7 ms·

I am terribly underpaid.

by bobmaxup 7y ago

willis936 7y ago
I feel that. Though I don’t have to live in a CA hellscape where half my paycheck has go to rent.
- senordevnyc 7y ago
  It’s really not that bad. I just took a job in NYC at Square making $420k my first year (though stock price increase is already pushing that closer to $500k) and my rent is $4300 for a 2 bedroom in a doorman building in manhattan. It’s expensive, but only about 10% of my gross income. Once you include my wife’s income, it’s even less of a big deal (and she makes under six figures). You might consider CA a hellscape for other reasons, but the cost-of-living-adjusted salaries for big tech in SF, Seattle, and NYC are higher than anywhere else in the country.
  - dennisgorelik 7y ago
    > cost-of-living-adjusted salaries for big tech in SF, Seattle, and NYC are higher than anywhere else in the country ... if you do not have children. Consider how much you would have to pay for a modest 2000 square feet house in SF or NYC.
    - senordevnyc 7y ago
      I do have a child. And she goes to a $55k / year private school. My point still stands.
    - randallsquared 7y ago
      For NYC, there are a smattering of houses under (to pick an arbitrary cutoff) 900K at 2000 square feet: https://streeteasy.com/houses/nyc/status:open%7Cprice:-600000%7Csqft%3E=2000%7Carea:100,300,400,200 https://streeteasy.com/houses/nyc/status:open%7Cprice:-60000... Many have mortgage payment estimates under what senordevnyc mentioned paying for rent, now.
      - ghaff 7y ago
        I don't think any of those houses are in locations that most people here mean when they say NYC (by which many mean Manhattan south of about 110th Street or a fashionable part of Brooklyn).
        senordevnyc 7y ago
        Most tech jobs in NYC are in midtown and lower Manhattan, but people live all over. In my office there are people living in all 5 boroughs, Westchester, NJ, and Long Island. It’s true that Manhattan and BK are more heavily represented, but there are options.
        ghaff 7y ago
        Sure. A very common pattern among my friends was that, when they had or were planning to have kids, they moved out of Manhattan to Greenwich or whatever. (This was a while back so the outer boroughs were probably relatively less interesting relative to the commuter rail destinations.) But, at least in my bubble, when people are talking about the high CoL of NYC, they're mostly talking about living in the core. The Bay Area is a bit unusual in that compared to a number of other expensive cities, it's hard to really commute out of the expense unless you have a really long commute. The East Bay comes closest I guess. By comparison, I live in the Boston area but you can get out to many suburban or even relatively rural towns within an hour. (Historically that's where almost all the computer industry jobs were anyway although that has changed somewhat.)
        randallsquared 7y ago
        I'm not sure I can argue about exactly what constitutes NYC, given that I pre-excluded Staten Island. :) However, I work in the flatiron district, and most of my co-workers live in Brooklyn, the Bronx, Queens, and NJ. One of the unexpected things I discovered when moving here two years ago is that there are a lot of reasonably-priced areas within an hour or so commute on buses or trains.
        7y ago
  - pansa2 7y ago
    > higher than anywhere else in the country. Anywhere else in the world. For example, in London you’d probably pay at least 50% of your current rent, but only receive 25% of your current salary.
