3 ms·

In September 2014, a few weeks into the inquiry, Google’s board of directors awarded Mr. Rubin a stock grant worth $150 million, to be paid out over several yea

In September 2014, a few weeks into the inquiry, Google’s board of directors awarded Mr. Rubin a stock grant worth $150 million, to be paid out over several years, said three people briefed on the decision. It was an unusually generous sum, even by Google’s standards. Mr. Page typically recommends how much senior executives are paid, said three former Google executives. Over the years, Mr. Page had told people he felt Mr. Rubin was never properly compensated for his contribution to Android, two people who spoke to him said. What about all the engineers who helped build Android? I wonder if their aggregate compensation even comes close to $150 million. It is insane how much we compensate and praise the people at the very top as if they did the work alone.

skj 8y ago
> I wonder if their aggregate compensation even comes close to $150 million. at 200k/yr on the low end, to 500k/yr on the high end (excluding outliers), let's call it 300k/yr average. That's 500 engineers costing 150m per year. So, yeah I think it comes close and probably exceeds.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- khazhou 8y ago
  So you just demonstrated that indeed, the 500 employees under Andy, all combined might have received the same compensation as him alone. Compensation in tech is ridiculously unfair.
  - skj 8y ago
    The number of employees under Andy is not clear to me. 500 for the early days of Android seems plausible. But yeah, I did not intend my comment as a rebuttal to yours - I just like numbers to add up. I don't really think "fair" comes into it. It's a market value issue. I'm here at Google making senior engineer compensation, and when I look at what I go through every day and compare to friends who make less per year than I pay in taxes, that seems unfair to me too. But, in the end, some combination of skillset, talent, scarcity, and luck results in my value to my employer being what it is, and my friends' value to their employers being what that is. It doesn't seem fair, but I also don't see particular fault from any party. Now, with my comp and my friends' comp, it's sort of the result of the blind machine and in the end only larger political or social forces can affect things. With executive comp, it seems like a small club of bamboozlers at the top, wanting more and more and sharing more and more among themselves. However, in this case, it was basically Larry's money to give and he decided how much. Android is clearly a win for Google, and (perhaps unjustly, but how could I know?) Andy was the one pegged as responsible for the success. Edit: Also this wasn't his yearly compensation, but a one-time bonus recognizing his total contribution to Android.
uxp100 8y ago
> What about all the engineers who helped build Android? I wonder if their aggregate compensation even comes close to $150 million. Aggregate? Surely yes.
FigBug 8y ago
> I wonder if their aggregate compensation even comes close to $150 million. $150 million / 10 years / $200k per dev = 75 developers. I'm pretty sure more than 75 people work on Android, so yeah, a lot more than $150 million has been paid out.

skj 8y ago

> I wonder if their aggregate compensation even comes close to $150 million. at 200k/yr on the low end, to 500k/yr on the high end (excluding outliers), let's call it 300k/yr average. That's 500 engineers costing 150m per year. So, yeah I think it comes close and probably exceeds.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
khazhou 8y ago
So you just demonstrated that indeed, the 500 employees under Andy, all combined might have received the same compensation as him alone. Compensation in tech is ridiculously unfair.
- skj 8y ago
  The number of employees under Andy is not clear to me. 500 for the early days of Android seems plausible. But yeah, I did not intend my comment as a rebuttal to yours - I just like numbers to add up. I don't really think "fair" comes into it. It's a market value issue. I'm here at Google making senior engineer compensation, and when I look at what I go through every day and compare to friends who make less per year than I pay in taxes, that seems unfair to me too. But, in the end, some combination of skillset, talent, scarcity, and luck results in my value to my employer being what it is, and my friends' value to their employers being what that is. It doesn't seem fair, but I also don't see particular fault from any party. Now, with my comp and my friends' comp, it's sort of the result of the blind machine and in the end only larger political or social forces can affect things. With executive comp, it seems like a small club of bamboozlers at the top, wanting more and more and sharing more and more among themselves. However, in this case, it was basically Larry's money to give and he decided how much. Android is clearly a win for Google, and (perhaps unjustly, but how could I know?) Andy was the one pegged as responsible for the success. Edit: Also this wasn't his yearly compensation, but a one-time bonus recognizing his total contribution to Android.

uxp100 8y ago

> What about all the engineers who helped build Android? I wonder if their aggregate compensation even comes close to $150 million. Aggregate? Surely yes.

FigBug 8y ago

> I wonder if their aggregate compensation even comes close to $150 million. $150 million / 10 years / $200k per dev = 75 developers. I'm pretty sure more than 75 people work on Android, so yeah, a lot more than $150 million has been paid out.