Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by RandallBrown | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

RandallBrown

The article just avoids that problem.

> very few companies pay so much below market that it would be a nonstarter

I don't really agree with that statement as my experiences have been different.

View on HN

Yeah given the author’s expertise in job markets I’m shocked she wrote this as well.

I don’t think there’s a single other profession with as much compensation variability as software engineer. I’ve heard it described as bimodal or trimodal, but I’m not even sure that captures it.

There was a YC company on the hacker news homepage recently looking for senior AI engineer for 60k. Even by international standards that’s absurdly cheap , but this is a YC backed company, I don’t think their head is in the sand (though I do suspect YC coaches founders to play moneyball with hiring as YC companies as a whole seem to pay far below average).

There’s many companies that consider 150-200k as “standard”.

And there’s still many companies paying 400-600k for senior engineers. I thought in the “tech recession” with the interest rates up this wouldn’t be available for a while but an acquaintance who got laid off from Twitter did the “grind interview prep and interview a dozen companies simultaneously” strategy just this summer in 2023 and got multiple competing 500k+ offers (all liquid) for staff SWE including from some companies I didn’t realize paid that much like HubSpot.

Despite many great offers he also encountered many companies that tried to lowball by claiming “salaries are going down for engineers” but that turned out to be wishful thinking and/or a bluff on the company’s part given his final result.

So basically there is no “market rate” for senior engineers but to the extent there is one a huge percentage look to massively go under it. I don’t blame them as it’s part of the game but just be aware many companies say things like “we want the best and are willing to pay for it” but then lowball and try to bluff engineers into thinking “the market” is much lower than reality. Which they do because many many engineers fall for it.

A lot of companies don't know what they want and how much that costs. The "senior engineer" at my FIL's 60-person company makes less than an inbound "junior" at a FAANG.

Obviously a silly example, but the caliber of folks is totally different. If I am a job searcher, I want to know the employer understands and is willing to pay for my caliber because otherwise our ideas of what the role is and what it should pay could be vastly off.

Because the marker is relative. What’s crap pay to you is a golden opportunity to others. Experience is relative as well. They may not have the experience and the company doesn’t care about that, only to fill the seat. Don’t take it personally.

Whether I am thrilled to take a $60k TC job or my absolute minimum is $400k that doesn't change the market in that 60k is insultingly low and 400k is well above the median (cue all the folks who think FAANG is the market chiming in about $450k TC juniors).

Wait, which FAANG hires junior engineers for $450k?

Probably not "junior" in the traditional sense of the world. Maybe some PhD holders researching very, very specific literature that the company wants to lock in pronto. You're not hiring a new engineer for that much to simply code.

Perhaps people who joined shortly before a stock rally. I was pulling ~$270k TC at 2 YoE, but it was really ~$175k TC at the time I actually joined the company. Equity is so variable, that's why it's better to compare TC at time of offer. Of course, when I negotiate I always cite the highest stock value in the last several months.

TC numbers are typically not meant to include stock variations.

Equity variability is why TC always uses the price of stock at offer unless you're trying to brag on the internet.

$60k is a lot of money in other parts of the world

Yeah, in different markets.

My understanding is that the game is usually about the money saved between the offer and the target salary band.

Companies have their review schedules and the new hires would be boarded before the reviews. This would allow to hire at low ball and then give a "raise", effectively leveling it.

Not only aiming at below market figure saves company the money, this also serves as a retention tool.

So, it does pay to know an approx of the target comp band AND your own "happy" target. The hard part is to formulate it as a package.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com