7 ms·

I'm the author of this piece - I've had multiple jobs since then (obviously), and I've always been given pretty substantial raises and bonuses throughout my car

I'm the author of this piece - I've had multiple jobs since then (obviously), and I've always been given pretty substantial raises and bonuses throughout my career enough to nearly 10x my first jobs salary in only 15 years. Now all that isn't from one job, but because I'm a contractor and basically set my rate with each new company, I invest as much as I can either in the stock market, or more recently into side projects and my family run businesses, etc.

giantg2 5y ago
It seems like nowhere will just give you a raise because it's the right thing, valuation-wise. You basically have to threaten to leave or something. My inflation adjusted increase over 10 years with one promotion (10%) and a masters degree (9%) has been 22%.
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  The right valuation is determined by people rejecting job offers (or leaving current jobs) and accepting job offers. Repeated cleared transactions is what allows a market to determine the price.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    But can also create inefficiencies for an organization because they lose institutional knowledge and incur training costs.
    - lotsofpulp 5y ago
      Markets are more efficient when transaction information is public, and hence all wages should be public. Assuming the goal is to minimize that friction.
      - giantg2 5y ago
        True. It would be great if they would at least post salary ranges for jobs (based on company policy and/or the people in the role at the company). I don't even feel like applying to most jobs. If it's not paying more than I make now, why should I waste my time? Such a pain to filter out jobs without it listed.
        lotsofpulp 5y ago
        Colorado took the first step in that direction. If you are applying to a company that employs people in CO, you can check their CO listing.
        giantg2 5y ago
        Except the ranges aren't even useful. I've seen most that are like $50k-150k. Not helpful at all in my opinion.
        lotsofpulp 5y ago
        It will take some time, and ideally more stated will follow. If CA/WA/OR/MA/IL/NY/NJ/CT follow, then it could lead to some real change.
        nradov 5y ago
        Hence why some companies now explicitly disallow CO residents from applying for jobs. Those employers would rather lose out on CO talent instead of weakening their negotiating position by posting an explicit salary range.
        lotsofpulp 5y ago
        Yes, but to avoid it, the employer must not have any employees in CO. The law applies for any position that can be done remotely, even if the employer does not intend to hire a CO resident, as long as the employer already has CO employees: https://www.huschblackwell.com/newsandinsights/updated-faqs-colorados-equal-pay-rules-for-job-posting-and-pay-transparency https://www.huschblackwell.com/newsandinsights/updated-faqs-... >Under EPT Rule 4.3 (A), the promotion posting requirements do not apply to employees who are entirely outside of Colorado. However, if a Colorado employer has a promotion opportunity available anywhere in the company, even outside of Colorado, its Colorado employees must be notified. Under EPT Rule 4.3(B), job postings and promotional opportunities do not need to include compensation information if the job will be performed entirely outside of Colorado or if the job is posted entirely outside Colorado (i.e., not on the internet). >INFO #9 instructs that the out-of-state exception applies “narrowly,” only where the job is tied to non-Colorado worksites (e.g., waitstaff at restaurants outside Colorado). Therefore, postings for remote positions that can be performed anywhere are subject to the EPEWA’s requirements, even if the posting states that Colorado applicants won’t be accepted. However, a non-Colorado job that may include “modest” travel to Colorado is still considered an out-of-state job not subject to the transparency requirements.
  - zenithd 5y ago
