6 ms·

It really still isn't the norm anywhere to list compensation and I suspect that Y Combinator has the same problems of disparate compensation based on when peopl

It really still isn't the norm anywhere to list compensation and I suspect that Y Combinator has the same problems of disparate compensation based on when people joined as any other company. Heck, we are all switching jobs constantly because the new guy got more than we did, despite being the same level and having more experience at the company. Plenty of companies decided to stop hiring from Colorado rather than post compensation in the job postings. If I had to guess, I suspect it provides no competitive advantage to list compensation except if you pay top tier. As an anecdote from a friend, the wage differences can be substantial. The friend just recently got a new job and the senior who mentored him in onboarding also got promoted a level too. That senior was talking about how they finally reached six figures (Canada has much lower pay than the USA, so this isn't crazy). My friend made six figures starting, with 3-5 fewer years of experience and just about two years overall. There are a lot of absurdly underpaid people out there.

netizen-936824 5y ago
>There are a lot of absurdly underpaid people out there. In my observation, this is literally the backbone of capitalism
- lotsofpulp 5y ago
  Not really. It is simply a consequence of a market lacking price transparency. We have the internet. We have laws protecting employees discussing their pay. There is nothing in capitalism stopping anyone from disclosing their pay and creating a transparent market. And it is happening, albeit slowly (see levels.fyi and glassdoor). CO’s transparency laws also help, and anything to help transparency will assist. The main resistance I sense is actually from people themselves, for various social and emotional reasons.
  - MattGaiser 5y ago
    Well, if you are on the higher end, you probably don't want to share with those on the lower end, simply because 1 of 3 things will happen. 1. They ask for a raise and don’t get it. You lose a team member when they leave. 2. You can’t get a raise because your boss is forced to give your colleague a raise and doesn’t want to have to hand out raises. 3. Your colleague stews and resents you. People say it won’t happen, but I have heard a ton of complaining about how X earns so much and they don’t deserve it from co-workers.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - lotsofpulp 5y ago
      Yes, everyone likes to think they are top 10% (or even above average). That is what I meant by my last sentence.
    - zdragnar 5y ago
      I have witnessed number 3 in action. My first programming job introduced pay bands a few years in (it was a young company that grew from small to a few hundred at that point) and word got around about the people who were already earning above the band for their level. The mood around those who were already above their band went from "yeah they're okay devs" to "wtf, those guys aren't nearly good enough" pretty quickly. I'm just happy to be one of those that got a good raise to meet the bottom of my payband and not the other way around.
    - inetknght 5y ago
      > 1. They ask for a raise and don’t get it. You lose a team member when they leave. Yes and that should be a lesson to pay the whole team more. > 2. You can’t get a raise because your boss is forced to give your colleague a raise and doesn’t want to have to hand out raises. Your colleague wasn't paid well, asked to get paid better, and got it. Now you're said because you can't continue to get paid more relative to your colleague? Lose your greed and grow some empathy in its place. > 3. Your colleague stews and resents you. People say it won’t happen, but I have heard a ton of complaining about how X earns so much and they don’t deserve it from co-workers. Then work with them to explain how and why you deserve more than your colleagues. Otherwise, they might be right about you not deserving it. You getting what you don't deserve means, by your own logic, that they're not getting what they do deserve.
      - imgabe 5y ago
        > Otherwise, they might be right about you not deserving it. #3 results from a fundamental confusion people have that pay is based on people "deserving" something. Like it's an expression of virtue or your worth as a person or a reward for doing something good. It's not. You're paid based on supply and demand and your negotiating skills, nothing more. It's not a golden star from your teacher that you're a nice boy. It's whatever you were able to convince the company the monetary value of your contribution is worth. That's all. Get over whether someone deserves this or that. I'll solve this once and for all: nobody deserves anything. You're responsible for figuring out how to provide value and capture it.
  - heavyset_go 5y ago
    > Not really. It is simply a consequence of a market lacking price transparency. With close to perfect information, there is little room to profit, which would put a spoke in the wheel of capitalism.
    - tshaddox 5y ago
      What spoke in the wheel? In hypothetical perfect competition there is zero long run economic profit. The whole point of profit motive is that the opportunity for economic profit means there are resources being allocated inefficiently.
    - lotsofpulp 5y ago
