
Analysis of compensation, level, and experience details of 19k tech workers - rainboiboi
https://huyenchip.com/2020/01/18/tech-workers-19k-compensation-details.html
======
compiler-guy
This is terrific work, but the early claim that, “As far as I know, this is
the largest data on compensation and level details of tech workers.“ makes me
wonder if he isn’t aware of the other data sets, or wrote imprecisely.

There are extremely detailed and very large sets of this sort of data
available if you are willing to spend large amounts of money and sign big
nondisclosure agreements. All the biggest companies share into these sets and
know what everyone is paying everyone else.

So the companies don’t have an advantage just because they negotiate with many
people themselves. They know because they get industry reports about what
everyone else is doing.

This doesn’t change anything about his points. If anything, it makes them
stronger. But better data absolutely is out there.

~~~
atq2119
This seems like a great argument in favour of unionizing in order to level the
playing field a bit.

If companies cooperate in this way even when they might otherwise be
competitors, then so should workers.

~~~
Cthulhu_
I don't think it would work to be honest; going by Dutch unions, they will
make it so that everyone working in industry X will get the same compensation
(or, compensation tiers based on e.g. experience and position). This won't
work in the US because the same job will pay $200K in SF versus $50K
elsewhere. The people in SF won't want to give up their cushy wage and
conditions so that someone in a less fortunate area can earn more.

~~~
gmueckl
This is why German unions often negotiate for different geographic areas
independently. This way, different costs of living are factored in.

~~~
lowdose
But the Netherlands is actually one big city so this wouldn't make much sense.
The Netherland is as economically independent from Germany as Hong Kong is
from China.

~~~
gmueckl
My point was merely that there are models for solutions for the problems the
parent post saw for the USA. I did not want to claim that this works for the
Netherlands, too.

------
hiphipjorge
> Tech favors the young. For people with more than 15 years of experience,
> there’s practically no correlation between years of experience and income
> (corr < 0). After 15 years of experience, you either retire, switch to
> management, or change career.

I’ve never quite understood the dynamics of this. Do people mostly self
select? Is there organizational pressure to do this? Is the constant rate of
change in terms of technology too exhausting for people to keep up (More
senior engineers are def capable!)? In my experience I’ve seen a it of all of
these, but honestly not enough examples to see clear patterns (...precisely
because I’ve only worked with people in their 20s and 30s).

~~~
axaxs
Mostly self selection. This data is -extremely- off. Who is most likely
worried about their salary, or most likely to search about it and compare?

If I had to guess, the median salary for a software engineer in the USA is
about 100k. For 15 years experience, probably about 150k. Yes, you might make
200k in the valley sharing an apartment, but for every one of those are three
in Salt Lake City, Denver, Dallas, etc who are content with much less.

Most software engineers in the US don't take this survey. The ones who do have
something to prove.

~~~
eldavido
It's frankly crazy that software people make only 100K.

Yes, I know the industry is huge, and has many different areas and levels of
difficulty, and required skill. But it's nuts that people don't bat an eye
paying even a mediocre lawyer $200 or $300/hr (my dumb-ass condo lawyer
charges $365/hr) and somehow software engineers, who have to do crazy feats of
applied math, manage absurd levels of complexity, deal with ridiculous
deadlines, and work on increasingly critical pieces of the global economy,
work for the equivalent of $50-60/hr.

This can't go on, it seems only natural that pay is going to keep going up,
especially when people realize how hard and complicated this stuff is, and how
much demand for it there is, in terms of how much power and competitiveness it
gives businesses, and how relatively few people can really do it at even a
passable level.

My property manager quoted me $90/hr to change a lightbulb. My jaw almost hit
the floor.

~~~
wutbrodo
> t's nuts that people don't bat an eye paying even a mediocre lawyer $200 or
> $300/hr (my dumb-ass condo lawyer charges $365/hr) and somehow software
> engineers, who have to do crazy feats of applied math, manage absurd levels
> of complexity, deal with ridiculous deadlines, and work on increasingly
> critical pieces of the global economy, work for the equivalent of $50-60/hr.

