Slashdot Mirror


IT (And Other) Salaries On The Rise In The U.S.

pertinax18 writes "CNN Money is reporting that salaries for most college grads are on the rise once again. Especially interesting to collegiate (and other) /. readers may be the 4.1% increase in pay for CS grads, and 10.7% increases in pay for others in the field. From the article: 'If those numbers sound enticing, it's probably because computer science graduates are long overdue for a pay increase. "They haven't seen an increase since 2001 and this is the first year, in all four reports, that they showed an increase," Koncz says.' Are things finally starting to look up for us?"

36 of 780 comments (clear)

  1. Bush's Fault by ari_j · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Why is it Bush's fault when salaries go down, but a magical coincidence when they go up?

    1. Re:Bush's Fault by ari_j · · Score: 4, Insightful

      So you're saying that things were not on the decline until spring, 2001? Seems to me that 2000 wasn't all that hot, either. Explain how you blame that on Bush.

    2. Re:Bush's Fault by ari_j · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So why was the economy under Clinton such a praiseworthy thing, but at the same levels under Bush it's something to vote against him for?

    3. Re:Bush's Fault by TrentL · · Score: 4, Interesting

      First, I don't actually hold Bush responsible for the economy. BUT, if Bush is going to claim that $500 billion deficits are a neccesary evil for fighting an economic slow down, I'm going to demand results. This economy is NOT worth what we've paid for it in long-term debt. More competent politicians (such as Robert Rubin) could have gotten much more "bang for the buck" with the money Bush has squandered.

    4. Re:Bush's Fault by randall_burns · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It isn't just inflation-you need to look at where the jobs are. We've seen a decline in IT jobs the last few years-and much of that decline is in the places with the lower cost of living--so all these figures mean is that newer grads are getting jobs in places like California with a high cost of living.

    5. Re:Bush's Fault by Omega1045 · · Score: 4, Insightful
      If I recall it was just two (2) months into Bush's presidency that most economists came out and called it a recession. I don't care if you are Satan himself, you cannot kill the economy in two months.

      I am not a Bush fanboy, but I would also like to point out that it is interesting that all the Enron, etc, crap is pointed at Bush when it all occured during the Clinton administration under the nose of Reno.

      --

      Great ideas often receive violent opposition from mediocre minds. - Albert Einstein

    6. Re:Bush's Fault by OwnedByTwoCats · · Score: 4, Insightful
      The more likely case is that the economy was already fragile and on course to cracking regardless if Bush or Gore had been president.

      That is an adequate explanation for 2001. But it fails to explain that Bush promised hundreds of thousands of new jobs every month if his tax cut was passed, and it was passed, and the jobs just haven't materialized.

      Most economists believe that other choices, like modest tax cuts targeting the middle class along with extending unemployment insurance, would have cost the treasury far less, and done far more to get the economy moving again.
    7. Re:Bush's Fault by Odin's+Raven · · Score: 4, Informative
      Why is it Bush's fault when salaries go down, but a magical coincidence when they go up?

      As people are fond of saying: "You must be new here..." (Not just to /., but to the planet Earth. ;-)

      It's for the same reason that leaders (in the U.S.A., and in other countries, and even the PHB down the hall from your cube) will claim credit for economic upturns during their reign, while claiming that any and all economic downturns were caused by:

      • magical coincidence
      • market forces (see "magical coincidence")
      • consumer uncertainty (see "magical coincidence")
      • the failed policies of a predecessor from an opposing political party
      • evil pixies (see both "magical coincidence" and "opposing party")
      • terrorists (see "opposing party")

      Leaders in power like to claim credit for good things, and avoid responsibility for bad things. Opponents of leaders in power like to assign blame for bad things, and claim responsibility for good things (or at least deny that the leader may have had a role in the good things).

      Welcome to the world of carbon-based Terran life forms. For further study, may I recommend reading a long-running classic field study of this planet's society, conducted by the noted sociologist, Scott Adams. While the studies focus primarily on interactions within hierarchical corporate institutions, you may find them illustrative as you attempt to understand the political systems you encounter on your survey of our planet.

      Live long and prosper, or whatever the appropriate greeting is on your homeworld.

