

Should Younger Developers be Paid More? - ubasu
http://itmanagement.earthweb.com/entdev/article.php/3921006/Should-Younger-Developers-be-Paid-More.htm

======
fingerprinter
A previous boss once said to me "I don't want to pay to train current
engineers, I'm going to hire someone who knows X already".

Experienced engineers who were more than capable of learning something soon
realized that their growth at company was limited b/c boss didn't see them as
being different than their current state. So, if you are code Java now, boss
thinks you are a "java engineer". People started to leave quickly.

Experience shows what not to do more than it shows what to do. Imagine someone
who "knows python" trying to build django, twisted or tornado w/out having
general real world experience, domain experience or really understanding why
those need to be built. That is a recipe for disaster.

Smart, capable engineers are constantly reinventing themselves. If they feel
they are not going to be given a chance to work on something interesting b/c
they don't have X on their resume they will move on. The business will suffer
as they take domain knowledge and experience with them.

That boss is still at that company. Engineering staff has over 150% turnover
in past 18 months (when above boss started). Most engineers have moved onto
things that are much more glamorous and interesting but still say they would
have preferred to stay there and work on that system. The company itself has
slowly started to lose market share and customers are not renewing their
contracts. A former clear #1 in the space has become a #3 or #4 at best. Those
months watching this boss destroy this company are some of the best lessons I
could ever learn...on what not to do and how not to do it.

~~~
gaius
There was an excellent comment on a previous article that I can't find now,
someone said, when you join a company, it's because you meet their minimum
requirement. You work hard and in a few years, you're a badass at what you do
- but because the change was gradual, no-one really notices it. The only way
to monetize your new level of skill is to jump ship and join another company
as "the guru".

~~~
fingerprinter
Was this the comment?

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2095406>

~~~
gaius
Yes! Well found :-)

------
tsotha
Meh. The whole thing is based on an anecdote which may or may not even be
true.

Anybody who pays a premium for new college grads is an idiot. Comp Sci
programs don't teach you what you need to know to produce production code. It
takes a good three or four years of professional experience for people to pick
that up. Some never do.

There's a reason new grads are having a hard time getting hired in this crappy
economy. It's not because employers don't know better - it's because employers
_do_ know better. Yeah, it sucks to be in that chicken-and-egg position, but
everybody was there in the beginning.

~~~
robryan
I guess if the Facebook thing is true, it means that they find the market for
really talented engineers very tight right now so instead or making bets on
the best comsci talent in the hope that they can quickly get them up to speed
on writing good production code.

~~~
tsotha
Right now the market just isn't that tight, so even assuming that would ever
be a good strategy it certainly isn't one now.

More likely it's a rumor that grows with the telling.

------
kenjackson
While I an appreciate that person's position of getting to market quickly, but
I find it hard to believe that you couldn't competently train shart engineers
in a week or two on mobile app technology.

I recall at one of my companies we had some incredibly strong devs, but all
with Unix backgrounds. We needed them up to speed on Windows and COM. We did
two courses for them -- probably WinTellect or something (one Windows, the
other COM). In less than a month we had a small team of Windows devs that were
as strong as any I'd seen.

We hired for really bright people first. Moving them to the technology was
pretty easy. And if one month is the difference between making and breaking a
market, you may want to reassess the market.

~~~
lukev
Agreed. Good developers are good developers. The same traits that make someone
successful on one platform are identical to what will make them successful on
another.

If you pay more for certain training backgrounds, you're paying _only_ for the
few weeks/months required for a good dev to come up to speed on the new
technology. The company in the article probably spent tens or hundreds of
thousands of dollars more than they needed to for virtually no gain, unless
those few weeks/months made a critical time-to-market difference.

------
nostrademons
Technology is a brutal industry for those that fall off the leading edge.
Anyone who's considering going into it should know that.

It's often worth it to have periodic career breaks simply to refresh your
skillset. Found a startup in whatever the hottest area is. Take on a side
project to teach yourself something knew. Switch to a new job working on
hipper technologies.

But if you're expecting to gradually keep your head down and put in your 40
hours a week at the same employer for the next ten years, you're going to be
disappointed. Basically everything you started out knowing will be obsolete by
then.

~~~
anthonyb
Exactly. Really the article is about paying more for more skilled developers
(or at least, ones with skills that you need) rather than just senior vs.
junior.

IMO, both the employer and developer are to blame in the scenario given. The
developer hasn't kept his skills current, sure, but also the employer/customer
requires the new hotness by next week and nobody has thought to train any of
their existing developers in it (and end up paying a 130% premium).

~~~
tgflynn
_The developer hasn't kept his skills current_

This comment and similar comments I've seen on this post seem to be implying
that every developer needs to continuously be learning the latest
technology/platform -- in this case mobile.

I really don't think that makes sense. Technology is way too diverse to expect
everyone to know everything. Do you think every web developer needs to be able
to develop iPhone apps (and vice versa) ?

