3 ms·

This is true in the abstract, but we're talking about a salary of $207,264 in this case. You don't need to be independently wealthy to make it on our salary.

Aurornis 1y ago
Exactly. It’s also important to know that they support remote work, so these salaries really are not bad at all. For someone in a non-tech city who doesn’t want to move this would be a great startup job. My only reservation is that I’ve interviewed with or worked for multiple companies that made some claim about paying everyone the same and there was always some loophole: The company might have a fixed base pay but then use very different equity grants. One company claimed to give everyone the same base comp and equity but then it was discovered that some people were getting huge annual “guaranteed bonuses” that were effectively base compensation. It has left me tired of seeing companies push the idea of everyone being paid the same while not being open about the entire compensation structure. EDIT: To be 100% clear, I don’t know what Oxide’s entire comp structure looks like. The examples above were for past companies I worked for.
- steveklabnik 1y ago
  We have salary and equity, no bonuses. Salary is identical, equity is not. I certainly agree with you that that kind of shenanigans can be annoying; I had a former employer who hired people with "oh it's a bonus but you always get 100% of it" and then, we did not get 100% of it.
  - Aurornis 1y ago
    > Salary is identical, equity is not. Thank you. This is the question I was hoping to see an answer for.
    - brettgriffin 1y ago
      More important than just getting answer, do you understand _why_ every employee isn't granted the same amount equity?
      - Aurornis 1y ago
        Isn’t it obvious? This is where they vary compensation for the same reasons everyone else varies compensation. If they gave everyone the same equity compensation presumably they’d put that front and center like they do for the base salary. The claims about paying everyone the same are a red herring because it’s only about base salary.
      - everfrustrated 1y ago
        Because if you want to poach talent then you'll likely need to induce them to leave their existing employer and will need to match their existing equity grants that might soon vest. Obviously that number is different for different people.
  - throwanem 1y ago
    It's bullshit to talk about salary equality as though that mattered when equity is the real upside, and you know it. The claim to strive for a "generational company" is just "we're a family here" in other terms. Congrats on the raise.
    - steveklabnik 1y ago
      I think there are tremendous benefits to having a flat salary structure, regardless of upside. My other friends in tech are envious of the lack of having to waste time doing perf, for example. > Congrats on the raise. Thank you.
      - throwanem 1y ago
        From your perspective of course it has benefits. From mine? Getting stack ranked wasn't even in my top 10 as concerns went, but I'm really good at my job, and I keep quality notes that make it easy to recap a quarter or half. (But like I said, I'm good at my job.) I don't really see what that has to do with focusing your rhetoric on 10% of startup comp as though it were 100% - especially now that your tax discount on cash comp has been restored! - but you're welcome, of course.
        growse 1y ago
        > but I'm really good at my job How good you think you are at your job is pretty meaningless if some manager above you wants to weaponise the company's perf policy against you.
        throwanem 1y ago
        I'm good enough at my job to see that when it's happening. That's one reason why I didn't say 'I think.' Another is because I know the way to bet is that, with this weapon forbidden, others will be found to replace it. Why go into any of that without even the promise of hazard pay? I'd rather just do honest work.
  - tialaramex 1y ago
    Bonuses are bullshit. When the first startup I worked for was acquired they asked everybody to basically agree they won't quit for a period of time - transition. Fair enough. However for the ordinary staff (like me) this agreement had no actual carrot, they're offering a so-called "Bonus scheme", but it's clearly designed so that they decide what it pays, whereas execs are getting an up-front specific financial inducement to stay. So I explain to colleagues that if you might want to quit you should not sign, the "bonus" is worthless but you're locked in by signing - however I did get some pushback from people who could not see this or haven't done this before. Sure enough when that bonus was due to pay out, I got a heads up from a friend (who was being compensated because he was like CTO or something) that it was worthless, because of course they get to pick the numbers so they're going to pick zero. I don't care, because I was on a different scheme and anyway I work for salary, if you want to pay me to do something, you can pay me, don't fuck about with nonsense about a "bonus", but some people ended up stuck for a year or two believing they're getting a bonus to wait.
benreesman 1y ago
It's still a class thing. With the CoL in most SWE-heavy metros and the outright war on engineer pricing power over the last few years? Just about any engineer who isnt independently wealthy is: - recovering from layoffs and a period of unemployment at a high-COL cost structure - facing layoffs with the above salients - facing an imperative to insulate their fucking house with cash for their turn in the above crosshairs Competence and a willingness to work hard stopped equalling access to basic necessities in November of 2022 - February of 2023, depending on how you count, and inflation has savaged a notional 200k. "200k is plenty to live on" is rich, well-connected guy talk in 2025.
- Aurornis 1y ago
  > With the CoL in most SWE-heavy metros They’re a remote company. They’re not targeting HCOL metros. > and inflation has savaged a notional 200k. > "200k is plenty to live on" is rich, well-connected guy talk in 2025. Claiming that $200k is not enough to live on is rich-guy talk. The majority of the country lives on well below $200K. I agree that a single person living in a HCOL metro like SF Bay Area would not find this compensation attractive, but that person also has nearly infinite other jobs to choose from nearby. Jobs like this (remote work for interesting startup) do not need to pay HCOL comp.
  - benreesman 1y ago
    Nothing about a remote gig in one job affects the imperstives I highlighted about past layoffs or future uncertainty: pricing relocation into or out of e.g. SFBA at zero is another conversational gambit popular with the out-of-touch. You don't teleport. It's bad generally, this is a terrible time to be a working person in general. How SWEs stack up against profession X? Depends on profession X. SWEs are in a job market where a bunch of folks who have been repeatedly prosecuted for wage fixing (most successfully/recently in 2012) are taking another swing at it in a much more lawless regime. That's as precarious as it gets when this cabal monopolizes the front row at the Inaugeration.
    - Aurornis 1y ago

