Ask HN: Is your company considering inflation in this year's comp review cycle?
My current company (not FAANG but a household name) just handed me a sub-inflation raise (5.5%) in spite of my "exceeds expectations" performance rating. New hires are getting 50% more equity than the total value of my unvested equity. The official line is that inflation is not a factor in assessing annual comp adjustments.
Does this match up to your experience elsewhere? I'm certain I could make more by switching jobs, but I wonder if I'm being screwed by more than the usual amount by staying.
I'm really effective in my current role. Past a certain level of seniority it's a big ordeal to change jobs, rebuild your network within a new company, rebuild reputation and social capital, etc. These network effects are a big part of your effectiveness as a staff+ engineer. I'd rather not move, but it seems I have to given the hundreds of thousands being left on the table.
283 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 250 ms ] threadif you have to rebuild your network to be effective at a new firm, anyone they bring in (at a higher rate) will have to do the same
If the intention of an flat company-wide increase is fairness it should be a fixed dollar amount that's the same for everyone. I've never seen a company do that though.
I'm sure that any company that implemented a policy like that would lose some senior staff (maybe not such a loss if they're people who think perpetuating inequality is good), but the junior staff would be much more likely to stay. If the point is staff retention, then you have to consider which staff you want to keep.
You want to keep the higher paid staff more than the lower paid staff. That’s why you pay them more.
Which staff you want to retain depends on a lot of things other than seniority and pay, but that's not the point. More senior staff are already being paid more.
Let's reframe this problem slightly. Imagine you have two people, one on 100k and the other on 500k. The difference in 'value' is measured as 400k. If you give both of them 5% raises, so one is 105k and the other is on 525k, the difference in value is now 420k. Why has the pay differential between junior and senior staff increased by 20k now? If you don't fix it, over a couple of decades you're going to be paying your junior staff an order of magnitude less than the seniors. How do you justify that?
Here's another example. Imagine there's a company where seniors are paid slightly different amounts despite doing the same work. One is on 200k and another is on 180k. If you give both of them 5% that's really giving the higher paid one 1k more (10k vs 9k). You can't claim that it's fair to give someone a bigger pay rise on the basis that they already earn more. That makes no sense.
Blanket percentage-based pay rises don't work. Companies should be more intelligent and work out more nuanced solutions.
That it does not accord with your intuitive sense of fairness is not an argument that other people have to bow to. Treating everyone the same according to a blanket rule, uniformly applied, is absolutely a kind of fairness.
Fairness is a subjective judgment, not a property of the universe. Which criteria to be used in making decisions is a choice, not something immediately obvious.
The reason (relating to my other comment) can literally be ‘it is 2022 and these are the new rates.’
Often that’s enough reason.
Be matter of fact about new prices, and try to explain as little as possible.
(But always give some reason. Any reason beats no reason, but a simple even vague reason beats too many reasons.)
Baffled me for years until I started to understand that I needed only to offer fewer and simpler reasons to get my ideas implemented.
is there a more lightweight model where for say 10-20% they'll handle searching, billing, rate negotiations, late payments and disputes?
i'm not sure if i'd go into contracting again without something like that. it takes far too much energy to be the asshole that is necessary to not get screwed in business (for yourself) and it detracts from the actual work and life satisfaction in general.
It's already been well established by many even in non inflationary times that dev salary is maximized by switching job every 2-5 years or so, subspecialty dependent.
Then what is?
Engineer comp has exploded the last few years, well past inflation. So if they're not matching inflation, and they're not matching the market (which would be even higher) then it sounds like they just pay you whatever they feel like and hope you stick around.
Amazon is increasing pay for many technical jobs, although specifics haven’t been communicated. They’re selling it as a large bump for everyone, although I already understand it’s mainly to retain talent or at least match inflation. We’ve underpaid our talent in the past compared to competitor companies.
Leave. They either only want you at a discount or you will get a counter offer to consider.
"Inflation" is shorthand for 'price inflation' - every single price and dollar amount goes up, and, when it happens too fast, can tear an economy apart (e.g. 1942 Berliners packing cash into wheelbarrows to go and buy bread).
EDIT: grammar
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/27/business/economy/price-in...
Combine that psychological effect with our current post-truth world of disinformation campaigns, and it seems to me that people can create inflation, or create more of it.
The first step is some event triggers a reduction in supplies for some commonly needed good. In Zimbabwe they chose to expel white farmers and replaced them with black farmers, many of whom who had little to no experience in farming. Food production rapidly plummeted and many farms simply ended up being completely abandoned.
The second step is rising prices as a result of the first. Wheat isn't inherently worth 5 coppers. It's worth however many coppers people are willing to pay for it. If there's half as much wheat to go around as before, people are going to be willing to pay more to ensure they are the ones who get their wheat.
The third step is an entity, usually a government, trying to solve the problem by attacking the effect rather than the cause. The government of Zimbabwe saw many people were quickly becoming unable to comfortably afford food. And so they responded by giving people more money aiming to bring them closer to their previous buying power.
The fourth step is a new increase in prices. This time the supply of wheat has stayed the same, but people suddenly have more money to bid on it. So again people are willing to pay more to ensure they get their wheat.
The fifth and final step is: goto the third step.
---
The end result is Zimbabwean's becoming quite capable at big figure math alongside the complete collapse of their economy. For instance we saw the introduction of the world's first $100 trillion bill. In a nutshell, giving people more money to combat inflation is like trying to put out a fire by dousing it with the only liquid you have - gas.
[1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperinflation_in_Zimbabwe
Lets call a properly measured inflation I. Let I_z, I_usa be inflation of Zimbabwe and USA respectively. The first derivative of I increases faster in third world countries than in those countries with world reserve currency status: d(I_z)/dt >> d(I_usa)/dt. That's why the US likes to project military power, that's why the super wealthy class in the West support wars to project the power in order to control the first derivative of I.