      I do not think so. See retail and insurance businesses, with their consistent 2% to 6% profit margins. Bigger potential profits merit bigger risk taking. But not all investments have the same risk profile and time horizons.
      - MattGaiser 5y ago
        Insurance is so far from perfect information though. Maybe perfect information in for an average year is possible, but it is the black swan years that knock you out. Even then, there is no perfect information on clients.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
      - mypalmike 5y ago
        It's not a matter of thinking so or otherwise. It's a mathematical question of what value each worker added to the product. Other expenses aside, profit is the difference between the value they added and the wage they were paid. You don't get profit without underpaying relative to the value provided by a worker.
        JackFr 5y ago
  - tshaddox 5y ago
    > There is nothing in capitalism stopping anyone from disclosing their pay and creating a transparent market. Is that actually true? Is it possible to verifiably disclose one’s pay? Are you supposed to sign an affidavit or something?
    - lotsofpulp 5y ago
      Yes? Using records such as paystubs, W-2, or 1099. Obviously, they can be falsified, but I presume we are not talking about that. There is also the Norway method of having the government provide it.
      - tshaddox 5y ago
        If the idea is for the entire labor market to change significantly due to everyone voluntarily sharing their salary, then we ought to be talking about a mechanism of ensuring honesty, just like an auction (generally) wants to design their auction in such a way that people are honest about their willingness to pay.
        lotsofpulp 5y ago
        Ideally, but you do not need the entire labor market to participate to do it. I am guessing even shining a light on a small, representative set of real time data will be enough to get things moving.
- TOGoS 5y ago
  > In my observation You win award for understatement[1] of 2021. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value
cblconfederate 5y ago
> really still isn't the norm anywhere to list compensation Jobs posted on remote job forums like weworkremote.com and remoteok.com routinely list salary ranges.
- alborzb 5y ago
  Heads up for anyone else that reads this comment and tries the site in their job searches, first one is a typo for weworkremotely.com :)
pcthrowaway 5y ago
> Plenty of companies decided to stop hiring from Colorado rather than post compensation in the job postings. Do you know if there's any data supporting this?
- MattGaiser 5y ago
  It is anecdotal from constantly seeing remote job postings saying things like "this role can be performed from any US state except Colorado." Sometimes Hawaii is included. Let me try and dig up a few of these.
  - jedberg 5y ago
    I wish California would pass this law. It would be really hard to avoid tech workers in California.
    - Sebguer 5y ago
      California, IIRC, mandates that they provide you the pay range if you ask for it.
      - jedberg 5y ago
        Yeah after the first interview. But that's way different than with the job posting.
      - gojomo 5y ago
        "We're so glad you asked. Our possible range, depending on the candidate, is from minimum wage to $1M/year."
        joshuamorton 5y ago
        If a company answers this way, it is likely that you would succeed on a claim under the California Equal Pay Act. This kind of hair splitting doesn't generally go over well.
lettergram 5y ago
I think most people are naive (even on HN) regarding compensation and negotiations. The first thing I do at the start of every interview conversation is ask comp. I then tell them my total comp and ask for X% over. If equity is discussed, I always require my same base pay or slightly higher. The reality is that ensures a continued trajectory upward. I also always request 2-4x any equity I’m offered. If they want to keep me, they need to make it worth my while at a higher risk profile (equity isn’t cash on hand). Equity is always a gamble, for the company and the employee. I personally demand higher because plenty of my work is open source and I offer more references as well. That mitigates the company risk and in return I demand more equity (as I’m reducing said companies risk).
- chmod600 5y ago
  I am no expert, but it sounds like you are naive when it comes to negotiation as well.
  - MattGaiser 5y ago
    Please explain why for the rest of the class. A few sentences for those of us who know we are naive would be helpful.
    - willhinsa 5y ago
      > You can’t win if you guess at their salaries. > If you underestimate what they’re willing to pay, you’re leaving money on the table. If the real answer is that they would compensate someone like you up to $75,000 dollars, and you guess they would pay a salary of only $65,000, you very literally may have just cost yourself $10,000. [0] [0] https://fearlesssalarynegotiation.com/salary-expectations-interview-question/ https://fearlesssalarynegotiation.com/salary-expectations-in... And a video from the creator of that site (Josh Doody) on this specific issue (disclosing current salary): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N7mOR9yv2U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N7mOR9yv2U
      - forix 5y ago
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]

