5 ms·

When You Can't Compete On Salary: Tech Talent on a Budget

11 points by fecak 13y ago

mrfusion 13y ago
Interesting point about remote work. Would you say we're at a tipping point for large numbers of employers starting to offer remote work? It seems like there's more talk of it and it seems more mainstream lately.
- fecak 13y ago
  It could be the places I spend my time online (including HN), but employee demand for remote work is growing and I expect it will take a relatively small number of companies changing policy for remote work to gain momentum. Right now obviously the standard is the office model, and remote is so rare that the office companies aren't having a hard time competing for talent with the remote shops. Once a higher percentage of shops start going remote, the companies that don't offer it will start having a harder time competing. I don't think we are too far off from seeing remote being more widely accepted, but it's hard to tell when that change will be. At say 5% the offices still can get their hires, but if it gets around 20% (and with no major public failures) you'll start to see companies reconsidering policy.
- x0x0 13y ago
  I haven't seen it, and I'm an experienced data scientist, a seemingly high demand specialization. There's plenty of demand, for people who want to live in sf or the peninsula. I'd rather live in Tahoe or slt and work remotely, but nobody offers that to a first approximation (cl data scientist [1]; telecommute [2]). If you want remote ML people, contact me. [1] http://sfbay.craigslist.org/search/jjj?zoomToPosting=&catAbb=jjj&query=data+scientist&excats= http://sfbay.craigslist.org/search/jjj?zoomToPosting=&catAbb... [2] http://sfbay.craigslist.org/search/jjj?zoomToPosting=&catAbb=jjj&query=data+scientist&addOne=telecommuting&excats= http://sfbay.craigslist.org/search/jjj?zoomToPosting=&catAbb...
  - fecak 13y ago
    I certainly can't get into a data debate with a data scientist, but do you think part of the reason SF companies aren't offering remote work is that they don't have to? The biggest tech market would seem least likely to need to offer remote work - even though demand is high, it's probably much harder to find data scientists in some small suburb hours from an airport or university than it is in SF. How would those numbers look nationwide?
ChrisBland 13y ago
Some other things I would consider: Dress Code, am I going to have to wear a collared shirt every day? Am I going to wear a Tie? If you expect me to take a paycut from market then you had better expect I'm going to be comfortable. Vacation: I know it may seem unfair to other employees, but if you can't pay like the big boys and you still have a vacation policy, then you need to allocate more. Normal is 3 weeks, give them 5 weeks. A conference budget, will I be able to further my education while employed? Internal Hackathons, do you allow your engineers to pick any project and work on it for a week? If your company is having a hard time hiring great devs and/or can't afford them, take a look at your policies. Thats a big reason we don't want to work for you.
- fecak 13y ago
  Dress code could have made this list. Conference budget is something I considered, but that also costs out-of-pocket for the firm. I didn't mention benefits for the same cost reason. I've actually had conference costs written into an offer letter a few times for new hires. That is something that benefits the employee and (sometimes) the company, particularly if the company rep is a speaker and represents well. Internal hackathons and 20% (or less) time type programs would attract at least some others.
Jemaclus 13y ago
I'm glad to see that equity was so far down on the list here. Too many founders think equity and salary are interchangeable, but the fact is that equity doesn't pay the bills. All of the other things you mentioned, however, are good reasons for me to take a pay cut. Very, very good list. I'd add vacation as another item, like someone else said. Another thing employers need to realize is that sometimes the job seeker is looking to move up, and just because they applied for your job doesn't mean they hate their current job. For instance, I'm rather content at my current job. I like it. It pays well. My team is solid. The work itself... maybe a bit boring. But is that enough for me to jump ship and take a pay cut? Probably not. Sometimes YOU need ME more than I need YOU. Sometimes I'm desperate. You need to be able to figure out which kind of candidate I am and make your offer accordingly. I'm not saying rip me off, but you can save some $$ if I'm desperate. If I'm not desperate, though, you have less leverage in the negotiation and you either need to not make me an offer at all or make me one I can't refuse. Middle ground just isn't good enough for the most part. (At the very least, expect negotiation from a strong candidate.) /rant :)
- x0x0 13y ago
  At some point vacation is far more important than salary; two weeks is unworkable. Both my and my SO's families are in other states, so one 3-4 day trip to each family plus 1-2 personal days to take care of typical life stuff and you've blown through 10 vacation days without a vacation for us, since visiting family is nice but not all that relaxing. Also, founders massively overrate the value of the lottery tickets they're dispensing, at least until the bay gets so bubblicious that banks accept options as payment.
- fecak 13y ago
  Vacation was on the list (line with reasonable hours) but I didn't go into detail as it seemed self-explanatory. Personally, I never assume applicants hate their job. In this market, people have incentive to shop around, and movement between jobs isn't frowned upon. I think most people learn more by moving around a bit, and hiring managers look at people with 20 year tenures and they don't see loyalty - they see stagnation.

