Slashdot Mirror
Techie Pay Approaches All-time High
Stony Stevenson sent in this ITNews story which opens, "Techies were paid nearly record-high hourly wages in the third quarter, according to a new report released Thursday by staffing firm Yoh. Based on data compiled from 75 Yoh field offices and 5,000 technology professionals contracted in short and long-term projects, pay increased an average of more than 5.5 percent for the quarter ended Sept. 30, compared to the same period last year."
This is a link to a news source in Australia. They then link to informationweek.com, who is in the US. But I've never heard of the company who runs the survey they are talking about, so I have no way to know who was surveyed about their wages.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
It's hard to know what conclusions to draw from this sort of thing unless they have a very well thought out metric and collect it consistently from year to year. For instance, the US has been gradually moving away from long-term employment with a regular paycheck and benefits (such as a pension and paid vacation) and towards contracting with fewer benefits and stability. I would certainly expect these contractors to receive more cash per hour, but that isn't the whole picture.
I dunno, I've thought about it a million times, and when it comes down to it our only real skills are memorization, problem domain reduction, patience, discipline, and critical thought ... which boils fairly well down to critical thought. Once I come to that conclusion, I can't help but wonder if I even want to be so rare.
<xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
The other problem with this comparison is that this is only looking at contractor pay, not full-time employee salaries. As full disclosure, I work for a firm that provides IT Staffing as one of its services. Yes, certain in-demand skill sets are getting big bucks. Where I work locally, there have been so many positions posted for various C programmers that we simply can't find anymore, and the ones who will move for a short term or mid-term project are asking and, by and large, getting ridiculous salaries.
But when we do full-time placements, I'm not seeing a big increase. Not only that, but the majority of positions we filled this year were full-time placements.
So I think saying they are at an all-time high needs to be qualified: for certain contractors, which are the jobs where companies like Yoh are most likely to be placing candidates.
Bill
But, if you don't have 5 years recent experience already, you can forget about those area: SAP, Project Management, database administrators.
You're spang-on there. I used to be a hotshot datawarehouse architect billing $100/hour. Then 9/11 hit and I had to take $anyoldjob which did not even involve databases. Now, my database skills are 6 years old, and I haven't a prayer of getting hired for a datawarehouse position. Now, mind you, I had a natural aptitude for relation databases, and went from 0 to eclipsing my peers in less than a year, so obviously, I could learn it again in a matter of months, but that is not what employers want to hear.
So I am still doing $anyoldjob, which is a serious waste of my talent, and doesn't pay much to boot.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
Compared to what? Internationally or nationally? I don't know about the national inflation of the US, but when you compare the USD to other currencies from large markets, I'd say no, it didn't lose 5.5 percent of its value. It lost much more.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Bingo - How do you think that people get experience? The WoW fairy?
Eventually wages will rise to the point that american businesses realize something they should of been thinking about years ago - You need people of all skill levels. Apprentices are necessary.
Heck, I was shocked to see that the USAF is finally acknowledging that - they would ramp up tech school training, give huge bonuses to keep people in(and get them in), then proceed to force people out when they went over their requirements. Result: Fields were unbalanced, with either too many higher ups or too many juniors. Now they're finally accepting that while things might be a little more 'unbalanced' in the short term, plotting further into the future is a good thing. Because then they can adjust course with a tap instead of a sledge.
Businesses need to realize this as well - while you might loose 80% of your apprentices to other jobs, you should keep at least some of them. Provide the right benefits and treat them right, and you might keep over half of those you want - making the program worth it as you collect talent from the beginning.
I don't read AC A human right
Actually... I would say there's three things at play here...
1) We're techies... we like problem solving... especially interesting ones. Keep us fed with interesting problems, and we'll stay for a long time.
2) IT people (as a group), are generally bad at negotiating.
3) A standard fear of change... everyone has it. Especially when it comes to jobs and paychecks (unless they're going up).
And I worked for many years at small companies... working the 60+ hours. About two years ago, I was without a job, and got one at a faceless corporation. It's amazing, my stress level is lower, my pay is higher (by a significant amount), and my hours are generally less. The other IT people who I work with who started by interning for this company don't seem to understand how bad it can be... which amuses me...
