7 ms·

For everyone in the Bay Area and the rest of California, the minimum legal salary (with exceptions) for software developers is ~$81k. It is likely if you are b

For everyone in the Bay Area and the rest of California, the minimum legal salary (with exceptions) for software developers is ~$81k. It is likely if you are being paid less for full time software development that you are not being paid enough. I'm not a lawyer, but googlefu: http://www.morganlewis.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/publication.detail/publicationID/3989632d-51ed-4da3-bed0-31703588790e http://www.morganlewis.com/index.cfm/fuseaction/publication....

powera 13y ago
That's not quite what it means. That's the minimum salary to be an "exempt" software developer, which means that if you are paid less than that you have to get paid overtime.
- petercooper 13y ago
  So it seems - http://www.dol.gov/elaws/faq/esa/flsa/011.htm http://www.dol.gov/elaws/faq/esa/flsa/011.htm - that if you're a software developer in California earning under $81k and you work more than 40 hours per week, those extra hours should be paid at a minimum of 150% your normal rate, if I'm to understand correctly. Or is it possible for an employment contract to specify a higher number of hours as the "standard" work week?
- bicknergseng 13y ago
  Right. I'd wager few fall into that category, and many fall into the 40+ a week category.
eru 13y ago
Wow. Just when you think America is just like countries you know, something like this comes along.
- kyrra 13y ago
  It's more California, they have some pretty interesting laws on their books.
- acchow 13y ago
  California is quite different from most of America.
- mturmon 13y ago
  Don't worry. The comment that surprised you is not really true. The 81k figure is for "overtime-exempt" employees (often just shortened to "exempt"). I.e., if you make less than that, you are considered "overtime-eligible" (opposite of exempt), and in that case, if you work more than 40 hours per week, you have to be paid overtime. Also, the 81k figure pertains only to software people. There is a figure for other occupations, but it is much lower. There are also differences in how business travel is treated. Overtime eligible employees have to be paid for all time spent in transit, but exempt do not get extra pay. (Of course, in both cases, travel expenses will be paid by the company, I am speaking of pay for travel time.) In fact, the 81k figure is a marker and not a bright line. The actual separator between overtime eligible ("OTE") and exempt employees considers several factors, including job responsibility and experience. The OTE/exempt distinction has become more rigid in recent years because of lawsuits by attorneys representing low-paid (e.g 60k/year range) employees who had been considered "salaried", and asked to do extra work for free (e.g., the travel time mentioned above) because they were salaried. These suits resulted in the distinction between OTE and exempt shifting. If you ask me, it has in general hurt very early career engineers making 70k per year, because they have to account more strictly for their time than before. For instance, they cannot redistribute their hours between work days the way salaried employees can. (Only speaking of California here.)
  - jimmaswell 13y ago
    >they cannot redistribute their hours between work days the way salaried employees can. As far as I can tell, they can, they just have to get compensated for it ie the employer can't abuse it.
    - mturmon 13y ago
      I believe the driver for day-to-day recording of work hours is that if they work beyond a certain limit (could even be 8 hours) on a given day, they get OT for that. Thus, you can't work 12 hours one day and 4 the next day without pay consequences. There are other workplace rules for OTE employees as well, which in some cases include mandatory lunchtimes and breaks (but I'm not sure how widely this applies to software people). I think supervisors and organizations look the other way on some fine points, but I'm describing the letter of the law. I have one OTE employee, and I'm desperately trying to get them promoted beyond this threshold so we don't have to deal with the hassle. Because I've already learned more about CA labor law than I want.
thoughtsimple 13y ago
In Massachusetts it is essentially $455/week or $23660/year. Almost the same.
shmerl 13y ago
Are there legal limitations on the salary for particular industry? This sounds strange. I have heard only about global legal minimum salary. Not about minimums per industry.

powera 13y ago

That's not quite what it means. That's the minimum salary to be an "exempt" software developer, which means that if you are paid less than that you have to get paid overtime.

petercooper 13y ago
So it seems - http://www.dol.gov/elaws/faq/esa/flsa/011.htm http://www.dol.gov/elaws/faq/esa/flsa/011.htm - that if you're a software developer in California earning under $81k and you work more than 40 hours per week, those extra hours should be paid at a minimum of 150% your normal rate, if I'm to understand correctly. Or is it possible for an employment contract to specify a higher number of hours as the "standard" work week?
bicknergseng 13y ago
Right. I'd wager few fall into that category, and many fall into the 40+ a week category.

eru 13y ago

Wow. Just when you think America is just like countries you know, something like this comes along.

kyrra 13y ago
It's more California, they have some pretty interesting laws on their books.
acchow 13y ago
California is quite different from most of America.
mturmon 13y ago
Don't worry. The comment that surprised you is not really true. The 81k figure is for "overtime-exempt" employees (often just shortened to "exempt"). I.e., if you make less than that, you are considered "overtime-eligible" (opposite of exempt), and in that case, if you work more than 40 hours per week, you have to be paid overtime. Also, the 81k figure pertains only to software people. There is a figure for other occupations, but it is much lower. There are also differences in how business travel is treated. Overtime eligible employees have to be paid for all time spent in transit, but exempt do not get extra pay. (Of course, in both cases, travel expenses will be paid by the company, I am speaking of pay for travel time.) In fact, the 81k figure is a marker and not a bright line. The actual separator between overtime eligible ("OTE") and exempt employees considers several factors, including job responsibility and experience. The OTE/exempt distinction has become more rigid in recent years because of lawsuits by attorneys representing low-paid (e.g 60k/year range) employees who had been considered "salaried", and asked to do extra work for free (e.g., the travel time mentioned above) because they were salaried. These suits resulted in the distinction between OTE and exempt shifting. If you ask me, it has in general hurt very early career engineers making 70k per year, because they have to account more strictly for their time than before. For instance, they cannot redistribute their hours between work days the way salaried employees can. (Only speaking of California here.)
- jimmaswell 13y ago
  >they cannot redistribute their hours between work days the way salaried employees can. As far as I can tell, they can, they just have to get compensated for it ie the employer can't abuse it.
  - mturmon 13y ago
    I believe the driver for day-to-day recording of work hours is that if they work beyond a certain limit (could even be 8 hours) on a given day, they get OT for that. Thus, you can't work 12 hours one day and 4 the next day without pay consequences. There are other workplace rules for OTE employees as well, which in some cases include mandatory lunchtimes and breaks (but I'm not sure how widely this applies to software people). I think supervisors and organizations look the other way on some fine points, but I'm describing the letter of the law. I have one OTE employee, and I'm desperately trying to get them promoted beyond this threshold so we don't have to deal with the hassle. Because I've already learned more about CA labor law than I want.

thoughtsimple 13y ago

In Massachusetts it is essentially $455/week or $23660/year. Almost the same.

shmerl 13y ago

Are there legal limitations on the salary for particular industry? This sounds strange. I have heard only about global legal minimum salary. Not about minimums per industry.