Trade Group: US Software Developer Wages Fell 2% Last Year

First time accepted submitter russotto points out the claim of industry group TechAmerican Foundation (reported by Computerworld) that "wages for the software industry are falling, not rising. Wages fell 2% to $99,000 in 2012." Averages are one thing; the article points out though that wages vary vastly within the industry, and that some jobs are harder to fill (thus, better paid) than others. An excerpt: "Victor Janulaitis, CEO of Janco Associates, a research firm that also analyzes IT wage and employment trends, cited a number of reason for the decline in wages for software professionals. First, technology is becoming easier to implement without having an IT professional, he said. Also, the option of turning to outsourcing creates less pressure to increase wages. As the recession continues, companies continue 'to look at productivity and will often look to hire individuals who are lower cost employees,' said Janulaitis. That could include displaced baby boomer workers who have been out of work for some time and 'will take a lower paying job just to get back into the workforce.'"

Comments

crap I need a raise

[Anonymous Coward]

apparently I'm not earning enough

Re:crap I need a raise

[Anonymous Coward]

I think that "varies widely" part might have been code for, "we asked people in the valley."

Sad, but true

[TheRealMindChild]

Also, the option of turning to outsourcing creates less pressure to increase wages

WORKER: I would like to discuss a raise to my salary
BOSS: No, you aren't getting a raise. Hell, you should be HAPPY to get what you are getting. I could get 10 guys from Infosys for what I am paying you!

Re:Sad, but true

[HornWumpus]

Worker was a fool for starting the conversation without an offer in hand.

Then next line should be:

WORKER: Hire those programmers, I quit. Best of luck to you.

Re:Sad, but true

[phantomfive]

If you start the conversation by expressing how happy you are at your current company, you don't even need another offer. Just say, "I've been contacted and I know I can make more, but I'd really like to keep working here." Nevermind that you've only been contacted by recruiters who talk to all of us.......

Re:Sad, but true

[tqk]

... being a racist and an asshole.

I think most people would consider the "and an asshole" there to be redundant.

Re:Sad, but true

[Richard Dick Head]

Haha, depends on where you are at I guess. Maybe you need to move? Or just save some of what my grandfather liked to call "fuck you" money. Enough so that at any time you can tell your boss "fuck you" and you go find another job. Otherwise you'll just get bullied by your boss forever.

Anyway, more on topic, I hear there is a shortage of talent in the Bay Area. Although...since there are only so many LGBT software engineers who are good, software engineers who are good but who don't understand cost-of-living, single and straight software engineers that are good but don't understand that California girls are trained from birth to be cocaine-snorting psychotic leeches who will rob you blind (true story), etc.

Eventually you will see companies discover that they could move to tech hubs in places like Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Missouri, Arkansas, etc...and have far less trouble finding qualified people (although like anywhere else you still have to weed through the dunces) because these are places a normal, non-fucked-up person who is missing some critical piece of their logical reasoning would actually consider living. So some companies will move. And while the average income would decrease every time that happens, the quality of life would increase quite a bit.

You might disagree with me for hating on the Bay Area, but I doubt there is anything anyone could possibly say to change my mind, and there are a ton of people who think the same way :D You just can't live a normal life in a place like that. Otherwise there wouldn't be a shortage there, because I hear the scenery is nice and the weather is great...

Another move is that I'm seeing it is popular to move into consulting (especially baby boomers)....so their entire incomes wouldn't necessarily show up on "salary" averages. A savvy consultant will "pay" himself as little salary as possible to avoid donating good money to the bottomless pit of the IRS.

No, things are on the uptick. The smart engineers are collectively getting smarter. The dumb ones are are getting screwed, but that story hasn't exactly changed in the past decades. There was a small blip in the late 90's where any idiot could put on a software engineer hat and make money, and those same idiots have been camping out in the industry like fat squirrels around an empty bird feeder. Eventually they'll go away. :D

Re:Sad, but true

[HornWumpus]

Might work once, and not really all that well.

If you want a good raise you need to change jobs or be ready to.

Re:Sad, but true

[HornWumpus]

That's more or less what I said. 'Best of luck to you' is the polite way of saying that (less the Jew hate).

Re: Sad, but true

[Anonymous Coward]

That escalated quickly.

Re:Sad, but true

[cranky_chemist]

No, you need to change jobs, period.

According to this site: http://www.westportone.com/candidate/counteroffer.htm :

"According to national surveys of employees that accept counter-offers, 50-80 percent voluntarily leave their employer within six months of accepting the counter-offer because of unkept promises. The majority of the balance of employees that accept counter-offers involuntarily leave their current employers within twelve months of accepting the counter-offer (terminated, fired, laid off, etc.)."

So, basically, if you go to your boss with another offer in hand and accept a counteroffer, he or she is going to screw you over simply because they can. And that's how the big sharks swim in the deep end of the pool. If you want better working conditions and/or more money, change jobs. The only exception is if you work in academia, where you have the protections of tenure.

See also:

http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/outside-voices-careers/2012/03/26/why-you-shouldnt-take-a-counteroffer

http://ask.slashdot.org/story/02/06/13/0615238/is-it-wrong-to-accept-an-employment-counter-offer

Re:Sad, but true

[phantomfive]

I can tell you from experience, it can work really well.

I had one coworker who kept doing it over and over. Kept getting raises. Of course, he was willing to go somewhere else if he needed to, as you mention.

Re:Sad, but true

[HornWumpus]

Your boss was always going to screw you over. His plan didn't change when he was forced to pay you more. They will play some sort of face saving game, give you a new title and claim they are paying you more for the additional responsibility. The end game for you is to take his job outright, then move on to greener pastures.

You certainly can't afford to relax. If you don't more or less have the employer by the short and curlies they wouldn't have counter offered. As long as that doesn't change, nothing has changed.

When you next go looking for a job, your current compensation will be higher and you will have a bigger war chest (unless you spend it all like a moron).

However, if after accepting a counteroffer, they start a new person as your 'understudy', they are already planning on firing you. Some companies are like that, others aren't. If your company is like that then you should truly _extort_ them while you've got them by the balls.

Re:Sad, but true

[PopeRatzo]

Anyway, more on topic, I hear there is a shortage of talent in the Bay Area. Although...since there are only so many LGBT software engineers who are good, software engineers who are good but who don't understand cost-of-living, single and straight software engineers that are good but don't understand that California girls are trained from birth to be cocaine-snorting psychotic leeches who will rob you blind (true story), etc.

Sounds like someone can't get a date.

Re:Sad, but true

[HornWumpus]

California east of the coast range is a more or less normal place and retains access to tech centers in the south bay. West of the coast range is pure granola (fruits, nuts and flakes).

Granting the state is run by and for LA and SF.

Re:Sad, but true

[Anonymous Coward]

WORKER: Fuck you, you greedy greasy Jew piece of shit, go pinch your fucking pennies. Go hire your cheap-ass shit stinking dotheads and burn your shop to the ground, I don't give a fuck. Greedy, greedy disgusting hooknosed fat fucking Jew. Go fuck yourself and die of Tay-Sachs.

That's what I would say.

-- Ethanol-fueled

FTFY

Re:Sad, but true

[catchblue22]

I have an hypothesis:

# of libertarian slashdot posters = k / (average software developer salary)

where k is some real number.

Re:Sad, but true

[AK Marc]

Yeah, I put in my notice one place, and was offered a "promotion" to supervisor. I politely declined the offer. A supervisor is salaried, and the workers make more than the supervisors from overtime and such. Neither job is desirable in a long term. If I'd stayed, I'd have been frustrated in a month, and still looking elsewhere. That, and I went up $10k/yr in the new job, much better than a pay cut.

Re:Sad, but true

[Anonymous Coward]

A few years ago, a coworker in another department accepted an offer from another company in town. He turned in his notice the next day. Lo and behold, they gave him a counter offer. Seems that they really did think his specialty was worth more than they were paying him and it was just the economy limiting what they could do. After a bit of negotiation, he accepted the counter offer and told the other company he wasn't coming to work for them.

Well, three years later he was complaining about how he wasn't getting a pay raise that year like the rest of us. Turns out he hadn't gotten a pay raise since accepting the counter offer. He'd gotten so upset with it that he'd started looking for another job. But guess what? He couldn't even get interviews - especially at the company that he'd turned down (I wonder why...) which had two job postings that looked exactly like his experience. Seems the word had gotten out around town that he couldn't be trusted and other companies were treating him like poison.

Having accepted then changed his mind, he didn't realize what the other company had put into the process. They had spent hours screening candidates, performing phone interviews, calling people in for personal interview, etc. And then when they had offered him a job that he'd accepted, they had needed to call up the other candidates (some of whom were just as qualified) and tell them "thanks, but no thanks, we have someone else". That had left the company in a lurch as well as hurting their reputation with the other people involved - of course they were upset. And the people involved can carry long memories even as they go to new companies, talk to their friends down the street, talk to recruiters, and so on.

I left there over 2 years ago and still keep in touch with some of my former coworkers. Last I heard, this guy was still complaining about no pay raises and no interviews.

Moral of the story: be careful not to burn any bridges, you might need to cross them someday.

Re:Sad, but true

[buddyglass]

Add in a constant factor and I'd buy it.

Re:Sad, but true

[buddyglass]

I suspect it has to do with the attitude that's used when the other offer is presented. You could do this:

I have an offer in hand for %10 more than what you're paying me now. If you can't or won't match it then I'm perfectly happy to go elsewhere. Your move.

