3 ms·
This article is nearly 10 years old. Is this still true?
by asaph 2y ago
This article is nearly 10 years old. Is this still true?
- dmitrygr 2y agoyes
- giancarlostoro 2y agoCertainly feels like it.
- yumraj 2y agoThis concept is timeless. Numbers might vary though..
- lotsofpulp 2y agoI assume it will always be true outside of employees who are exceptionally VIP or employees selling to union/government roles that are compensated strictly according to length of tenure. The employer gets labor at a lower price, and the employee gets lower volatility. If you want the best price, you have to do the work to keep buying and you have to do the work to keep selling, only way any market can work.
- eschneider 2y agoExcept the employee isn't guaranteed lower volatility. At. All.
- lotsofpulp 2y agoThere is volatility due to the buyer changing the terms of deal (including ending the deal), and there is also volatility due to the seller choosing to sell to different buyers, such as working in a different location or getting along with new colleagues, etc. The former is not controllable from the perspective of a labor seller, but the latter is. Whether or not the tradeoff is worth it is dependent on the seller and always in flux. I would say the tradeoff is usually not worth it.
- swiftcoder 2y agoYep. Inside Meta there was a robust network sharing offer and raise/promo letters. Someone hired in at your same level today would be making 10-20% more per year that you had been employed there.
- datadrivenangel 2y agoSo the hiring bump was going up faster than inflation? So after 2-4 years a new hire at the same level would be making almost at least 50% more than you...
- swiftcoder 2y agoYes, compensation competition between FAANG in that era was savage (though I would guess that this has slowed down since the great layoff)
- disgruntledphd2 2y agoHuh? This must have been in equity, right, given that the bands were consistent for everyone when I was there. I find it hard to believe that they changed that.
- swiftcoder 2y agoTotal comp. TC of most L4+ was >50% RSUs, it doesn't make much sense to discuss only base+bonus
- disgruntledphd2 2y ago> TC of most L4+ was >50% RSUs In the US, during a period of insane stock price appreciation, yes. People who joined in Dec 2022 got massively screwed though, so it's not really reliable cash.
- swiftcoder 2y agoEven without appreciation - my RSU grants were 50% of my TC at the time of grant
- kilroy123 2y agoDefinitely, yes.
- iends 2y agoAs a manager, it seems true to me. It's much easier to convince HR to pay $X for a new employee than to give a current employee a large enough raise to hit $X.
- HumblyTossed 2y agoYeah, love how HR says, "We can't do that..." Um, yes, you can. You just won't.
- toyg 2y agoBecause they have to answer about the budget in aggregate. If three developers are paid $100k each on year 1, and they hire a new one on 120k on year 2, the average salary has only gone up 5%. If they don't hire and just bump the veterans to 120k, overall expenditure is lower but the average salary is now 20% higher and it looks bad (and you're not growing).