite low. As cost and value are not always correlated, and rarely match each other. For the part of looking elsewhere for a better salary, I agree. The managers are doing a poor job and moving around is the only option. This is a huge cost to the companies that lose expertise and need to train new employees and show how much overpaid their managers are because pay and worth are not related, and this is big a problem. * https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/08/salesforce-fires-two-security-team-members-for-presenting-at-defcon/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/08/salesforce-fires-two...
tensor 9y ago
Companies that hire consultants for tech are incompetent technically. That comment means little.
EGreg 9y ago
If you don't have anyone else making you an offer, then you're worth that amount. That's how much that counterparty has offered. It may not necessarily be how much you're worth to that party, let alone some other party. They may be bluffing. They may not have enough money at the moment. And so on. If later on they get $10 million income and they can't continue without you, then even though they are still paying you $X you can easily find out you're worth more by threatening to leave. You're worth whatever it costs to replace you in the open market.
shmerl 9y ago
> the reason why, yet you're paid table scraps -- it's because that's what you're worth. That doesn't make any sense and sounds like everyone is always paid fairly. That's far from true.
- jstanley 9y ago
  If you think you're not being paid fairly, do something about it (e.g. demand more, or quit and do something else for money). If you can't get more, you're not being exploited. You're taking advantage of the best option available to you.
  - shmerl 9y ago
    I hope you recognize, that the statement that everyone is always paid fairly is false. Thinking otherwise borders on some kind of serious ethical blindness.
    - ingenuous2 9y ago
      Where did they make that statement? All I'm hearing GP say is if the only way to know your worth to the market is to test it. There is no other way to measure what your employment is worth.
      - shmerl 9y ago
        It was phrased that way above, read carefully. If all they meant was "if you aren't paid fairly, leave and find a better place", that's OK, but that's not how it was phrased (which was quite improper).
ralfd 9y ago
> Coworker was building a new house, and when it came to the numbers it was let loose that it was going to cost about $700K. This didn't seem like much Not much? I hate you Silicon Valley!
akvadrako 9y ago
It's not that simple, because the other option is don't work. If you value your time more than anyone is willing to pay, that means your value is greater than your highest offer.

paulcole 9y ago

>If you don't have anyone else making you an offer, then you're worth that amount. If you have money saved you always have another offer. The biggest leverage you have as an employee is saying "no thanks" and leaving. As long as you're willing to do that you can demand whatever you want.

BurningFrog 9y ago

> "that's what you're worth" Your argument is sound, but this is really unfortunate phrasing. It's actually what your work is worth. Not what you as a person is worth, and it's important to keep those things separate, both for sanity and rigor.

purple-again 9y ago
Your value to society is the value of your work which in everyone else's context is your value. No one cares if your apartment is clean which is why no one pays you to clean your apartment.
- jacalata 9y ago
  Ah, so Steve jobs was worth $1/year.
  - purple-again 9y ago
    Sigh. In what version of the world do you believe Steve Jobs ever went a year of making $1? Even if his tax return showed income of $1 for that year (it never did) the net worth of his assets increased significantly during the year and the value of that would be captured eventually.
    - jacalata 9y ago
      I don't, but people who believe one silly thing often believe others so I thought you might. Let's go with some other examples: open source software. Breastfeeding. Ooh, how about literally every person in America under 10 years old? They're all worthless and society wouldn't be negatively affected if they disappeared out of existence? After all, close enough to 0 of them are being paid by anyone.
    - AstralStorm 9y ago
      Her got paid by stock dividend. Had a pretty important share in Apple Inc.
  - 9y ago

plaguuuuuu 9y ago

>If you'd shopped around, you'd have been worth more. But you didn't, so you weren't. Isn't that circular logic? By that logic, nothing can ever be undervalued, because its fair value is defined by how much it's sold for. If you want to go all supply-and-demand, an employee's value is still not what they request, it's what it would cost to replace them, on average

rubber_duck 9y ago
You are correct - to the company he's worth the amount it would take to replace him. Plenty of people can negotiate to get closer to that so negotiating a raise isn't pointless - but lateral moves are often easier. Although you can be more valuable in a different company - for eg. if your current company isn't good at utilizing your specializations.
emsy 9y ago
Not circular logic, it's excactly how it works. Someone offers you money for your time and if both parties find an agreement on how much that time is worth, they've determined a value that is acceptable for both parties. No one is forced to employ or be employed.
- komali2 9y ago
  >no one is forced to be employed Er, can you clarify? If you don't work, you don't eat.
  - danielharrison 9y ago
    Like the thousands of unemployed people? Some haven't eaten for years. That's not what he means, just like that's not what you mean.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- EGreg 9y ago
  "No one is forced to employ or be employed" Pretty sure most people who live paycheck to paycheck would disagree.