This isn't mysterious: the legal profession is controlled by a corrupt guild
engaged in regulatory capture, while engineering is more or less an entirely
free labor market.

~~~
eldavido
Completely agree.

Just not sure what the endgame is. Attorneys and many other professionals are
REALLY entrenched. They're kind of in the sweet spot of, enough money to be
influential (unlike most traditional trade unions), enough members to have
national lobbying clout, but not big enough to be considered "big and bad".

It's the same deal with realtors, doctors, attorneys, architects, CPAs, and
other jobs considered "upper middle class".

I just can't help but think something has to give with these kinds of work
over the next 20 or so years. If companies like Uber can figure out a way to
break another massively corrupt guild (taxis and medallions), there have to be
ways to route around many of these professions decidedly customer-hostile
behaviors.

~~~
logicchains
>Just not sure what the endgame is

Automation? Presumably most of the non-ambiguous parts of the legal system
could eventually be translated into computer programs. If smart contracts ever
really took off this might happen.

------
baron816
> Indeed surveyed 1,000 women in the field and found that the main reasons
> women leave tech are: advancement opportunities, wage disparity, and work-
> life balance.

I wonder if they leave because of a _perceived_ wage disparity/lack of
advancement opportunity. Actually, everyone should be wondering that and we
should try to get hard evidence. This report suggest that there isn’t much of
a disparity, and it’s generally very hard for anyone to get to very high
levels. If we had good statistical evidence that women aren’t discriminated
against when it comes to promotions and compensation, then more would likely
stay. If we had evidence that they were, well, then we could do more.

I do have less sympathy for women who have an opportunity to work in tech than
for women working as waitresses, or as social workers, or maid.s Women leaving
tech are doing so probably because they can afford to. But most women out
there aren’t that lucky. What I’d like to see is the government doing more to
make it possible for all working women with families to better balance their
lives. Probably the best thing they can do is extend the school day and school
year and provide stipends for child care. Mandating that more women get board
seats isn’t going to help the single mother working at the grocery store
cashier very much.

~~~
xenihn
I really don't understand how wage disparity can be given as a reason in the
current market, assuming that you're a software engineer. If you don't like
how much you make, go find a new employer. I know it's not that simple, but
it's doable. Just quitting your career altogether doesn't make any sense,
unless you never enjoyed it to begin with.

>If we had good statistical evidence that women aren’t discriminated against
when it comes to promotions and compensation, then more would likely stay.

I live in SF, and I "only" make $150k a year. All of my friends in the city
make at least double what I do thanks to RSUs. Some make three times as much.
Three of them are women (!!!!). I've accepted that I'm probably never going to
get into a company that pays that well, and that's fine.

I still have a very comfortable life. I'll probably wash out if there's
another downturn, but I'll have saved up enough money to comfortably start
over and do something else.

The idea of quitting because I earn significantly less than other people with
the same years of experience (or less) is insane. I can admit that they're
better engineers than me. That's why they get the big bucks.

~~~
lawlorino
> I live in SF, and I "only" make $150k a year. All of my friends in the city
> make at least double what I do thanks to RSUs. Some make three times as
> much. Three of them are women (!!!!). I've accepted that I'm probably never
> going to get into a company that pays that well, and that's fine.

This isn't statistical evidence, this is an anecdote about you and your friend
circle.

~~~
xenihn
You completely misinterpreted that part of my post. I'm not going to quit tech
just because I know that I make significantly less than other people. It
doesn't even make sense as a reason for me to quit.

I don't even understand how you could have seen that as an attempted
refutation of statistical evidence, as opposed to my actual point, which is
that I'm not going to quit tech because I know that I make way less than other
people.

------
gyulai
The sample seems skewed towards expensive cities and high-paying companies. I
realize that FAAAM are big companies, but I find it hard to believe that they
make up for as much as 40% of the tech workforce. The same goes for those
cities.

------
christiansakai
> "After 15 years of experience, you either retire, switch to management, or
> change career. I hope that this analysis can guide people in making
> important career decisions"

What do I need to make out of this sentence? I am 5 years in my dev career, 33
years old currently. I don't want to go into management if possible.