11 points by fecak 13y ago

Interesting point about remote work. Would you say we're at a tipping point for large numbers of employers starting to offer remote work? It seems like there's more talk of it and it seems more mainstream lately.

fecak 13y ago
It could be the places I spend my time online (including HN), but employee demand for remote work is growing and I expect it will take a relatively small number of companies changing policy for remote work to gain momentum. Right now obviously the standard is the office model, and remote is so rare that the office companies aren't having a hard time competing for talent with the remote shops. Once a higher percentage of shops start going remote, the companies that don't offer it will start having a harder time competing. I don't think we are too far off from seeing remote being more widely accepted, but it's hard to tell when that change will be. At say 5% the offices still can get their hires, but if it gets around 20% (and with no major public failures) you'll start to see companies reconsidering policy.
x0x0 13y ago
I haven't seen it, and I'm an experienced data scientist, a seemingly high demand specialization. There's plenty of demand, for people who want to live in sf or the peninsula. I'd rather live in Tahoe or slt and work remotely, but nobody offers that to a first approximation (cl data scientist [1]; telecommute [2]). If you want remote ML people, contact me. [1] http://sfbay.craigslist.org/search/jjj?zoomToPosting=&catAbb=jjj&query=data+scientist&excats= http://sfbay.craigslist.org/search/jjj?zoomToPosting=&catAbb... [2] http://sfbay.craigslist.org/search/jjj?zoomToPosting=&catAbb=jjj&query=data+scientist&addOne=telecommuting&excats= http://sfbay.craigslist.org/search/jjj?zoomToPosting=&catAbb...
- fecak 13y ago
  I certainly can't get into a data debate with a data scientist, but do you think part of the reason SF companies aren't offering remote work is that they don't have to? The biggest tech market would seem least likely to need to offer remote work - even though demand is high, it's probably much harder to find data scientists in some small suburb hours from an airport or university than it is in SF. How would those numbers look nationwide?

ChrisBland 13y ago

Some other things I would consider: Dress Code, am I going to have to wear a collared shirt every day? Am I going to wear a Tie? If you expect me to take a paycut from market then you had better expect I'm going to be comfortable. Vacation: I know it may seem unfair to other employees, but if you can't pay like the big boys and you still have a vacation policy, then you need to allocate more. Normal is 3 weeks, give them 5 weeks. A conference budget, will I be able to further my education while employed? Internal Hackathons, do you allow your engineers to pick any project and work on it for a week? If your company is having a hard time hiring great devs and/or can't afford them, take a look at your policies. Thats a big reason we don't want to work for you.

fecak 13y ago
Dress code could have made this list. Conference budget is something I considered, but that also costs out-of-pocket for the firm. I didn't mention benefits for the same cost reason. I've actually had conference costs written into an offer letter a few times for new hires. That is something that benefits the employee and (sometimes) the company, particularly if the company rep is a speaker and represents well. Internal hackathons and 20% (or less) time type programs would attract at least some others.

Jemaclus 13y ago

I'm glad to see that equity was so far down on the list here. Too many founders think equity and salary are interchangeable, but the fact is that equity doesn't pay the bills. All of the other things you mentioned, however, are good reasons for me to take a pay cut. Very, very good list. I'd add vacation as another item, like someone else said. Another thing employers need to realize is that sometimes the job seeker is looking to move up, and just because they applied for your job doesn't mean they hate their current job. For instance, I'm rather content at my current job. I like it. It pays well. My team is solid. The work itself... maybe a bit boring. But is that enough for me to jump ship and take a pay cut? Probably not. Sometimes YOU need ME more than I need YOU. Sometimes I'm desperate. You need to be able to figure out which kind of candidate I am and make your offer accordingly. I'm not saying rip me off, but you can save some $$ if I'm desperate. If I'm not desperate, though, you have less leverage in the negotiation and you either need to not make me an offer at all or make me one I can't refuse. Middle ground just isn't good enough for the most part. (At the very least, expect negotiation from a strong candidate.) /rant :)

x0x0 13y ago
At some point vacation is far more important than salary; two weeks is unworkable. Both my and my SO's families are in other states, so one 3-4 day trip to each family plus 1-2 personal days to take care of typical life stuff and you've blown through 10 vacation days without a vacation for us, since visiting family is nice but not all that relaxing. Also, founders massively overrate the value of the lottery tickets they're dispensing, at least until the bay gets so bubblicious that banks accept options as payment.
fecak 13y ago
Vacation was on the list (line with reasonable hours) but I didn't go into detail as it seemed self-explanatory. Personally, I never assume applicants hate their job. In this market, people have incentive to shop around, and movement between jobs isn't frowned upon. I think most people learn more by moving around a bit, and hiring managers look at people with 20 year tenures and they don't see loyalty - they see stagnation.