A Tech Job Still Pays $120 an Hour Despite Mass Layoffs (bloomberg.com) 87
Mass layoffs across the US technology industry have now claimed well over 300,000 jobs. And yet, companies are still hiring in areas they see as mission-critical. Contract positions are still commanding $120-an-hour wages. From a report:The industry hasn't seen cuts this deep since the dot-com bubble burst, but Linda Lutton, who has been recruiting for tech firms since 1987, says it doesn't feel like a bust. For one, she said, firms are still taking her calls. "I'm in constant contact with my tech clients, and they keep telling us, 'We will come back,'" said Lutton, who recalls how clients suddenly stopped answering their phones during the dot-com crash of the early 2000s because they had folded overnight. "I haven't had a single message from a single client saying, 'We have to cut everything down.'" Whatever happens to the tech industry in the coming months and years will ripple across the entire US economy. The sector now claims the biggest share of market value in the S&P 500, accounting for about one-quarter of the index. That's up from 18% a decade ago. Tech accounts for about 6% of US gross domestic product, and a similar share of jobs across the country. The average pay in tech is nearly twice that of the typical US worker.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
No, they don't. Stop telling obvious lies.
Re: 120 an hour isn't dick ! (Score:2, Informative)
I'll see your "Lies, all lies!!" and raise you some data points:
https://transparentcalifornia.... [transparen...fornia.com]
For comparison, US congressmen get paid $174k, and the US president $400k.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/s... [forbes.com]
FWIW I came to this state with a kidney transplant, and getting ongoing care for it is stupidly hard here. I had all of zero problems in Arizona, even when I was on Medicaid.
Substandard doesn't even begin to describe the roads here:
https://ktla.com/news/californ... [ktla.com]
Power grid? ...Yeeeeah...
Water management:
h [latimes.com]
Re: (Score:2)
So you can't back up your bullshit claims then? Color me surprised.
Like I said, stop telling obvious lies.
Re: 120 an hour isn't dick ! (Score:2)
Are you stupid or just high?
Re: (Score:2)
LOL! I can read. None of your links back up your bullshit. You'll only fool the lazy and stupid like that.
Now, fuck off. You're a waste of everyone's time.
Re: 120 an hour isn't dick ! (Score:2)
If you read it, then what was your takeaway from it?
Lies (Score:4, Informative)
https://www.houstonchronicle.c... [houstonchronicle.com]
The average person pays more in Texas than California. Plus California has much stronger workers protection laws.
Re: Lies (Score:2, Funny)
That's a lie because...Texas...a state I've never once set foot in my entire life. That's honest to goodness 100% pure red herring whataboutism, which furthermore 100% disregards the cost of living, or the fact that California politicians are insanely overpaid, or the fact that California's infrastructure is complete shit.
Furthermore, that one little entirely irrelevant talking point you made doesn't even apply to the level of pay we're talking about here. At that level, according to your own research you w
Re: (Score:2)
This has already been fact-checked pretty well and you can find more thorough explanations, but this claim is somewhere between false and misleading.
We know that 40% of US households pay no income tax. It's probable that a similar number are not paying state income tax in California either. And since lower income people are probably also renting, they're not directly paying property tax either. In fact, roughly 50% of people in California are renters, compared with 35% in Texas. So the median California
Re: 120 an hour isn't dick ! (Score:5, Interesting)
I had a friend working in Dallas, making $250K a year ask me what he would need to make to have a similar standard of living in the Bay Area. When I used a cost-of-living calculator online, it said >$750K, which I didn't believe until I started running the numbers.
The taxes alone are the largest part. California is going to have an effective tax rate on that income of a bit under 10% and your effective federal tax rate is going to be around 25%. When you make $250k, your effective federal tax rate is closer to 15%. So with a $750K salary instead of $250K in Texas, you'd pay 6X the taxes with 3X the income. The upshot of this is that even though you're making 3X more, you're taking home only 2X more after taxes.
Then after taxes you've got really high housing costs. And it's not just that your mortgage payment is way higher, it's everything else related to your house as well. I've got relatives in Santa Barbara and any kind of renovation project costs 2-3X what it would cost in Texas. Utilities cost more as well. For my friend, who was living in a large house in Dallas worth ~$750K, it would be impossible to find a comparable home in the Bay Area for less than $5M.
And the unfortunate truth for my friend was that he was only going to make 1.5X in California, not the 3X he would need to have a similar lifestyle.