Or you could do something like this:

So, I've been offered more money by another employer, but I really like working here and count several members of the team as genuine friends. I would hate to leave you guys in the lurch and really don't want to leave, but this offer is for significantly more than my current compensation and, as you can imagine, that's hard to turn down. My only goal is to be paid "fairly" as defined by the value proposition I present as an employee. With that in mind, while not definitive, this other offer suggests that my value may exceed the level at which I'm currently being compensated. Please understand: I am in no way giving you guys an ultimatum. This is not me "demanding" more money. That said, my family and I have a decision to make, and if you could manage to even partially bridge the gap then the decision would be that much easier to make. Thanks for understanding.

The first is confrontational and communicates that the employee has no real attachment to the job and is truly only interested in the money. He or she will always demand any other offer be matched and will bolt as soon as one isn't.. The second formulation is much more sympathetic. It's probably less likely to get you a full match of the other offer, but it's also less likely to piss off your manager and put you on the fast track to termination.

Re:Sad, but true

[HornWumpus]

The right answer is to ask for a raise as politely as possibly but with the clear message that the current rate isn't cutting it. Don't mention the offer.

If, predictably, they say 'F.U.' (or it's equivalent) then you simply quit and take the new job. The only reason they get any notice at all is to avoid burning the bridge.

Giving the bastards a chance to counter is an act of _loyalty_. Don't do it, they don't deserve it.

Don't even try to out weasel word a weasel. They know good and well that both your statements are equivalent and will react the same to both.

Re:Sad, but true

[HornWumpus]

Let me add one thing that has actually worked for me. Before going to 'ask' for a raise mention to the office snitch that you have a better offer. Only works if the office snitch isn't generally known.

That way they think they are outsmarting you by paying you more.

Re:Sad, but true

[Anonymous Coward]

And be sure to leave on as good terms as possible, so when they have to hire a contractor to help fix the mess their cheap labor caused, they'll be willing to contract with you (and at double what you were making before, which will by that point seem like a bargin to them).

Re:Sad, but true

[buddyglass]

Don't know what to tell you except to say that I don't view my manager as a "bastard", nor do I think those two statements of mine would be received identically. That's not to say there isn't some merit to your suggestion that the offer never be mentioned. Even when you're polite about it, mentioning that you've already interviewed somewhere else and gotten an offer suggests you were already pretty unhappy where you are, or else you wouldn't have taken the time to interview somewhere else. In retrospect I probably wouldn't mention the other offer. I'd say something like, "I've taken some time to survey the job market, and it really seems as if someone with my qualifications is viewed as more valuable than my current compensation would suggest. Hopefully we can both agree that employees of {insert company name} should be compensated 'fairly' given the current market value of their labor, right?"

Re:Sad, but true

[Anonymous Coward]

Another strategy that you might try is to increase the value of your current salary. What do I mean by this? Well, you can start by putting in somewhat less effort at your current job while preparing for and looking for a better one. Your current employer isn't going to give you a good or bad recommendation either way. If you were good then they will be sore about losing you and even if you weren't they still won't say anything, other than to confirm your dates of employment, because there's really nothing in it for them. Nobody is going to pay them anything for giving you a good recommendation and by giving you a bad recommendation they risk a lawsuit and all for no reward. A good company will take time to review performance and give regular raises to good and loyal staff. If your company isn't already doing this then you have little to lose by trying the strategy described above, especially if you're good enough to find work elsewhere and have savings built up to bridge a period of unemployment. Most companies are using you without regard to your career or advancement anyway so you might as well find a way to use them as a stepping stone on to something better. Companies care about their stock price, not you, so it's best to look out for yourself because if you don't who else will?

Re:Sad, but true

[Grishnakh]

If you don't more or less have the employer by the short and curlies they wouldn't have counter offered.

If you're a skilled employees, chances are you do have the employer "by the short and curlies", in a way: they have a schedule they're working towards, and if one employee up and leaves, that's going to screw up their schedule, and make the boss look bad. They don't have extra employees sitting around ready to take your place at a moment's notice (and most likely they're chronically "understaffed" anyway), and there's little chance they're going to find someone qualified within 2 weeks (assuming you give them that much time, rather than just walking out; they might also have a dumb policy of kicking you out as soon as you resign).

So, it's entirely to their advantage to go ahead and give you a raise to keep you around for a little while longer, until they can find your replacement. Then they'll get rid of you, when it's convenient for them.

This is why you should never accept a counteroffer. If it were a good company, they would have given you a raise already. The sad truth is, you can't stay at any company too long, because (with rare exceptions) they'll always keep your salary at whatever it was when you first joined, plus perhaps some very meager inflationary raises. Within a few years, you'll always find that you can make more money by jumping over to a different company and doing the same job.

Re:Sad, but true

[Grishnakh]

That guy probably needs to move to a different city. That's the only way to break that cycle.

But yes, this is a good illustration about why you should always avoid changing your mind after formally accepting an offer.

Re:Sad, but true

[mysidia]

Having accepted then changed his mind, he didn't realize what the other company had put into the process. They had spent hours screening candidates, performing phone interviews, calling people in for personal interview, etc. And then when they had offered him a job that he'd accepted, they had needed to call up the other candidates

If you're going to be seeking a counteroffer, don't lie and accept the offer, until you are finally able to commit to it.

You better inform the prospective employer of your actual intentions

Re:Sad, but true

[Anonymous Coward]

This is why you demand a revised contract within a week or you accept the offer. You can't just accept a verbal counter-offer, that's crazy.

Re:Sad, but true

[mysidia]

Don't know what to tell you except to say that I don't view my manager as a "bastard", nor do I think those two statements of mine would be received identically.

That makes sense... it's not your manager's job to be "the bastard"; its to manage appropriately.

Now your manager's manager may order your manager to do something that is adverse to you; regardless of how nicely you have handled the situation with your manager.

Your manager might not be able to approve the raise, without in essence the counteroffer; your manager's manager when informed of this, may order that your manager start going about the process to replace their person who has done this.

Re:Sad, but true

[buddyglass]

Not saying that's not true for some folks, but it isn't for me. Small startup, around 20 employees, maybe 8 of them technical. My "manager" is basically the CTO. That said, I spent five years at IBM so I'm familiar with the other side of the coin. Even at those types of places, though, your first-line manager typically has some discretion w.r.t. raises. If I had another offer in hand from a company whose work environment, benefits, stability, etc. where roughly comparable to my current situation but who was willing to pay me more then I'd probably just give my two weeks notice and call it a day. At that point, even if my employer were to offer to match, what would be my motivation to accept?

Re:Sad, but true

[HornWumpus]

There might be individuals who aren't bastards. But when they are in a group they are 'the bastards'.

A group of Crows is called a murder, a group of managers is called 'the bastards'. It's just a definition thing.

Re:Sad, but true

[HornWumpus]

As I said 'truly _extort_ them'. Surely there is a rate that would make you accept their work if only for 1 more day.

Re:Sad, but true

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd actually say the "and an" was the redundant bit

Re:Sad, but true

[Runaway1956]

WORKER: I would like to discuss a raise to my salary
BOSS: Hell, boy, didn't you see that damned bus sitting in the parking lot when you came in? You and I are both going to be looking for work in two to four weeks. Go look in the conference room, and see our replacements.

Re:Sad, but true

[Loki_1929]

Works well right up until the economy takes a dive. Then you're not only the last man in (i.e. first man out), you're also so overpriced that nobody will touch you. Meanwhile, the 'chump' down the street who found himself a decent place to work and stayed there, pressing for better wages along the way, is the last guy out the door and is making a lot more than you are when you're standing in the unemployment line. I have a cousin who thought all the job hopping would be great and it was ... for a while. Sure he got that super high salary, got to live in the ritzy area with the nice car, killer stereo, and huge TV. Then the 90s' tech bubble burst and he spent the next ten years (yes, TEN years) looking for steady work in his field.

You all seem to sign up to bad jobs at bad companies. Rather than hopping around for extra cash now, why not do some research on prospective jobs, find the best of the best, get in there, and stay?

With the attitudes expressed here about "extorting" and otherwise screwing over the employer intentionally, it's no wonder they treat you like dirt. With what I've seen written here, sounds like a lot of the posters here deserve it.

Re:Sad, but true

[Loki_1929]

No wonder employers treat you like dirt.

Re:Sad, but true

[Anonymous Coward]

I did that, except it went more like this:

WORKER: I have been busting my butt, I deserve an increase.
BOSS: Yes. You have been adequately performing your duties. Here's an extra $.25/hr.
WORKER: Fine. Let me buy you coffee. (mental note to look for new job)
BOSS: BTW we need you to put in overtime on a poorly-planned project that's slipping.
WORKER: How much is the overtime pay?
BOSS: You get no overtime pay, you're salaried.
WORKER: Then I'd prefer not to work overtime.
BOSS: Overtime is mandatory.
WORKER: Fine. I quit.
(...5 unemployed months later...)
WORKER: Can I have my old job back?
BOSS: Ha! We hired a contractor to replace you. We pay him more than we paid you, and he gets paid overtime but no benefits. We miss you, though.

Re:Sad, but true

[Anonymous Coward]

Even better is....
If you want a salary raise, look for an other job where you will receive what you want and change, doing this you still can go back one day for a better wage. Unfortunately today we have quite more people in IT than jobs and also there is many bad people in the area that are very good in talking and nothing else, then any employee that had people like this (and it's not hard to this happen ) will not want to pay more due bad experience and many options at cheap price.
Before work on IT was nearly granted a job but not now. However it's good because in 2 or 3 years the amount of people coming to IT will be quite less and many those good with speak willl leave the area. Then I hope at least we'll have more and better opportunities.

Re:Sad, but true

[Anonymous Coward]

And then when they had offered him a job that he'd accepted, they had needed to call up the other candidates (some of whom were just as qualified) and tell them "thanks, but no thanks, we have someone else"

Bullshit detected. Nobody does this.