~~~
kmonsen
I'm almost 10 years older and still doing well as a non-manager. Have
colleagues 10-20 years older than me too in the same boat. Don't worry too
much about it and do what you enjoy. You will probably have to deal with
people a bit more, and every day life is less about coding and more about
meetings and strategic plans.

~~~
pmiller2
For me, it’s not about doing well. I know I’m doing well making over 3x the US
median family income, even if that means I’m paying approximately the US
median individual wage per year in rent. It’s about how I was chronically
underemployed for several years before I broke into the tech industry, to the
extent that my ability to retire at a normal age is in question.

I would like to know what the rate of increase of pay vs years of experience
is for both SWEs and engineering management. I’m a senior engineer right now,
and, the next level is probably about 3 or 4 years away if things go as
expected. Am I doing my bank account a disservice by not switching to
management now?

My impression is that it’s probably far easier to make the jump from M1 to M2,
possibly even to M3, in those 3 years than it is from senior engineer to staff
engineer. At some point, my career level will plateau, no matter what I do,
but I want to find the place that leaves me with the most money at age 67
(full retirement age in the US).

------
kstenerud
This seems a bit off. With 20 years experience I was getting 120k in San
Francisco in 2015. This is for an expert C, C++, ObjC/Swift, Python, Java, LUA
engineer who has worked the whole stack and shipped many products of all
sizes.

Eventually I left the city entirely because it was too damn expensive.

~~~
eldavido
You don't seem to be too bothered by this. I've had wild swings in pay myself,
worked places big and small. Maybe saying this to others in the thread:
there's more to life than how much money you make.

I agree SF is getting way too expensive, it seems you either work FAANG or get
out. At least, that's how it feels, and I think the city is worse for it, with
every passing day.

I think it's also important to think about where you were working. See my
other comments in this discussion; I don't think it's accurate to say
"underpaid", "underused" maybe, but not "underpaid".

~~~
kstenerud
Actually it does bother me, because it means that employers have been lying to
me when they said that this is normal. And if they lie about that, it means
that they are deceptive and untrustworthy.

I'm autistic, so this is an area I have trouble in.

~~~
Tade0
The incentive is huge to not tell you the whole truth, like "this salary is
normal _but for this company_ ".

To give an example: I spent almost two years making a hilarious $13k annually
in Poland(where I'm from) while my employer was charging our US customers
standard rates, so multiples of that.

When I switched jobs in 2015, my salary went up 2.5x.

This whole time I was making 40% of the market rate and nobody bothered to
tell me.

~~~
sethammons
> this salary is normal but for this company

My HR guy was open about it. Our company and others were in a data sharing
collective. You pick a title, a region, and experience level and it shows
stats on thousands of other companies. By the time you drill down, maybe a
dozen companies match.

He showed me that for a senior software developer in Orange County at the time
(around 5 years ago?), the data showed that I was being paid above median at
$120k/yr (pretty sure that was my rate at the time). The problem? I had an
offer on hand for $150k. The HR guy was locked with, "yeah, but the data here
shows you are already paid above what we should." The CEO helped us meet in
the middle. Good choice for me to stay. Base salary is now way higher than
what we were talking about then, plus the company went public and I got a
start up lotto ticket.

Anyway, yes. The company has a limited vision too of what your salary should
be, even when they have more data available to them. The only way to see your
market rate is to check the market.

------
serpix
These numbers are close to double that of Europe. Only self employed
consultants get near the bottom edge of those incomes.

~~~
fastbeef
Salaries in the US are pre-payroll taxes, post in EU. Also not included in US
salaries: daycare, healthcare, college savings.

Is see this trope all the time, but it’s an illusion. Compare apples to
apples.

Edit: Payroll tax != income tax. Most people aren’t even aware the employer is
paying this. It’s the light blue bar in the chart in this article:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payroll_tax](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Payroll_tax)

~~~
foldr
No, these are double or more than pre-tax London salaries. I'm not sure about
continetal Europe, but the convention in the UK is to report pre-tax salaries.

Healthcare is complicated. Most cushy tech jobs in the US come with the
premiums included. But in the US there is always a significant risk of large
and unpredictable medical expenses. (Especially when you consider that there's
no guarantee that you'll keep your job!) That one is difficult to put figures
on.

I don't personally care about daycare and college savings as I'm not planning
to have kids.