Re: (Score:2)
Chalk it up to differences in weather. Most people would much rather live in Santa Barbara than anywhere in Texas.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
My friend worked in Dallas. When I last was looking for a job, I had a pretty good offer in Austin. When you really look at it, Austin has high property prices (for Texas), but otherwise everything is pretty reasonable. The cost of gas and groceries isn't any higher in the Austin area than it is elsewhere. There aren't many additional taxes/fees living in the Austin area compared to the rest of Texas. I wanted to be near mountains and so didn't take the Austin offer, but I would probably recommend the
Re: (Score:2)
Republicans did this on purpose by via lowering SALT, to punish states that didn't vote Trump.
$120/hour for a contract isn't what it seems. Subtract 401k match, time off that isn't built-in, the need to buy your own medical insurance, and you end up netting rather less.
Re: (Score:2)
The SALT limit fight is kind of weird when you think about it. Democrats arguing for a tax break for the wealthy...
Repealing the SALT limit would save me money every year, but I think it's the right thing. I'm not sure that there's been a compelling case made for why a higher (or unlimited) SALT deduction should be allowed other than "because my constituents don't like it." If California, New York, and Illinois don't like it, they could do the opposite and allow individuals to deduct their federal income
Re: (Score:3)
235k is not too shabby. Then again, who cares about money? I want power.
You know how you get power? By asking 120k instead of 235k and then giving them the option to either jump through your hoops or you quit and sign up with someone else who then gest a 235k guy for 120k. It's fun to get PHBs fired.
Most job postings are fake (Score:5, Insightful)
Also pump up investors (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I searched and couldn't find a citation among all the posts about job openings which are so fake they're not even posted by the company they purport to be from. Any chance you have something in your history?
Re: Also pump up investors (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
thanks, here it is, gives full text in private browsing mode
https://www.wsj.com/articles/t... [wsj.com]
Re: (Score:2)
And yet, in the last two months I had absolutely no problem landing interviews and job offers for IT leadership roles. I landed a position that paid $30K more than my previous role. I'd say there are plenty of real job postings out there.
It's because more than 300k people retired (Score:5, Informative)
Re:It's because more than 300k people retired (Score:5, Insightful)
The real problem with any sector these days is retirement as a good number of people retired during covid if I remember right it was in the low percentages maybe up to 5% of the workforce. So even though we have a demand down swing in labor, the shortage was even greater than that. I work in the tech sector and I'm still getting emails from recruiters
And despite the popular OK Boomer memes, those olde farts that retired were/are actually worth their pay. My pay is by task, and sometimes there are different hours. I was re-hired part time - could be full time if I wanted - because the younger people they were trying to use found the work too stressful. Or they weren't technically adroit enough. Or they didn't have the right demeanor. You have to be nice, but you have to be respected and obeyed.
We see it in here all the time, especially since it's popular today to demand not to ever go into work, but that work must be done at home only.
Guess who goes away first?
Re:It's because more than 300k people retired (Score:5, Interesting)
Worth their pay or not, boomers are retiring. En masse.
And there is very little coming in to replace them. And you know where we notice this most? Mainframes. Yes, those old, pesky, crappy, legacy shit that's so uncool and nobody under 40 wants to touch. You have NO idea how many huge corporations not only still have them but depend on them, tied to them for sink or swim.
Quite seriously, if you're looking for a field to get into if you're in it for the money, forget big data, forget AI, even forget security. Mainframe is where the money is. Because these people are desperately needed, the average age of the average mainframer is pushing 60 and they want to retire. They're currently kept in employ for prices that make your average security expert turn green.
Re:It's because more than 300k people retired (Score:5, Interesting)
Worth their pay or not, boomers are retiring. En masse.
And there is very little coming in to replace them. And you know where we notice this most? Mainframes. Yes, those old, pesky, crappy, legacy shit that's so uncool and nobody under 40 wants to touch. You have NO idea how many huge corporations not only still have them but depend on them, tied to them for sink or swim.
With a problem that it kinda works.
Quite seriously, if you're looking for a field to get into if you're in it for the money, forget big data, forget AI, even forget security. Mainframe is where the money is. Because these people are desperately needed, the average age of the average mainframer is pushing 60 and they want to retire. They're currently kept in employ for prices that make your average security expert turn green.
The COBOL effect, indeed.
I've encouraged people to go into RF, and even analog. Seems like buggy whips, but it isn't. The entire tech world seemed to think that there is nothing but digital, and RF is the field of people who will die soon, and good riddance.
