4 ms·

> There the thing: nobody wants to pay engineers on par with managers I used to think like that but I learned in time that the core issue is that engineers rar

> There the thing: nobody wants to pay engineers on par with managers I used to think like that but I learned in time that the core issue is that engineers rarely know how to present their job in terms of monetary benefit during salary negotiations. i.e. as an automation engineer I led an initiative that saved a previous employer more than 60k€ yearly using automation and optimizing other validation workflows. as principal engineer at my current job I saved them more than 30k€ yearly by replacing a licensed component with an open source one, filling the feature gaps myself outside of work hours. these thing get noticed, not just the stuff done but the ability of thinking in money, and unlocks the full engineering potential in salary negotiations

deanCommie 7y ago
I assume these must be small examples on a long list of accomplishments, because 30k/year doesn't seem like it's enough to offset your salary. I have to imagine the impact of a principal engineer should be measured in the 10-100x of their salary?
- LoSboccacc 7y ago
  it was just a bunch of examples of stuff that was specifically done on top of my other job resps. also, not every place is the silicon valley and not every company is a fortune 500, plus some perspective about relative worth also applies - i.e. the automation stuff was calculated in time saved by the Indian based testing team, which reduces the raw impact.
- frostburg 7y ago
  That's some pretty impressive ingrained bias towards rent-seekers. Why not 1.1x or the board can try doing the work?
  - perl4ever 7y ago
    Consider a fast food business. Should the manager be satisfied with making 10% profit on french fries?
    - frostburg 7y ago
      10% on raw materials would be losing money, but 10% on total expense, with the difference going to the workforce is fine to me. I don't see why fast foods shouldn't be cooperatives, they're not exactly capital intensive or high risk. To be clear, I wasn't referring to the board having a choice in the matter.
  - alexis_fr 7y ago
    Sorry I both agree with you but reckon 10x is about the correct ratio. It’s not rent-seeking, it’s “sharing wealth” and “diminishing inequalities”. A good engineer needs to pay for: - Administrative employees, - Office rental, - Junior members of the teams who are growing up towards seniority, - Women who are non productive but required to pass the diversity requirements and make the company look good. You may claim it’s unfair that productive members are exploited to pay for nonproductive ones, but that’s the neo-conservatives’ argument, and has been rejected by most of the Silicon Valley. I honestly think that the currebt situation is already the middle ground betweeb “pay proportional to your added value” and “diversity, equality and social responsibility requires adjusting the salaries of highest-paid engineers.”
dhimes 7y ago
engineers rarely know how to present their job in terms of monetary benefit The point is, they shouldn't have to. The managers should be handling that fairly. Otherwise, it's an adversarial game where only one team knows how to play. Engineers should be experts in engineering. Holding them at a disadvantage because they are not good at the other feels wrong.
- LoSboccacc 7y ago
  but even in such a scenario how a manager would know how to assign merit? they aren't expert in engineering either. someone in between has to connect the dots, but there is no such figure and the incentives for doing that communication work are all on the engineers' side addendum: I do however agree it sucks to have to compete with other fellows
  - dhimes 7y ago
    I would think the manager would have a bigger picture view of the value added, but it probably varies with particular cases.
user5994461 7y ago
>>> by replacing a licensed component with an open source one, filling the feature gaps myself outside of work hours. Your achievement is to save money by doing all the work for free in your spare time? While I agree that engineers should negotiate better and keep track of their achievements, that is not one at all.
- sooheon 7y ago
  Sometimes an initial sacrifice for future mutually beneficial dividends is warranted, if it’s likely to be reciprocated. Keeping things purely transactional is better if you expect your counterpart to try to take advantage of you, of course, but I don’t think this is the case for all professional relationships, always.
- LoSboccacc 7y ago
  > that is not one at all. I'm significantly ahead of all my peers in job position and salary so I must have been doing something right. I've a family now and such investment done prior are helping immensely. all my peers know I'm dependable and all previous manager know I do get things done. the large reference network is both a source of work opportunities and has been a safety net during times of need. why would people choose the misery of strictly contractual relationship when you can build partnerships and friendship wherever you go with just very little effort.

deanCommie 7y ago

I assume these must be small examples on a long list of accomplishments, because 30k/year doesn't seem like it's enough to offset your salary. I have to imagine the impact of a principal engineer should be measured in the 10-100x of their salary?

LoSboccacc 7y ago
it was just a bunch of examples of stuff that was specifically done on top of my other job resps. also, not every place is the silicon valley and not every company is a fortune 500, plus some perspective about relative worth also applies - i.e. the automation stuff was calculated in time saved by the Indian based testing team, which reduces the raw impact.
frostburg 7y ago
That's some pretty impressive ingrained bias towards rent-seekers. Why not 1.1x or the board can try doing the work?
- perl4ever 7y ago
  Consider a fast food business. Should the manager be satisfied with making 10% profit on french fries?
  - frostburg 7y ago
    10% on raw materials would be losing money, but 10% on total expense, with the difference going to the workforce is fine to me. I don't see why fast foods shouldn't be cooperatives, they're not exactly capital intensive or high risk. To be clear, I wasn't referring to the board having a choice in the matter.
- alexis_fr 7y ago
  Sorry I both agree with you but reckon 10x is about the correct ratio. It’s not rent-seeking, it’s “sharing wealth” and “diminishing inequalities”. A good engineer needs to pay for: - Administrative employees, - Office rental, - Junior members of the teams who are growing up towards seniority, - Women who are non productive but required to pass the diversity requirements and make the company look good. You may claim it’s unfair that productive members are exploited to pay for nonproductive ones, but that’s the neo-conservatives’ argument, and has been rejected by most of the Silicon Valley. I honestly think that the currebt situation is already the middle ground betweeb “pay proportional to your added value” and “diversity, equality and social responsibility requires adjusting the salaries of highest-paid engineers.”

dhimes 7y ago

engineers rarely know how to present their job in terms of monetary benefit The point is, they shouldn't have to. The managers should be handling that fairly. Otherwise, it's an adversarial game where only one team knows how to play. Engineers should be experts in engineering. Holding them at a disadvantage because they are not good at the other feels wrong.

LoSboccacc 7y ago
but even in such a scenario how a manager would know how to assign merit? they aren't expert in engineering either. someone in between has to connect the dots, but there is no such figure and the incentives for doing that communication work are all on the engineers' side addendum: I do however agree it sucks to have to compete with other fellows
- dhimes 7y ago
  I would think the manager would have a bigger picture view of the value added, but it probably varies with particular cases.

user5994461 7y ago

>>> by replacing a licensed component with an open source one, filling the feature gaps myself outside of work hours. Your achievement is to save money by doing all the work for free in your spare time? While I agree that engineers should negotiate better and keep track of their achievements, that is not one at all.

sooheon 7y ago
Sometimes an initial sacrifice for future mutually beneficial dividends is warranted, if it’s likely to be reciprocated. Keeping things purely transactional is better if you expect your counterpart to try to take advantage of you, of course, but I don’t think this is the case for all professional relationships, always.
LoSboccacc 7y ago
> that is not one at all. I'm significantly ahead of all my peers in job position and salary so I must have been doing something right. I've a family now and such investment done prior are helping immensely. all my peers know I'm dependable and all previous manager know I do get things done. the large reference network is both a source of work opportunities and has been a safety net during times of need. why would people choose the misery of strictly contractual relationship when you can build partnerships and friendship wherever you go with just very little effort.