netizen-936824 5y ago

>There are a lot of absurdly underpaid people out there. In my observation, this is literally the backbone of capitalism

lotsofpulp 5y ago
Not really. It is simply a consequence of a market lacking price transparency. We have the internet. We have laws protecting employees discussing their pay. There is nothing in capitalism stopping anyone from disclosing their pay and creating a transparent market. And it is happening, albeit slowly (see levels.fyi and glassdoor). CO’s transparency laws also help, and anything to help transparency will assist. The main resistance I sense is actually from people themselves, for various social and emotional reasons.
- MattGaiser 5y ago
  Well, if you are on the higher end, you probably don't want to share with those on the lower end, simply because 1 of 3 things will happen. 1. They ask for a raise and don’t get it. You lose a team member when they leave. 2. You can’t get a raise because your boss is forced to give your colleague a raise and doesn’t want to have to hand out raises. 3. Your colleague stews and resents you. People say it won’t happen, but I have heard a ton of complaining about how X earns so much and they don’t deserve it from co-workers.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    Yes, everyone likes to think they are top 10% (or even above average). That is what I meant by my last sentence.
  - zdragnar 5y ago
    I have witnessed number 3 in action. My first programming job introduced pay bands a few years in (it was a young company that grew from small to a few hundred at that point) and word got around about the people who were already earning above the band for their level. The mood around those who were already above their band went from "yeah they're okay devs" to "wtf, those guys aren't nearly good enough" pretty quickly. I'm just happy to be one of those that got a good raise to meet the bottom of my payband and not the other way around.
  - inetknght 5y ago
    > 1. They ask for a raise and don’t get it. You lose a team member when they leave. Yes and that should be a lesson to pay the whole team more. > 2. You can’t get a raise because your boss is forced to give your colleague a raise and doesn’t want to have to hand out raises. Your colleague wasn't paid well, asked to get paid better, and got it. Now you're said because you can't continue to get paid more relative to your colleague? Lose your greed and grow some empathy in its place. > 3. Your colleague stews and resents you. People say it won’t happen, but I have heard a ton of complaining about how X earns so much and they don’t deserve it from co-workers. Then work with them to explain how and why you deserve more than your colleagues. Otherwise, they might be right about you not deserving it. You getting what you don't deserve means, by your own logic, that they're not getting what they do deserve.
    - imgabe 5y ago
      > Otherwise, they might be right about you not deserving it. #3 results from a fundamental confusion people have that pay is based on people "deserving" something. Like it's an expression of virtue or your worth as a person or a reward for doing something good. It's not. You're paid based on supply and demand and your negotiating skills, nothing more. It's not a golden star from your teacher that you're a nice boy. It's whatever you were able to convince the company the monetary value of your contribution is worth. That's all. Get over whether someone deserves this or that. I'll solve this once and for all: nobody deserves anything. You're responsible for figuring out how to provide value and capture it.
- heavyset_go 5y ago
  > Not really. It is simply a consequence of a market lacking price transparency. With close to perfect information, there is little room to profit, which would put a spoke in the wheel of capitalism.
  - tshaddox 5y ago
    What spoke in the wheel? In hypothetical perfect competition there is zero long run economic profit. The whole point of profit motive is that the opportunity for economic profit means there are resources being allocated inefficiently.
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    I do not think so. See retail and insurance businesses, with their consistent 2% to 6% profit margins. Bigger potential profits merit bigger risk taking. But not all investments have the same risk profile and time horizons.
    - MattGaiser 5y ago
      Insurance is so far from perfect information though. Maybe perfect information in for an average year is possible, but it is the black swan years that knock you out. Even then, there is no perfect information on clients.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
    - mypalmike 5y ago
      It's not a matter of thinking so or otherwise. It's a mathematical question of what value each worker added to the product. Other expenses aside, profit is the difference between the value they added and the wage they were paid. You don't get profit without underpaying relative to the value provided by a worker.
      - JackFr 5y ago
- tshaddox 5y ago
  > There is nothing in capitalism stopping anyone from disclosing their pay and creating a transparent market. Is that actually true? Is it possible to verifiably disclose one’s pay? Are you supposed to sign an affidavit or something?
  - lotsofpulp 5y ago
    Yes? Using records such as paystubs, W-2, or 1099. Obviously, they can be falsified, but I presume we are not talking about that. There is also the Norway method of having the government provide it.
    - tshaddox 5y ago
      If the idea is for the entire labor market to change significantly due to everyone voluntarily sharing their salary, then we ought to be talking about a mechanism of ensuring honesty, just like an auction (generally) wants to design their auction in such a way that people are honest about their willingness to pay.
      - lotsofpulp 5y ago
        Ideally, but you do not need the entire labor market to participate to do it. I am guessing even shining a light on a small, representative set of real time data will be enough to get things moving.
TOGoS 5y ago
> In my observation You win award for understatement[1] of 2021. [1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value

