5 ms·

Having read all comments, I'm somewhat lost. I was hired in London in 2008 on £37K, it was my first programming job after uni, I had clean resume. Today a compe

Having read all comments, I'm somewhat lost. I was hired in London in 2008 on £37K, it was my first programming job after uni, I had clean resume. Today a competent beginner with a few web projects under his belt easily gets around £45K. I'm hiring developers for my startup – http://www.makersacademy.com http://www.makersacademy.com – and I wish I had more applicants. I'm happy to pay £350-450/day for a decent Ruby dev and or around £60K permanent for the same position and I don't get nearly as many candidates as I'd like to. I was hiring devs at Forward Labs (http://www.forwardlabs.co.uk http://www.forwardlabs.co.uk), arguably one of the coolest places in London, and I had the same problems: small number of applicants, qualified candidates asking for £400-£450 or equivalent. At SiliconmilkRoundabout, the biggest startup job fair in London, dozens of startups are fighting to find a developer, many of them happy to pay more than £40K or £50K. From what I can tell based on my experience and what other entrepreneurs/recruiters are telling me, hiring devs is incredibly hard not because the companies are unwilling to pay but simply because there are not enough devs looking for work. Occasionally I interview candidates that don't know the basics of software development, e.g. what mocking is or how to use TDD but they are asking for £400+/day because someone is going to pay that. The data by Adzuna (http://blog.makersacademy.com/what-is-the-demand-for-ruby-developers-in-london-today/ http://blog.makersacademy.com/what-is-the-demand-for-ruby-de...) shows that the average Ruby salary is over £50K, and top 30% make over £60K. How is that compatible with the results of this poll? How is it possible that there are so many complaints about low salaries in the comments, while at the same time my experience hiring Ruby devs suggests the low salary isn't a problem at all? If you're one of those devs who voted £30-39K or £40-49K above and know how to use Ruby/JS at a decent level, drop me a line, I'll have a much better offer for you: evgeny@makersacademy.com.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
adrianhoward 13y ago
I agree. My experience of folk I know in London is that even vague competence is going to get you £35-40k - and being actually good is going to get you a fair bit more than that. Hell - I live in bloody Dorset and I'd be expecting to pay at least £35k for a decent dev. I'm confused about what kind of work the 0-30k folk are doing and for whom. If I were in that group I'd be seriously thinking about: * Switching jobs - I'd be job hunting right now * I'd be looking at freelancing rates and experimenting with that * I'd be taking a serious look at my skill set, and the skill set of the job adverts and doing a compare and contrast * Thinking about whether I'm selling and marketing myself appropriately Seriously - it's a sellers market in London for dev skills right now. I regularly get folk chasing me for £50-60k jobs - and I'm explicitly not looking, don't live in (or want to live in) London, and have very un-hip skills in the old CVs they have of mine (perl anybody ;-)
- _progger_ 13y ago
  It is not a sellers' market just yet but hopefully will be. £50-60k is slowly coming back to pre 2008, but the pound was stronger back then.
_progger_ 13y ago
Ruby is not mainstream at all. Also my guess is that most decent experienced Ruby devs are already on at least 50-60k - why switch? Another thing I noticed is that London start-ups are a bit shy when it comes to offering stock options. So the recipe is something like 70k + 1-2% stock options and ideally a bonus (doesn't have to be a huge one 5-10%). It's a market - if you can't get something at given price it doesn't mean it is not present/not for sale.
rmc 13y ago
So at 60k you can't find devs maybe that's not high enough. Try offering 100k, see how many applicants you get. If you can get lots of CV then you've found the market price. Remember, to attract people you'll also need to attract people who are in jobs already. For that you'll have to offer something better than what they have.
- shadchnev 13y ago
  Yes, I understand this, although I don't see any difference in number of applicants when I mention the salary and when I don't (I usually don't). I'm not seeing many good people who would be ready to join if I paid them more (it happens occasionally and we usually find a compromise). My recruiters are telling me that increasing the offer wouldn't give me more applicants. However, if the harsh reality is that I must be paying more to devs, then how come there are so many devs (about 200) in this poll indicating they are getting under 50K? Why these two hundred people don't talk to me and many other companies desperate to hire developers on much better terms?
  - _progger_ 13y ago
    I am receiving letters from recruiters every day. Salaries rarely exceed 55-60k. Why should I bother if I am already getting that? And that's a mainstream enterprise skill set. Also your recruiters are likely to filter out people you might like. Did you tell them that github repo trumps a degree?
    - rmc 13y ago
      Exactly, for some people that's the baseline. 60K might not be a 'wow' factor.
  - rmc 13y ago
