it's a fairly weak attempt at 'collusion'.
What form of success here qualifies as "weak?"
If big tech companies are colluding to depress engineer wages, they're pretty obviously failing.
You're going to have to show your work here.
What form of success here qualifies as "weak?"
If big tech companies are colluding to depress engineer wages, they're pretty obviously failing.
You're going to have to show your work here.
what makes you think you aren't worth 10 times that?
Now apply this to the implication that these sv companies did not depress engineer wages.
you aren't paid in proportion to your worth; you are only paid in proportion to your negotiating power. if 50 other people can produce the same worth for your employer, you're going to be paid a lot less than if you are the only one who can produce the same amount of worth.
don't take this as an argument that you are being paid "unfairly" - you're not. just see it this way - you are worth much more than that. set your career sights a lot higher because you deserve it.
I thought HFT was going into rough times?
Sure, you're a drop out, but if you have an in-demand skill set replacing you is not going to be cheap.
Market price is market price. These companies are generating massive income. They are paying high wages (and colluding to avoid paying higher ones) because engineers are necessary to that.
The question you should ask during salary negotiations isn't, "Do I, based on my own value judgments and moral code, deserve this much money?" It's: "Are they paying me market price for my skills?"
If market price for your work is more money than you need or you believe you deserve, then take it and give it to somebody you think does deserve it. I promise you that if you let your employer keep the extra, they will not do anything better than you will with it.
Take the money.
Illustration:
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=profit+per+employee+app...
Remember this is net rev, what they take in after paying everyone. Assuming the average employee makes $120K, and given that they can't exist long enough to make $1 without the engineers showing up, these companies should be willing to pay everyone up to 2-3x that
Anyway, considering that employees also have equity, those numbers aren't obviously damning.
Nor are they particularly relevant, as "willing to pay" isn't the same as "market price"
It should be the same if aggregate engineer negotiation for compensation was efficient
either that or there's a glut of engineers on the market, which would seem to be the opposite of what we're always hearing