Slashdot Mirror
Post-crash Salary Survey
MrRules writes "It's that time again;
the 2002 salary survey's are out.
This year there's an interesting twist:
SAGE,
SANS and Sun's
BigAdmin site have combined to run the largest global
participation sysadmin salary survey ever done.
What I like is that this is different to those surveys
done by HR departments -- this is real data on how you
spend your time, by sysadmins for sysadmins. It'll be interesting to see how things have changed over the past 18 months."
It would be nice if my company (and my previous company) could afford a Sysadmin... Be happy if you can be in the Sysadmin survey cause every developer I know is in a "Self-admin" shop... where the network has 100 band-aids and nobody can quite remember all of the Root passwords.
At least with sysadmin, I would think the chances of having your job outsourced to India or somewhere else are less, at least some on site presence is still required. With a smaller tech sector, I think a diverse skill set will be mandatory. I myself am a part time admin, part time developer, and am always looking to expand my skill set. Browsing employment ads recently, employers seem to want an ever expanding set of skills and experience. I have BS in CS, and 6 years experience, but I may end up doing some of the (mostly meaningless) certs that HR drones seem to like.
Sure. Then they move all of the machines to India.
We really need your help
http://www.gofundme.com/help-sherry
So, excuse me if my heart doesn't bleed for you.
Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
Sure they do, no doubt about that. But then I'd rather trust a SysAdmin that is unshaven wears a tshirt and short and you can smell from 10 meters away. Because, honestly: who would trust a SysAdmin in a suit that has a nice perfume on?
(Writing this myself at work while wearing a suit... Damn coporate policies..."
Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
Nonsense. If you want to add wealth to the economy and insure that it circulates the most it makes the most sense to add it to the bottom. The wealthiest people are more likely to save a larger portion of their money or to invest it overseas.
You can't give 1 million dollars to the rich and expect all of it to end up in the hands of the less wealthy at some point in time. But it is much safer to assume that if you give 1 million to the poor it will trickle up.
My only political goal is to see to it that no political party achieves its goals.
Take it quietly for now, then remember it when the market picks up again and you get to choose: who to work for, when you want to leave, and how much to charge. >:)
My current plan is to ride this out in my current, moderately stable job where I'm still earning dotcom-boom money, and spend even more time than usual on skilling up.
Now call me paranoid but I've been burned by much more innocent looking sites asking for my e-mail address.
.5 seconds.
No offence, but how exactly is someone knowing your email address getting "burned"? Can we please get a little perspective? You weren't mugged or shot. You weren't targeted by the government because of your beliefs. You weren't even called by those annoying telemarketers. You got some email, that you probably filtered out anyway. Or deleted it in
I hate spam too, but please think outside the monitor every once in a while. This is why people don't treat geeks seriously.
mh
Well, all you Clinton-haters can relax now; our long national nighmare of peace and prosperity is finally over.
You don't generate WEALTH by spending your money on things. You may generate wealth for the company making the widget, but not for yourself.
If you want to generate wealth for yourself, you have to invest and let your money work for you. When you invest, your money doesn't sit in some dark drawer somewhere growing an multiplying; it gets lent out to other companies and people so they can build and buy things. That's where the growth comes from. You don't have to produce anything to stimulate the economy, you just need to induce a flow of money (with your investments).
" I know that chart makes Clinton look good and Bush look really bad, but I'm not quite sure you can assign the blame/credit quite so easily"
OTOH you also can not claim that he had nothing to do with it.
GW for example created a brand new dept which ended up being one of the largest departments in history. In other words he grew the size of the federal govt more then anybody else in recent history.
He also undertook one of the largest rollbacks in civil rights in history.
He of course also went to war and caused insane amounts of deficit spending.
All under a republican senate and house.
Anybody who says republicans are for a smaller govt or that republicans care about individual liberties may now proceed to eat their own words.
"You will notice that even Clinton's record surplus started declining in 2000, the same time as the economy."
When I was growing up my parents thought me to save money for a rainy day. That's the purpose of surpluses, to build up reserves in case something bad happens.
War is necrophilia.
And boy just about now, people are beginning to wonder why the hell they outsourced. Slowly *very* slowly the penny is dropping with management that cheap != good.
Make no mistake, those that have been biding their time over the past 18-24 months are starting to see market improvements, and are in place to maximize this.
I've seen people that have been made redundant 12 months ago get re-employed by their ex-employers, and other people rewriting huge portions of overseas-outsourced work.
I have a question for the people who are mourning the decline in salaries. Have you considered moving to where the same job would be more profitable?
I ask this question because I am considering it myself. I am a programmer specialized on a platform that is practically dead. (Natural/Adabas, if you're curious.) A search 2 weeks ago on monster.com showed that there were more jobs for this platform available in India than in the rest of the world combined. Here, there were only 8 jobs posted across the nation. (Did I mention that this platform was practically dead?)
Yes, I realize that these Indian jobs are probably just contracted back here to the U.S., but I will apply next week for a passport. When I receive it, I will then begin checking on these Indian jobs. "If you can't beat 'em, join 'em." Ya know? I'm assuming that the relative pay in India will still be better than taking a lower-paid job here in the U.S. on a modern platform. I intend to talk with an Indian programmer soon to get his opinions.
Have other people pushed this option out of their minds? I just wanted to point out that it may still be valid.