    I don't see any difference in number of applicants when I mention the salary and when I don't (I usually don't). Perhaps potential applicants think that you, like all companies, are going to pay what everyone else is. If you don't mention salary, they presume (correctly) you're paying about the average. You don't have an opportunity to "wow" them. if the harsh reality is that I must be paying more to devs, then how come there are so many devs (about 200) in this poll indicating they are getting under 50K? Why these two hundred people don't talk to me and many other companies desperate to hire developers on much better terms? One potential reason: Fear of the unknown. Someone in a job for £45K knows what the job is. They know what their co-workers are like, they know how stressful/relaxed it is. They know what their boss is like, they know what the commute is like. Your new job is a big unknown. It's risky. It might be just as good, or it might be crap, the boss might be an asshole, you might be working for a client from hell, it might be very stressful, the technology stack might be horrible. If someone changes job to you, they are taking a risk. A £15K raise (£45K → £60K) is only about ~ £7K after taxes (right?), which is about £500 per month extra in their pocket. If they have a decent salary already, it might not be worth changing to a potentially crappy job for only that. However if you offer a large salary increase (£100K), then suddenly the equation looks better, maybe that risk might pay off. The "risk pay off" doesn't have to be salary. Why not offer 40 days annual leave, and a 4 day week for £60K. Again, reward the risk. Applicants might think "Oh the job could be boring and the boss could be an asshole, but it's only a 4 day week, and double the amount of holidays!"
mpeg 13y ago
As it's been mentioned elsewhere in the thread, asking for base salary only is a bad idea. I'd be happy to consider moving jobs for £80k~+, but £60k would be a huge step down, and yet I voted £40-49k because that's my base salary. My company knows they can get away with paying me less because I have enough stock+bonus to make it worth it anyway (which I don't agree with, but it's still better than not being paid that at all)
eyko 13y ago
In the end it's not so much about the money, but I'd be surprised if you didn't get top candidates for 100K (obviously). I don't think, however, that money plays a big part. In my case, I'm earning in the 30-39K range as a full-stack web dev (ruby and javascript), but I wouldn't change for 40, 45... and might start to think about it if I am offered 50, 60, or something high enough that it'd be difficult not to accept, but the bottom line is that a lot of us are not looking, or willing to change, because we're happy with our jobs. But of course, every now and then we think about moving on, and then even just a small rise in salary would interest us, as long as we get a change it atmosphere, meet new developers with some passion for what they do, etc. If you have a nice team (which you do, and forward labs is also an awesome place by the way) and offer an average to high salary, then I think your problem won't be so much in attracting good devs, but more in filtering out bad ones. Another thing might be that the developers you want might not come across your offers, since they're not out there looking.
lucaspiller 13y ago
I think one of the big issues is visibility. When I was in London getting £35k I thought that was good. I had no idea I could get more moving around. I got a lot of emails from recruiters, and pretty much the only ones that had salaries were for contracts not permanent. If I knew I could have got more elsewhere I bloody well would have taken it :)
jamedjo 13y ago
Is it the number of applicants or the quality which is the issue? Would it help if you targeted CS students by running web dev workshops? That way you could attract developers who haven't considered applying to a startup and might not otherwise teach themselves web development. Student salaries are also lower. Maybe you could look further geographically too. We had an ItMegaMeet in Bristol yesterday which sponsor companies used for recruiting. I too would be surprised at how little some CS students know about web development and testing-- if I hadn't sat through a web tech unit so outdated that those of us with some experience could easily have done a better job. I helped the lecturer improve the course for the next year, but think these kinds of things need a different and more collaborative teaching model. Thing is though- some things are easier to train on the job than others. So while I would hire my peers, I'd personally see it as a bonus if they used TDD not a prerequisite.
mordae 13y ago
I live and work in Prague and recently our team have finally found a sponsor for our software project. I am very happy that in a month or two, together with full-time system administrator pay with maximum bonus from state research/education institution we work for I will finally be able to pay my rent and food at the same time. We are looking at ~£13K each. I am very competent in C, Python and do Racket for fun. Both other guys are competent in Python, one of them have some Android experience, both are competent in modern web stuff. One of the guys just learned PgPL/SQL in a week, on flu, because it was needed. Do we even live on the same planet?
dmmalam 13y ago
Just from what you said, the solution 'seems' very simple: Compensate more. This may mean pay, equity, or being able to work on interesting problems. From my experience there are many extremely talented programmers in London, and these guys can work anywhere they want, including starting their own company or moving to the US. Also 'coolness' is hard to define, I see many startups think cool is having some beanbags and a pingpong table, whilst working on a standard CRUD RoR app. To most talented engineers, they would much rather be working on interesting technical challenges. This is how hedge funds get them: squeezing a few millis out of an already optimal trading engine by whatever means possible is extremely fun. Same reason game companies, F1 and GCHQ can pay peanuts.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

