4 ms·

Have you heard about the law of supply and demand? Because it is bullshit. Salaries are not set based upon some fictional law of economics. Instead, look to soc

Have you heard about the law of supply and demand? Because it is bullshit. Salaries are not set based upon some fictional law of economics. Instead, look to sociology and biology to explain managerial salaries. Developers may be harder to recruit than managers but occupy a lower rung on the totem pole than them. Hence cannot be paid more than managers. Because pay is status and leaders have more status than followers. The more people you lead the more status and money.

buboard 7y ago
This makes sense but will be downvoted.
- Foober223 7y ago
  I upvoted it. It's a good insight.
UK-Al05 7y ago
Supply and demand and your explanation are both true. They are competing. Managers want it be structured like your explanation, what they actually get is structured by supply and demand. Because they setting below the market rate they then struggle get anyone. If a company comes along and does not follow hierarchical setting salaries, then they will get all the better programmers. Overtime if the software is critical to their business, then they will die out. It just takes time.
JSavageReal 7y ago
This is the best explanation. As much as managers pretend like lead/senior engineers are on the same rung of the hierarchy, they're not. Engineers are seen as "resources", a cost center, an input that produces an output, a more differentiated assembly line worker (engineers have higher status at tech companies obviously, but it's still the same dynamic). Managers report to the executives / upper management, and have all the relationships, political capital, and power. Is it fair? That's a separate question, but not a question the company cares about. Remember a company isn't a democracy, it's a dictatorship/oligarchy, probably led by someone non-technical who's goal is to maximize business profits, not please engineers. As an engineer I wish it was different.
eb0la 7y ago
I agree that Pay is status; but I believe with a bigger pay comes bigger responsability. Landing on a role with bigger responsability must be properly compensated or you won't be able to fill the position.
- paulriddle 7y ago
  Correct, but I'd like to point out that responsibility does not imply consequences. If the higher-ups mess up they can blame it on those below them. Usually it is done in an indirect way by setting expectations. For a lot of people, if they are the ones setting expectations they mentally take themselves out of the equation, assuming they are good. They might be wrong.

buboard 7y ago

This makes sense but will be downvoted.

Foober223 7y ago
I upvoted it. It's a good insight.

UK-Al05 7y ago

Supply and demand and your explanation are both true. They are competing. Managers want it be structured like your explanation, what they actually get is structured by supply and demand. Because they setting below the market rate they then struggle get anyone. If a company comes along and does not follow hierarchical setting salaries, then they will get all the better programmers. Overtime if the software is critical to their business, then they will die out. It just takes time.

JSavageReal 7y ago

This is the best explanation. As much as managers pretend like lead/senior engineers are on the same rung of the hierarchy, they're not. Engineers are seen as "resources", a cost center, an input that produces an output, a more differentiated assembly line worker (engineers have higher status at tech companies obviously, but it's still the same dynamic). Managers report to the executives / upper management, and have all the relationships, political capital, and power. Is it fair? That's a separate question, but not a question the company cares about. Remember a company isn't a democracy, it's a dictatorship/oligarchy, probably led by someone non-technical who's goal is to maximize business profits, not please engineers. As an engineer I wish it was different.

eb0la 7y ago

I agree that Pay is status; but I believe with a bigger pay comes bigger responsability. Landing on a role with bigger responsability must be properly compensated or you won't be able to fill the position.

paulriddle 7y ago
Correct, but I'd like to point out that responsibility does not imply consequences. If the higher-ups mess up they can blame it on those below them. Usually it is done in an indirect way by setting expectations. For a lot of people, if they are the ones setting expectations they mentally take themselves out of the equation, assuming they are good. They might be wrong.