Get a degree in the field of electromagnetics, and you can pretty much write your own ticket. I always like to pull out a smartphone among the digital uber alles crowd, to let them know that they are just using a fancy walkie talkie on a radio system. Weird - it shocks some who believe it's digital only. But you are correct about the olde boomers wishing to retire.
Me? well, my new part time gig helps pay for my pricey toys. And I'm treated well.
Re:It's because more than 300k people retired (Score:4, Interesting)
The thing is, it doesn't get taught as it was. Moreover, there is no reason for the youth of our time to dig into it in their spare time.
I came a wee bit late to the RF/EE party. I grew up in the 80s when you didn't need mad soldering skills anymore just because you wanted a computer. Though I was fascinated with the "batteryless radio" (a crystal radio) I built when I was 12. Had my friends take it apart and look for the battery, they thought it was magic.
Dad's physics book was quite the treasure trove for interesting experiments. Though he kept his chemistry book locked away, after I got it, I knew why. Damn, they taught kids in the 60s pretty much how to blow up their school in chemistry... anyway.
But in general, I was late to the electrical engineering party. Today, I really hate that because I had to relearn everything I needed for my hardware projects the hard way. But I see the same development with the next generation. Me, I can program a wide variety of assembler dialects. And I can easily pick up new ones. It's sometimes hard for me to understand why people consider it such a hard language, to me, it's the easiest, simplest language ever conceived. No multiple inheritance or polymorphism or any such crap, you see. Just straight, pure and direct.
And that fact also means that I can and do find quite a few quite serious flaws in modern hardware, which allows for a tidy side income in bug bounties. Because the people designing these things today sometimes apparently don't really understand the core implications of what they do anymore either.
I still wish I understood a bit more about RF. It's what keeps me from digging deeper into the implementation of some Bluetooth devices, and trust me, THAT is a treasure trove of bugs. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY, in the history of mankind, managed to implement that protocol securely.
Re: (Score:2)
Mainframes. Yes, those old, pesky, crappy, legacy shit that's so uncool and nobody under 40 wants to touch. Because these people are desperately needed, the average age of the average mainframer is pushing 60 and they want to retire. They're currently kept in employ for prices that make your average security expert turn green.
60? Incorrect. That would be the low end, not the average. Most mainframers are in their 70's and retired, and double-dipping as consultants.
AIX admin's are on average in their 60's...
As far as crappy, in financial and insurance sectors, they generate 80% of the revenue and are about 5% of the CapEx and OpEx, and ~1% of the outage calls.
Re: (Score:2)
OMG, you're telling me we have the young 'uns among the Mainframers in our company?
We indeed have one that only turned 54 a few weeks ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Worth their pay or not, boomers are retiring. En masse.
Boomers were born 1946 to 1964. That puts them at 59-77 years old. They should be retiring by now.
If we haven't figured out how to run shit without them, that's on us.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that the bosses don't like to retire, they actually enjoy "working" (I use the term very loosely here). So you have a bunch of 70somethings pretending like they still know how the world works.
Re: (Score:2)
Worth their pay or not, boomers are retiring. En masse.
Boomers were born 1946 to 1964. That puts them at 59-77 years old. They should be retiring by now.
If we haven't figured out how to run shit without them, that's on us.
It is complicated, for certain. As a mid-aged boomer, I saw the workplace change from a place where you were mentored or apprenticed, to one wherethat was thought of as wasteful, taking two people to do something rather than one. A place that started out with simple charge numbers and ended up with 16 digit numbers, with the accountants expanding their presence from just a couple to the biggest department in the institution, and sucking every last cent of overhead money, and demanding more. Which made Profe
I had mainframes on my resume (Score:1)
I had mainframe work on my resume. I dropped it because it attracted the worst kind of crappy MSP headhunters. The companies stuck on mainframes all have deep seeded management and tech culture issues similar to the place where I scooped up the experience.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, yes and no. You'll be mostly working in the finance sector, and yes, these folks tend to be VERY conservative when it comes to many things.
But that's also where the money is, and they're quite willing to part with that money if you offer them a skill that lets them make some more.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds like you’re the sucker if so many people are taking a pass on those jobs.
Then don't whine about nO One CaN bUy A hOUse Or cAr anY more.
And they failed miserably, not took a pass, me wee one.
No one wants to work anymore, right guys?
just like people drop to AC when they are petrified and pissing their panties because they are afraid, me hearty coward.