adrianhoward 13y ago

I agree. My experience of folk I know in London is that even vague competence is going to get you £35-40k - and being actually good is going to get you a fair bit more than that. Hell - I live in bloody Dorset and I'd be expecting to pay at least £35k for a decent dev. I'm confused about what kind of work the 0-30k folk are doing and for whom. If I were in that group I'd be seriously thinking about: * Switching jobs - I'd be job hunting right now * I'd be looking at freelancing rates and experimenting with that * I'd be taking a serious look at my skill set, and the skill set of the job adverts and doing a compare and contrast * Thinking about whether I'm selling and marketing myself appropriately Seriously - it's a sellers market in London for dev skills right now. I regularly get folk chasing me for £50-60k jobs - and I'm explicitly not looking, don't live in (or want to live in) London, and have very un-hip skills in the old CVs they have of mine (perl anybody ;-)

_progger_ 13y ago
It is not a sellers' market just yet but hopefully will be. £50-60k is slowly coming back to pre 2008, but the pound was stronger back then.

_progger_ 13y ago

Ruby is not mainstream at all. Also my guess is that most decent experienced Ruby devs are already on at least 50-60k - why switch? Another thing I noticed is that London start-ups are a bit shy when it comes to offering stock options. So the recipe is something like 70k + 1-2% stock options and ideally a bonus (doesn't have to be a huge one 5-10%). It's a market - if you can't get something at given price it doesn't mean it is not present/not for sale.

rmc 13y ago

So at 60k you can't find devs maybe that's not high enough. Try offering 100k, see how many applicants you get. If you can get lots of CV then you've found the market price. Remember, to attract people you'll also need to attract people who are in jobs already. For that you'll have to offer something better than what they have.

shadchnev 13y ago
Yes, I understand this, although I don't see any difference in number of applicants when I mention the salary and when I don't (I usually don't). I'm not seeing many good people who would be ready to join if I paid them more (it happens occasionally and we usually find a compromise). My recruiters are telling me that increasing the offer wouldn't give me more applicants. However, if the harsh reality is that I must be paying more to devs, then how come there are so many devs (about 200) in this poll indicating they are getting under 50K? Why these two hundred people don't talk to me and many other companies desperate to hire developers on much better terms?
- _progger_ 13y ago
  I am receiving letters from recruiters every day. Salaries rarely exceed 55-60k. Why should I bother if I am already getting that? And that's a mainstream enterprise skill set. Also your recruiters are likely to filter out people you might like. Did you tell them that github repo trumps a degree?
  - rmc 13y ago
    Exactly, for some people that's the baseline. 60K might not be a 'wow' factor.
- rmc 13y ago
  I don't see any difference in number of applicants when I mention the salary and when I don't (I usually don't). Perhaps potential applicants think that you, like all companies, are going to pay what everyone else is. If you don't mention salary, they presume (correctly) you're paying about the average. You don't have an opportunity to "wow" them. if the harsh reality is that I must be paying more to devs, then how come there are so many devs (about 200) in this poll indicating they are getting under 50K? Why these two hundred people don't talk to me and many other companies desperate to hire developers on much better terms? One potential reason: Fear of the unknown. Someone in a job for £45K knows what the job is. They know what their co-workers are like, they know how stressful/relaxed it is. They know what their boss is like, they know what the commute is like. Your new job is a big unknown. It's risky. It might be just as good, or it might be crap, the boss might be an asshole, you might be working for a client from hell, it might be very stressful, the technology stack might be horrible. If someone changes job to you, they are taking a risk. A £15K raise (£45K → £60K) is only about ~ £7K after taxes (right?), which is about £500 per month extra in their pocket. If they have a decent salary already, it might not be worth changing to a potentially crappy job for only that. However if you offer a large salary increase (£100K), then suddenly the equation looks better, maybe that risk might pay off. The "risk pay off" doesn't have to be salary. Why not offer 40 days annual leave, and a 4 day week for £60K. Again, reward the risk. Applicants might think "Oh the job could be boring and the boss could be an asshole, but it's only a 4 day week, and double the amount of holidays!"