Re:Sad, but true

[ediron2]

It happens. It even gets screwed up: a colleague currently has a rejection letter in hand and yet the university chair, when asked, said "you got a WHAT!?... no, I will admit that we've got an offer out to someone else, but it hasn't been accepted yet and the provost is still negotiating with that person."

I've gotten rejection letters, then phone calls when positions don't pan out.

And a nonprofit that a family member serves on the board of currently has yet another similar dilemma: they narrowed to a candidate 2000 miles away, took a long time doing that, and the negotiations with the candidate aren't going well. But their 2nd-thru-5th choices all have moved on. They took long enough for a low-paying job that the pool has drained itself.

Who knew there were so many ways to screw the pooch while hiring people...

Re:Sad, but true

[HornWumpus]

My _clients_ treat my like gold. Because I don't let them treat me like dirt, I deliver consistently and I don't bullshit them.

I'm decades past having a full-time employer.

Re:Sad, but true

[Grishnakh]

There are no "good" companies out there; that's the thing you don't seem to understand. There aren't any companies which are going to give you a generous raise each year (at least enough to match what you'd make at another job elsewhere, i.e., keeping up with the "market rate"); that's just not the way companies work any more. Companies treat workers like dirt because they're shortsighted, and because a fair number of employees (like you, it seems) put up with it because they're afraid of losing their jobs, and are willing to work 60-hour weeks for years on end just so they can be seen as "loyal", even though company management doesn't give a shit and will sack you as soon as it helps them make this quarter's financials look better.

A killer stereo and huge TV don't cost anything, BTW. You can get a huge TV now for under $1000; to someone making 6 figures, that's really not a lot of money. Nice stereos cost quite a bit less than that these days. And it's not like you're going to buy a new one of these every year. If you want to point at things which Americans usually waste a lot of money on, it's 1) car (with giant car payments), 2) cable/satellite TV (worse if you get the stupid sports packages), 3) alcohol (not really expensive from a store, but at bars and restaurants it's insanely overpriced). Living in a "ritzy" area is not a waste of money, because the alternative is living in a ghetto and getting shot at or robbed on a regular basis. Thanks to the housing boom, a decent house still costs $250k-500k in many cities, even after the housing bust (prices went down, but not that much) (yes, decent houses are much cheaper in other places, but these are generally non-tech cities where Slashdotters are not going to have an abundance of jobs to choose from, and consequently salaries are far, far less, even less than half as much).

As for your cousin, what was his field and his specialty, and where did he live? He was doing something seriously wrong if it took him 10 years to find steady work again. Was he one of those people who became a "web developer" in the dot-com days, with no degree or credentials whatsoever? If so, well no wonder he couldn't find any work after the bubble popped. People with degrees and real credentials and experience haven't had that problem. Moreover, was he one of those people who absolutely refused to move from whatever little city they (and their extended family) have lived in their whole lives? That's a career-killer too. You can't be a professional and be unwilling to move to where the work is, and do well. If you're dead-set on living in a certain place, then you need to forgo education altogether, and just get a job out of high school doing something that's in high demand in your local area (like working as a grocery cashier for minimum wage), or perhaps get an education in something that there's plenty of jobs in your area for (like medical technicians; every little city has several hospitals and lots of medical clinics). Don't bother getting a college degree if you don't want to move to where the work is.

Anyway, sorry about the asides, but the point is, if you have a good education and experience in the software field, and you're willing to move to where the work is, there's plenty of jobs open for software developers, regardless of the economy. I got laid off in 2009 when the economy sucked (along with my entire team; company decided to toss out the whole department because it didn't think its profit margin was high enough, even though it had customers lined up with guaranteed high volumes for years), and I had another job in a month at a 20% increase in salary. Combined with the 4-month-equivalent severance package, it was a pretty sweet deal. And I'm no rock-star performer either. All that stuff you read about high unemployment and no jobs doesn't apply to software people.

Re:Sad, but true

[Anonymous Coward]

What a joke. Couldn't get a job after turning one down? Where does he live?

Look, just because someone offers you a job doesn't mean you have to take (regardless of any counter offer). But I know many programmers who do. Get your offer, think about it. If you decide you don't want it, well no hard feelings, it's just business.

Re:Sad, but true

[Loki_1929]

You're just not correct. I've worked for good companies that give good raises based on the merit of the individual and protected employees when times were tough. Are they perfect and incredibly generous all the time for everyone? Of course not; but it doesn't have to be for the company to be a good company. I'm not putting up with anything; I'm getting good annual raises, praise for my work from multiple levels of management, and a clear advancement path. I live where I want right now and with some more time in where I currently am, I could potentially move just about anywhere.

There are good companies. Step one is finding them. Step two is getting a job with them. Step three is working hard (not killing yourself or blowing through 60 hours a week, just doing the job) and showing quality work. Step four is sticking around long enough to see the benefits and payoffs of being there. There's no shortage of bad companies too, and it seems like you've found some, but it does not mean that's all there is. Want to get an idea of whether it's any good there? Next time you're considering a new job, talk to some of the people you'd be working with. Specifically, look for people in their late 20s, early 30s and ask them how long they've been working there. People in their 20s change jobs these days like race car drivers change gear. Find a company with a bunch of 28 and 30 year olds who've been there 6, 7, 8 years and you can bet they're doing something right.

And in other news...

[jacobsm]

CEO wages only went up 3.6%.

Of course their wage base is slightly higher than us mere mortals.

Re:And in other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course, the colleges have been turning out software drones by the thousands. Some percentage of them have to be good. When supply of competent enough programmers goes up past a certain point, wages are obviously going to come down. Simple High School economics of Supply and Demand.

Good managers are very rare. You can't train them. Colleges can't produce them. None of you will ever be them. CEO's who perform are very rare. The ones who are just good at the bureaucracy games are of course garbage, but still, most of them are worth the money because they can generate share holder wealth. No management talent, you get Detroit.

Re:And in other news...

[ehiris]

"Of course, the colleges have been turning out software drones by the thousands"

lol. That's like saying that Van Gogh was a "paint and canvas drone". Remember, just because an institution teaches a skill, the skill can be applied creatively or not.

Most "high tech" software I see these days is unimaginative and based on pointless corporate executive drone direction (ITIL, ...) It's written often in India by people with low creative angst and inability to tell their supervisors that they are full of shit.

Some of the best software I see these days comes from Israel. In the US people are mostly busy band-aiding low quality code that comes from "low cost" regions.

Unfortunately the truth over the past few years has been that the majority of corporations have lost their way in creating cool new products and the name of the game has become reducing cost by replacing people with contracts sold by people with an army of unmotivated drones who need to be given direction every step of the way. (paying for hands instead of brains)

Re:And in other news...

[PopeRatzo]

Good managers are very rare.

So we're told. Yet, the distribution of good and bad managers is almost exactly the same as good and bad line workers.

most of them are worth the money because they can generate share holder wealth.

Share value increases most when jobs are cut. Any idiot can cut salaries and jobs to get a quarterly bump in share price. The success of US corporations has more to do with corporate consolidation increasing pricing power than it does brilliant management.

We have a system where management success means the failure of everyone else who works for the company. Instead of an economy that is based on widespread prosperity, we have one based on prosperity for a very small group who succeed in a system whose rules they set, and misery for everyone else.

We actually have some historical experience with these situations, and it never, ever ends well for elite.

Re:And in other news...

[cyberspittle]

Outsource upper management and CEOs. Cost savings would be awesome.

Re:And in other news...

[Opportunist]

And that's what's wrong with the USA today. Working simply doesn't pay anymore. Not working and having others work for you does.

In earlier days, we called them spongers and leeches, but in today's world where everyone needs a title, it's CEO.

Re:And in other news...

[westlake]

Of course their wage base is slightly higher than us mere mortals.

$99,000 makes the developer a demi-god.

US Household Income

According to the Census ACS survey, the median household income for the United States was $50,502 in 2011, the latest data available.

US Per Capita Income

The ACS 1-year shows the per capita income in the United States was $26,708 in 2011, the latest year available.

Income US

Re:And in other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

Careful - you're beginning to sound like a socialist

Re:And in other news...

[mysidia]

Share value increases most when jobs are cut. Any idiot can cut salaries and jobs to get a quarterly bump in share price. The success of US corporations has more to do with corporate consolidation increasing pricing power than it does brilliant management.

Share value increases when jobs are cut, and the resulting decrease in costs is more than the resulting decrease in revenue and future revenue prospects.

The ultimate corporation(TM) is one that has sky-high revenue expected to be repeated and increase every year into the future and no employees or costs required to support this revenue.

Re:And in other news...

[Opportunist]

So? When THIS is what capitalism gets us, I guess socialism can't be so bad.

Re:And in other news...

[mysidia]

$99,000 makes the developer a demi-god.

I'm not sure what kind of methods used to calculate this 99,000 number comes from anyways. Maybe stock grants for developers involved in startups? Or maybe it's a geographic thing.

I've been professional in this field for 6 years; I have a bachelor of science in CS, 8 programming languages, and I don't see nearly half of that.

Admittedly i'm the only developer in my organization, and I get hit with system engineering tasks and working with IT technicians as well, to provide them the help they need to understand what actions they need to be taking.

But I think the 99,000 number is a fiction.

Compensation probably varies from company to company... so where appreciation from stock option grants is considered in some companies 99,000 may be Demo-God status... in other companies 99,000 might be feh...

Companies are unlikely to pay programmers more than their CEO though; furthermore, pay decreases down the chain of managers, and the more managers there are above the developer.... probably, the more people there are that the programmers' definitely won't get paid more than.