cblconfederate 5y ago

> really still isn't the norm anywhere to list compensation Jobs posted on remote job forums like weworkremote.com and remoteok.com routinely list salary ranges.

alborzb 5y ago
Heads up for anyone else that reads this comment and tries the site in their job searches, first one is a typo for weworkremotely.com :)

pcthrowaway 5y ago

> Plenty of companies decided to stop hiring from Colorado rather than post compensation in the job postings. Do you know if there's any data supporting this?

MattGaiser 5y ago
It is anecdotal from constantly seeing remote job postings saying things like "this role can be performed from any US state except Colorado." Sometimes Hawaii is included. Let me try and dig up a few of these.
- jedberg 5y ago
  I wish California would pass this law. It would be really hard to avoid tech workers in California.
  - Sebguer 5y ago
    California, IIRC, mandates that they provide you the pay range if you ask for it.
    - jedberg 5y ago
      Yeah after the first interview. But that's way different than with the job posting.
    - gojomo 5y ago
      "We're so glad you asked. Our possible range, depending on the candidate, is from minimum wage to $1M/year."
      - joshuamorton 5y ago
        If a company answers this way, it is likely that you would succeed on a claim under the California Equal Pay Act. This kind of hair splitting doesn't generally go over well.

lettergram 5y ago

I think most people are naive (even on HN) regarding compensation and negotiations. The first thing I do at the start of every interview conversation is ask comp. I then tell them my total comp and ask for X% over. If equity is discussed, I always require my same base pay or slightly higher. The reality is that ensures a continued trajectory upward. I also always request 2-4x any equity I’m offered. If they want to keep me, they need to make it worth my while at a higher risk profile (equity isn’t cash on hand). Equity is always a gamble, for the company and the employee. I personally demand higher because plenty of my work is open source and I offer more references as well. That mitigates the company risk and in return I demand more equity (as I’m reducing said companies risk).

chmod600 5y ago
I am no expert, but it sounds like you are naive when it comes to negotiation as well.
- MattGaiser 5y ago
  Please explain why for the rest of the class. A few sentences for those of us who know we are naive would be helpful.
  - willhinsa 5y ago
    > You can’t win if you guess at their salaries. > If you underestimate what they’re willing to pay, you’re leaving money on the table. If the real answer is that they would compensate someone like you up to $75,000 dollars, and you guess they would pay a salary of only $65,000, you very literally may have just cost yourself $10,000. [0] [0] https://fearlesssalarynegotiation.com/salary-expectations-interview-question/ https://fearlesssalarynegotiation.com/salary-expectations-in... And a video from the creator of that site (Josh Doody) on this specific issue (disclosing current salary): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N7mOR9yv2U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N7mOR9yv2U
    - forix 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]