It seems to me that the post has more to do with the employer discovering an
inconsistency in the way they were evaluating the value of their employees. Is
the mobile developer really generating more value for the company than the
backend/customer logic guy with 10 years experience. I doubt it, and judging
by the outcome the manager seems to agree.

~~~
tsotha
From what I can tell after the little iPhone boomlet subsided there's not a
whole lot of money in mobile apps. How many minecrafts are there, really, out
there?

~~~
elai
There is a market in developing mobile software as part of a general mobile
platform. Making the mobile app for salesforce.com and what not. Also a good
majority of smartphone users don't really pick up on the apps and are starting
to get more into customizing their cellphone and what not, there is a wave on
the horizon of smart phone users using their phones more and getting apps and
what not.

------
patio11
There is a market inefficiency in that wages are dominated not by one's value
to the company today but by one's value to the company the last time one
engaged in free negotiations for wages. This inefficiency is persistent and
exploitable. If you're being underpaid, changing jobs is the simplest, most
reliable way to fix that.

~~~
alnayyir
"Ooh but then you're disloyal and a job hopper!" - Calacanis et al.

As I stated last time, only businessmen and finance grads are allowed to
exercise self-interest. When labor starts responding to the market they get
_really_ mad.

------
tzs
I've realized another problem with the situation described in the article.
Let's say I work at a company, and I have skills U, V, W, and X, and I know
the company's systems in and out. I've been there for 10 years and am an
excellent employee.

The company needs someone with skills Y and Z, for some new project. They hire
some kid, and pay him 30 or 40% more than they are paying me. They tell me
they have to pay that, because there is a lot of competition for people with Y
and Z. OK, fine--although if management had done their job and figured out we
would need Y and Z ahead of time, I would have been happy to learn Y and Z.

So what happens a year down the road, when that new project is done, and we no
longer need Y and Z, and that kid is now doing the same work I do--but with a
lot less knowledge of the company systems, a lot less experience in U, V, W,
and X, and is still making 30% more than me?

Is the company going to cut his pay to match mine? That won't work--the kid
will quit. Are they going to raise my pay (and everyone else in a similar
situation) to match the kid's? Probably not financially viable.

They are going to have to find something to do for the prior workers at this
point, or moral is going to be low, and they will probably have a lot of
people leaving.

Alternatively, if Y and Z turn out to be something the company still needs a
year after hiring the kid, then by that time the rest of us will probably have
learned them, too, after seeing how lucrative such skills are. Do we all get
raises up to the kid's level? If we are actually now doing Y and Z we'd
certainly expect at least equal pay. If we aren't doing Y and Z, then we
should be going to other companies that need Y and Z, and getting the big
bucks.

------
philk
It's a bit unpleasant if you're on the wrong side of the equation but it's
just market forces. Mobile application developers were scarce while normal
developers were plentiful.

The big lesson is that you should continually refresh your skills and develop
new things on your own time.

------
synnik
I feel hourly rates for consulting could be driven by "hot" skills, but not
employee rates. Any manager who pays new employees less than old ones is
asking for trouble like this. HR departments should also prevent this, if they
have their act together.

That being said, nobody should get too bent out of shape if someone else makes
more than them. If you agree to work for a salary, then live with that
decision... don't come crying to management because someone else bargained
better.

~~~
Locke1689
_That being said, nobody should get too bent out of shape if someone else
makes more than them. If you agree to work for a salary, then live with that
decision... don't come crying to management because someone else bargained
better._

Bullshit. If someone with practically the exact same skillset as you is being
paid significantly more than you're being underpaid for the company's own
evaluation of your skillset. What you should do is say: my skills are worth x
and y is getting paid that; if you don't increase my salary proportionately
that I will go work for someone else at market rates.

Of course, if the issue is just that your coworker is for some reason getting
paid far over his skill set or market rates then they just got lucky.

------
gaius
_Lost in all of this are the dedicated engineers who have put blood, sweat and
tears into an organization, only to be left behind when technology changes.
But is it their own fault? The company’s fault? Or just a natural cycle?_

Let's say you join a company as, I dunno, a Unix sysadmin. When you go in,
it's because they hired you for your Unix skills. But after 5 years, your
value to the company isn't just those skills anymore, it's that you know the
company's systems, its business, the particular way "we do things here", you
have a network of people within the organization and can "get stuff done" and
so on. And probably, by now, your Unix skills are falling a bit behind,
because the company is not about the bleeding edge, they say if it ain't broke
don't fix it (many large organizations only upgrade when the vendor desupports
something) and besides, your time is spent in meetings now.

So people can fall into a trap - they're doing very well in the company - and
don't even notice they're falling behind until it's too late...

------
gnubardt
I've noticed (in several years as an intern software engineer) that it's
responsibility and foresight that separate junior and senior level developers,
technical skill less so.

Having in depth skill with a new technology is certainly a desirable attribute
but I'd rather have the reliability of a n experienced developer (especially
since they should be able to pick up something new).

------
DanielBMarkham
I don't want to rag on this article but heck if I can figure out what the
point is.

This is very easy. If you know stuff that few other people know, you can make
more money. Once everybody figures out that's where the money is, the money
isn't there any more.