Not necessarily (Score:2, Interesting)
Also, 300k retirements is 1 good month's worth of new hires. Boomers retiring has an effect, but I'm not sure how strong it really is. Now, the 1m+ dead from COVID, the millions of women who dropped out of the job market because childcare costs more t
Re: (Score:2)
there's a lot of inertia in large organizations. Yeah, I'm sure there's some boomers that're missed. But I can tell you that one of the things that drives this is that when they leave nobody seems to go out of their way to stop them. They just get replaced.
Except when they don't.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, 300k retirements is 1 good month's worth of new hires. Boomers retiring has an effect, but I'm not sure how strong it really is. Now, the 1m+ dead from COVID, the millions of women who dropped out of the job market because childcare costs more than they can earn, the long COVID patients and the underemployed because employers refuse to hire for entry level w/o a college degree (read:H1-B Bait) are I think larger factors.
Not in tech. In tech, childcare costs way less than women can earn. Most tech folks worked from home and thus relatively few died from COVID or got long COVID compared with the job market on the whole. And most tech companies hire without a college degree all the time.
Anyway, it's worth pointing out that after factoring in the self-employment tax, this is the equivalent of earning $210k pre-tax income per year from non-contract employment, even before you factor in other lost benefits such as company-pro
Re: (Score:3)
And despite the popular OK Boomer memes, those olde farts that retired were/are actually worth their pay.
Like every other generation, boomers are hit and miss as far as being strong employees. Many of them have incredibly relevant experience and capabilities and are a hard asset to lose when they retire, and many of them have been dead weight for a decade before they finally retire. Just like many millennials are incredible employees and many millennials have no idea what it takes to succeed in the corporate world.
I'm surprised companies don't have more programs to keep older employees as part time once they h
Re: (Score:3)
And despite the popular OK Boomer memes, those olde farts that retired were/are actually worth their pay.
Like every other generation, boomers are hit and miss as far as being strong employees. Many of them have incredibly relevant experience and capabilities and are a hard asset to lose when they retire, and many of them have been dead weight for a decade before they finally retire. Just like many millennials are incredible employees and many millennials have no idea what it takes to succeed in the corporate world.
Correct. In the end, we're all just people. I had bad luck with a lot of millenials, but two women were among the best people I ever worked with.
I'm surprised companies don't have more programs to keep older employees as part time once they hit retirement age. I have had the opportunity a few times to work with retired coworkers who came back as a part time contractor, and it was a great experience for everyone involved. They got an easier transition into retirement and I got a wealth of experience and knowledge to pull from while I was learning the ropes in a new position.
They had a plan called emergency rehire where I retired from. And I went back for a while. But there were time limits on that. It's supposed to be a way to make up for the lack of mentoring in today's world, but the dingdongs just had me doing what I was already doing, and when I left for good, it was like a big surprised.
The folks I work for now are in a comple
Re: (Score:2)
Toys, brand new tennis balls for your walker and a fresh IV bag.
As long as the IV is Tequila, I'm game.
BTW, if and when I get to that point, I'm checking out.
Re: (Score:2)
This is especially true for companies that still have folks grandfathered into pension plans. Pension plans usually offer a lump sum payout at retirement based on current interest rates. The lower the interest rate, the larger the lump sum payout is. In 2022 when interest rates leaped up, some of my old colleagues had to choose between retiring or essentially working for free for the next 3-4 years.
Re:It's because people retired (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, but also no.
Prior to the pandemic we had the opposite problem. Report [gallup.com] after report [usatoday.com], baby boomers weren't retiring. People age 70, age 75, the weren't leaving the workplace so there was tremendous downward pressure, and even a few of the Silent Generation were remaining at their posts. Gen X and Gen Y felt that pressure and often couldn't move up in the business pyramid because the past guard wouldn't give up top spots. Underemployment was a buzzword ten years ago, people being forced to take a side-gig because there were no vacancies at the level above.
The pandemic hit, and many Boomers and Silent Generation finally decided to retire. A huge number of the 2020 and 2021 early "great resignation" tend were Baby Boomers leaving [forbes.com], which isn't too surprising since in 2021 they were aged 55-75, and most of the remaining Silent Generation, 75+ at this point, also finally pulled out.
So over 75 million baby boomers, the bulk were leaving, and the generation replacing them on the other end, Generation Z and Millennials, has about 68 million people. The obvious math issue with population replacement there is obvious. Baby boomers were a boom of babies and a population bubble that people have known about.