    - senordevnyc 7y ago
      I tend to think that’s true, but I can’t say for sure. I do think someone working remotely while living in an ultra-low CoL place like Vietnam might come out ahead, but that has serious downsides as well, particularly if you ever want to move back to a developed country. You’ll have lived well in Vietnam but you won’t have built much wealth compared to your SF/NYC/Seattle peers.
      - ghaff 7y ago
        That's somewhat a function of how much you get paid. However, leaving aside debates about remote work generally, in my experience once you get beyond five or six hour time differences, synchronous communications start to get really hard--especially if you're not willing to significantly deviate from a "normal" schedule.
  - metalforever 7y ago
    Um is this a realistic salary in NYC
    - senordevnyc 7y ago
      If you’re a senior engineer working at a public tech company, yes. To be clear, this is total comp. About half is base and the rest is equity.
    - tudelo 7y ago
      with a few years of experience expect over 200k for top tech in NYC
onion2k 7y ago
I make less than 1/3rd of what London devs seem to be on. That's depressing.
nagyf 7y ago
Me too. I’m working at a FAANG company and apparently I could make 100k more. I was relocating for this job and I wasn’t really prepared for the negotiation, totally screwed it up, and I think they gave me the minimum they could. Oh the bright side, it’s still a good salary for me and I earn enough for two person to live comfortably.
- md_ 7y ago
  I’m a little surprised at that. FAANGs tend to have fairly prescribed comp systems. There’s flexibility around equity and signing bonuses, but if you told me that you were making (base+bonus) say $250k and someone at your level was making $350k, I’d be pretty surprised. This reveals one of the challenges in these comparisons, by the way: total comp can vary dramatically due not only to initial signing bonuses (which can result in a total comp “cliff”) but also due to time-at-level: e.g. if you were just promoted to level n and your peer was at n for four years, your peer’s net cash flow includes four previous n-sized RSU grants, whereas yours is 3x of n-1 grants. Of course transparency is still good, but it’s easy to misunderstand what causes a comp difference; in the case of the fast-promoted engineer they may appear to earn less per year despite having a steeper career trajectory than a slower peer.
  - deanCommie 7y ago
    You shouldn't be surprised at all. The higher up you go the wider the range is. The range for a senior SDE at my company in my city is 250-400 (according to blind). So you absolutely can have some people making $250k and others $350k for the same position at the same company. Having said that.......by and large.....it's deserved. It is INTENDED to be merit-based. But how fair is that merit-based system? Are people being shafted? Absolutely. International transfers. Those that don't negotiate well, or don't know their worth.
    - md_ 7y ago
      Well, again, if that’s total annual comp, sure, for the reason I gave (vesting of previous grants biasing toward longer tenure at level, signing cliffs). But as a one-time manager at a FAANG, in my experience, the ranges for comp in terms of base+bonus are rarely that wide. Anyway, I’m sure there are counter examples, but my point was that if you are at a FAANG making $250k and you find out someone at the same level is making $350k, it’s unlikely to be merely that you didn’t negotiate well enough.