Could literally double my total comp if I spent some time doing leetcode. Probably 20% raise without leetcode.
Have some silver (bronze?) handcuffs or would probably be gone already.
For example, I know somebody who was told to come with an offer if they wanted a raise. They came to their first line with an offer for 20% more plus more equity. The first line said they would match the salary, but ultimately some exec thought it was too much and only offered a 10% raise. The person left.
Please just don't. You're better than that. Here's a list of companies who don't participate in this bullshit: https://github.com/poteto/hiring-without-whiteboards
At my current gig I was hired at staff level in Nov. 190k (please, let's normalize sharing salaries) . I could do better, but I am passionate about my job for the first time in 10 years. How much do you value happiness?
You're not an imposter. Especially as an HN reader (you're actually interested in your job).
That’s over a 100% increase from your current rate.
I’d personally recommend practicing leet code, if that’s the thing holding you back… maybe 1 problem a day. By the time you actually decide to change companies, you wont be interview prepping just before an interview.
Oh yes, I know, and I am envious. My soul and mental health is worth more. Solving problems makes me feel alive. Parroting answers does not.
I was somewhat headhunted by UiPath. Huge money. Crazy salary. First round I had whiteboard problems with the most awesome engineer that there is. Absolutely aced that, the engineer missed a meeting over shooting shit about algorithms. Second and third leetcodes were engineers that were clearly running off known solutions, and couldn't rapport over best or alternative solutions. I absolutely made a fool of myself, and I'm really good at that stuff.
Leetcode encourages parrots, and I need to believe that I'm better than that. Arriving at the thesis of a doctorate of a tenured scholar in the heat of a 1.5hr interview is hardly a representation of how valuable an engineer is.
I am so glad I failed. I was kicking myself at the time for tolerating the bullshit (I had a gun/green card issues at my back), I knew that I should have walked away.
Spending a few months doing some leetcode revision to pass some interviews that could personally yields me hundreds of thousands, potentially millions, of dollars, is a very acceptable trade-off. Many people accept that because the risk/effort/reward ratio is very worthwhile.
I've worked in two FAANG companies and the level of talent and skills is phenomenal, an order of magnitude over anywhere else I've ever worked. They all played the game, and continue to play the game, and receive the rewards for doing so.
Choosing not to participate because you dislike the process isn't going to change the hiring process.
Sounds like there are about 2-300,000 points …
I generally expect a leetcode interview to lead to either an environment where there's a lot of fires and putting out fires is the only high status thing (at which point maintenance and fundamentals get ignored - no one notices the service that didn't catch fire); or else you get a very snobbish environment where you're expected to memorize answers (at the expense of saying "I don't know" and spending a couple hours doing research)
(Some people are fine with this, of course, but I personally find it exhausting)
Yeah this isn’t true at all. Much of the leetcode paradigm exists because companies want to hire top tier talent, and they want to fill head count at significant scale to quickly ramp up new teams or entire organizations. There might be a better style, but this style has worked well enough for these companies to establish $1 trillion+ market caps, regardless of how you feel about it. And no one wants to risk moving off this because of how expensive it is to hire and fire.
I've worked for some phenomenal companies that treat employees incredibly well and compensate them top of the market. They required some leetcode to get in but other than that, the culture was fantastic and the quality of my peers was/is top notch.
To me it seems like you just don't want to spend a few weeks prepping and you're coming up with reasons to justify it.
I've obviously spent weeks prepping and passed leetcode interviews: otherwise I couldn't comment on the drawbacks I've seen working for such companies.
There's usually only two choices once you get top seniority in your position: move to a different role with a higher salary cap, or find another employer. Personally, if I was happy in my role, I wouldn't leave just for money. It's hard to find an actually enjoyable place to work. You might be really lucky and just have GIG syndrome.
Biggest effective raise I have gotten without leaving for another company, and I considered myself obscenely compensated to start with. Pretty content.
With the 5.5% increase, is your compensation competitive with similar roles at other companies? Are you making enough salary to live a comfortable, satisfying lifestyle? Is the equity you have increasing in value over time better than, say, a mutual fund or ETF? Are you concerned you're not being paid your worth, or are you experiencing FOMO and anxiety because it feels like the economy is failing?
Internally it’s nothing but complaints about comp and attrition, but to me it’s the best I’ve ever been paid. My idea was to stay here long term and learn a ton before thinking about leaving, but does anyone do that anymore? Maybe I’m being naive.
Complaints on comp and attrition, I've seen literally in every large-ish company I or my friends have worked at. It's a lot of politics.
Since your at a FAANG, learn a lot, build network, and that shiny company name on your resume will help you move later when the time comes.
I don’t feel that I should be anything higher than L4 but at the same time it’s hard not to feel the FOMO and insecurity that comes with being “behind” in a hot market.
I've been fortunate enough to always leave companies on good terms while generally happy there. I've left for exciting new projects and challenges, rather than for compensation. Part of that is I try to be an agent for change when there's something I am frustrated with. I've also always given several months notice. I also have the mentality of committing to something for at least three years.
I haven't stressed out about compensation. I've always negotiated aggressively before accepting a job offer, and then just not worried about it. I've leaned toward equity over salary, and found that my salary naturally increased over time to stay competitive anyway. I have a reputation for being straight forward, honest and reliable, and that's paid off more than any negotiation or job change. I would have probably been the wealthiest today if I stayed at my first job, making a relatively comically low salary, but I wouldn't be as good of an engineer.
[0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADobcQEhrzQ
Throwaway for obvious reasons.
It tells you the date so you can see if the data is current. Smaller companies might not have enough recent data to be accurate though.