    This strategy can be sub-optimal from the employer's perspective. Consider yourself as an employer and assume your employees have perceived switching cost C > 0. Your employee will approach you with bids b_1, ..., b_n all of which are substantially larger than C. So to keep your employee you will need to pay C plus some premium. In fact, not just any premium, but probably something close to max(b_1, ..., b_n). If you can make good guesses at C and b_1..b_n, then you can retain employees by ensuring you're always giving raises between C and max(b_1, ..., b_n). And all of that assumes that employees are fungible at any particular price point. They're not; employers also have switching costs. Among two otherwise equivalent employees you'd much prefer the one you already have.
    - lotsofpulp 5y ago
      This might be true for FAANG employers or others employing people in high demand, but based on the behavior of the vast majority of employers, it is clearly less costly of a problem than the savings of not having to pay prevailing market prices for all their employees.
- kongin 5y ago
  You don't have to threaten to leave, you do leave.
  - denton-scratch 5y ago
    The cost of changing jobs is pretty high, in my assessment. I mean, perhaps not if you're young, single and mobile; but if you are married with kids in school, own a home and pay a mortgage, changing jobs is personally very disruptive. And then you have to develop a working relationship with your new boss and employer, and your new colleagues; you have to learn new tools and platforms, which may make you much less productive for up to a year. And all of these learnings carry risk - for whatever reason, the new job might not work out, and you might have to move again, this time maybe with a shotgun to your head. The employer-employee relationship isn't symmetrical, even if you are a superstar engineer. No company has ever relocated just because a superstar engineer decided he preferred a warmer climate. Basically, staff are fungible, employers are not.
bityard 5y ago
I just wanted to say that I really enjoyed your writing style and the overall message of the article. Thank you. Whenever a topic like this comes up on HN or Reddit, most of the comments I see are incredibly pessimistic about the job market and/or reek of entitlement. I'm not saying that we should make excuses for exploitative employers but unless you get extremely lucky when starting out, you just have to show up and put in the work, even when the works sucks, even when the pay sucks. Then after a little while, put that shit on your resume and move on to something better. Rinse, repeat.
- jermaustin1 5y ago
  Thank you for saying that. I love writing down my stories. It is therapeutic, almost like writing them releases me from the bad memory. It is basically a VERY lightly edited stream of consciousness.
- giantg2 5y ago
  "Then after a little while, put that shit on your resume and move on to something better. Rinse, repeat." I guess I'm one of the pessimists. I'm 10 years in and nothing has gotten better. The benefits have been eroding too. It never paid off and I have trouble seeing it ever pay off if the first third of my career has been so terrible. I've become disengaged, which I'm sure will lead to a vicious cycle.
  - jermaustin1 5y ago
    I can only speak from my own history, but I've worked in Houston, TX and NYC, and both have pretty good senior dev jobs available at all times. Are you maybe not applying for those higher positions? Junior devs will always be taken advantage of unless you know someone. I even took a Jr Dev job (on paper) only 6 years ago or so, because the manager knew me. I was paid more than the senior developer, and he reported to me in practice.
    - giantg2 5y ago
      I'm not allowed (have a wife) to leave my current area (Philly-ish). I have applied for a couple jobs. I dont apply to most jobs because there is no salary info or the salary range listed is not any better than my current job. I'm an intermediate developer. I've unofficially filled roles like senior dev and tech lead. I've also worked as an ASC (supposed to be reserved for senior devs). Oh well