mpeg 13y ago

As it's been mentioned elsewhere in the thread, asking for base salary only is a bad idea. I'd be happy to consider moving jobs for £80k~+, but £60k would be a huge step down, and yet I voted £40-49k because that's my base salary. My company knows they can get away with paying me less because I have enough stock+bonus to make it worth it anyway (which I don't agree with, but it's still better than not being paid that at all)

eyko 13y ago

In the end it's not so much about the money, but I'd be surprised if you didn't get top candidates for 100K (obviously). I don't think, however, that money plays a big part. In my case, I'm earning in the 30-39K range as a full-stack web dev (ruby and javascript), but I wouldn't change for 40, 45... and might start to think about it if I am offered 50, 60, or something high enough that it'd be difficult not to accept, but the bottom line is that a lot of us are not looking, or willing to change, because we're happy with our jobs. But of course, every now and then we think about moving on, and then even just a small rise in salary would interest us, as long as we get a change it atmosphere, meet new developers with some passion for what they do, etc. If you have a nice team (which you do, and forward labs is also an awesome place by the way) and offer an average to high salary, then I think your problem won't be so much in attracting good devs, but more in filtering out bad ones. Another thing might be that the developers you want might not come across your offers, since they're not out there looking.

lucaspiller 13y ago

I think one of the big issues is visibility. When I was in London getting £35k I thought that was good. I had no idea I could get more moving around. I got a lot of emails from recruiters, and pretty much the only ones that had salaries were for contracts not permanent. If I knew I could have got more elsewhere I bloody well would have taken it :)

jamedjo 13y ago

Is it the number of applicants or the quality which is the issue? Would it help if you targeted CS students by running web dev workshops? That way you could attract developers who haven't considered applying to a startup and might not otherwise teach themselves web development. Student salaries are also lower. Maybe you could look further geographically too. We had an ItMegaMeet in Bristol yesterday which sponsor companies used for recruiting. I too would be surprised at how little some CS students know about web development and testing-- if I hadn't sat through a web tech unit so outdated that those of us with some experience could easily have done a better job. I helped the lecturer improve the course for the next year, but think these kinds of things need a different and more collaborative teaching model. Thing is though- some things are easier to train on the job than others. So while I would hire my peers, I'd personally see it as a bonus if they used TDD not a prerequisite.

mordae 13y ago

I live and work in Prague and recently our team have finally found a sponsor for our software project. I am very happy that in a month or two, together with full-time system administrator pay with maximum bonus from state research/education institution we work for I will finally be able to pay my rent and food at the same time. We are looking at ~£13K each. I am very competent in C, Python and do Racket for fun. Both other guys are competent in Python, one of them have some Android experience, both are competent in modern web stuff. One of the guys just learned PgPL/SQL in a week, on flu, because it was needed. Do we even live on the same planet?

dmmalam 13y ago

Just from what you said, the solution 'seems' very simple: Compensate more. This may mean pay, equity, or being able to work on interesting problems. From my experience there are many extremely talented programmers in London, and these guys can work anywhere they want, including starting their own company or moving to the US. Also 'coolness' is hard to define, I see many startups think cool is having some beanbags and a pingpong table, whilst working on a standard CRUD RoR app. To most talented engineers, they would much rather be working on interesting technical challenges. This is how hedge funds get them: squeezing a few millis out of an already optimal trading engine by whatever means possible is extremely fun. Same reason game companies, F1 and GCHQ can pay peanuts.