Stack Exchange Developer Compensation [pdf] | Hacker News Reader

Stack Exchange Developer Compensation [pdf]

blog.stackoverflow.com

43 pointsswilliams19 comments

"Our compensation is not based on how well you negotiate or how often you ask for raises... We don’t have a range of possible salaries for every level, we have a single salary, so everything about the system is algorithmic."

Bullshit. Politically savvy employees will just move their lobbying from blatantly asking for raises to arguing that they are on a new "level."

Consider that this document lists 10 different criteria for just the "public artifacts" portion of the ranking, including writing blog posts, public speaking, participating in hackathons, being on panels, and "participating in Stack Exchange." Queue the guy who says his upvotes and tweets bump him to the next level.

And "public artifacts" is just one of FIFTEEN (!) vague areas on which you are graded, including "Outreach," which lists some of the exact same criteria as "public artifacts," like public speaking and hackathons; "Getting Things Done;" "Ships" (how is that different from Getting Things Done?); "Ideas" (sounds objective!); "Extracurricular programming learning;" and "Other engineering type skills."

This sounds like a compensation system that pretends to be far more objective than it really is, which is actually more dangerous than one that acknowledges (and thus treats carefully) its own subjectivity.

(Which happens to be a broader issue I have with StackOverflow itself; much as I love it, the site is plagued by know-it-alls wielding pseudo precise rules "your question is overlocalized" and "not really a question" to delete reasonably compliant content. But that's a whole other comment.)

Bullshit. Politically savvy employees will just move their lobbying from blatantly asking for raises to arguing that they are on a new "level."

My previous employer implemented that. And what you predicted is exactly what happened. The first salary negotiation after the new policy went like this: "We'd like to offer you $X." "No. I'd have to take at least 15% more than that." "Oh. We'll have to change your job title, then."

I suppose that some organizations can pull this off, but they're very rare. Maybe StackOverflow should ask how the military does it.

Maybe StackOverflow should ask how the military does it.

You're not allowed to quit. It simplifies things a great deal.

"Everytime you judge a person in more than 5 criterias he will be able to do pretty well in one. ando losy in the others." "Tell me how you measure me and I'll tell you how I'll behave" (Eliyahu M. Goldratt)

The PDF is part of a larger blog post: http://blog.stackoverflow.com/2011/07/how-much-should-you-pa...

I believe if people shared their salaries with their co-workers only good things will come for the individuals.

A) Either you will feel valued and continue happily along your way.

B) You will realize you are not being fully appreciated, find a new job opportunity, and know now how much to negotiate for.

FYI: I just created a poll "How much do you make as a programmer?" (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2763932)

You might be interested in this HN comment thread about methods of anonymously sharing salary information between coworkers:

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2439443

No way. Most people would be irritated most of the time because there would always be some idiot making more than you.

In my experience, people fall into two categories when they know what they're co-workers make.

1. They don't care because money isn't the main reason they are at their job.

2. They do care and they A) are unworried about people they outearn and B) are jealous/contentious with those that outearn them.

I see no advantage in informing an office of what everyone earns.

I thought I was going to see the numbers :(

I would love to see some stackexchange developers dropping by and give us some numbers..

In the attached blog post (that mwsherman linked to) Joel states: "The only thing that is not public is the actual, final computation that determines each individual’s paycheck, because we have to balance our own philosophy of openness against the individual developer’s right to personal privacy."

There is a previous discussion about this from last night here http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2761427

I looked for both that link and the pdf, but didn't see it in the first 2 pages and New. Nuts. I felt that the pdf had more useful info than the associated blog post, so I submitted that one.

I want to meet the guy who's A+++ at modem-whistling.

That'd be Captain Crunch: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Draper

If they have objective measures and are compensating based on them, there's no reason not to tell people what the formula is. You can still hide what you measure people at (Bob's only A+ at LINQ, vs. A+++). Without specifying how measurements translate into yearly compensation they're just waving their hands around and saying how scientific they are without actually being so.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com