5 ms·

Stack Exchange Developer Compensation [pdf]

43 points by swilliams 15y ago

spottiness 15y ago
I thought I was going to see the numbers :(
- awa 15y ago
  I would love to see some stackexchange developers dropping by and give us some numbers..
- swilliams 15y ago
  In the attached blog post (that mwsherman linked to) Joel states: "The only thing that is not public is the actual, final computation that determines each individual’s paycheck, because we have to balance our own philosophy of openness against the individual developer’s right to personal privacy."
mwsherman 15y ago
The PDF is part of a larger blog post: http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/07/how-much-should-you-pay-developers/ http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/07/how-much-should-you-pa...
eykanal 15y ago
I want to meet the guy who's A+++ at modem-whistling.
- dadkins 15y ago
  That'd be Captain Crunch: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Draper http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Draper
almightygod 15y ago
I believe if people shared their salaries with their co-workers only good things will come for the individuals. A) Either you will feel valued and continue happily along your way. B) You will realize you are not being fully appreciated, find a new job opportunity, and know now how much to negotiate for. FYI: I just created a poll "How much do you make as a programmer?" (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2763932 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2763932)
- albedoa 15y ago
  You might be interested in this HN comment thread about methods of anonymously sharing salary information between coworkers: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2439443 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2439443
- mchusma 15y ago
  No way. Most people would be irritated most of the time because there would always be some idiot making more than you.
- padobson 15y ago
  In my experience, people fall into two categories when they know what they're co-workers make. 1. They don't care because money isn't the main reason they are at their job. 2. They do care and they A) are unworried about people they outearn and B) are jealous/contentious with those that outearn them. I see no advantage in informing an office of what everyone earns.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
- eykanal 15y ago
  The labels themselves aren't important; it could be salt, pepper, oregano, and sugar, for all it matters. The descriptions of what each level means are very clear. Their rationale of "C, D, and F employees would already know where they stand" also makes sense... they're trying to communicate that they expect above-average to excellent work from all members of their team.
- zengr 15y ago
  What do you mean by "If they added an F------ they'd be perfect for eBay"?
dolinsky 15y ago
There is a previous discussion about this from last night here http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2761427 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2761427
- swilliams 15y ago
  I looked for both that link and the pdf, but didn't see it in the first 2 pages and New. Nuts. I felt that the pdf had more useful info than the associated blog post, so I submitted that one.
deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
mapgrep 15y ago
"Our compensation is not based on how well you negotiate or how often you ask for raises... We don’t have a range of possible salaries for every level, we have a single salary, so everything about the system is algorithmic." Bullshit. Politically savvy employees will just move their lobbying from blatantly asking for raises to arguing that they are on a new "level." Consider that this document lists 10 different criteria for just the "public artifacts" portion of the ranking, including writing blog posts, public speaking, participating in hackathons, being on panels, and "participating in Stack Exchange." Queue the guy who says his upvotes and tweets bump him to the next level. And "public artifacts" is just one of FIFTEEN (!) vague areas on which you are graded, including "Outreach," which lists some of the exact same criteria as "public artifacts," like public speaking and hackathons; "Getting Things Done;" "Ships" (how is that different from Getting Things Done?); "Ideas" (sounds objective!); "Extracurricular programming learning;" and "Other engineering type skills." This sounds like a compensation system that pretends to be far more objective than it really is, which is actually more dangerous than one that acknowledges (and thus treats carefully) its own subjectivity. (Which happens to be a broader issue I have with StackOverflow itself; much as I love it, the site is plagued by know-it-alls wielding pseudo precise rules "your question is overlocalized" and "not really a question" to delete reasonably compliant content. But that's a whole other comment.)
- byrneseyeview 15y ago
  Bullshit. Politically savvy employees will just move their lobbying from blatantly asking for raises to arguing that they are on a new "level." My previous employer implemented that. And what you predicted is exactly what happened. The first salary negotiation after the new policy went like this: "We'd like to offer you $X." "No. I'd have to take at least 15% more than that." "Oh. We'll have to change your job title, then." I suppose that some organizations can pull this off, but they're very rare. Maybe StackOverflow should ask how the military does it.
  - GavinB 15y ago
    Maybe StackOverflow should ask how the military does it. You're not allowed to quit. It simplifies things a great deal.
aredington 15y ago
If they have objective measures and are compensating based on them, there's no reason not to tell people what the formula is. You can still hide what you measure people at (Bob's only A+ at LINQ, vs. A+++). Without specifying how measurements translate into yearly compensation they're just waving their hands around and saying how scientific they are without actually being so.

