4 ms·

To throw some numbers at this question about salaries. Here is the Standard Offer for a college hire Level 59 Microsoft SDE (Developer) to Seattle over the yea

by yajoe 13y ago

To throw some numbers at this question about salaries. Here is the Standard Offer for a college hire Level 59 Microsoft SDE (Developer) to Seattle over the years as I've observed them. 2005-2006: 70k 2007-2008: 80k 2009-2010: 85/90k (there was a macro recession here) 2011-2012: 100k/105k 2013: 105k--110k (tbd) In 6 years that's a 50% increase. What other industry has as much salary growth for front-line or entry-level people? I believe in a shortage. The most likely cause is this VC-infused hiring bubble going on that may burst and put a lot of people back on the market. What's tragic is that Microsoft people who started in 2006 and had 70% careers are often making similar money as the entry-level folks. Combine that with a toxic environment and stagnant products, and it's pretty easy to understand why great people leave the company. It's also pretty easy to understand why Microsoft wants to import H1Bs that often are terrified of getting deported back and will do anything to keep their jobs.

larsberg 13y ago
Two things that make me suspect this information is anecdotal rather than from a hiring manager (though I could be wrong): 1) I left MSFT around 2006, but the offers I made to (admittedly, mostly blue chip) candidates in 2002-2004 were closer to 80k and not even at the top end of the L59 level band. I'm not sure those early year numbers are quite spot on. 2) The initial offers are set for the middle of the L59 compensation range/band. As those bands went up, so did all of the others - I guarantee the L59 band is not above the L60 band. If you got hired in 2006, you're at least L62 by six years later (or you would have been managed out, in any non-disfunctional org). Even if you'd been camping and never made L63 (which is a big bump), you would get raises as the midpoint for the band moved over the years. Otherwise, it raises very serious issues with your group's HR generalist about why you have a L62 who's being paid outside (below or above) the acceptable range around the salary band and the manager would have been encouraged to either motivate or manage out the employee, if they really didn't deserve raises to take them back into the correct compensation range. Microsoft is disfunctional about many things, but the HR generalists were pretty good at tracking and running numbers and asking very hard questions about people who were over/under-compensated or stagnating at a low level (sub-L63).
- lawnchair_larry 13y ago
  I don't know what all that Microsoft-specific talk means, but you can confirm his numbers by checking the H1-B wage data from MS. I don't recall what the numbers are, but I recall it being fairly close to those supplied in recent years.
- yajoe 13y ago
  > I left MSFT around 2006 The company changed significantly since then. Bill left. There was a layoff (well, a couple, but the first was a black swan nonetheless). There is a new review system and new rules about comp. It's not the same place you remember. I really liked the MSFT around 2006, too :)
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
rayiner 13y ago
> What other industry has as much salary growth for front-line or entry-level people? I believe in a shortage. From 2005 to 2008, first year analyst/associate salaries at Wall Street banks, consulting firms, and law firms jumped 30% or more. In neither case was there a real shortage of people across the industry. Instead, it was just a matter of a few top firms bidding up salaries for the top young graduates in response to a temporary boom. Certainly nobody was calling for increased immigration to address any perceived "talent shortage." This is exactly what is happening in Silicon Valley right now. You're seeing a spike in salaries for the few top people at the few top employers as the result of a temporary boom in the sector. You're not seeing a long-term trend of the industry needing more CS graduates than our domestic institutions can provide.
smm2000 13y ago
I was hired by Microsoft as a fresh grad in 2005 for 84000 year. 84000 in 2005 according to CPI calculator (http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl) is $100,117.42 today. Add to that that two years ago Microsoft reduced stock grants and put more money into base salary and actual total compensation increase for fresh grads is negligible.
kragen 13y ago
I think Microsoft is sort of a special case. Fifteen years ago they could attract the best and the brightest with below-market salaries, both because they dominated the software and computer industries (so your stock options were worth a lot, and your work would be on a computer in every office and every home), and because it was a fantastic place to work.

by yajoe 13y ago

larsberg 13y ago

Two things that make me suspect this information is anecdotal rather than from a hiring manager (though I could be wrong): 1) I left MSFT around 2006, but the offers I made to (admittedly, mostly blue chip) candidates in 2002-2004 were closer to 80k and not even at the top end of the L59 level band. I'm not sure those early year numbers are quite spot on. 2) The initial offers are set for the middle of the L59 compensation range/band. As those bands went up, so did all of the others - I guarantee the L59 band is not above the L60 band. If you got hired in 2006, you're at least L62 by six years later (or you would have been managed out, in any non-disfunctional org). Even if you'd been camping and never made L63 (which is a big bump), you would get raises as the midpoint for the band moved over the years. Otherwise, it raises very serious issues with your group's HR generalist about why you have a L62 who's being paid outside (below or above) the acceptable range around the salary band and the manager would have been encouraged to either motivate or manage out the employee, if they really didn't deserve raises to take them back into the correct compensation range. Microsoft is disfunctional about many things, but the HR generalists were pretty good at tracking and running numbers and asking very hard questions about people who were over/under-compensated or stagnating at a low level (sub-L63).

lawnchair_larry 13y ago
I don't know what all that Microsoft-specific talk means, but you can confirm his numbers by checking the H1-B wage data from MS. I don't recall what the numbers are, but I recall it being fairly close to those supplied in recent years.
yajoe 13y ago
> I left MSFT around 2006 The company changed significantly since then. Bill left. There was a layoff (well, a couple, but the first was a black swan nonetheless). There is a new review system and new rules about comp. It's not the same place you remember. I really liked the MSFT around 2006, too :)
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]

rayiner 13y ago

> What other industry has as much salary growth for front-line or entry-level people? I believe in a shortage. From 2005 to 2008, first year analyst/associate salaries at Wall Street banks, consulting firms, and law firms jumped 30% or more. In neither case was there a real shortage of people across the industry. Instead, it was just a matter of a few top firms bidding up salaries for the top young graduates in response to a temporary boom. Certainly nobody was calling for increased immigration to address any perceived "talent shortage." This is exactly what is happening in Silicon Valley right now. You're seeing a spike in salaries for the few top people at the few top employers as the result of a temporary boom in the sector. You're not seeing a long-term trend of the industry needing more CS graduates than our domestic institutions can provide.

smm2000 13y ago

I was hired by Microsoft as a fresh grad in 2005 for 84000 year. 84000 in 2005 according to CPI calculator (http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl) is $100,117.42 today. Add to that that two years ago Microsoft reduced stock grants and put more money into base salary and actual total compensation increase for fresh grads is negligible.

kragen 13y ago

I think Microsoft is sort of a special case. Fifteen years ago they could attract the best and the brightest with below-market salaries, both because they dominated the software and computer industries (so your stock options were worth a lot, and your work would be on a computer in every office and every home), and because it was a fantastic place to work.