Re:And in other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

You need to go looking around for better jobs, then. I live and work in the Dallas area, which has one of the lowest costs of living in the United States. I have an MS, but otherwise very similar qualifications. I made 54k straight out of school. I was up to 60 within a year after that, now make 70, and I'm pretty sure I could do a good deal better if I jumped shipped. Throw devs with a couple decades experience and devs in California (which has much high pay and cost of living), and I'm not surprised at all by 99k being the average.

Re:And in other news...

[Loki_1929]

You might wish to do a little more study of history prior to making such statements. One foray into socialism (Mao's Great Leap Forward) resulted in about 30 million people dead. About 2 million of those were suicides. Most of the rest were from famine.

Other attempts have been ... somewhat less successful.

So while Larry Page might be taking home a good bit more money than the developers working for him, and that might make some of us unhappy, what we don't have is millions of people dying in the streets around us.

Re:And in other news...

[Loki_1929]

Depends entirely on the area. For instance, Mississippi's median household income is a whopping $37,000 while in Maryland it's $70,000. Dig deeper and you find that within those areas there exist hot and cool spots with drastically different numbers.

Put that developer making $99,000 in certain counties of Northern VA, Boston, NYC, SF, etc and he'll be scraping by in a medium size condo or small townhouse. Put him in the middle of Mississippi and he can comfortably afford this 5,000 sq ft 6 bed, 5 bath house sitting on just under 2 acres of land.

Chances are good that if he's making that kind of money, he's in that first group of areas and he's wondering where all his money goes. Salary means little without the context of the particular regions cash flow.

Re:And in other news...

[Loki_1929]

Here I went and found the place and forgot to post the link to it.

http://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/472-Racquet-Club-Rd_Leland_MS_38756_M86585-83323?ex=MS553220259#modal_PhotoGallery

Re:And in other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

Umpff! Petty comunists. British capitalism made the same death toll in just three years (1876-1878). So much for comunist productivity.

Re:And in other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

With a median household income of $119,134, the Census Bureau reports that Loudoun County, Virginia now occupies the number one spot for the highest median U.S. income. The number two position belongs to Fairfax County, Virginia at $105,797. Arlington, Virginia comes in third at $100,735.

Re:And in other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

and I don't see nearly half of that

You should be in the 70-80's by now at the very least if you are a software guy. You need to move on. Your company is shorting you by a GOOD margin. Even in 'cheap' areas. You are being tasked with IT work and programming work. If your job is mostly 'IT' sort of work then you are probably in line.

IT work covers a large swath of work. Pretty much all the way from guys who pull wires and deliver paper to a printer to guys who architect 300 way cluster computers to guys who design medical software.

Re:And in other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

so a patent troll?

Re:And in other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

You might wish to do a little more study of history prior to making such statements. One foray into socialism (Mao's Great Leap Forward) resulted in about 30 million people dead. About 2 million of those were suicides. Most of the rest were from famine.

Other attempts have been ... somewhat less successful.

I notice you left out the European and Scandinavian countries where democratic socialism has worked quite well and raised living standards.

So while Larry Page might be taking home a good bit more money than the developers working for him, and that might make some of us unhappy, what we don't have is millions of people dying in the streets around us.

You sure about that? http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/us_hunger_facts.htm

Re:And in other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

It varies from market-to-market. On the coasts, I have no doubt that developers make more than I do out here in "flyover country". But while my salary is half, my cost of living is LESS than half. Even in the slightly overpriced metro area I live in, housing costs 1/8th (or less!) of what it is in most parts of California. Grocery and gas prices are substantially cheaper too, especially when compared to the east coast.

So my "half" salary isn't so bad, really.

The downside is that you don't get to "hang with the cool kids", so to speak. None of the trendy companies are here because that requires a certain level of glamor, and a low cost of living isn't "glamorous". But it's certainly efficient and helps companies retain their help for a lower pay scale. Think of it as "on-shoring". It's starting to catch on now, with the ongoing rejection of H1B limit increases being one of the driving factors. You can pay just as little to someone in the midwest and not have to deal with H1B paperwork. Why do the legal dance to exclude non-H1B's, when you can just take advantage of an existing demographic difference?

Re:And in other news...

[ediron2]

Backwater-of-flyover-state resident here. Midcareer geek, and I make that amount.

There really is a second skillset many nerds utterly lack that gets those sorts of paychecks. I'm not so hot at the skills, but keep trying to focus on acquiring them: networking, communications, diplomacy, communications, career planning, communications, goals, communications, understanding a manager's needs and, of course, communications.

Re:And in other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

In no way is the market we have a free market.

Re:And in other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't know where you live, but here in California (LA in my case, not Bay Area which is a different beast) entry level developers get around 60-75 if they're any good. With you 6 years, if you have the skills and personality to match the years, you could definitely hit the 100k mark. But then again the cost of living may be lower where you live. 100k in California is not the same as 100k in Georgia...

Re:And in other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe in one respect: Van Gogh only sold one painting in his lifetime.

(Yes, it's debatable whether he sold a few more, but the point stands that his work was not highly valued when he did it)

Re:And in other news...

[Opportunist]

That's not what I said.

Re:And in other news...

[Anonymous Coward]

Senior software devs (whose skills are up to date) easily make this figure in the Minneapolis area.

I'll Say

[Anonymous Coward]

There were layoffs across the industry. Personally, my wages were reduced by 100%.

Still Short-sighted

[Gr8Apes]

From my own personal experience, you get what you pay for. Yes, you can overpay, but that is true for any employee. A few good programmers will outperform 100 mediocre "code-monkeys", and that holds true even if there are 1 or 2 good leads / architects. Why? Because a good design doesn't overcome bad code. I'll also note that there are some companies that just fill seats. The jobs here are not the kind that appeal to good programmers, unless they just want to pull a paycheck while working on something they care about. There are lots of these jobs, and most holding them are overpaid.

I personally know of several where the "programmers' don't know how to even configure their own tools, nor build their software locally (this would be on both .NET and Java platforms btw, and multiple cases for both). Sadly, these "engineers" are paid near the average, and barely can converse about basic language concepts. They've been employed for years, in some cases a decade or more, at a single company. These are the type of folks that make outsourcing seem viable, because you'll get about the same quality of people there, and sometimes, if you're lucky, better. It doesn't mean you'll succeed with either set.

Re:Still Short-sighted

[Billly Gates]

My employer doesn't care about quality. Only price.

I do desktop support and if I have a ticket you can expect to wait 2 weeks before I will bother to talk to you. I am doing hte work of previously 4 people and they cut my hours. I am a cost who doesn't add value to the shareprice.

Same is true with developers. So what if your code only works in ancient IE. It is cheaper and as long as it still works the users can work around the bugs and restart your app when it crashes etc.

There is no value in I.T. only cost accountants who can raise the shareprice so the CEO can keep his job. That is the goal of business. It is not to make money but have everlasting money and less and less costs to go with it to make those magical financial ratios look better for trading computer programs.

If you want to be respected become an accountant or get into sales. They are not a cost but a profit!

Re:Still Short-sighted

[Opportunist]

Agreed. For more than one reason, and from personal experience. I've had both, a crew of code monkeys and a small but incredibly efficient team of well paid but also very good programmers. To say that the latter were vastly outperforming the former (for less money in total, too) is an understatement.

Two people doing each 50% of work will not compensate for one person who could do 100%. Simply due to a lack of information. One person has, by design, all the information that person has. This is not true for two people who should do this one person's work instead. They have to synchronize and exchange information, and that invariably fails at some level as we all know, where you either lose efficiency by having to design an interface between these people or, lacking this, lose even more efficiency when their interface just doesn't work out.

In the end, you're better off with FEWER, but BETTER people than you could ever be with a truckload of code monkeys. Yes, even if they cost a multiple of the monkeys. A billion code monkeys with keyboards will never write the better OS.

Re:Still Short-sighted

[Gr8Apes]

And I posit that any such employer is only looking at the short term quarterly results, and generally can expect just a few of those before reaching the peak or maintaining the plateau. After that will generally come a relatively rapid decline that, depending upon business model will either end in a collapse or a fraction of the original company before they undertook such a short-sighted approach.

I've had several of those employers, 1 sort of worked out by being bought, although not for the ones that didn't get enough options at the right strike price, and the others suffered their expected fates. Even a 1 out of 10 ratio is pretty bad. Generally when they start this, I start looking, because unless the potential short term payout is good, it'll be a miserable 12-24 months, and that's only if you're lucky. A couple of friends stayed with one, and it continued for 5 years of continual RIFs before they finally were shut down. That was the "success" story.

Re:Still Short-sighted

[Alex Belits]

Agreed. For more than one reason, and from personal experience. I've had both, a crew of code monkeys and a small but incredibly efficient team of well paid but also very good programmers. To say that the latter were vastly outperforming the former (for less money in total, too) is an understatement.

That means, they work on the project that is already reduced to the worthless state, likely due to your inept management.

LOOK EVERYONE, shit programmers and shit managers are coming out of their closets!

Re:Still Short-sighted

[Alex Belits]

My apologies, the very opposite applies here -- the comment about the shit programmers/managers are for http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3764705&cid=43768603 and http://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3764705&cid=43768647

Re:Still Short-sighted

[mysidia]

Because a good design doesn't overcome bad code.

In theory, a good design ought to be provide some insight into how that design can be tested.

Often tests only look at 'correctness'; does the code yield the proper output given the right input.

Ideally there should be some code quality metrics included in testing, and also performance benchmarking including resource usage.

E.g. in addition to required input/required output; required satisfactory runtime characteristics and code quality metrics (CQM)

Anyways; it may be a challenge, if the code quality metric is good enough, it could be used to overcome bad code by flagging it for review and rewrite

Re: Still Short-sighted

[DigiShaman]

I provide lvl 3 desktop/sever support a Windows environment. Even though I work for a MSP as outsourced IT, the owner of the company I work for still looks down on us. Never mind the companies we service at a fraction of the cost of a dedicated "IT dude" on their backs. But the moment I'm tasked to scoping out and selling a $300 printer or some such, I'm a fucking hero. Err, relative to my current status of earned respect. Which BTW borderline between very little to none.