43 points by swilliams 15y ago

spottiness 15y ago

I thought I was going to see the numbers :(

awa 15y ago
I would love to see some stackexchange developers dropping by and give us some numbers..
swilliams 15y ago
In the attached blog post (that mwsherman linked to) Joel states: "The only thing that is not public is the actual, final computation that determines each individual’s paycheck, because we have to balance our own philosophy of openness against the individual developer’s right to personal privacy."

mwsherman 15y ago

The PDF is part of a larger blog post: http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/07/how-much-should-you-pay-developers/ http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/07/how-much-should-you-pa...

eykanal 15y ago

I want to meet the guy who's A+++ at modem-whistling.

dadkins 15y ago
That'd be Captain Crunch: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Draper http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Draper

almightygod 15y ago

I believe if people shared their salaries with their co-workers only good things will come for the individuals. A) Either you will feel valued and continue happily along your way. B) You will realize you are not being fully appreciated, find a new job opportunity, and know now how much to negotiate for. FYI: I just created a poll "How much do you make as a programmer?" (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2763932 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2763932)

albedoa 15y ago
You might be interested in this HN comment thread about methods of anonymously sharing salary information between coworkers: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2439443 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2439443
mchusma 15y ago
No way. Most people would be irritated most of the time because there would always be some idiot making more than you.
padobson 15y ago
In my experience, people fall into two categories when they know what they're co-workers make. 1. They don't care because money isn't the main reason they are at their job. 2. They do care and they A) are unworried about people they outearn and B) are jealous/contentious with those that outearn them. I see no advantage in informing an office of what everyone earns.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

eykanal 15y ago
The labels themselves aren't important; it could be salt, pepper, oregano, and sugar, for all it matters. The descriptions of what each level means are very clear. Their rationale of "C, D, and F employees would already know where they stand" also makes sense... they're trying to communicate that they expect above-average to excellent work from all members of their team.
zengr 15y ago
What do you mean by "If they added an F------ they'd be perfect for eBay"?

dolinsky 15y ago

There is a previous discussion about this from last night here http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2761427 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2761427

swilliams 15y ago
I looked for both that link and the pdf, but didn't see it in the first 2 pages and New. Nuts. I felt that the pdf had more useful info than the associated blog post, so I submitted that one.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

mapgrep 15y ago

"Our compensation is not based on how well you negotiate or how often you ask for raises... We don’t have a range of possible salaries for every level, we have a single salary, so everything about the system is algorithmic." Bullshit. Politically savvy employees will just move their lobbying from blatantly asking for raises to arguing that they are on a new "level." Consider that this document lists 10 different criteria for just the "public artifacts" portion of the ranking, including writing blog posts, public speaking, participating in hackathons, being on panels, and "participating in Stack Exchange." Queue the guy who says his upvotes and tweets bump him to the next level. And "public artifacts" is just one of FIFTEEN (!) vague areas on which you are graded, including "Outreach," which lists some of the exact same criteria as "public artifacts," like public speaking and hackathons; "Getting Things Done;" "Ships" (how is that different from Getting Things Done?); "Ideas" (sounds objective!); "Extracurricular programming learning;" and "Other engineering type skills." This sounds like a compensation system that pretends to be far more objective than it really is, which is actually more dangerous than one that acknowledges (and thus treats carefully) its own subjectivity. (Which happens to be a broader issue I have with StackOverflow itself; much as I love it, the site is plagued by know-it-alls wielding pseudo precise rules "your question is overlocalized" and "not really a question" to delete reasonably compliant content. But that's a whole other comment.)

byrneseyeview 15y ago
Bullshit. Politically savvy employees will just move their lobbying from blatantly asking for raises to arguing that they are on a new "level." My previous employer implemented that. And what you predicted is exactly what happened. The first salary negotiation after the new policy went like this: "We'd like to offer you $X." "No. I'd have to take at least 15% more than that." "Oh. We'll have to change your job title, then." I suppose that some organizations can pull this off, but they're very rare. Maybe StackOverflow should ask how the military does it.
- GavinB 15y ago
  Maybe StackOverflow should ask how the military does it. You're not allowed to quit. It simplifies things a great deal.

aredington 15y ago

If they have objective measures and are compensating based on them, there's no reason not to tell people what the formula is. You can still hide what you measure people at (Bob's only A+ at LINQ, vs. A+++). Without specifying how measurements translate into yearly compensation they're just waving their hands around and saying how scientific they are without actually being so.