I am terribly underpaid.

willis936 7y ago

I feel that. Though I don’t have to live in a CA hellscape where half my paycheck has go to rent.

senordevnyc 7y ago
It’s really not that bad. I just took a job in NYC at Square making $420k my first year (though stock price increase is already pushing that closer to $500k) and my rent is $4300 for a 2 bedroom in a doorman building in manhattan. It’s expensive, but only about 10% of my gross income. Once you include my wife’s income, it’s even less of a big deal (and she makes under six figures). You might consider CA a hellscape for other reasons, but the cost-of-living-adjusted salaries for big tech in SF, Seattle, and NYC are higher than anywhere else in the country.
- dennisgorelik 7y ago
  > cost-of-living-adjusted salaries for big tech in SF, Seattle, and NYC are higher than anywhere else in the country ... if you do not have children. Consider how much you would have to pay for a modest 2000 square feet house in SF or NYC.
  - senordevnyc 7y ago
    I do have a child. And she goes to a $55k / year private school. My point still stands.
  - randallsquared 7y ago
    For NYC, there are a smattering of houses under (to pick an arbitrary cutoff) 900K at 2000 square feet: https://streeteasy.com/houses/nyc/status:open%7Cprice:-600000%7Csqft%3E=2000%7Carea:100,300,400,200 https://streeteasy.com/houses/nyc/status:open%7Cprice:-60000... Many have mortgage payment estimates under what senordevnyc mentioned paying for rent, now.
    - ghaff 7y ago
      I don't think any of those houses are in locations that most people here mean when they say NYC (by which many mean Manhattan south of about 110th Street or a fashionable part of Brooklyn).
      - senordevnyc 7y ago
        Most tech jobs in NYC are in midtown and lower Manhattan, but people live all over. In my office there are people living in all 5 boroughs, Westchester, NJ, and Long Island. It’s true that Manhattan and BK are more heavily represented, but there are options.
        ghaff 7y ago
        Sure. A very common pattern among my friends was that, when they had or were planning to have kids, they moved out of Manhattan to Greenwich or whatever. (This was a while back so the outer boroughs were probably relatively less interesting relative to the commuter rail destinations.) But, at least in my bubble, when people are talking about the high CoL of NYC, they're mostly talking about living in the core. The Bay Area is a bit unusual in that compared to a number of other expensive cities, it's hard to really commute out of the expense unless you have a really long commute. The East Bay comes closest I guess. By comparison, I live in the Boston area but you can get out to many suburban or even relatively rural towns within an hour. (Historically that's where almost all the computer industry jobs were anyway although that has changed somewhat.)
      - randallsquared 7y ago
        I'm not sure I can argue about exactly what constitutes NYC, given that I pre-excluded Staten Island. :) However, I work in the flatiron district, and most of my co-workers live in Brooklyn, the Bronx, Queens, and NJ. One of the unexpected things I discovered when moving here two years ago is that there are a lot of reasonably-priced areas within an hour or so commute on buses or trains.
        7y ago
- pansa2 7y ago
  > higher than anywhere else in the country. Anywhere else in the world. For example, in London you’d probably pay at least 50% of your current rent, but only receive 25% of your current salary.
  - senordevnyc 7y ago
    I tend to think that’s true, but I can’t say for sure. I do think someone working remotely while living in an ultra-low CoL place like Vietnam might come out ahead, but that has serious downsides as well, particularly if you ever want to move back to a developed country. You’ll have lived well in Vietnam but you won’t have built much wealth compared to your SF/NYC/Seattle peers.
    - ghaff 7y ago
      That's somewhat a function of how much you get paid. However, leaving aside debates about remote work generally, in my experience once you get beyond five or six hour time differences, synchronous communications start to get really hard--especially if you're not willing to significantly deviate from a "normal" schedule.
- metalforever 7y ago
  Um is this a realistic salary in NYC
  - senordevnyc 7y ago
    If you’re a senior engineer working at a public tech company, yes. To be clear, this is total comp. About half is base and the rest is equity.
  - tudelo 7y ago
    with a few years of experience expect over 200k for top tech in NYC

onion2k 7y ago

I make less than 1/3rd of what London devs seem to be on. That's depressing.

nagyf 7y ago

Me too. I’m working at a FAANG company and apparently I could make 100k more. I was relocating for this job and I wasn’t really prepared for the negotiation, totally screwed it up, and I think they gave me the minimum they could. Oh the bright side, it’s still a good salary for me and I earn enough for two person to live comfortably.

md_ 7y ago
I’m a little surprised at that. FAANGs tend to have fairly prescribed comp systems. There’s flexibility around equity and signing bonuses, but if you told me that you were making (base+bonus) say $250k and someone at your level was making $350k, I’d be pretty surprised. This reveals one of the challenges in these comparisons, by the way: total comp can vary dramatically due not only to initial signing bonuses (which can result in a total comp “cliff”) but also due to time-at-level: e.g. if you were just promoted to level n and your peer was at n for four years, your peer’s net cash flow includes four previous n-sized RSU grants, whereas yours is 3x of n-1 grants. Of course transparency is still good, but it’s easy to misunderstand what causes a comp difference; in the case of the fast-promoted engineer they may appear to earn less per year despite having a steeper career trajectory than a slower peer.
- deanCommie 7y ago
  You shouldn't be surprised at all. The higher up you go the wider the range is. The range for a senior SDE at my company in my city is 250-400 (according to blind). So you absolutely can have some people making $250k and others $350k for the same position at the same company. Having said that.......by and large.....it's deserved. It is INTENDED to be merit-based. But how fair is that merit-based system? Are people being shafted? Absolutely. International transfers. Those that don't negotiate well, or don't know their worth.
  - md_ 7y ago
    Well, again, if that’s total annual comp, sure, for the reason I gave (vesting of previous grants biasing toward longer tenure at level, signing cliffs). But as a one-time manager at a FAANG, in my experience, the ranges for comp in terms of base+bonus are rarely that wide. Anyway, I’m sure there are counter examples, but my point was that if you are at a FAANG making $250k and you find out someone at the same level is making $350k, it’s unlikely to be merely that you didn’t negotiate well enough.