4 ms·

I will paste the same reply to the other, similar comment: I'm glad you related it to my industry because I can assure you that not every L3 in Google contribu

I will paste the same reply to the other, similar comment: I'm glad you related it to my industry because I can assure you that not every L3 in Google contributes the same value to the company. They have vastly different backgrounds, education, experience, and aptitudes. Some are willing to work 80 hour weeks. Some aren't. Some are very skilled in technologies which aren't in-demand and don't currently generate a lot of value for Google. Some work on projects which generate a lot of value for Google. Some have excellent qualifications but little experience. Some have lots of experience but no qualifications. Some are extroverts and some are introverts. Some are great at communicating their thoughts and ideas. Some aren't. Some are grumpy and surly. Some are super friendly. There are thousands and thousands of ways in which an L3 is not the same as another L3, and I promise you, no two L3s generate exactly the same value to Google. This is why pay at each level is in a range, so that these individual factors can be considered. This is compounded by the fact that there are L3s with more experience and/or qualifications than L5s. This is far from an objective comparison of an employees value generation.

maerF0x0 5y ago
The only way I've seen this been well handled is to break out the value adding concepts to "bonuses" or add'l comp for details like: "we give people and extra $24k per year if they do oncall rotation" and we give "x% more to those who work more and contribute more" otherwise once it becomes public it turns into infighting of "we're both L3s, why do they get more?" (ignoring that one of them leaves early 2-3x a week to care for their child, or is a single worker with nothing better to do than contribute and thus does more than others) ... They're simple concepts, but hard to get people to be grown ups about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KSryJXDpZo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KSryJXDpZo Also people psychologically overestimate their contributions and underestimate others... Has a lot of application in both the workplace and in intimate relationships.
- RHSeeger 5y ago
  But putting a lot of that money into bonuses completely defeats the point of having published salary ranges. It's really no different than having no bonuses, but a larger range for each salary bracket. And nobody wants companies to post a salary range for a position where the low and high ends are widely disparate; it has a similar value to not posting the range at all.
  - maerF0x0 5y ago
    >position where the low and high ends are widely disparate; This is more or less what I've observed in practice in Colorado. The range is quite high, and it excludes nearly 50% of real total comp due to equity, benefits, etc that are variably applied.
- pnutjam 5y ago
  You know it's illegal to discriminate based on the family status of a worker; which is exactly what you're describing. Jobs should have clear defined goals and workaholics should not be able to ruin it for everyone else.
  - maerF0x0 5y ago
    you're assuming a whole crap ton of things not said here

maerF0x0 5y ago

The only way I've seen this been well handled is to break out the value adding concepts to "bonuses" or add'l comp for details like: "we give people and extra $24k per year if they do oncall rotation" and we give "x% more to those who work more and contribute more" otherwise once it becomes public it turns into infighting of "we're both L3s, why do they get more?" (ignoring that one of them leaves early 2-3x a week to care for their child, or is a single worker with nothing better to do than contribute and thus does more than others) ... They're simple concepts, but hard to get people to be grown ups about. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KSryJXDpZo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KSryJXDpZo Also people psychologically overestimate their contributions and underestimate others... Has a lot of application in both the workplace and in intimate relationships.

RHSeeger 5y ago
But putting a lot of that money into bonuses completely defeats the point of having published salary ranges. It's really no different than having no bonuses, but a larger range for each salary bracket. And nobody wants companies to post a salary range for a position where the low and high ends are widely disparate; it has a similar value to not posting the range at all.
- maerF0x0 5y ago
  >position where the low and high ends are widely disparate; This is more or less what I've observed in practice in Colorado. The range is quite high, and it excludes nearly 50% of real total comp due to equity, benefits, etc that are variably applied.
pnutjam 5y ago
You know it's illegal to discriminate based on the family status of a worker; which is exactly what you're describing. Jobs should have clear defined goals and workaholics should not be able to ruin it for everyone else.
- maerF0x0 5y ago
  you're assuming a whole crap ton of things not said here