5 ms·

I guess the trouble is that we don't have any self-admitted exploited workers. Everyone is a temporarily embarrassed Founder/CTO. With thanks to Steinback - ht

I guess the trouble is that we don't have any self-admitted exploited workers. Everyone is a temporarily embarrassed Founder/CTO. With thanks to Steinback - https://hellyesjohnsteinbeck.tumblr.com/post/23486952183/commonly-misquoted-socialism-never-took-root-in https://hellyesjohnsteinbeck.tumblr.com/post/23486952183/com...

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
jandrewrogers 3y ago
At least in the US, the average software developer does eventually become a millionaire, working a pretty cushy job. If that is "exploitation" then most people would be like to be exploited like that.
- pc86 3y ago
  The average software developer makes $110k/yr, and there's a clear differentiation between having a million dollars (or millions) in your 20s and 30s compared to retiring with $2-3 million in a 401k that you need to live off of for four decades.
  - mmmmmbop 3y ago
    $2-3 million in a 401k by retirement age is still 30-40x the median amount. [0] [0] https://www.bankrate.com/retirement/average-401k-balance-by-age/#:~:text=65%2B,%2470%2C620 https://www.bankrate.com/retirement/average-401k-balance-by-...
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
  - iteria 3y ago
    I just keep thinking about the fact that literally everyone in my family makes less than that. To say that a developer _only_ makes 110K is high level privilege in many places including tech hubs. 110K is more than a whole household makes in my metro area. The average dev out earns dual income family. This is why I spend a lot of think wondering what could a union even do for me? I work in comfort. If I work long hours that's my decision because I can always get another high paying less stressful job. Over my career I've taken very high paying jobs with high stress for the money and also chill lower paying jobs. Every job I've ever had I've outearned my both my working parents.
    - lesuorac 3y ago
      > This is why I spend a lot of think wondering what could a union even do for me? I mean the same thing it does for Tom Cruise. You're really thinking about this the wrong way. Companies all the time join trade groups and pay membership fees to coordinate their efforts. Are you going to argue that companies are making a fiscally irresponsible decision? A union is strictly the same thing as a trade group except its membership is labor and not management.
      - iteria 3y ago
        Tom Cruise is in an industry where he can be shut out at any given moment and there's only like 5 employers. How does that match tech? FAANG pays outrageously compared to regular dev jobs, but regular devs jobs are still pay absurdly high for a job that has a lot of comfort. This is nothing like average actor. So for me, average dev, what is a union doing for me? What can a union offer me that I don't currently get? I make far more than median income in my area. It has never taken me long to get another job even when I burned a bridge. I can't be "black balled". My benefits are stellar and every company I have interacted with has stellar benefits. Merely being at a company with developer bestows better benefits for all white collar workers in my experience. What can a union offer me when unions in the US are prone to valuing seniority over all (I say this as someone with 10+ yoe) and prone to being sympathetic to companies over time and tending towards modest progress instead of allowing supply and demand pressure to be fully felt. Software development is not at the stage where it has been whole consolidated and companies are insulated from market pressure. If you work for an airline what real threat is your quitting? You can only do so so many times. This is not the case for developers. Unions however would bring forth a kind of calcified standardization that will resist radical change. That's why I'm against it. If unions existed when I first