      --
      A marriage is always made up of two people who are prepared to swear that only the other one snores.
  2. What a Crock by HackHackBoom · · Score: 5, Informative

    Show me places in the industry or people who have received raises. Not to sound bitter, but I know not a single person in my circle of friends and business associates who've said they're getting raises.

    It's more about cuts and firings lately :(

    --


    "It's not stealing if you don't get caught!"

    1. Re:What a Crock by geoffspear · · Score: 4, Insightful
      You don't need to give anyone a raise to have a higher average salary. You just lay off all of the lower-paid employees, replacing them with contracted offshore labor, and let your higher-paid managers keep their jobs.

      It's just like lowering the unemployment rate by waiting for people to give up looking for jobs instead of actually creating new jobs. Lying with statistics is fun!

      --
      Don't blame me; I'm never given mod points.
  3. Oh great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now President Bush is submitting stories to Slashdot!

  4. How come I aint not get no raise? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Im went to ITT school for HTML intraweb programming and Im stil only get 5.45 per hour?!?

  5. one omission by rritterson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The numbers look great on a cursory glance, but they are missing one thing important: They don't list what percentage of graduates were able to find a job within x months of graduation.

    So sure, maybe the ones that were hired are making more, but if they are only hiring a small percentage of grads, you'd expect them to make more, wouldn't you? (As they would be more qualified than the average grad)

    --
    -Ryan
    AUWYHSTOT (Acronyms are Useless When You Have to Spell Them Out Too)
    1. Re:one omission by ari_j · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Don't forget about inflation. Even if you find a job that pays 4.1% more than it would have a year go, you're still taking a hit if inflation is over 4.1%.

    2. Re:one omission by Randolpho · · Score: 4, Informative

      w3rd.

      Average salaries may be on the increase, but total jobs in the IT field are not. It's getting *more* difficult to find a job; the glut of IT folks out there (and it *is* a glut) means employers can sit on their haunches while waiting for that "perfect candidate" who has exactly 3 years as an Oracle DBA and 5+ years experience with ADO.NET. (Yes, I've seen job offers exactly like that -- has ADO.NET even been *around* for 5 years?).

      There are *ZERO* entry level jobs on the market at the moment. So the rest of us who just got out of college, even if we racked up experience with internships or other on-the-side jobs, are screwed unless we can lie convincingly in our interviews. If we can even *get* an interview, that is.

      --
      "Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised."
      -Marilyn Manson
    3. Re:one omission by DAldredge · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, it isn't. That number is as much BS as enron's books. It doesn't include food and energy (gas, natural gas, fuel oil, petro, or electricty) in its figures.

      What has went up the most in the past 12-24 months? Food (Milk and anything made with milk) and Energy prices.

      Funny how it excludes the products that almost everyone has to buy from its calculations, isn't it?

  6. Are they really? by Nos. · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder if this isn't a side effect of a lot of the outsourcing to India that's happening. If a lot of the lower paid jobs (tech support and the like) are outsourced, what's left behind are the higher paying jobs which results in a higer average.

    1. Re:Are they really? by DAldredge · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You forget that not every one can do the high tech work. You also forget that they can vote.

      If it gets bad enought they will just vote them a much larger portion of your check.

  7. A Year ago... by JaffaKREE · · Score: 5, Informative

    A year ago, getting an IT job was hard as hell. Countless resumes, postings and searchings EVENTUALLY netted me a DBA position.

    In the last few months, I've started getting emails randomly from recruiters who've seen my resumes posted. I haven't been looking, haven't updated it. One of the opportunities struck me, so I took it. No problems. I've been offered more jobs in the past month - without looking for anything - than I could even get close to a year ago.

  8. I'm confused by lucabrasi999 · · Score: 4, Funny

    What does salary increase mean?

  9. CS != IT by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    While there is certainly crossover, your typical IT employee is/was not a CS major. CS is programming and software engineering, IT is servers and networks, and yes, occasionally writing some code. Programmers' salaries rising doesn't mean shit to most of us IT employees.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  10. Theory by webword · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Low wage jobs have been outsourced from the U.S. therefore the remaining jobs in U.S. drive higher mean wages, even for college graduates.

