4 ms·
Lower base pay would make the job postings relatively unattractive though. Wouldn't this law encourage higher base pay and lower bonuses in order to make the jo
by Buttons840 4y ago
Lower base pay would make the job postings relatively unattractive though. Wouldn't this law encourage higher base pay and lower bonuses in order to make the job posting look better?
- sokoloff 4y agoIf I told you “in 2020, Amazon’s highest base pay is $165K”, would that stop you from thinking that Amazon paid tech workers well?
- JonChesterfield 4y agoAnd if it wasn't Amazon, but some other less well known company?
- Buttons840 4y agoIt might stop me, yes. I would be more likely to apply to Apple, Google, or Meta because they have higher base pay (according to the numbers in the article). Work at X, base pay $60,000 plus bonuses. Work at Y, base pay $100,000. Would you look into X or Y first?
- fatnoah 4y agoI'd look into companies that are going to pay the most, which is why looking only at base could be bad. For example, a senior software engineering manager a couple years ago might see something like Amazon,FB, and Google base salaries of $160k/$250k/$250k respectively. That's only a fraction of the potential pay, though as both Facebook and Google have a 25% annual bonus. Amazon's package would likely include something like a $275k bonus for the first two years. Now, add in stock. Both FB and Google would offer $1.4M+ worth of stock, vesting over four years. Amazon might be closer to $700k/800k at that time. Finally, there are joining bonuses. I'm not sure about Google or Amazon, but FB can (could?) go up to $100k. Regardless of the actual numbers, the point is that the "base" is less than 50% of your compensation in many cases. It's certainly an important data point as one thinks about possible future stock values, etc, but it sometimes only tells part of the story.