Re:Still Short-sighted

[Alex Belits]

Design can not be tested. Only implementation can be tested, and testing does not resuce the stupidity of people that work on the project, it just catches most glaring mistakes and worst brain farts. If the programmer writes buggy code, it will be still buggy after passing tests -- except if he is stupid or dishonest enough, he will be able to cover up bugs by writing workarounds for tested scenarios.

Re: Still Short-sighted

[Billly Gates]

Which is why I am scoping other career options.

We are great at what we do ... or not in my case as I feel horrible about my pissed off users who email me all the time wondering why it takes 2 weeks to fix there fucking computer when I only do IT stuff now 4 hours a day. FYI I have 36 open tickets I need to solve in 4 hours a day in 1 - 2 week time frame. Many require me to ship units to HP for service or an executive is out of town on a trip or something. 36 was manageable if I worked 8 hours previously but man my boss is not going to be happen tomorrow morning with 4 tickets more than 2 weeks old where I didn't have time to get them done :-(

That or I will be fired soon for being the cost center and not that valuable anyway.

Re:Still Short-sighted

[Anonymous Coward]

Question: What is the most efficient number of programers on a project?
Answer: One.

Re:Still Short-sighted

[Xest]

"Anyways; it may be a challenge, if the code quality metric is good enough, it could be used to overcome bad code by flagging it for review and rewrite"

By whom? The same bad developers? They'll eventually get fed up of being told their code is bad even though it is and will just leave it bad and ignore any warnings.

The only way to solve it is to have good developers to rewrite the bad code, which just means you're going to have to hire some good developers to re-do what the bad developers did wrong in the first place, so why even bother having those bad developers at all?

Re:Still Short-sighted

[Gr8Apes]

Overly simplified and provably wrong. I have need of a server serving data requests, a phone app to display the data, and a web site which also displays the data. Simple problem, at least 3 devs with no loss of efficiency and possibly increased synergy. How you ask? Because when complexity gets high enough with enough moving parts, having to document and lay out your interfaces with multiple experts will usually vet out the design up front and reduce the creation of errors. Communication is a good thing, but it can be abused. See Agile.

Re:Still Short-sighted

[Anonymous Coward]

The most efficient form of government is a dictatorship, but that doesn't mean it's the best.

There are some software projects that are just not practical for a single developer, whether because of size or just specialized knowledge. You may get the urge to develop a video codec, but you'd have to become an expert in video signals and digital compression before you could code it. Is it worth the time that will take?

And you won't be able to draw on the creativity a group offers. Some ideas just won't occur to you that might occur to others, and you can't act on ideas that you are mindful of.

Re:Still Short-sighted

[mysidia]

They'll eventually get fed up of being told their code is bad even though it is and will just leave it bad and ignore any warnings.

The developers who don't ignore them, and consistently improve their CQM or have good CQM get all the important development work.

Those who choose to ignore successful metrics ultimately get marginalized and eventually laid off.

Time for a union/guild?

[Anonymous Coward]

I know we all like to be individuals but they are just playing us.

Re:Time for a union/guild?

[HornWumpus]

Read the post immediately above yours. He's talking about you.

Re:Time for a union/guild?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry dog, I'm doing alright for myself. Doesn't mean I can't give a shit about the rest of you

Re:Time for a union/guild?

[Anonymous Coward]

Unions are only helpful for those that are below average. If you're above average, you can't advance on your own merit.

Re:Time for a union/guild?

[dkleinsc]

That's nonsense. What the union negotiates for depends on what the union members vote for, so you don't have to put things like "can't promote people to management" into the contract if you don't want it.

A example of the kinds of things a union could organize for programmers if one existed:
- Limits on and payment for overtime, after-hours and weekend work.
- Office conditions. Usually that isn't an issue, but if it is and your choices are "deal with it" or "quit", you may want a third option.
- Hiring standards that prevent a true idiot from ever working at the company.
- And yes, minimum pay agreements.

Re:Time for a union/guild?

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you enjoy a 40 hour work week? You must be below average!

(I'm just curious if you're even thinking about what you're writing)

Re:Time for a union/guild?

[tjb]

I prefer to be able to set my own schedule, work from home when that is a reasonable choice and otherwise be marginally attached via email 24/7 to keep up on things. I like spending 25-30 hours/week in the office, I suspect a union would really fuck that up.

Re:Time for a union/guild?

[benhattman]

I am a programmer, and I work in a union. It's actually quite nice, and it floors me that so many people have convinced themselves it's a bad thing. Here's what we get.

1) Overtime pay. It's not as good as regular overtime pay, but it is greater than your base hourly rate, and it does discourage your employer from working you overtime unless they honestly need it. I have currently negotiated with my manager a base schedule of only 35 hours a week; not common but I have known several people working similar schedules.
2) Scheduled annual pay raises. Not huge raises, usually in the ballpark of 2%-7%, but very respectable raises and everyone in the union gets them.
3) Protections with regard to leave. E.g. things like parental leave and other leave of absences.
4) Above average health insurance. My wife works for the state, and my insurance is better than hers. Take that for what you want.

What we don't get. Our offices generally suck. This is probably more an issue of this being an older company with older office buildings, rather than having anything to do with the union. The union could negotiate working conditions, but as our union is spread out among a great number of building sites, it's not a uniform concern. Also, the union doesn't negotiate for hiring standards.

Re:Time for a union/guild?

[Anonymous Coward]

I am a programmer, and I work in a union. It's actually quite nice, and it floors me that so many people have convinced themselves it's a bad thing.

Maybe because those of us that have been paying attention to the history of unions have observed them crater themselves as much as possible over the last 60 years?

Re:Time for a union/guild?

[Anonymous Coward]

> It's actually quite nice, and it floors me that so many people have convinced themselves it's a bad thing.

Yes, the benefits of organized extortion are nice; no one has said otherwise. However, it only lasts until the extorted decides they no longer want to put up with it.

Re:Time for a union/guild?

[Anonymous Coward]

lol kill yourself, slave.

Re:Time for a union/guild?

[Anonymous Coward]

"They only call it 'class warfare' when we fight back."

Clear evidence that there's a shortage

[ebno-10db]

Zuckerberg and fellow tech billionaires: This is clear evidence that there's a shortage of people with the right skills, so the government needs to increase the H-1B visa quota from 65,000 to 180,000.

Politician with extended hand: Yes, sir! Are there any other orifices you'd like me to lick, sir!

Me: I have no idea how anybody will justify the first statement above and keep a straight face, but apparently there are people who are much better at it than me. Having read Zuckerberg's op-ed in WaPo, it's obvious that logic, consistency and clear exposition are not required in that endeavor.

Re:Clear evidence that there's a shortage

[tqk]

Zuckerberg and fellow tech billionaires: This is clear evidence that there's a shortage of people with the right skills ...

"... at the price we're willing to pay ..."

That's how. "We have shareholders, damnit! Have you seen what our stock is trading at?!?"

Re:Clear evidence that there's a shortage

[AK Marc]

falling wages can also be a sign of growth. We hired 50% more software developers last year, of course, most of them were with less experience than our current ones, so they were paid less, but our current ones got fat raises as well.

The math works, and often these numbers are more a trend of waves of new hires, rather than any one particular person expecting a pay cut.

Re:Clear evidence that there's a shortage

[ebno-10db]

The math works

Not here. According to the sound bite statistics that are available without paying $175, the size of the workforce increased by 1.1% while wages fell 2%. Admittedly the source and exact definition of these stats is unclear, but frankly I wouldn't bet on your explanation.

Re:Clear evidence that there's a shortage

[AK Marc]

The math works

Not here.

You say that, but you only attack the logic, not the math.

According to the sound bite statistics that are available without paying $175, the size of the workforce increased by 1.1% while wages fell 2%.

So, there were 1000 developers, paid $100,000 each. 40 new developers started within the last year, and 29 retired. If wages for the 971 remaining developers remained flat, then the new developers started at $22,500 per year.

Yes, I realize it isn't exactly realistic, but the math itself will balance without a single software developer taking a pay cut. Also, reality would likely have a larger turnover and more new guys, which would bring up the new guy pay. The point was that a 2% loss in pay doesn't necessarily mean that anyone saw an actual pay cut.

Re:Clear evidence that there's a shortage

[ebno-10db]

Okay, I wasn't considering "retirees" (though in the real world it's hard to distinguish between true voluntary retirements and involuntary ones). Nevertheless your "I realize it isn't exactly realistic" means we agree on the likely reality.

What do you expect

[cyberspittle]

In a world based on inequality, people in other parts of the world are worth less than other places. We have global proce for oil, etc. but not on labor. If the world needs inequality and we have laws to justify it (ethics and morals aside), we will have inequal pay. All humans should have an interest in this. In the future, we will ultimately have 2 types of people: people who have robots, and people who don't.

Re:What do you expect

[Anonymous Coward]

You got it backwards: in the future there will be robots who have people, and robots who don't. You should start learning how to pleasure robots now, to ensure your place in the future.

Re:What do you expect

[cyberspittle]

ROFL

Re:What do you expect

[Zontar The Mindless]

I have a girlfriend. What do I need a pleasure robot for?

Re:What do you expect

[BonThomme]

for her

Re:What do you expect

[Anonymous Coward]

Pleasure robots don't age and don't get fat.

Re:What do you expect

[Anonymous Coward]

Pleasure robots don't age and don't get fat.