Aurornis 1y ago

Exactly. It’s also important to know that they support remote work, so these salaries really are not bad at all. For someone in a non-tech city who doesn’t want to move this would be a great startup job. My only reservation is that I’ve interviewed with or worked for multiple companies that made some claim about paying everyone the same and there was always some loophole: The company might have a fixed base pay but then use very different equity grants. One company claimed to give everyone the same base comp and equity but then it was discovered that some people were getting huge annual “guaranteed bonuses” that were effectively base compensation. It has left me tired of seeing companies push the idea of everyone being paid the same while not being open about the entire compensation structure. EDIT: To be 100% clear, I don’t know what Oxide’s entire comp structure looks like. The examples above were for past companies I worked for.

steveklabnik 1y ago
We have salary and equity, no bonuses. Salary is identical, equity is not. I certainly agree with you that that kind of shenanigans can be annoying; I had a former employer who hired people with "oh it's a bonus but you always get 100% of it" and then, we did not get 100% of it.
- Aurornis 1y ago
  > Salary is identical, equity is not. Thank you. This is the question I was hoping to see an answer for.
  - brettgriffin 1y ago
    More important than just getting answer, do you understand _why_ every employee isn't granted the same amount equity?
    - Aurornis 1y ago
      Isn’t it obvious? This is where they vary compensation for the same reasons everyone else varies compensation. If they gave everyone the same equity compensation presumably they’d put that front and center like they do for the base salary. The claims about paying everyone the same are a red herring because it’s only about base salary.
    - everfrustrated 1y ago
      Because if you want to poach talent then you'll likely need to induce them to leave their existing employer and will need to match their existing equity grants that might soon vest. Obviously that number is different for different people.
- throwanem 1y ago
  It's bullshit to talk about salary equality as though that mattered when equity is the real upside, and you know it. The claim to strive for a "generational company" is just "we're a family here" in other terms. Congrats on the raise.
  - steveklabnik 1y ago
    I think there are tremendous benefits to having a flat salary structure, regardless of upside. My other friends in tech are envious of the lack of having to waste time doing perf, for example. > Congrats on the raise. Thank you.
    - throwanem 1y ago
      From your perspective of course it has benefits. From mine? Getting stack ranked wasn't even in my top 10 as concerns went, but I'm really good at my job, and I keep quality notes that make it easy to recap a quarter or half. (But like I said, I'm good at my job.) I don't really see what that has to do with focusing your rhetoric on 10% of startup comp as though it were 100% - especially now that your tax discount on cash comp has been restored! - but you're welcome, of course.
      - growse 1y ago
        > but I'm really good at my job How good you think you are at your job is pretty meaningless if some manager above you wants to weaponise the company's perf policy against you.
        throwanem 1y ago
        I'm good enough at my job to see that when it's happening. That's one reason why I didn't say 'I think.' Another is because I know the way to bet is that, with this weapon forbidden, others will be found to replace it. Why go into any of that without even the promise of hazard pay? I'd rather just do honest work.
- tialaramex 1y ago
  Bonuses are bullshit. When the first startup I worked for was acquired they asked everybody to basically agree they won't quit for a period of time - transition. Fair enough. However for the ordinary staff (like me) this agreement had no actual carrot, they're offering a so-called "Bonus scheme", but it's clearly designed so that they decide what it pays, whereas execs are getting an up-front specific financial inducement to stay. So I explain to colleagues that if you might want to quit you should not sign, the "bonus" is worthless but you're locked in by signing - however I did get some pushback from people who could not see this or haven't done this before. Sure enough when that bonus was due to pay out, I got a heads up from a friend (who was being compensated because he was like CTO or something) that it was worthless, because of course they get to pick the numbers so they're going to pick zero. I don't care, because I was on a different scheme and anyway I work for salary, if you want to pay me to do something, you can pay me, don't fuck about with nonsense about a "bonus", but some people ended up stuck for a year or two believing they're getting a bonus to wait.

benreesman 1y ago

It's still a class thing. With the CoL in most SWE-heavy metros and the outright war on engineer pricing power over the last few years? Just about any engineer who isnt independently wealthy is: - recovering from layoffs and a period of unemployment at a high-COL cost structure - facing layoffs with the above salients - facing an imperative to insulate their fucking house with cash for their turn in the above crosshairs Competence and a willingness to work hard stopped equalling access to basic necessities in November of 2022 - February of 2023, depending on how you count, and inflation has savaged a notional 200k. "200k is plenty to live on" is rich, well-connected guy talk in 2025.

Aurornis 1y ago
> With the CoL in most SWE-heavy metros They’re a remote company. They’re not targeting HCOL metros. > and inflation has savaged a notional 200k. > "200k is plenty to live on" is rich, well-connected guy talk in 2025. Claiming that $200k is not enough to live on is rich-guy talk. The majority of the country lives on well below $200K. I agree that a single person living in a HCOL metro like SF Bay Area would not find this compensation attractive, but that person also has nearly infinite other jobs to choose from nearby. Jobs like this (remote work for interesting startup) do not need to pay HCOL comp.
- benreesman 1y ago
  Nothing about a remote gig in one job affects the imperstives I highlighted about past layoffs or future uncertainty: pricing relocation into or out of e.g. SFBA at zero is another conversational gambit popular with the out-of-touch. You don't teleport. It's bad generally, this is a terrible time to be a working person in general. How SWEs stack up against profession X? Depends on profession X. SWEs are in a job market where a bunch of folks who have been repeatedly prosecuted for wage fixing (most successfully/recently in 2012) are taking another swing at it in a much more lawless regime. That's as precarious as it gets when this cabal monopolizes the front row at the Inaugeration.
  - Aurornis 1y ago