Hacker News Reader

I've worked for my company for 7 years now, and I "get paid well for it". The actual $ figure isn't important, other than "it's enough for me". I'm sure it's less than the average software developer with my experience, and certainly it's less than the incredible figures that the big SV companies apparently pay.

But I love working here, the company mission is very inspiring, and my coworkers are excellent. And my salary is enough that my needs are met. So I'm really not interested in keeping score.

Since you asked, and I believe in transparency: Inclusive of stock and cash bonus compensation, my W2 says I was paid a little over $225k in 2018. The W2 I received for my first year of employment says I was paid a little over $60k in that year.

I don't know if it's true that people get screwed if they don't change employers. I certainly don't feel screwed. Maybe I could make more if I went to work at one of the other large technology companies; that's certainly been something I've thought about. But I'm quite happy with what I am paid and feel like the downsides (real or imagined) of changing employers are not outweighed by the upside of a higher income.

where is this job located, that matters a lot in evaluating if you "got screwed" by being at total comp 225k after 2 decades. For comparison, 175k was my total comp at Bay Area job out of college.

I live in Seattle, though that’s not where I first started with my employer, so that may skew the numbers.

Also, depending on when we respectively graduated from college, the starting salaries are different. Starting salaries for IT where I lived when I graduated were in the $40-50k range.

Your answers read exactly like most of the people I know at Microsoft. I think to a certain extent companies with high average tenure produce cultures where people become risk-averse and reinforce these values through statements like your own.

For what it's worth, by staying there you are leaving a serious amount of compensation behind, assuming your skills could find you another job. $225k would be $350k elsewhere, easily. Many of the MSFT lifers I know don't really have a skillset that would translate or be valuable elsewhere, due to their focus on their company. That's probably true of most cases where someone stays at a single firm for a long time.

By no means am I suggesting there's anything wrong with your worldview, just pointing out that in this industry, you are leaving serious comp behind by not shopping around. Your work after moving would probably be more enjoyable and interesting, too.

I don’t know about this math. What if you change jobs and hate the new job? How do you put a dollar value on months wasted working at a place that’s not a good fit for you.

There’s only a 33% chance a job will work out. That is, that both you and the employer agree it’s a good fit after a year. So you are more likely to fail in a job change, and the odds get worse the more jobs you change.

That's not how that math works, _at all_.

Besides, you have an asymmetric opportunity, since you can interview, get an offer, and decline it if you don't like the new option. You don't need to quit before interviewing. In fact, that post-offer woo phase can give you a huge chance to get more information about the new gig.

Time has value. And interviews only give you a partial view of your ultimate working situation. But you and I are looking at this from totally different perspectives, I have no interest in convincing you I’m right. My experience is that if money is really what you want, you should start a business. As a owner you will earn more but must deal with instability. If it’s stability you want, you get a job. That’s the trade off I and many other entrepreneurs often consider. So job hopping to make a few extra K is a waste of time. Why job hop when you can do your own thing and double your income? Seems like someone that’s afraid to commit either way.

> By no means am I suggesting there's anything wrong with your worldview, just pointing out that in this industry, you are leaving serious comp behind by not shopping around. Your work after moving would probably be more enjoyable and interesting, too.

You may be right, at least about the money, but I think you're missing the other side of it that I tried to express: I don't need more money. I don't even, really, want more money. What I do want is to do something mostly interesting--I don't have to optimize for interest--in the least amount of time. I like what I do for work, even if some days I don't love it, but I adore what my salary allows me to do outside of work.

Switching employers, looking for a new one, making those decisions...they all take time that I don't have to spend right now because my needs are quite nicely met where I am and, so far as I can tell, will continue to be met for a long time. I do side projects outside of work to keep practice in some skills that don't directly relate to my work and I have friends who are at other companies and are also my professional network if I ever do need another job.

tl;dr: I'm optimizing for contentedness, not income or interest, and that's the big reason why I've stayed at the same employer for almost two decades. My employer treats me well and pays me enough so I am content.

In practice it just doesn't happen to the level that makes changing jobs worth it.

When it comes to base salary - sure you might get salary that's bigger than existing employees in same role. And then on first annual cycle they'll be in the same ballpark as you through combination of salary increase and annual bonus. That's because bigger companies usually look at "total compensation".

I guess if you play it right you might "inflate" pending RSUs and ask them to match it.

Though how much can you "inflate" it in the age when employeers too can go to glassdoor and check what that other company usually gives?