This was a huge part of the great resignation as it applied to tech. Yes, people absolutely were leaving. It's because in tech nearly all promotions come when you cross a company, not from within. The top spots finally opened up so Gen X left to take their place at other companies. This left a vacuum, and Gen Y moved in, same with Millennials, Gen Z, and the new entrants from Gen Alpha starting to take entry level spots. Yes people resigned in mass, and yes the boomers were leaving a hole of about 10 million workers generally, but it never was the sky falling like so many news reports claimed. We don't really see reports right now about people underemployed because there are no senior openings, there are jobs all around in tech despite the layoffs, which is confusing some people.
These aren't really a tight labor market due to business-side pressures. These also aren't a mass resignation due to not working. These are a tight labor market with roughly 10 million old adults leaving and under-employed people moving up.
This was coupled with massive growth during the pandemic, especially at a lot tech companies.
That second side we're now seeing is basically a correction, not a recession.
While many industries shrunk, tech had a growth explosion. Headline:"Microsoft adds 23k employees in one year, growing 14% despite pandemic and tight labor market" [ahttps]. Headline: Just how massive Amazon has grown during the pandemic, in 8 charts. [fortune.com]
Now we're seeing a reduction, but compare the numbers. Microsoft had about 10,000 laid off in January, a few more following, but that's still a growth against the pandemic growth. Amazon's first round was 18,000, and another 9 announced this week, but it still leaves them with a bigger workforce. Another correction against the pandemic growth. Zoom had many layoffs, after their explosive pandemic growth. Twilio, Yahoo, etc., all of them look more like corrections to me, not recessions.
So yes, all the things happened, but they're really just the effect of multiple scales all balancing themselves out.
Re: (Score:1)
So over 75 million baby boomers, the bulk were leaving, and the generation replacing them on the other end, Generation Z and Millennials, has about 68 million people. The obvious math issue with population replacement there is obvious. Baby boomers were a boom of babies and a population bubble that people have known about.
It was well known. I don't remember much from Jr High (middle school these days) but I vividly recall my 8th Social Studies teacher round about 1984 sounding the alarm bells of serious issues when the Boomers started retiring. To the issue at hand to funding SS, and others. This should come as no surprise to anyone.
Re: (Score:1)
I don't think it's just that. It's that 300k devs were made redundant, but the global dev shortage is well into the millions.
Big Tech may have decided it was over staffed, but there are thousands of companies that are still have long been desperate for those engineers. The competition for them hasn't gone away, and developers haven't lost their appetite for the salaries they were on.
I work at a mid-level company that's made it's way past unicorn startup phase that competes with big tech on salaries. Our sa
Re: (Score:1)
They might be desperate, but a) they are not paying comparatively and b) they are a lot pickier - don't ask me why - when hiring.
One good thing the big companies do, is that they recognize that a good engineer can retool quickly. The smaller com
Re: (Score:2)
Another 5% quit due to Long COIVD too. In the UK around 5% of the workforce has it to some degree. Some serious, some mild enough to keep working.
Whoop-de-doo (Score:2, Insightful)
After self-employment tax and regular income taxes, that cuts it right there to like $80 an hour.
Given that contracts do not include health care or retirement benefits, that's like $40 an hour.
Given that contracts only cover working time and not time to perform ongoing professional development, training, setting up equipment, etc., that's like $20 an hour.
Given that you have to bid on contracts using un-paid time, that's like $15 an hour.
Contract work i
Re:Whoop-de-doo (Score:5, Interesting)
Little known fact - social security tax is only collected on the first ~$160,000 of income. Self-employment tax is mostly just replacing social security tax that you and your employer pay (also Medicare, which doesn't phase out with income). Once you hit $160K, your self-employment tax will drop to 2.9%.
But you're right, contract pay needs to be significantly higher than ordinary wages in the industry for the contractor to come out ahead. Working as a contractor makes you more keenly aware of expenses and taxes that others don't think about.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Working as a contractor makes you more keenly aware of expenses and taxes that others don't think about.
And this right here is why the government HATES contractors and makes their life difficult at every turn. If everyone had to pay self-employment taxes via quarterly payments instead of near-invisible payroll withholding like they do for W2 employees, there would be far far less tolerance for government spending. When the government announces another few billion in money for Ukraine, rather than cheering it on, the public would be up in arms and there would be zero chance of incumbents getting reelected.
Re: (Score:2)
I think if people knew that 1/8 of their income was going to social security, they'd be really unhappy about it.