Nephilium
Too bad inflation is at 18%, as measured by the increase in the money supply. 10-15% measured by price increases, if you include the stuff the FED likes to leave out, you know, like housing, fuel, college education, health care, unimportant stuff like that which the average techie doesn't spend much of his income on.
Pity party!
Oh, wait... my student loans are locked at 3 and 1/8%, my home mortgage is locked at 6 1/8%, and I don't have any credit card debt. *CHING* Health care is a job benefit, and fuel is about as expensive as it was in the early 80s. *Meh* Imported electronics that, let's face it now, are luxury items cost nominally more because of the currency shift, but not proportionately because, let's fact it again, who else are the electronics companies going to get to buy their product in the same volume for more. *boo*
About the only thing I can complain about it that my investments are probably losing real value. Since my investments are about 1/4 of the size of my debt at this stage in my life, I'm thinking net positive.
in Hong Kong technician or so-called engineer's wages always like diving ... LOW! Today's the "management" got highest pay whatever their ability is, they can mess up a company, walk away a few weeks, and get a job elsewhere doing the same things again and again....I saw quite a number of US and Japan "engineer" did their projects like a mess ... amazing LOW quality! I wonder WHERE the guys who taught us these valuable knowledge and experience
It should be clear if you put the above clues together: us slipshod US techies are training for management.
Table-ized A.I.
Maybe in Australia techs are well paid. I don't think they are here in the US.
I make less than I did 10 years ago and my cost of living is at least twice as much and the skill and experience required is far far more than what was required 10 years ago. My experience is that most companies these days are rather cheap when it comes to paying their geeks. I didn't even go for the high paying job offers I had back then - if I had, then I would have been making 6 or 7 times what I'm making now. To many wannabes came into the market and watered down the pay rate and made it harder to prove your skill as compared to the average jerk who got a degree but has little personal interest in geekdom. They can do what they were trained for but they don't have large amounts of extra knowledge that makes them exceptional.
I think geeks need to be more organized. Not as a union but as a trade organization of some kind. Not everyone can become a doctor or a lawyer - they have to pass certain exams and have a certain amount of real world experience. Certifications help but they are often more a test of test taking experience than at real world skills. We need something more organized and rigid. Also I think taking the exams should be affordable enough to be accessible to anyone while passing the exam should be hard enough to weed out the posers. Exams should focus on more than one area. It's not enough to be a network admin or a programmer - real geeks are network admins and programmers and system admins and much more. It should be a test to prove who is really up to the title of being a geek. It should cover history, theory, and practical skills on all levels.
At what price learning? At what cost wisdom? The price is a man's peace of mind, and the cost is his life.
Funny, so many people want to be self-employed. I quit my full-time job in 1999 and went full-time consulting at $50/hr. I'm now at $125/hr. And I don't have to work 40/hours a week, let alone 60/hours a week with no overtime pay. And when a project is done, I get a brand new interesting challenge.
Dedicate my life to a company that isn't going to care about you when push comes to shove? No thanks. I'll just keep on billing $125/hour and working less than 40 hours a week on average, pay for my own health care, write a check each quarter for taxes to the government... but most importantly, own my own life. Thank you very much.
** Posted as A.C. because I don't want to publicize my consulting rate in a forum such as this where it will inevitably be mocked for being too low (there's always someone that earns more) or flamed as bragging (there's always someone that earns less).
This guy has managers that has managers and somewhere high up, someone has decided that training unproven talent is not cost-effective. It is kind of a tragedy of the commons problem. Engineering talent is a resource that every IT company must share, just taking from the talent pool is most cost-effective for each individual company, but means that the pool will dry up. Training talent is not a smart strategy because, as the GP said, no company should expect the trainee to remain in the company.
The corporations themselves choose that way. They erased the concept of loyalty between empolyee and employer. Loyalty is for suckers when everyone at any time can be fired for what ever reason. If the corporations want to maximize their profit, then the employees will do likewise, jumping ship at the first opportunity. It is a situation that is optimal for each individually, but sucks at the whole.