Also (in the decrease order of unsavoriness) they: don't fart, disapprove the pink colour or go out with the boys to the pub to waste good money that can be spent on shoes.

The answer is obvious

[plopez]

More H1B visas. Only then can we increase productivity and innovation which will keep profitability and CEO salaries high.

Re:The answer is obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

Your sig! It is so appropriate!

Re:The answer is obvious

[cyberspittle]

Actually, we need H1-B visa for management, upper management, etc. Once done we can then outsource that position to a country. If we paid a CEO 80K in US dollars for someone living in non-developed nation, we could save millions (maybe more) and make companies profitable.

Re:The answer is obvious

[beelsebob]

Speaking as a soon to be H1B... I'm raising your average, stop whining.

Re:The answer is obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

How do you know you are not the exception that proves the rule?

Re:The answer is obvious

[plopez]

How do you know what my average is? Average what? Weight? Height? Days collecting unemployment?

Re:The answer is obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

When I was on H1-B I was paid up to 200K (including stock options). Then when it expired, I left. And I still get paid that. Not all H-1Bs are slave labor.

Re:The answer is obvious

[beelsebob]

Perhaps you should read the summary, and find out what we're talking about.

Re:The answer is obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

If I could get paid well, that would also raise my average.

Re:The answer is obvious

[beelsebob]

Ah, I see, so what you're after is protectionism? Companies should employ people less well suited to the job because they're American?

Re:The answer is obvious

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the point is that I don't give a fuck what the average is, if I'm not getting paid enough anyway!

Great!

[tqk]

'That could include displaced baby boomer workers who have been out of work for some time and will take a lower paying job just to get back into the workforce.'

I look forward to all the offers.

Original study

[phantomfive]

Here's a link to the original study. It's not clear where they are getting the "wages fell 2%" statistic, but in California, the average annual wage was $123,900.

Re:Original study

[ebno-10db]

Last time I checked, California was only 1 of 50 states. While the most populous state, 88% of Americans live elsewhere. Admittedly it does have a disproportionately high number of "high tech" workers. However, if the higher employee compensation that results from state or local (e.g. Silicon Valley) demand for such people (and the high cost of living in such areas) is a problem, then businesses are free to locate elsewhere in the country, or at least open branch facilities there.

Bottom line: what's you point in mentioning an isolated statistic that anyone can read on Tech America's summary page?

Re:Original study

[Anonymous Coward]

California also has a higher cost of living than the average.

If a Fortune 500 company offers the same job in California and Texas, the one in California will pay 10-20% more.

Re:Original study

[phantomfive]

Because 20% of tech workers live in California. If it's an isolated statistic, it's relevant to a huge chunk of people.

Re:Original study

[ezelkow1]

This

I hate it when they dont mention if these wage comparisons are adjusted based on cost of living. If I were a tard I would have accepted an offer in california a long time ago, but then again like alot of engineers Im not and understand that a 10% raise of my current salary means Im losing money by going to california

Its also odd that some new engineers dont understand this. We have interviewed and given out offers to software engineers who came back and either turned it down or had a ridiculously high counter offer for an engineer 1 position all because they were given a high offer out of a company in california

Re:Original study

[Scarletdown]

Here's a link to the original study. It's not clear where they are getting the "wages fell 2%" statistic, but in California, the average annual wage was $123,900.

Wherever you are living, if you are pulling a 6 figure income, you should be living happily ever after. Otherwise, I posit the question, "If you are rich, why aren't you smart?"

Re:Original study

[Billly Gates]

I think it is much less. Regular programmers are still hired. Where I work 80% are Indians but that is because the owners are friends with all the politicians and has friends in offices to get the H1B1s to them first.

Not everyone is like that and I feel not everyone is competent or awesome at their job. Having so many programmers to me means more weeds to sort to find the wheat. The wheat will jump ship too as they are in such high demand.

If I had more experience programming I would move to San Jose and I would be hired fast. Would you want to hire me? Of course not ... well at least not in that capacity but I would do it because it pays well.

The point is normal companies still hire the majority of programmers even with outsourcing and not just Silicon Valley .coms. Many are more experience and have a home which is why they are not there and these are the ones you want that are good at their jobs without paying 100k+ a year.

Re:Original study

[phantomfive]

Wherever you are living, if you are pulling a 6 figure income, you should be living happily ever after.

Except for the fact that you still have to wake up five days a week and go to work for someone else.......

Re:Original study

[phantomfive]

I really have no idea what you are saying.

If you are wondering why I said that 20% of tech workers live in California, I said that because it's in the study. Maybe the study is wrong, I don't know.

If you are thinking somehow you are not good enough to move Silicon Valley and get a job, I can tell you that there are plenty of lousy programmers in Silicon Valley making more than $100k. The skill you need to improve is your job search skills.

Re:Original study

[Scarletdown]

Yeah. There is that. I forgot about that aspect. I forgot how depressing it can be having most of the fruits of your labors going toward the enrichment of a boss or exec or some other higher up. I may not be getting "rich" doing what I do (haunting thrift stores, yard sales, and public auctions for a wide variety of things to resell on the 'bay and other sites), but I make enough to pay my bills and other living expenses, and stash away a bit each month for a rainy day.

It is well worth it to me to be able to do my thing, set my own schedule, and for the most part, be answerable to no one except myself. Now, time to shut down all time wasting Firefox tabs and get to work. These goods aren't going to photoshoot and write themselves up. :D

Re:Original study

[ebno-10db]

I can get someone to work for less than half in Fargo and in Texas.

Cheaper, yes. Half? No. BTW North Dakota is in the midst of an oil boom.

Old timers will tell you Silicon Valley started because it was dirt cheap land, wages, lower taxes, than the more popular New York City and New Jersey of IBM, GE, and Bell Labs of the 1960s high tech hub.

How far back are you going? I can tell you that at least as far back as the 70's SV was expensive, and I doubt it was ever that cheap, at least not after the gold rush.

BTW, NYC proper was never much of a tech hub, at least not post-WWII. It was Northern NJ, Long Island, and the northern suburbs of NYC and a little further (largely IBM up there).

I do get a laugh out of people debating why SV is where it is. Success has a thousand fathers and failure is an orphan. Sure Stanford is a good university, but it's hardly unique in that respect. HP was a good innovative company, but it also was not unique. The only explanation I've heard that is unique is that when Bill Shockley founded Shockley Semiconductor Laboratory, he chose to do it in Mountain View, because his ailing mother lived in Palo Alto (it's nice to know that there was somebody that Shockley wasn't a complete bastard to). People reject this for two reasons. First, they don't like the idea of happenstance instead of something more predictable and explainable. Second, nobody wants to admit that a blatant racist and all-around bastard like Shockley is the guy that was responsible for Silicon Valley.

Re:Original study

[AmiMoJo]

The average wage in the UK is a lot lower and falling. The government is trying really, really hard to drive down wages at the moment. Businesses simply want to pay their staff less, and the government supports businesses. They call it "removing red tape" and "making it easier for businesses to employ people", which translated means "removing employee rights" and "making it easier for businesses to fire people or give them short term rolling contracts instead of a real job".

Re:Original study

[Anonymous Coward]

I think this video pretty much sums up why Silicon Valley exists although Shockley and Stanford were both a big part.

Re:Original study

[ebno-10db]

It was cheap farmland which was a fraction of the cost of nearbye San Francisco and New York/New Jersey.

Back in the 50's and 60's there was still plenty of farmland waiting to be turned into suburban housing and office tracts in NJ, Long Island, Rockland County (just north of NYC - not sure if Westchester was still cheap), etc., not to mention many other areas of the country, so I don't really buy the "cheap farmland" as an explanation, other than to explain why it's not in an expensive city.

Re:Original study

[Loki_1929]

Couldn't disagree more. In some places, that 6-figure salary provides you less buying power than one half that size in other areas.

Having a larger cash flow does not equate to a higher standard of living.

Not even including inflation

[Anonymous Coward]

Plus inflation your wages actually went down 4%.

Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[ebno-10db]

From the summary and article:

lower cost employees ... could include displaced baby boomer workers who have been out of work for some time and 'will take a lower paying job just to get back into the workforce.' Maybe when pigs fly. If you've been out of work for some time or are old enough to be a boomer, you'll have a hard time getting a job. Put 'em together and you're probably toast. Hiring boomers who've been out of work for a while at lower pay would be a rational and probably a desirable response (not the lower pay part, but in a market economy that's how it works). In reality employers are horribly prejudiced against such people and will just scream that we need more H-1B's.

Re:Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[ebno-10db]

Drat, forgot to check the formatting before posting. Should have been:

lower cost employees ... could include displaced baby boomer workers who have been out of work for some time and 'will take a lower paying job just to get back into the workforce.'

Maybe when pigs fly. If you've been out of work for some time or are old enough to be a boomer, you'll have a hard time getting a job. Put 'em together and you're probably toast. Hiring boomers who've been out of work for a while at lower pay would be a rational and probably a desirable response (not the lower pay part, but in a market economy that's how it works). In reality employers are horribly prejudiced against such people and will just scream that we need more H-1B's.

Re:Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[Anonymous Coward]

In reality employers are horribly prejudiced against such people and will just scream that we need more H-1B's.

Because the attitudes are:

1. "you wouldn't be unemployed if you were any good."
2 ."If you got the skills then you can get a job." What if you do have the skills but have been out of work? Then back to #1.

It is very telling how employers who claim that they can't find "qualified" people never state exactly what qualifications they are looking for. They just make vague statements about "not having skills". That's the same as saying as giving a product review and just saying "it sucks".

Re:Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[ebno-10db]

Because the attitudes are:

1. "you wouldn't be unemployed if you were any good." 2 ."If you got the skills then you can get a job." What if you do have the skills but have been out of work? Then back to #1.