I have a family member who worked at a restaurant. The owners realized that they weren't withholding social security taxes on tips and then began doing so. There was practically a revolt among employees who were really angry that the owners were taking 7.5% of their tips. Many threatened to quit and some actually did.
Re: Whoop-de-doo (Score:2)
While it is true that contact needs some adjustments for comparison, that much hyperbole is excessive.
No, it's not the case that a tech contractor billing $120/hr is no better off than a worker in a fast food restaurant.
Re: (Score:3)
You are omitting the greatest intangible benefit of contract work, that you don't have a boss but a customer. That alone is worth the reduction in the total amount you make.
Re: (Score:3)
Until you need health insurance.
Re: (Score:2)
I buy health insurance for myself on an open market for $700/month. While that's outrageously expensive compared to the rest of the developed world, at $8,400 per year after taxes means you only have to charge some $12K more a year -- a fraction of $150-250K/year you can charge as a contractor -- to cover for it.
Re: (Score:3)
Your math is really bad here. Your estimate of self-employment and regular income taxes is fine, but health care and retirement benefits do not reflect $40 per hour. No company offers $7k per month in health care, life and disability insurance, and retirement benefits to employees per month. If you have a family health plan, that is closer to $20 per hour for a full time worker. $15 per hour if you are single, or $10 per hour if you are on your spouse's plan. And most companies give at best 10%-20% of your
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not quite that bad; you should walk away with 40% worst case after all those things. I'm not sure about contractors today, but for me it used to be closer to 70%; I needed 20% to cover self-employment taxes and benefits, and 10% to cover administrative overhead and unpaid time. I was working more than 40 hours a week though and actually had a company set up for it. The extra things that were tax deductible alone made it a huge win.
Now, if you are working through a contracting agency it could be a wh
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Things that are mixed use or otherwise necessary expenses like a computer or cell phone are prime examples, but for my wife's business she was able to put ~50% of her gross income into her 401k and end up with near zero tax liability. I guess not everybody approaches it that way, but we didn't need her income for survival so it made much more sense to build up her retirement account.
Re: (Score:1)
Contracts don't include retirement benefits or health care. True. If you're only insuring yourself, the health insurance thing is relatively cheap-ish. I'd rather be an FTE if I had a partner and a dozen children I have to provide health care for. Hell yeah make my employer contribute to that. But a lot of the other benefits that come with an FTE role don
Re: (Score:2)
Especially considering that in 2000, Java contractors in Wisconsin (of all places!) were billing at $200/hour. $120 an hour would be a decent mid-90's wage.
Sorry to hear ... (Score:3)
Actually, they're not.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, I don't think the average Chief Ethics Officer would be qualified.
Re: (Score:3)
Wow! We found the alien. Is it not nice on your home world?
$120?! (Score:4)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, where? I only got $50/hr. as a contractor!
Horse, as Col. Potter would say, hockey (Score:2)
I just broke six figures a year. In the last half-dozen years of a multi-decades long career, with a B.Sc. Other than the Big Name companies, nobody pays that kind of money. A third of that in your gross paycheck is normal.
Re: (Score:3)
Where do you live and what is your risk profile? A solid unix sysadmin in Los Angeles would make a minimum of $160k with less than 10 years of experience.
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting... I make 6 figures (okay, it starts with a "1", but you get it), and i work for a small-ish consulting company with staff of well under 200. Yes, there are smaller places that pay that.
I did take a significant pay cut when I left a much larger firm (via a generous voluntary exit offer).
Fire and Rehire (Score:3)
So they're doing fire and rehire to cut their wage bills. It's not a bust because it's just capitalists doing capitalism
A tech job? (Score:1)
I am currently looking for a job - guess why - and I am getting very few offers above $100/hr, most seems to be between 150K and 170K per year.
Contracts do not pay more to account for instability, they are just a way for some company to skim my salary when they resell me to another company.
$120/hour? That's nothing (Score:1)
$120/hour is peanuts now. You think it's a big deal to be paid what people were paid 20 years ago? That's junior developer/administrator/devops pay. (Support is going to be a bit less...)
The thing you need to note is that tech salaries have not significantly gone up since the dotcom bust.
Housing costs many times what it did in the tech culture areas. $120/hour barely gets you a 1000sqft for housing, if you're lucky. Everything is more expensive.
Not due to economy, just cleaning up (Score:2)
So, tech companies go through cycles where they have to get rid of the trash so to speak. Basically, good tech companies need ppl that actually wo
When they layoff tech workers... (Score:1)
wage (Score:1)