3 ms·
It makes me feel bad how many people see these figures and immediately start trying to find ways to rationalize why they must be overstated. Aside from some of
by opportune 7y ago
It makes me feel bad how many people see these figures and immediately start trying to find ways to rationalize why they must be overstated. Aside from some of these companies not being public (so those RSUs are not very liquid) or backloading vesting, they’re pretty accurate IME.
The main thing I would point out is that the years of experience guideline is a bit optimistic. Many engineers get downleveled moving into top paying companies (so someone with 9 years of experience might be level 2) and usually either level 2 or level 3 is a terminal level, meaning it’s both ok to stay at that level for a long time and that promotions get harder.
Also, while these figures don’t (or shouldn’t) include signing bonus/relo, nor health insurance, free food, and other benefits, it should be noted that most of these are in the Bay Area or similarly expensive areas. So a lot of your money goes to housing (with housing close to work large enough for a family being super expensive), and state taxes are a bit steep.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- poulsbohemian 7y ago>It makes me feel bad how many people see these figures and immediately start trying to find ways to rationalize why they must be overstated. Some of the numbers can be hard to comprehend... for example, tech salaries weren't great until about the last decade. And, it used to be that the eye-popping numbers were not for everybody, and certainly not for entry-level / new-grads. Heck, just the amount of transparency in compensation available now was completely foreign when I started my career. Likewise, what's interesting is that in our always connected digital world, location still matters. Thus, for someone not working at a FAANG and not in specific geographic locations, these numbers are other-worldly.
- crispyambulance 7y ago> for someone not working at a FAANG and not in specific geographic locations, these numbers are other-worldly. Yes. other-worldly is a good word for it. It's not so much that people don't believe these numbers, I think. It's more of a sense of disappointment and feeling left out. So many experienced professionals work their whole adult lives and end up maxing out at only a 1/10th of the compensation of a "principal" at a FAANG in Silicon Valley.
- jcadam 7y agoAnd the last few years I've taken to blowing off recruiters from SV (including FAANG companies). I'm earning very good money for a software engineer where I live, but... dang, "other-worldly" is a good term for the money you people make. OTOH, being forced to live in California is a huge downside to any FAANG job (for me, anyway).
- exclipy 7y agoWe need to cut the myth that these salaries only exist in Silicon Valley. Seattle and NYC also offer otherworldly packages. Google (and probably other FAANGs) also pay extremely well in Boston, Los Angeles, Boulder, Chicago, Austin and Zurich/Switzerland.
- poulsbohemian 7y agoYes - but try Des Moines or Missoula or Boise or even Portland, OR (a growing tech hub) and these salary levels are hard to hit. And, outside of the FAANGs the salaries are a step down just about everywhere.
- exclipy 7y agoWas just responding to the "being forced to live in California" comment.
- fletchowns 7y ago> being forced to live in California is a huge downside to any FAANG job (for me, anyway) You must not like being able to go snowboarding on a Saturday and surfing on a Sunday :)
- thorwasdfasdf 7y agosome of it could be jealousy and envy since most SWE won't get to ever work at a FAANG. FAANGs higher the best, and if you've failed at getting highered by a FANG then you probably won't like seeing all these great figures.
- softawre 7y agohired* But yeah.