It is very telling how employers who claim that they can't find "qualified" people never state exactly what qualifications they are looking for. They just make vague statements about "not having skills". That's the same as saying as giving a product review and just saying "it sucks".

Aren't prejudices wonderful? My favorite examples of how a tight labor market can force employers to overlook their prejudices are the World Wars. In WWI factories started hiring black people, and in WWII they added women. Neither group could get the time of day before that, and as you may have heard, they did just fine providing labor for the Arsenal of Democracy (historical note: we won both wars).

Re:Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[KitFox]

It is very telling how employers who claim that they can't find "qualified" people never state exactly what qualifications they are looking for. They just make vague statements about "not having skills".

"To qualify in the US, you must have a minimum of 10 years' experience with Windows Server 2008, 30 years of experience with Windows as a whole; You must know C, C++, C#, Java, PHP, ASP, .NET, JavaScript, Python, Perl, ASM, Objective C, HTML, CSS, and at least five other languages of your choice, all at a guru level and never -ever- need to use any reference material; You must be able to code a full working 100,000 lines of code with no bugs within 40 work hours; You must be able to QA test the whole thing in another 40 work hours; You must be able to take every single feature request coming from marketing and implement it within that week of coding - even the features that are requested the day after the week ends; You must have a doctorate in Computer Sciences; And you must be willing to work for no more than $41K/year."

Re:Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[Anonymous Coward]

You forgot a key element: you must enjoy coding in your off time. Only people who code as a hobby are good coders.

Re:Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[Billly Gates]

The economy maybe improving but it is far far from the days of WWII or the 1990s. It maybe returning soon slowly but it will take a few years.

Older companies (as non .coms) are happy to hire such people when it is hard to find workers. It is the 20 somethings that think they are just as awesome as the those with +30 years extra experience like to swag around their d*ck size on being cool and feel threatened by those who worked there way up rather than had connections fresh out of school.

Re:Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[Billly Gates]

I have seen jobs where they give you an IQ test and tell you they want a masters degree! Then hand you a headset to work at the call center and say "I am paying you $35,000 and not $22,000 a year/$10 an hour like the rest of call centers!! Why aren't you grateful to have a job?!"

That company just hired a bunch of Indians as they could not find any qualified workers.

Re:Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[Anonymous Coward]

>1. "you wouldn't be unemployed if you were any good."

After working for any meaningful length of time, how the hell do you not have a network of people willing to vouch for you?

Re:Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[Anonymous Coward]

Thanks for the tips!

-Human Resources

Re:Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[Anonymous Coward]

Apparently the U.S. have a dire shortage of worker with such qualifications, but there are some countries in Asia with an abundance of this as their minimum skill set!

While we're at it, who are we blaming?

Re:Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[Maxo-Texas]

Five million people went on social security between 2000 and 2009.
Five million people went on social security in 2010 and 2011 alone (numbers not in ofr 2012 yet).

The boomers (71 million more to go), the chinese boomers (460 million), and the european boomers (I don't have a figure) are going to be retiring (or dying) fast over the next 18 years.

Only 15% of men and under 10% of women work past age 67 (despite statements that they have to or want to when they were younger).

Half the men are dead by age 75, half the women are dead by age 78.

Currently, only 1.8% are making it to age 90. They make up under 1% of the population but that's because of immigration and population growth since their cohort was born.

I think this boomer situation is going to hit really hard between now and 2016. Essentially, an extra 3.6 million people retire compared to the base rate. Then in 2017, it rises to 2 million extra people per year. That continues for the next 18 years. So 11.6 million extra people retire (from a total population of about 28 million) over the next 8 years alone. That's enough to eradicate the unemployment rate.

And... at least in my case when my early boomer parents passed away, I'd been saving so hard that I was able to retire at 52 and I didn't even go on social security.

So I guess I think thing will get really good for employees between now and 2020 (and probably be quite nice by 2016).

However, robotics and automation are coming on very fast and i think after 2020, that trend will cancel many of the benefits of the fast retirement. It gets very singularity like by the 2030's.

Re:Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[Billly Gates]

Many of these older folks got screwed over when the stock market crashed and switched to bonds and gold and are being screwed over royally again as other investors buy stocks again.

Most I know can't retire and are forced to work as taking social security at 62 doesn't pay the mortgage. You were responsible and probably lucky as well. Most never got a big paying job or invested in some housing and lost everything in 2008. That is more common as older folks have more saved money to do things like invest in real estate.

But for the younger workers ....
I think jobs will come back from China to the US. Apple is doing this right now. The reason is price of gas. As fuel and wages go up not to mention risk (what if China sides with North Korea in a war with South Korea) the cost benefit goes away. When gas hits $4.50 a gallon the savings will go away as a single cargo ship uses as much as 50,000 cars worth of gas a year!!

Supply Chain improvements and just in time inventory systems depend on everything being close together and that is hard when you now have a supply chain half way across the world and need 2 warehouses for each continent and long lead time to get it to the retail when a local competitor which is a startup can ship it within 24 hours and your wait time is 1.5 weeks for the same cost!

So who knows what is going to happen and it will be interesting to watch.

Re:Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[RubberChainsaw]

Excellent! You have just written my resume for me!

Re:Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[Anonymous Coward]

I can do the work in Venus's hours, but I only accept pay scales based on Mercury years. Pay must be provided in Earth dollars (USD).

Re:Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[Anonymous Coward]

In order to truly make it match a really ridiculous requirements position, it should also require 30 years of experience with Linux and be in the Boston, MA or SF Bay areas. All of this on one person.

Re:Boomers get jobs? When pigs fly.

[Maxo-Texas]

One thing to watch out for is oversell by the retirement industry.

As I said above, only 1.8% of us make it to 90. If you are in poor health or your parents and grandparents all died by 80, your odds of being in the group that makes it to 90 are not good. A lot of people really "know" they are going to die before 80 based on their health and parents mortality.

From experience, when you retire your spending drops enormously.

Your apple comment is odd. Didn't we have an article on slashdot that the "jobs" they were bringing back were almost all going to be done by robots?

Haven't we seen this before?

[Anonymous Coward]

A company I worked for in the early 2000s paid salaries that were directly determined by a survey like this. When the news was filled with people being laid off, salaries went up. When hiring seemed pretty good in 2004 or so, the averages were flat to down a little bit.

The recession continues

[adam.voss]

As the recession continues, ...

By what definition is the recession continuing? While, the job market has not recovered, I do believe we have been experiencing economic growth.

Re:The recession continues

[drinkypoo]

By what definition is the recession continuing? While, the job market has not recovered, I do believe we have been experiencing economic growth.

We're operating on borrowed time with this many unemployed.

Re:The recession continues

[ebno-10db]

By what definition is the recession continuing? While, the job market has not recovered, I do believe we have been experiencing economic growth.

By the technical definition of recession (IIRC two or more quarters of decreasing GDP) we haven't been in a recession in quite some time. But the colloquial definition is "the economy sucks". That would include a weak job market.

Re:The recession continues

[BonThomme]

the recession ended six months into Obama's first term, at which time, conservative denial began

Re:The recession continues

[Xest]

America's economic growth has occurred because of massive public spending.

In the UK we've seen worse than average economic status because we've been cutting too much too fast and doing the opposite to America.

For the Western world, if you want to look at the true health of the general economy for Western nations then it's best to look at reasonably sized countries like France/Germany that have had a much healthier balance between austerity and public expenditure, or alternatively at the Eurozone as a whole where such austerity/spending programs tend to balance out a little.

If you look at that sort of picture you'll see that growth is roughly flat for developed western nations under natural circumstances (i.e. if government did nothing and had carried on as normal with no special expenditure/austerity).

So yes, America has returned to growth, but it's not natural growth, it's artificial growth fed by heavily increasing debt. Similarly in the UK we've been in recession more than similar economies like France/Germany/America in recent years because we've cut things a little too much because the current Conservative party saw it as an opportunity to make ideological changes rather than necessary changes to improve economic health.

I think just about every forecast now though believes that natural growth will return to Western economies this year or next but we're not quite there yet.

Note finally that I'm not making an argument about whether austerity or debt fed growth are a better option, both have their benefits, both have their disadvantages, that's a different discussion for a different day though. Personally however I think that it doesn't matter too much which option governments take, I think until you get a return of natural economic growth it doesn't really matter what governments do, things will still be shitty in some way or another.

In theory, theory and practice are the same...

[tutufan]

I agree with you, in theory. But, in order for that 10x-100x to be achieved, conditions have to be conducive. It's like starting up that 600mph car to make a record run on the salt flats. If things are right, you can achieve phenomenal results. But, things usually aren't that optimal, and in a suboptimal environment, your gifted driver will be much less able to distinguish themselves from a merely good driver.

Having watched things play out many times over a (eek) long career, I've observed that it's fairly rare that skill and opportunity coincide. If you find yourself in such a position, revel in it, as it probably will not last.

Re:In theory, theory and practice are the same...

[Anonymous Coward]

You (tutufan) and Gr8Apes make very good points. I can't tell you, in recent times, how often
I'm unable to apply everything I know to a task because the "Indians" won't understand it. No, really.
I don't write obfuscated code, either and I'm not an Einstein. Or told that condition/error will never happen,
so we don't want you to plan/code for it - and then it happens 2 weeks after it's deployed/released.

This has always been a problem in the industry of late because simple programming is easy to get into,
so everybody/management thinks that since they can add two numbers together, they "know" how to
program. And this is the level of a code-monkey. So funny in a sad sorta way.

C#/.NET is the best language for really FU**ing things up - there isn't a way to do decimal math in the
language! They use floating point! And the Indians think this is accurate! That's okay, send all of those
rounding errors to me - I don't mind pennys!