started my career, I would have seen the rise of unlimited PTO that allows me EU level vacations. I never dreamed when I started that I'd take 5 or six weeks off a year and that would be fine. I could tell my interviewers I'd be doing that and that would be fine. Because as it stands companies need devs and I have power. People are upset about layoffs but barring Twitter which was an illegal shitshow, was anyone really harmed by it? Layoffs are rare in our field (ignoring game development which does actually need a union for inhuman work conditions and general instability). Easy money ended and so they layoffs happen. Should financial professionals be so up in arms about what happened to them in 2008 because it was the same kind of shitshow looking at my circle. I remain unconvinced at this moment that unions will help and in fact feel they will hurt our industry which hasn't settled into a bad state and unions could settle us at a point less than we could otherwise get.
- bazooka 3y ago
  Hot take. It’s also untrue. Software developers overall are not millionaires. I am discounting non-liquid assets like the main residence.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - dimva 3y ago
    Why are you discounting real wealth? I am a millionaire. If I spent my millions on buying a modest house in Palo Alto, does that mean I am no longer a millionaire? Have I lost all my wealth just by purchasing a home?
    - lotsofpulp 3y ago
      For the purposes of discussing security, counting the price of the residence is not very useful, assuming the discussion participants agree it is an “average” residence that meets minimum expected quality of life standards. For the purposes of discussing quality of life, if the person values living in the place they are which is higher priced than most others, then the price of the residence could be useful. I see no reason to include price of house if I were to sell it in my picture of my financial security because I have no desire to live elsewhere (or if I wanted to live somewhere more expensive).
  - mmmmmbop 3y ago
    > I am discounting non-liquid assets like the main residence. That's pretty unusual. Do you consider someone with $1.5M but no house considerably better off than someone with $500k and a $1M house?
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
- LtWorf 3y ago
  Everybody becomes a millionaire if they don't eat and don't pay rent. Are you done repeating this false statement?
- micromacrofoot 3y ago
  I don't think this is average, common maybe.
- UncleMeat 3y ago
  Yes, software engineers are paid very well as a class. Google made $21b in income in Q2 of this year. That's more than $100,000 per employee. $400,000 in profit per employee per year. I'd sure like to get paid another 400 grand annually. Exploitation can also happen in ways other than pay. 24/7 oncall is unfortunately common in our industry, including oncall that is unpaid.
  - sceptical 3y ago
    Why is 24/7 oncall exploitation? It is hardly unpaid when you are payed > $500,000 a year. Also you should know this upfront when accepting employment.
    - UncleMeat 3y ago
      Oncall can show up after the fact. You take a job paying $X. Two years later, people decide that 24/7 oncall is necessary and suddenly now you are required to perform this 24/7 oncall. Your pay is not adjusted. You have no say in this new job requirement. This oncall is unpaid (your compensation hasn't changed). >500,000 compensation is also highly unusual, even at very well paying companies.
- dfxm12 3y ago
  Give me a break with focusing on the "eventually one becomes a millionaire" bit. How much are our bosses, Musk, Bezos, Zuck, etc. making? in Steinbeck's lifetime, CEOs made "only" 42x of what the average worker made. Today, we're up to 120x. I recognize that we have it better than people working in a cannery, but this is exploitation all the same. We're getting paid just enough to not revolt, but nowhere near what we're worth.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

