6 ms·

The company where colleagues decide your salary

27 points by dsnr 5y ago

didgeoridoo 5y ago
Intuitively, this feels like it would disproportionally reward the most well-liked and politically-astute employees. Maybe that’s what you want, but I’d probably prefer something like Buffer’s transparent formula-based approach.[0] [0]: https://buffer.com/salaries https://buffer.com/salaries
- the_jeremy 5y ago
  The highest IC engineering salary is under $200k USD. So, sure, it's transparent, but I'd take opaque and more money any day.
  - jfim 5y ago
    It seems that most of their employees are in lower cost of living areas, though.
    - the_jeremy 5y ago
      There is a San Franscisco salary in there. Still under 200k.
  - didgeoridoo 5y ago
    Let me rephrase — if my company insisted on transparency, I would probably prefer a formula-based approach to a democratic one. Politicking makes me tired.
    - EricE 5y ago
      If any hair brained company ever implemented this their employees would be far from tired :p “Let’s implement mandatory high school cliques - and tie the outcomes to salary. Brilliant!” Who has the balls to propose stuff like this and even worse, other people pick it up and feature it in a story?
- sudeepj 5y ago
  US (Nashville), Software Engineer III => $121,005 India (Bangalore), Software Engineer III => $121,005 Am I reading this right? Does cost of living in Bangalore same as Nashville? (I am not aware of the formula here but I assumed cost of living must be a factor in it)
  - quelltext 5y ago
    Should it factor in? [1] I'm not even sure anymore that local demand / supply should affect it either. I'm still not sure what the right approach is but I can think of a few arguments against this practice. Re: COL, is it on the company to adjust your pay based on your environment? Should they then not also pay a father of 4 kids more money than a single one (in the same location)? More generally, consider what different pay based on location does to morale: Say for a single employee in the US / SV the company could afford 2 to 3 employees in India. By extension that makes an US employee more valuable as the company wouldn't spend that much money if they weren't sure that employee delivers more than 2-3 Indian employees. But do they? Wouldn't the US employee then by definition have to be in a higher grade (title) as well? Also take into account that it's traditionally harder to get promoted if you are not close to / in HQ, so Indian employees would already be at a disadvantage. I don't know what folks in India think. Maybe worrying about inequality is something people have given up on, but I'd personally avoid a company that "transparently" told me I was worth less for doing the same job just because of were I live [2]. We don't like when that happens to women or underrepresented groups. Why should we be okay with it in the context of globalization? [1] FWIW, they say their formula does take COL into account, so not sure what's going on. [2] In fact, and sadly so, I'd probably go for a company that is generally known to pay well but not transparently, instead, even if they end up paying me less than US employees as well. At least nobody's claiming fairness there.
    - sudeepj 5y ago
      From an employee p.o.v it should not. But the reality is that lot of companies open offices in certain countries because they can afford to pay less than US and while extracting the similar work. I am not talking about outsourcing companies and instead I am referring to product based companies opening their offices in Bangalore, Pune, Hyderabad, etc (or may be east European countries)
- ecf 5y ago
  A little under $100k to manage someone’s calendar as an executive assistant seems like a pretty sweet gig.
mountainriver 5y ago
Really must have missed the inclusive terminology memo
nobodyandproud 5y ago
Seems like a sure fire way to destroy anyone going through the imposter syndrome.
EricE 5y ago
Great - high school cliques all over again! I heartily recommend all of my competitors implement this fantastic idea!

27 points by dsnr 5y ago

Intuitively, this feels like it would disproportionally reward the most well-liked and politically-astute employees. Maybe that’s what you want, but I’d probably prefer something like Buffer’s transparent formula-based approach.[0] [0]: https://buffer.com/salaries https://buffer.com/salaries

the_jeremy 5y ago
The highest IC engineering salary is under $200k USD. So, sure, it's transparent, but I'd take opaque and more money any day.
- jfim 5y ago
  It seems that most of their employees are in lower cost of living areas, though.
  - the_jeremy 5y ago
    There is a San Franscisco salary in there. Still under 200k.
- didgeoridoo 5y ago
  Let me rephrase — if my company insisted on transparency, I would probably prefer a formula-based approach to a democratic one. Politicking makes me tired.
  - EricE 5y ago
    If any hair brained company ever implemented this their employees would be far from tired :p “Let’s implement mandatory high school cliques - and tie the outcomes to salary. Brilliant!” Who has the balls to propose stuff like this and even worse, other people pick it up and feature it in a story?
sudeepj 5y ago
US (Nashville), Software Engineer III => $121,005 India (Bangalore), Software Engineer III => $121,005 Am I reading this right? Does cost of living in Bangalore same as Nashville? (I am not aware of the formula here but I assumed cost of living must be a factor in it)
- quelltext 5y ago
  Should it factor in? [1] I'm not even sure anymore that local demand / supply should affect it either. I'm still not sure what the right approach is but I can think of a few arguments against this practice. Re: COL, is it on the company to adjust your pay based on your environment? Should they then not also pay a father of 4 kids more money than a single one (in the same location)? More generally, consider what different pay based on location does to morale: Say for a single employee in the US / SV the company could afford 2 to 3 employees in India. By extension that makes an US employee more valuable as the company wouldn't spend that much money if they weren't sure that employee delivers more than 2-3 Indian employees. But do they? Wouldn't the US employee then by definition have to be in a higher grade (title) as well? Also take into account that it's traditionally harder to get promoted if you are not close to / in HQ, so Indian employees would already be at a disadvantage. I don't know what folks in India think. Maybe worrying about inequality is something people have given up on, but I'd personally avoid a company that "transparently" told me I was worth less for doing the same job just because of were I live [2]. We don't like when that happens to women or underrepresented groups. Why should we be okay with it in the context of globalization? [1] FWIW, they say their formula does take COL into account, so not sure what's going on. [2] In fact, and sadly so, I'd probably go for a company that is generally known to pay well but not transparently, instead, even if they end up paying me less than US employees as well. At least nobody's claiming fairness there.
  - sudeepj 5y ago
    From an employee p.o.v it should not. But the reality is that lot of companies open offices in certain countries because they can afford to pay less than US and while extracting the similar work. I am not talking about outsourcing companies and instead I am referring to product based companies opening their offices in Bangalore, Pune, Hyderabad, etc (or may be east European countries)
ecf 5y ago
A little under $100k to manage someone’s calendar as an executive assistant seems like a pretty sweet gig.

mountainriver 5y ago

Really must have missed the inclusive terminology memo

nobodyandproud 5y ago

Seems like a sure fire way to destroy anyone going through the imposter syndrome.

EricE 5y ago

Great - high school cliques all over again! I heartily recommend all of my competitors implement this fantastic idea!