7 ms·
> Another $19 million a year or so out of Signal’s budget pays for its staff. Signal now employs about 50 people, a far larger team than a few years ago. What?
by vjk800 3y ago
> Another $19 million a year or so out of Signal’s budget pays for its staff. Signal now employs about 50 people, a far larger team than a few years ago.
What? I know silicon valley salaries are a thing, but absolutely everywhere else in the world this would be insane. Maybe change the headquarters to somewhere cheaper?
- sky_rw 3y agoI keep re-reading this section of their blog post trying to figure out what I'm missing here. $2.6 million full load per employee on avg? Is this heavily weighted to a few executives? Can somebody explain this to me? Edit: I'm stupid and did the math backwards.
- candiddevmike 3y agoOnly thing I can think of is it incentives them not to put backdoors into Signal/get fired.
- jedberg 3y agoYou mathed backwards. It's $380K per person fully loaded. Which is pretty inline with decent tech salary these days.
- dangoor 3y agoI think your math is off? $19M/50 people = $380,000?
- dale_glass 3y agoYou're doing that division backwards.
- winterismute 3y agoIsn't it 380k per person in average? Seems like in-line with FAANG salaries in major US cities.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- hansSjoberg 3y agoA few employees and their compensation are listed on their Form 990, page 7. Sidenote: did "Moxie" legally change his name from Matthew Rosenfeld? https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/824506840/202212729349301631/full https://projects.propublica.org/nonprofits/organizations/824...
- rodlette 3y agoThey have devs and support engineers earning 700k, more than the CTO?
- hansSjoberg 3y ago700k to drag your feet on implementing usernames for a full decade, seems cushy.
- contact9879 3y agoIt's in testing now; you'll soon have to switch to complaining about some other thing. Anyway, considering usernames required an extensive redesign of how Signal works, it's not surprising it took 5 years (3 years of full time)
- datpiff 3y agoCosts for staff are not just salaries. It's also pensions, taxes, benefits, the offices, software licenses and all the other stuff. I've often heard 50% of total cost going to salary, but it varies. Still does seem high though.
- gamblor956 3y agoPensions aren't a thing in the U.S. anymore, especially not for tech. And when a U.S. company says "staffing costs" that does not include licenses, offices, etc. It's strictly salary and benefits. According to Signal's 990, it's paying multiple employees over $700k. That's above-market for corporate compensation, and it's way above market for non-profit compensation, to the point where it could be considered private inurement.
- contact9879 3y agoThey cover this pretty substantially in the post on Signal's website (I know they merged the Wired article into this one). Signal is trying to compete with the richest companies in the world; including for talent. And considering Signal's origins and motivations, they're not going to lower salaries or decrease benefits because some people believe that working for a non-profit automatically means lower compensation.
- gamblor956 3y agoEngineers doing the same work on iMessage and Meta Messenger, i.e., their direct competitors, make less than 660k/annually in salary and benefits. This means that the pay packages are likely not based on comparable market wages, which is an actual legal requirement for highly compensated employees for U.S. charities.
- jtakkala 3y ago$660k total comp (including benefits) is probably right in the median of what an e6 earns at Meta. I don’t know where you’re hearing otherwise.