  11. trimming off the bottom by crowdozer · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder how much of this is due to outsourcing. Get rid of a bunch of the lower-than-average wages from the equation and you will get a perceived increase in average, which could then be misconstrued as a good thing. For example... 30K 40K 50K 60K = average of 45K Now outsource the jobs of the 30K and 40K guys so they go work at McDs and you have... 50K 60K = average of 55K Oooh were all making 10K more. WRONG.

  12. Re:And history drops almost 5% by stratjakt · · Score: 5, Funny

    What job, exactly, does a history major apply for, other than history teacher or museum curator?

    I hardly ever have an experience at work where I'm working on a design document or expense report or something, and all of a sudden it's like "OH SHIT! I'm gonna miss the deadline! When did Hannibal cross the Alps!?"

    --
    I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
  13. Perhaps, by Teclis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If IT Jobs are really earning more money than there must be a few things going on. Firstly, The industry may be seeing increased profits, Secondly, There may be increased demand for IT Professionals. Thirdly, There may be a decreased supply of IT Professionals.

    The salary paid to those working is not just something that is nice to have high. It is calculated from the state of the system. If the pay is bad then do something about it. Sometimes the only thing you can do is find a different job as there are too many workers in the industry.

    Also, the industry can regulate this more if IT people want more money. Take the Medical Profession for example. They place a limit on the number of accepted students every year. If CS education did this as well, then the decreased supply (I don't think the demand is going anywhere) will force employers to pay the workers more money. On the reverse side, not as many people would have jobs. This is almost like the question on Socialism vs. Capitalism. If you want everyone to be working and be marginally content, then don't expect alot of money. Judging from this article, that is not what people want but infact the Capitalistic prespective in that they want more money.

    --
    Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what's right. --Isaac Asimov
  14. I call shenanigans... by twiggy · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Sorry, but this is not as good a bit of news as it looks...

    Unemployment in the IT sector is up (due to both outsourcing AND the struggling economy), so who cares if the people with jobs are getting a bit more money?

    Furthermore, this article is talking specifically about fresh out of college newhires - something the person who posted this seems to avoid clarifying altogether.

    Guess what? They're getting these jobs and their first increase since 2001 (CS graduates) because the older folks who were making $60k and are now unemployed are gone - a net savings of $11k.

    Bottom line: It's still brutally difficult to find a decent computer science / IT job right now, and the people in them aren't getting huge raises. It's also important to note that there's complaints heard 'round the country from IT and CS folks about the fact that they're working ridiculous numbers of hours.

    The insane high salaries of the tech boom, however unjustified they seemed at the time, were actually justifiable because these fresh out of college kids were often dumping 60-80 hours per week into their job. (Note that I agree that the rest of the spending during the tech boom, however, was just as stupid as everyone says it was).

    --
    http://www.babysmasher.com
    http://www.openingbands.com
    1. Re:I call shenanigans... by enjo13 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Unemployment in the IT sector is up (due to both outsourcing AND the struggling economy), so who cares if the people with jobs are getting a bit more money?

      Speaking as someone with a job in IT.. I do.

      Thanks.

      --
      Turn s60 photos into awesome videos with mScrapbook for all S60 3rd edition phones!
  15. I'll tell you why by paranode · · Score: 5, Funny

    He eats babies, simple as that.

  16. New graduates don't have a clue... by Darlok · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As a partner in a small tech consulting business, I can state without reservation, "New CS Graduates don't have a clue what they're worth." The survey is almost certainly taken from a handful of large, national employers with fixed entry-level employement packages.

    The truth is that most CS graduates go into smaller businesses. And when they walk in my front door, they have no clue what they should be making. I've had B-students who held a student job doing data entry for their University walk in the door and tell me they're "willing" to work for $75,000 a year, to be a code monkey after graduation. I've also had graduate students with quite a bit of experience walk in and tell me they're expecting $36-40k.

    Depending on how many /. articles they read over the last 5 years, you either end up with new grads with no experience, who think they're the second coming, or experienced folks who had a bad co-op or were laid off rapidly from their first job, who walk in demoralized, and are willing to work for peanuts.

    As far as I'm concerned, the question of "What's a Degree Worth" is bunk. 90% of a new grad's worth has little to do with their academic program, and everything to do with their attitude, their experiences, and their fitness for the job. There's MIT grads that I wouldn't hire if they were the last non-Indian programmers on the planet.