~~~
esotericn
Employer's NI is 13.8%, so multiply a normal 'pre-tax' salary by 1.16. Then
again, the Americans are presumably getting health insurance so it'd be a
wash.

I have a sense that Americans are just better at negotiating (taught to do it,
and actually do it) than Brits. Anecdotally I know a whole bunch of people who
could be earning a lot more (not only in software), but they have this sort of
meekness that leads them to believe whatever number the other party says is
what they have to take.

Individually that may not make up all of the difference, but collectively it
probably does (e.g. the market depressing effect if most people don't bother).

~~~
foldr
>so multiply a normal 'pre-tax' salary by 1.16

I don't follow the logic of this. The amount of your quoted salary that you
get to keep (for a typical SE salary) is going to be somewhat higher in the US
than in the UK. (Not massively higher - Americans often inaccurately apply the
stereotype of high tax Europe to the UK.) Whether the deductions are for
employee or employer taxes is moot from a financial point of view.

~~~
esotericn
If someone says "I earn 50K" in the UK then they mean that's their salary
after employer NI but before income tax and employee NI. The cost to the
employer (in straight cash terms, not including related stuff like a desk,
computer, etc etc) is more than that figure.

It's not fully pre-tax, but we call it pre-tax, just pointing that out.

~~~
foldr
Ok, but that doesn't seem to have anything to do with US/UK pay disparities.
US pay also doesn't include all the taxes and other expenses being paid by the
employer in relation the the employee. E.g., the employer's portion of the
health insurance premiums won't be included.

------
madengr
25 years in RF hardware design. I think I’ll now just go shoot myself.

------
Thorrez
> Tech favors the young. For people with more than 15 years of experience,
> there’s practically no correlation between years of experience and income
> (corr < 0). After 15 years of experience, you either retire, switch to
> management, or change career.

Does the evidence indicate they "retire, switch to management, or change
career"? The evidence doesn't seem to contradict the idea that they stay in
their same jobs being paid the same amount as someone with 15 years of
experience.

------
graycrow
As a for a person living in Central Europe, it's somewhat depressing to see
these numbers.

~~~
bump64
As a person in Eastern Europe I also kind of envy this but then I remember
that the cost of living here is way lower and I am leading pretty good life
with the money that I make so it ain't that bad. It is better to just enjoy
life instead of being constantly worried if you make enough.

------
shmerl
Referenced [https://www.levels.fyi](https://www.levels.fyi) is very
interesting. Some values are hugely different for comparable levels in
different companies.

------
gok
That quote about 15 years being the end is bunk. Lots of people are individual
contributors for decades, many after trying management and deciding it wasn't
for them.

------
rolltiide
> I’d also like to restate the disclaimer: just because there’s no evidence in
> the data to support something, doesn’t mean that something doesn’t exist.

Huyen, this applies to other hypotheses as well. Work life balance and life
goals by the early 30s can be just as substantial of a factor than
assertiveness in offer negotiation.

------
WaitWaitWha
This is significantly off for at least Amazon/AWS & MSFT. I know Amazon
employees often get AMZN shares as bonuses ranging from single to triple
digits.

Current AMZN share is at 1864.72USD. It is not unheard of for an L4 to get 5
to 10 shares as bonus. I have heard of L6 getting 150 shares. That is
significant.

------
TrackerFF
Self-reporting can always lead to bias.

In fact, if the goal of sites like levels / glassdoor / etc. is to make
salaries more transparent, wouldn't it be a decent strategy for everyone to
just pump up their numbers, when reporting?

------
willvarfar
Section 2.2 "As level increases, the percentage of female software engineers
decreases" is something that has always worried me. With daughters who seem
technical, what career advice am I supposed to give them? Who are they
supposed to go to for better career advice? Etc.

This story "An alternative argument for why women leave STEM" discusses a
work-life-balance which, I guess, could apply beyond academia to tech
workplaces?
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22077603](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22077603)

