7 ms·

Glassdoor.com seems to have fairly accurate salary reports across different companies, jobs, and geographies.

by cpeterso 12y ago

tptacek 12y ago
Glassdoor has never been accurate about any firm I had firsthand knowledge of.
- mathattack 12y ago
  I've seen it be remarkably accurate, but that was for a "Mostly cash, limited bonus" environment. I think one of their sources is H1B filings, which can be very accurate for those types of jobs. It misses equity and outsize bonuses.
  - fredkbloggs 12y ago
    First of all, you should always value equity at zero. Neither your landlord nor the guys at the farmers' market want your stock certificates, which are overwhelmingly likely to end up worthless (if they aren't already). Second, most companies don't pay bonuses. Those that do usually have a bonus pool that depends in some way on the company's success in the marketplace, and they can almost always abolish bonuses at management's discretion. A good rule of thumb is that the more you need a bonus in a given year, the less likely it is that there will be anything in the pool. Don't even think of budgeting for a bonus. Ever. Knowing what you're actually going to get as long as they keep you on is the right information. The other thing you'd want, which is very hard to get, is how likely they are to keep you on. For public companies you can read the 10Qs and look for news about layoffs, but it's much harder to discern how secure you will be at a smaller/private employer. HTH. Signed, A Veteran of 2001
    - tptacek 12y ago
      Serious question: if you value equity at 0, then (ceteris paribus) given a choice between (1) an offer at $150,000 and 50 basis points and (2) an offer at $150,100 and 0 basis points, you should choose option (2). Given that: why should any employer offer equity?
      - madeofpalk 12y ago
        I don't know about should, but an employer would offer equity because employees will often overvalue it. IMO, equity is a great benefit. You might not get the most comprehensive benefits package, or you might work more hours at early stage company. Instead, you get equity.
        mathattack 12y ago
        In addition to relative value, equity has other benefits. It increases the "One team" spirit, where everyone rises and falls together. It also puts in a sense of fairness. If the firm thrives, it's not just the CEO and VCs who get rich. There are downsides (lack of control of share price, and some freeloading) but for startups it's a great tool. The effectiveness shrinks a bit for large firms.
        fredkbloggs 12y ago
        The effects you describe are probably specific to the individual. Having worked for several companies from tiny startups to gigantic megaliths, I can tell you that I never felt any of those things regardless of my equity package. I may be cynical, you may be naive, or both. Companies succeed by being in the right place at the right time, being lucky, having good connections, and having leaders who make the right decisions. If any of those is missing, failure is certain. If they're all present, failure is merely likely. As a rank and file employee, you can sometimes cause a very small company to fail but you can never make any company successful. You're just there to execute; execution is at least somewhat necessary but never anywhere near sufficient. The idea that making my economic outcome dependent on so many factors over which I have no control whatever is not merely expedient or regrettably unavoidable but explicitly fair would be silly if it were not so abhorrent.
        mathattack 12y ago
        On the last point, it's about fairness in the other direction. If an organization like Youtube/PickYourUnicorn sells for a billion plus dollars with only a small handful of employees, all of which are talented and have put in long hours, would it be fair for only the VCs and founders to see the upside? In a sense I view equity as a shared call option.
- danielvinson 12y ago
  My research has always shown it to be within ~10% of actual figures (pre-hiring research vs. post-hiring findings).
- boulos 12y ago
  As mentioned in the article, I think it's accurate at the very low end (i.e. the salary and bonus for fresh undergrads at Google).
- sgustard 12y ago
  Agreed. Well, I've seen it be reasonably accurate about the salaries (and associated gripes) of the lowest-performing 20%. You can use their numbers if that's where you place yourself.
ryanSrich 12y ago
FWIW Glassdoor is about the most inaccurate tool out there. $98k for a web developer in the Bay Area? Ha...yeah.

Glassdoor.com seems to have fairly accurate salary reports across different companies, jobs, and geographies.

tptacek 12y ago

Glassdoor has never been accurate about any firm I had firsthand knowledge of.

mathattack 12y ago
I've seen it be remarkably accurate, but that was for a "Mostly cash, limited bonus" environment. I think one of their sources is H1B filings, which can be very accurate for those types of jobs. It misses equity and outsize bonuses.
- fredkbloggs 12y ago
  First of all, you should always value equity at zero. Neither your landlord nor the guys at the farmers' market want your stock certificates, which are overwhelmingly likely to end up worthless (if they aren't already). Second, most companies don't pay bonuses. Those that do usually have a bonus pool that depends in some way on the company's success in the marketplace, and they can almost always abolish bonuses at management's discretion. A good rule of thumb is that the more you need a bonus in a given year, the less likely it is that there will be anything in the pool. Don't even think of budgeting for a bonus. Ever. Knowing what you're actually going to get as long as they keep you on is the right information. The other thing you'd want, which is very hard to get, is how likely they are to keep you on. For public companies you can read the 10Qs and look for news about layoffs, but it's much harder to discern how secure you will be at a smaller/private employer. HTH. Signed, A Veteran of 2001
  - tptacek 12y ago
    Serious question: if you value equity at 0, then (ceteris paribus) given a choice between (1) an offer at $150,000 and 50 basis points and (2) an offer at $150,100 and 0 basis points, you should choose option (2). Given that: why should any employer offer equity?
    - madeofpalk 12y ago
      I don't know about should, but an employer would offer equity because employees will often overvalue it. IMO, equity is a great benefit. You might not get the most comprehensive benefits package, or you might work more hours at early stage company. Instead, you get equity.
      - mathattack 12y ago
        In addition to relative value, equity has other benefits. It increases the "One team" spirit, where everyone rises and falls together. It also puts in a sense of fairness. If the firm thrives, it's not just the CEO and VCs who get rich. There are downsides (lack of control of share price, and some freeloading) but for startups it's a great tool. The effectiveness shrinks a bit for large firms.
        fredkbloggs 12y ago
        The effects you describe are probably specific to the individual. Having worked for several companies from tiny startups to gigantic megaliths, I can tell you that I never felt any of those things regardless of my equity package. I may be cynical, you may be naive, or both. Companies succeed by being in the right place at the right time, being lucky, having good connections, and having leaders who make the right decisions. If any of those is missing, failure is certain. If they're all present, failure is merely likely. As a rank and file employee, you can sometimes cause a very small company to fail but you can never make any company successful. You're just there to execute; execution is at least somewhat necessary but never anywhere near sufficient. The idea that making my economic outcome dependent on so many factors over which I have no control whatever is not merely expedient or regrettably unavoidable but explicitly fair would be silly if it were not so abhorrent.
        mathattack 12y ago
        On the last point, it's about fairness in the other direction. If an organization like Youtube/PickYourUnicorn sells for a billion plus dollars with only a small handful of employees, all of which are talented and have put in long hours, would it be fair for only the VCs and founders to see the upside? In a sense I view equity as a shared call option.
danielvinson 12y ago
My research has always shown it to be within ~10% of actual figures (pre-hiring research vs. post-hiring findings).
boulos 12y ago
As mentioned in the article, I think it's accurate at the very low end (i.e. the salary and bonus for fresh undergrads at Google).
sgustard 12y ago
Agreed. Well, I've seen it be reasonably accurate about the salaries (and associated gripes) of the lowest-performing 20%. You can use their numbers if that's where you place yourself.

ryanSrich 12y ago

FWIW Glassdoor is about the most inaccurate tool out there. $98k for a web developer in the Bay Area? Ha...yeah.