jandrewrogers 3y ago

At least in the US, the average software developer does eventually become a millionaire, working a pretty cushy job. If that is "exploitation" then most people would be like to be exploited like that.

pc86 3y ago
The average software developer makes $110k/yr, and there's a clear differentiation between having a million dollars (or millions) in your 20s and 30s compared to retiring with $2-3 million in a 401k that you need to live off of for four decades.
- mmmmmbop 3y ago
  $2-3 million in a 401k by retirement age is still 30-40x the median amount. [0] [0] https://www.bankrate.com/retirement/average-401k-balance-by-age/#:~:text=65%2B,%2470%2C620 https://www.bankrate.com/retirement/average-401k-balance-by-...
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
- iteria 3y ago
  I just keep thinking about the fact that literally everyone in my family makes less than that. To say that a developer _only_ makes 110K is high level privilege in many places including tech hubs. 110K is more than a whole household makes in my metro area. The average dev out earns dual income family. This is why I spend a lot of think wondering what could a union even do for me? I work in comfort. If I work long hours that's my decision because I can always get another high paying less stressful job. Over my career I've taken very high paying jobs with high stress for the money and also chill lower paying jobs. Every job I've ever had I've outearned my both my working parents.
  - lesuorac 3y ago
    > This is why I spend a lot of think wondering what could a union even do for me? I mean the same thing it does for Tom Cruise. You're really thinking about this the wrong way. Companies all the time join trade groups and pay membership fees to coordinate their efforts. Are you going to argue that companies are making a fiscally irresponsible decision? A union is strictly the same thing as a trade group except its membership is labor and not management.
    - iteria 3y ago
      Tom Cruise is in an industry where he can be shut out at any given moment and there's only like 5 employers. How does that match tech? FAANG pays outrageously compared to regular dev jobs, but regular devs jobs are still pay absurdly high for a job that has a lot of comfort. This is nothing like average actor. So for me, average dev, what is a union doing for me? What can a union offer me that I don't currently get? I make far more than median income in my area. It has never taken me long to get another job even when I burned a bridge. I can't be "black balled". My benefits are stellar and every company I have interacted with has stellar benefits. Merely being at a company with developer bestows better benefits for all white collar workers in my experience. What can a union offer me when unions in the US are prone to valuing seniority over all (I say this as someone with 10+ yoe) and prone to being sympathetic to companies over time and tending towards modest progress instead of allowing supply and demand pressure to be fully felt. Software development is not at the stage where it has been whole consolidated and companies are insulated from market pressure. If you work for an airline what real threat is your quitting? You can only do so so many times. This is not the case for developers. Unions however would bring forth a kind of calcified standardization that will resist radical change. That's why I'm against it. If unions existed when I first started my career, I would have seen the rise of unlimited PTO that allows me EU level vacations. I never dreamed when I started that I'd take 5 or six weeks off a year and that would be fine. I could tell my interviewers I'd be doing that and that would be fine. Because as it stands companies need devs and I have power. People are upset about layoffs but barring Twitter which was an illegal shitshow, was anyone really harmed by it? Layoffs are rare in our field (ignoring game development which does actually need a union for inhuman work conditions and general instability). Easy money ended and so they layoffs happen. Should financial professionals be so up in arms about what happened to them in 2008 because it was the same kind of shitshow looking at my circle. I remain unconvinced at this moment that unions will help and in fact feel they will hurt our industry which hasn't settled into a bad state and unions could settle us at a point less than we could otherwise get.
bazooka 3y ago
Hot take. It’s also untrue. Software developers overall are not millionaires. I am discounting non-liquid assets like the main residence.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- dimva 3y ago
  Why are you discounting real wealth? I am a millionaire. If I spent my millions on buying a modest house in Palo Alto, does that mean I am no longer a millionaire? Have I lost all my wealth just by purchasing a home?
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    For the purposes of discussing security, counting the price of the residence is not very useful, assuming the discussion participants agree it is an “average” residence that meets minimum expected quality of life standards. For the purposes of discussing quality of life, if the person values living in the place they are which is higher priced than most others, then the price of the residence could be useful. I see no reason to include price of house if I were to sell it in my picture of my financial security because I have no desire to live elsewhere (or if I wanted to live somewhere more expensive).
- mmmmmbop 3y ago
  > I am discounting non-liquid assets like the main residence. That's pretty unusual. Do you consider someone with $1.5M but no house considerably better off than someone with $500k and a $1M house?
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
LtWorf 3y ago
Everybody becomes a millionaire if they don't eat and don't pay rent. Are you done repeating this false statement?
micromacrofoot 3y ago
I don't think this is average, common maybe.
UncleMeat 3y ago
Yes, software engineers are paid very well as a class. Google made $21b in income in Q2 of this year. That's more than $100,000 per employee. $400,000 in profit per employee per year. I'd sure like to get paid another 400 grand annually. Exploitation can also happen in ways other than pay. 24/7 oncall is unfortunately common in our industry, including oncall that is unpaid.
- sceptical 3y ago
  Why is 24/7 oncall exploitation? It is hardly unpaid when you are payed > $500,000 a year. Also you should know this upfront when accepting employment.
  - UncleMeat 3y ago
    Oncall can show up after the fact. You take a job paying $X. Two years later, people decide that 24/7 oncall is necessary and suddenly now you are required to perform this 24/7 oncall. Your pay is not adjusted. You have no say in this new job requirement. This oncall is unpaid (your compensation hasn't changed). >500,000 compensation is also highly unusual, even at very well paying companies.
dfxm12 3y ago
Give me a break with focusing on the "eventually one becomes a millionaire" bit. How much are our bosses, Musk, Bezos, Zuck, etc. making? in Steinbeck's lifetime, CEOs made "only" 42x of what the average worker made. Today, we're up to 120x. I recognize that we have it better than people working in a cannery, but this is exploitation all the same. We're getting paid just enough to not revolt, but nowhere near what we're worth.