giantg2 5y ago

It seems like nowhere will just give you a raise because it's the right thing, valuation-wise. You basically have to threaten to leave or something. My inflation adjusted increase over 10 years with one promotion (10%) and a masters degree (9%) has been 22%.

lotsofpulp 5y ago
The right valuation is determined by people rejecting job offers (or leaving current jobs) and accepting job offers. Repeated cleared transactions is what allows a market to determine the price.
- giantg2 5y ago
  But can also create inefficiencies for an organization because they lose institutional knowledge and incur training costs.
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    Markets are more efficient when transaction information is public, and hence all wages should be public. Assuming the goal is to minimize that friction.
    - giantg2 5y ago
      True. It would be great if they would at least post salary ranges for jobs (based on company policy and/or the people in the role at the company). I don't even feel like applying to most jobs. If it's not paying more than I make now, why should I waste my time? Such a pain to filter out jobs without it listed.
      - lotsofpulp 5y ago
        Colorado took the first step in that direction. If you are applying to a company that employs people in CO, you can check their CO listing.
        giantg2 5y ago
        Except the ranges aren't even useful. I've seen most that are like $50k-150k. Not helpful at all in my opinion.
        lotsofpulp 5y ago
        It will take some time, and ideally more stated will follow. If CA/WA/OR/MA/IL/NY/NJ/CT follow, then it could lead to some real change.
        nradov 5y ago
        Hence why some companies now explicitly disallow CO residents from applying for jobs. Those employers would rather lose out on CO talent instead of weakening their negotiating position by posting an explicit salary range.
        lotsofpulp 5y ago
        Yes, but to avoid it, the employer must not have any employees in CO. The law applies for any position that can be done remotely, even if the employer does not intend to hire a CO resident, as long as the employer already has CO employees: https://www.huschblackwell.com/newsandinsights/updated-faqs-colorados-equal-pay-rules-for-job-posting-and-pay-transparency https://www.huschblackwell.com/newsandinsights/updated-faqs-... >Under EPT Rule 4.3 (A), the promotion posting requirements do not apply to employees who are entirely outside of Colorado. However, if a Colorado employer has a promotion opportunity available anywhere in the company, even outside of Colorado, its Colorado employees must be notified. Under EPT Rule 4.3(B), job postings and promotional opportunities do not need to include compensation information if the job will be performed entirely outside of Colorado or if the job is posted entirely outside Colorado (i.e., not on the internet). >INFO #9 instructs that the out-of-state exception applies “narrowly,” only where the job is tied to non-Colorado worksites (e.g., waitstaff at restaurants outside Colorado). Therefore, postings for remote positions that can be performed anywhere are subject to the EPEWA’s requirements, even if the posting states that Colorado applicants won’t be accepted. However, a non-Colorado job that may include “modest” travel to Colorado is still considered an out-of-state job not subject to the transparency requirements.
- zenithd 5y ago
  This strategy can be sub-optimal from the employer's perspective. Consider yourself as an employer and assume your employees have perceived switching cost C > 0. Your employee will approach you with bids b_1, ..., b_n all of which are substantially larger than C. So to keep your employee you will need to pay C plus some premium. In fact, not just any premium, but probably something close to max(b_1, ..., b_n). If you can make good guesses at C and b_1..b_n, then you can retain employees by ensuring you're always giving raises between C and max(b_1, ..., b_n). And all of that assumes that employees are fungible at any particular price point. They're not; employers also have switching costs. Among two otherwise equivalent employees you'd much prefer the one you already have.
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    This might be true for FAANG employers or others employing people in high demand, but based on the behavior of the vast majority of employers, it is clearly less costly of a problem than the savings of not having to pay prevailing market prices for all their employees.
kongin 5y ago
You don't have to threaten to leave, you do leave.
- denton-scratch 5y ago
  The cost of changing jobs is pretty high, in my assessment. I mean, perhaps not if you're young, single and mobile; but if you are married with kids in school, own a home and pay a mortgage, changing jobs is personally very disruptive. And then you have to develop a working relationship with your new boss and employer, and your new colleagues; you have to learn new tools and platforms, which may make you much less productive for up to a year. And all of these learnings carry risk - for whatever reason, the new job might not work out, and you might have to move again, this time maybe with a shotgun to your head. The employer-employee relationship isn't symmetrical, even if you are a superstar engineer. No company has ever relocated just because a superstar engineer decided he preferred a warmer climate. Basically, staff are fungible, employers are not.

bityard 5y ago

I just wanted to say that I really enjoyed your writing style and the overall message of the article. Thank you. Whenever a topic like this comes up on HN or Reddit, most of the comments I see are incredibly pessimistic about the job market and/or reek of entitlement. I'm not saying that we should make excuses for exploitative employers but unless you get extremely lucky when starting out, you just have to show up and put in the work, even when the works sucks, even when the pay sucks. Then after a little while, put that shit on your resume and move on to something better. Rinse, repeat.

jermaustin1 5y ago
Thank you for saying that. I love writing down my stories. It is therapeutic, almost like writing them releases me from the bad memory. It is basically a VERY lightly edited stream of consciousness.
giantg2 5y ago
"Then after a little while, put that shit on your resume and move on to something better. Rinse, repeat." I guess I'm one of the pessimists. I'm 10 years in and nothing has gotten better. The benefits have been eroding too. It never paid off and I have trouble seeing it ever pay off if the first third of my career has been so terrible. I've become disengaged, which I'm sure will lead to a vicious cycle.
- jermaustin1 5y ago
  I can only speak from my own history, but I've worked in Houston, TX and NYC, and both have pretty good senior dev jobs available at all times. Are you maybe not applying for those higher positions? Junior devs will always be taken advantage of unless you know someone. I even took a Jr Dev job (on paper) only 6 years ago or so, because the manager knew me. I was paid more than the senior developer, and he reported to me in practice.
  - giantg2 5y ago
    I'm not allowed (have a wife) to leave my current area (Philly-ish). I have applied for a couple jobs. I dont apply to most jobs because there is no salary info or the salary range listed is not any better than my current job. I'm an intermediate developer. I've unofficially filled roles like senior dev and tech lead. I've also worked as an ASC (supposed to be reserved for senior devs). Oh well