Football Odds
Insightful my ass. I used to work for the electric company, and then was a customer for them five years later. According to this AC, my electric bill should have been around 55% higher after 5 years, but my bill was strangely about the same (maybe up to 20% higher - maybe). Claiming that what China does is an indicator for the dollar is ridiculous considering the way they treat their own currency. When they let the value of the yuan fluctuate with the market, then you can use them as an indicator.
And then you start rambling about grain. I remember a couple years back that there was a grain scare, where they said the price was going to skyrocket and it never did. As for paying what food costs, I'm all for it, I would rather pay at the grocery store for my food than pay through my taxes to get cheaper food from our farmers and to also pay them to leave land fallow.
I also love the number of links you've put in your article and the complete lack of references. You read like someone saying that they've found a way to harvest free energy, or that you've disproved the theory of relativity - you throw out some terminology, make some up, confuse the hell out of people and then come to a conclusion.
to a service economy in the 80's (and now import everything).
-and then all those jobs were outsourced in the 90's.
and if you don't think we're poorer - don't take my word for it - when you index mean salary against inflation
(and this is without !energy! & !food!) - you see a decrease in wage rate. And that my friend, is an economic *fact*.
and incidentally a 5.5% raise, means 5.5% of *fiat* money. it means I have 5.5% more paper in my pocket - how much
paper is out in the market (or in this case ledger entries) {which have *nothing* to do with import/export), is the
real question -- and I'ld be willing to bet that more effective money has been introduced in the market through
shoddy loans, then that 5.5% increase pay indicates should exist.
Lastly, it was raised, 5.5% since what? 2006? come on now. compare it 2000 or 99 and then I might be impressed.
And give me a total number of people employed so I can judge relative wealth (e.g. area underneath the histogram)
Just last week they released a study that indicates that the "poor" in the US today have a higher standard of living then the "poor" in the US in the early '70s. By way of anecdotal evidence, I grew up the youngest in a large family. Today, I have a good friend who has a large family. My friend's career track resembles that of my father, his wife's career resembles that of my mother. His family is significantly better off than my family was when I was growing up.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
It's a fact that M3 is no longer published by the Fed. They claim it is "no longer useful" or something ridiculous like that, but the timing is rather suspicious - it's well known that the dollar has been massively inflated to pay for the war in Iraq (just look at the Federal budget deficit). The AC doesn't provide references it's true, but just Google "fed m3" to get the gory details. Then compare the reconstructed M3 for the US to other countries like UK or Switzerland. You'll find that the less allied to the US they are, in general, the more slowly their money supply increases. It's a bad trend.
You make assumptions here -- that there should be government-run public schooling and government-run social security. I disagree with both of those.
It's true that poor people need schooling too, but churches have, historically, provided a measure of free education. And if you complain about the religious teaching that goes with it, nothing says an atheists' group, or a charity with no religious alignment at all, can't run similar schools. And, by relying on voluntary donations, they'll be more efficiently run than the government -- people will support some other charity if this one wastes their donations.
And support for old people? What ever happened to their children supporting them?! Well, I guess that kinda went out of style when the government started doing it, but that's how it used to work. (And probably how it'll work again, since children aren't being born fast enough to support the Ponzi scheme called social security.) For the people who don't have children, nieces/nephews, or the like, again, private charity works.
And, if private charity is not considered a sufficient guarantee in either of these cases, and you feel that government must give people a hand who fall through the cracks, it plainly should be the least attractive option, to ensure that people turn to other sources first.No, it will steer them towards taking the easy way out and taking the shit you are handing them.
If you want them to see options as being, in order of preference:
then you've got to make that same list in order of easiness. They will _always_ take the easy way out. So you make working easier, by giving them wages for it. You make stealing harder by giving them jail time for it. And you jolly well better make riding the hand-out train more trouble than it's worth for those who can get a job. If not, your society winds up losing twice: you lose the productivity of those taking hand-outs, and you lose the hand-outs. Your society would be better off shooting people in such situations, as bullets are comparatively cheap. But the best way of all: by making the "free" ride uncomfortable, and the outlaw track completely unbearable, you can force all rational people to be as productive as possible.