taeric 9y ago

While this is a simplistic view that might help you feel good about taking advantage of someone, it is ridiculously easily abused. And, quite frankly, scares me if I think about it for too long. I don't want a society where there are people left behind simply because they did not make a job out of making more money. Nor do I want a society where services performed by folks leads to a massive wealth imbalance in workforces that don't have people specifically tasked with keeping this from happening. Especially with how anti union/similar setup current cultures are. And to be clear, I realize that that ship has somewhat sailed. Nobody was specifically tasked with making sure women/minorities were paid fairly. As a result, we have an obvious problem. One where the incentives have aligned such that many companies do not have an incentive to fix it. (There has to be a term for the occurrence where virtue signaling is high, but actual virtue is punished. Anyone know it?) That is, you are absolutely right in many senses. But I worry that as long as not all companies are paying more fair wages, than there is little incentive to be the one company paying fair wages. (There are incentives to pay above normal pay, but that can still be below fair. See again current women's pay gap.) So, can you reduce it down to folks are ultimately paid what they are worth. And if they simply shopped themselves around they could get more, but they didn't so they have accepted their low worth, so they are, ipso facto, worth less. Great. I just think we have plenty of evidence that shows that doesn't actually work.

meric 9y ago
virtue signaling is high, but actual virtue is punished Hypocrisy?
- taeric 9y ago
  I worded it wrong. I meant the incentives are high for the signaling, but actually inverted for the acts. My example was supposed to be that you are rewarded for looking fair, but it would actually be detrimental to be so. Deception and hypocrisy, I think, are related to this, but I feel they are a little different, too. Don't know if I can explain why. So perhaps I'm just wrong on that feeling?
acchow 9y ago

kartan 9y ago

> If you don't have anyone else making you an offer, then you're worth that amount. You are confused about cost and value. I have seen a lot of people with high salaries that are more of a problem than a solution for the company. As an example, you can look at the executive that fired Salesforce red team at the DefCon. Companies and upper management are usually bad at evaluating the value of employees. In some cases even punishing good employees while rewarding more ass-kisser types. So you can be worth a lot, but be paid quite low. As cost and value are not always correlated, and rarely match each other. For the part of looking elsewhere for a better salary, I agree. The managers are doing a poor job and moving around is the only option. This is a huge cost to the companies that lose expertise and need to train new employees and show how much overpaid their managers are because pay and worth are not related, and this is big a problem. * https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/08/salesforce-fires-two-security-team-members-for-presenting-at-defcon/ https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2017/08/salesforce-fires-two...

tensor 9y ago

Companies that hire consultants for tech are incompetent technically. That comment means little.

EGreg 9y ago

If you don't have anyone else making you an offer, then you're worth that amount. That's how much that counterparty has offered. It may not necessarily be how much you're worth to that party, let alone some other party. They may be bluffing. They may not have enough money at the moment. And so on. If later on they get $10 million income and they can't continue without you, then even though they are still paying you $X you can easily find out you're worth more by threatening to leave. You're worth whatever it costs to replace you in the open market.

shmerl 9y ago

> the reason why, yet you're paid table scraps -- it's because that's what you're worth. That doesn't make any sense and sounds like everyone is always paid fairly. That's far from true.

jstanley 9y ago
If you think you're not being paid fairly, do something about it (e.g. demand more, or quit and do something else for money). If you can't get more, you're not being exploited. You're taking advantage of the best option available to you.
- shmerl 9y ago
  I hope you recognize, that the statement that everyone is always paid fairly is false. Thinking otherwise borders on some kind of serious ethical blindness.
  - ingenuous2 9y ago
    Where did they make that statement? All I'm hearing GP say is if the only way to know your worth to the market is to test it. There is no other way to measure what your employment is worth.
    - shmerl 9y ago
      It was phrased that way above, read carefully. If all they meant was "if you aren't paid fairly, leave and find a better place", that's OK, but that's not how it was phrased (which was quite improper).

ralfd 9y ago

> Coworker was building a new house, and when it came to the numbers it was let loose that it was going to cost about $700K. This didn't seem like much Not much? I hate you Silicon Valley!

akvadrako 9y ago

It's not that simple, because the other option is don't work. If you value your time more than anyone is willing to pay, that means your value is greater than your highest offer.