    A degree is worth nothing. The grad's attiude and ability to produce is what sets their salary. Lacking that, they're either unemployed 6 months later, or getting bonuses and raises because the company wants to encourage loyalty and keep them around for a long time. The diploma on your wall has very little to do with that.

    --
    Notice: Your mouse has been moved. Windows will now restart so this change can take effect.
    1. Re:New graduates don't have a clue... by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      getting bonuses and raises because the company wants to encourage loyalty and keep them around for a long time.

      where the hell do you work??? What you speak of flies in the face of what corperate policy is.

      Do more and bust your arse = very little thanks and only more work with a "sorry no money available for raises" while we hear about the CTO getting a 1.2M bonus.

      I would kill to work for a company that encourages hard work and rewards for a job well done.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  17. Re:Got to be an average. by ReverendHoss · · Score: 4, Informative

    Agreed, averages may be useful to spot trends, but never compare your actual salary to them.

    Programmers in NYC get 80K per year just so they can keep up with the increased housing, cost of living, etc. Programmers in the Midwest get 35K. Same quality of life, just different numbers. Take a look at these numbers to make a comparison by region.

    Comes from employers/tax returns (I believe), so will probably be more accurate than surveys which have voluntary participation.

  18. Re:Got to be an average. by rk · · Score: 4, Funny

    In related news: A statistician from the local college drowned today in a lake with an average depth of 7 inches.

  19. You can't blame stuff like this on ANY president. by FlimFlamboyant · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Presidents don't create or destroy jobs. They don't raise or lower wages. At best, what they can do is create circumstances that make it possible or impossible for CORPORATIONS to do these things.

    You know what caused the tech market crash? Clinton? Bush? No... YOU did! By "you" I mean every American who pissed their savings away by investing WAY too much money in an empire that (at the time) had almost nothing to offer in terms of REAL product. As a result of all the venture capital flying around, too many .coms were created, hiring way too many people for jobs that the market simply wasn't prepared to sustain for the long term.

    The result? Exactly what SHOULD happen. Companies collapse, people lose their jobs (unfortunately), and the economy (not the president), along with the basic rules of supply and demand, slowly corrects our mistakes.

    --
    But God demonstrates his love for us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us - (Romans 5:8)
  20. Re:You can't blame stuff like this on ANY presiden by leadsling · · Score: 5, Funny

    HOLD ON THERE! Don't let something like economics get in the way of someone's pet theories. Next thing you know, you'll be wanting journalists to have proof for their stories before they're published! (couldn't resist ;>)

  21. Actually, you CAN kill the economy in 2 months. by Magnus+Pym · · Score: 4, Informative

    Are you in the telecomm industry? If so, you would have heard of the so-called "CLEC"s (Competive Local Exchange Carriers) that were to compete with the big telecom boys. As soon as Bush was elected, they went out of business... because the smart money knew that Bush would support the incumbent big firms against them... just like he sabotaged the Microsoft antitrust trial. As went the CLECs, so went the telecomm infrastructure startups who were building innovative equipment that the CLECs would have bought, but that the ILECs have no interest in buying, because they have a monopoly anyway.

    It is no accident that the bust coincided with Bush's election. Without Bush, there still would have been a dot-com bust, but other sectors would not have been as badly affected.

    It is also no accident that oil prices, after stagnating for pretty much the entire Clinton years, started skyrocketing after Bush's election. It is his priority to keep gas prices high. For every cent in gas price hikes, the Oil industry makes millions of dollars. And guess which industry forms Bush's personal financial base.

    Magnus.

  22. Re:Bush's Fault, Clinton's Fault, Bush's Fault, Re by Tlosk · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What should we have done? Let the inspectors finish their jobs maybe? Assemble a convincing case and get UN approval before playing cowboy half way across the world for something Hussein *might* do? Afghanistan was one thing, but we also had widespread support, because it was a reasonable and just thing to do, going directly after Bin Laden.

    Iraq was something we never should have undertaken. Life is filled with choosing the lesser of two evils. Invading a sovereign nation and pissing off 90% of the Arab world, torturing people, ignoring basic rights, excluding ourselves from international treaty agreements, this whole mess is going to return to us ten-fold over the next century.