Companies will only pay to train you after they have figured out they need
something -- and with most companies this is about six months or more after
they actually needed it. So they are in a bind and have to hire talent
immediately. Folks who come in knowing what the company wants pick up the
extra bucks.

The trick here is that you cannot rely on your company to train you. You have
to figure out where the market is going, all on your little lonesome, and then
do whatever you can to master the tech -- including writing programs for local
charities if that's what it takes to get real-world experience -- before the
market gets there. This is called investing in your future. It's the tech
equivalent of going to night school.

I've been playing this game for a long time, and I've been the young buck
making the big bucks (although I've never been the older complainer guy).
After I worked my way through code monkey, architect, lead, and pm roles, I
ended up training and watching software teams. So I've literally either
participated in or worked with folks helping and evaluating hundreds of teams.

Best teams? If I had to generalize, I'd pick the old guys who keep picking up
new tech. They know the business, they've been around long enough to play nice
with others, and -- if they've stayed current this long -- genuinely are
having a fun time with what they do. Plus they tend not to get stressed out by
too much. Second best? A mixed team with mostly young guys with lots of
current tech and a couple older guys to provide that gray-beard kind of
balance.

But that's just a generalization, and like all generalizations it's very
limited in its application. Each team is completely different. That's what
makes this biz so much fun. Just like my generalizing, I think companies get
too caught up in buzzwords. Smart guys with good attitudes can do a lot. I
wouldn't go ape-shit with concern simply because buzz word X wasn't in
somebody's job experience (or vice-versa) If you know you have to learn X for
this next project and you're sitting around waiting on somebody else to come
and teach it to you? That's just a little bit too passive for my tastes.

I hate to sound like such a hard-ass (well maybe not really) but this is a
very simple business that hasn't changed much in several decades. The pace
might have changed, sure, and the tech is all new, but the mechanics of being
a good project member, what makes a good project, and how people get paid and
such are all the same as they were in 1980 or something. Not much mystery to
kick around here in this narrow area of "why Joe makes 30% more than Fred"

------
patrickyeon
The biggest thing that jumped out at me was his response, when confronted by
his team lead. This manager totally waffled on the issue, than continued to
waffle, using language that just screams (to me) "you're getting screwed and I
don't have the balls to be honest with you about what's going on." Managers
like that, I have a really hard time trusting.

------
trustfundbaby
I think the title is a little misleading ... but I understand that "Should
Younger Developers with a hot and in demand skillset be paid more" is too long
and not as interesting.

That being said, I don't really understand what the dev was upset about ...
Its just good ol' supply and demand.

Being skilled at new hot technology is always a good thing. In my short time
as a dev, I've seen the crazy salaries for WPF (.NET), Rails, facebook (if
that counts) and now iphone/android developers and I'm sure this won't be the
last time either.

Want to make $200k+? Pick up the skills that are attracting that kind of coin.
Simple.

------
tzs
Possible solution: hire them as contractors. People expect contractors to get
paid more, so your current employees will stay reasonabye gruntled.

~~~
amurmann
You also aren't stuck with overpaid employees once everyone lese is up to
speed. That actually might be a downside for the highly paid youngsters. Once
everyone else has caught up with them, why keep them for such a high price?

------
bcaulf
Should managers think they are going to sneakily hire new, inexperienced
people for high salaries and not catch flak from long time employees?

------
stretchwithme
More appropriate questions include: Should I pay more for ability to learn?
Should I pay more for already knowing how to do what I need done?

Some people start out eager to learn, but lose it. And others become learning
machines. Pay more for the latter, regardless of their age.

------
cmelbye
I'm curious, what is the career path and salary looking like for people in
these situations as time progresses? For example, someone at Facebook who
might be paid $120k, how much higher is their salary going to get as they get
older and more experienced?

~~~
bstx
Typically bonuses and stock grants will become the major part of ones total
compensation. Base salary will grow but probably not by that much.

------
devilant
So today I learned two things from the front page on Hacker News: 1) College
students aren't really learning anything in college. 2) Fresh, young college
grads should be paid more.

Makes sense.

------
dstein

      George looked down and sighed. “So you are telling me 
      there are no guarantees, and oh by the way, you want me 
      to mentor these new guys on the business requirements?”
    
      “Yep, that sums it up,” I responded, not half as 
      convinced as I sounded.
    
      “Well, that sucks.”
    

It sounds like this engineer didn't learn anything. What he should've done was
quit on the spot and started updating his skillset. He should've taken his
experience and applied it to new technology, and then bring it to a completely
new company with new problems to tackle and hopefully an even higher salary.

~~~
anthonyb
Senior engineers usually have a mortgage and kids.

------
pasbesoin
Two of the most productive, and accurate, and quick -- while accurate --
fellows I worked with were getting into their 40's. Our boss was a bit
younger, but stood well apart from his peers in capability (and pleasantness).

My impression from this: It's the person, not the age.

EDIT: I've had the opportunity to work with some plenty smart women, too. (I
realized the prevalence of the masculine in the above.) Again, several were
"older". Same conclusion.