CAPTCHA = 'sugared' I didn't think I was sugar-coating anything!

Re:In theory, theory and practice are the same...

[HornWumpus]

C# Decimal type?

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.decimal(v=vs.80).aspx

That said I believe the guptas wouldn't bother or understand.

Re:In theory, theory and practice are the same...

[Anonymous Coward]

I was mostly with you until your rant about C#. I think maybe you are the person you describe.

Even in .NET 1.0 there was a decimal value type. For example - http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/364x0z75(v=vs.80).aspx

Re:In theory, theory and practice are the same...

[Anonymous Coward]

Yup. I clicked the link like I did a thousand times before expecting a miracle.
They represent the numbers as a power of 2, if I read the link correctly.
Not a problem except that the number one hundred cannot be represented as an exact
power of 2, for example. They fudge it by throwing a lot of significant digits so as
to hide or lessen the effect of the "check" digits they have to carry to make things work.
I'd like to see a binary (or hex) dump of

protected decimal MyFortune = 100;

http://www.herongyang.com/C-Sharp/Floating-Point-Data-Type-decimal.html has and interesting breakdown.

Looks like a huge hack to get it all to work - look at how 1 at various powers of ten is stored!!!
(I'm not sitting at a C# "terminal", or I'd punch in his sample code and try a bunch of other numbers
to find the breaking pattern.) He comments that it's 1/27 the speed! Wow! Un-frekin-believable.
And people eat this stuff up thinking this is "real" computer science!

Re:In theory, theory and practice are the same...

[gbjbaanb]

Apparently that is the C# decimal datatype class.
And it is 1/27th the speed of a double, this kind of thing is pretty normal in the .NET world - make a complicated class and use it where you'd normally use a primitive type and don't worry about speed or memory usage.

But then, us old timers wouldn't bother with such a way of doing things where performance is necessary (I'd except every time when using a decimal class), no we'd do something like this. 27 times slower... progress :-(

Re:In theory, theory and practice are the same...

[Alex Belits]

I agree with you, in theory. But, in order for that 10x-100x to be achieved, conditions have to be conducive. It's like starting up that 600mph car to make a record run on the salt flats. If things are right, you can achieve phenomenal results. But, things usually aren't that optimal, and in a suboptimal environment, your gifted driver will be much less able to distinguish themselves from a merely good driver.

This is completely wrong.

Bad environment at work hurts everyone, however good programmer remains being good programmer until the point when project is so bad, it is worthless no matter who and how works on it.

Having watched things play out many times over a (eek) long career, I've observed that it's fairly rare that skill and opportunity coincide. If you find yourself in such a position, revel in it, as it probably will not last.

That's because you are a shit programmer who drags everyone down.

Re:In theory, theory and practice are the same...

[HornWumpus]

In the real world we are programmer time constrained, not CPU constrained.

Using a complicated class is the right answer. Premature optimization and all that.

If it turns out that optimizing that code is needed you can slot in a fixed point class or switch to floats and deal with rounding. You won't have to do that in 1% of cases.

Re:In theory, theory and practice are the same...

[gbjbaanb]

no, in the real world programmers are so cheap you can hire hundreds of them. India, China, eastern europe... more than you can shake a H1B visa at.

In the real world we are already suffering extreme weather due to pumping lots of heavy "energy-storing" gases into our atmosphere. Im not sure we can continue to do this indefinitely, so it makes sense to do what we can about it sooner rather than later, and even if you don't believe that, the cost of electricity is booming (not to mention the cost of greenhouse gas emissions, now the politicians have realised they can tax it). So making your code more efficient is a sensible thing now matter how you try to deny it.

So the simple answer is to stop technology churn and start training programmers so they become good at coding, then we wouldn't have such crap classes and over-engineered systems.

As for "switch to floats", if you're using a decimal class, its precisely because you cannot switch to floats. A fixed point class is a better option though, and simpler, and faster.. so why not use it in the first place?!

Re:In theory, theory and practice are the same...

[HornWumpus]

The CO2 shadow of your mythical cheap competent programmers will overshadow the CO2 output of just using a library. 'Making you code more efficient is a sensible thing' is such a common fallacy it has name: 'premature optimization'. It's been discussed to death, look it up.

You can do most decimal math with floats rounding and remaindering. It just sucks.

Why don't you use fixed point in the first place? Because beancounting isn't _always_ butt simple. Sometimes they have special rules for fractional pennies etc. Then you wind up with code that uses one long int to count pennies and another to count .001 pennies. Ugly code, full of magic number scale factors.

Re:In theory, theory and practice are the same...

[gbjbaanb]

you really have no clue if you think anyone does currency computation with IEEE754 floats.

As for premature optimisation - that refers to writing your code regardless of its performance and then making the slow bits (or the most heavily used bits) fast. What it does not refer to is writing your code in a slow system by default so you have few places to go. You see many people talk about their PHP web sites wanting them to scale or simply go faster with the existing hardware and they simply cannot do it. If they'd started with a better idea of how to improve it (eg services that could be migrated to native code later) then they'd be in with a chance, as it is, the answer is always going to be "time to rewrite", which puts them pretty much where they started - nothing premature about considering more than very short term gain right from the start.

Re:In theory, theory and practice are the same...

[HornWumpus]

Nobody does been counting currency manipulation with floats unless they _have_ to. Because the code to make floats get the right answer is so ugly it's insane. But it's still faster in many cases. If for example you are writing a simulation model for an economic system floats are great for money. All an approximation anyhow.

Time to market and maintainability remains more important then execution speed for 99%+ of the code in the world. Using libraries is how that's done. e.g. What difference does it make if you code is slightly slower preparing database updates when it's database speed constrained anyhow.

I'm never going to defend PHP. It's the wrong tool for any job. Doesn't mean I'm writing bean counting apps in assembly language or C.

Re:In theory, theory and practice are the same...

[Anonymous Coward]

"import decimal"

I love Python. :)

Re:In theory, theory and practice are the same...

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow! What gbjbaanb (229885) said applies to you, IMHO.
That is the most nonsensical/convoluted logic I've read in a while.

You have to understand the history of Indian programming. It started
with IBM. It started with COBOL. See it yet? COBOL uses (probably
implemented as true BCD at the architecture level) decimal numbers/has
a decimal number type that is exact. The Indians we see today were
taught programming (in school) based on a subset of the COBOL language.
The Indians were not taught about its implementation, but for numeric values
they see the '.' point. Then they look at C's (IEEE754) float/double - see a
decimal point and think they're identical. They try a few fprintf() (again not
understanding the internals of the library) and it "looks" like it works. So
they conclude that COBOL decimals are identical to float/double in C.

This is all first hand - things that I have seen. Guess who developed C#?
Microsoft. Guess who MS employs to develop C# - Indians. The circle of life!

I'm not an Indian hater, either.

Misleading title

[Intropy]

The article states outright that the category includes "computer facilities management" and "other computer related services" and mentions "IT wage and employment trends." Including so many tangentially related positions makes it hard to draw any conclusions about software development trends.

Ah the myth of amazing software tech

[rsilvergun]

winning the day. Didn't work our so well for Corel did it? Or Novel? Or Sun?

Good enough is always good enough. Yeah, you're few good programmers will make better code, but my 100 code monkeys will make more of it. I'll have 10 products to market in the time you have 1, and I'll do it for less $. I'll take those savings and spend them winning bids in backroom deals. Eventually I'll buy up your company just to shut it down. Well, not unless Microsoft beats me to it.

Also, What's with this thing in America where we always, always blame the worker? Did it ever occur to you that you really can't compete in a global race to the bottom? Like clean air & water? Like health care? A steady food supply? Too bad. Somewhere in the world is a worker willing to live without it. You'll have to give up those 'luxuries' to compete.

As the saying goes: If you're so smart, why aren't you rich?

Re:Ah the myth of amazing software tech

[HornWumpus]

You've never managed a software project. It's painfully obvious based on the claims you make.

Re:Ah the myth of amazing software tech

[Anonymous Coward]

You'll have to give up those 'luxuries' to compete.

George B! I see they unlocked you account after that last "incident." Good for you.
Unless you were being sarcastic!

Re:Ah the myth of amazing software tech

[AmiMoJo]

Really depends on what software you are writing. If it is a vertical app that a company relies on and you screw it up then it could cost you a lot in both reputation and lawsuits. If you create a suite of products where each is dependent on the other (e.g. CAD/CAM/CNC) one bad one can scupper the others.

Re:Ah the myth of amazing software tech

[BonThomme]

or, "if you're so smart, why do you work here?"

Re:Ah the myth of amazing software tech

[Ytsejam-03]

winning the day. Didn't work our so well for Corel did it? Or Novel? Or Sun?

I assume you meant Novell.

Yeah, you're few good programmers will make better code, but my 100 code monkeys will make more of it.

Novell isn't really a good example. Starting in the late 90's, they began laying off employees in the states and replacing them with cheap labor in Bangalore. That didn't work out so well.

Especially telling was a blog post by then-CTO Jeff Jaffe sometime around 2008, where he talked about the superior quality of Novell's software. Only problem was that quality had been steadily declining for the past ten or so years. The comments section was full of Novell customers telling the CTO that he was full of shit.

Jaffe was fired (er, resigned) a year or so later, so that blog post is long-gone. Fortunately, the wayback machine has a copy.

Re:Ah the myth of amazing software tech

[Anonymous Coward]

you're few good programmers

"your".

only average people worry about average

[Anonymous Coward]

In other news, 95% of the human male population is sure of their penis length to be below average...

also a real apprenticeship system with mixed class

[Joe_Dragon]

also a real apprenticeship system with mixed classroom / on the job training can come from a union and or guild system.

and a union hall hiring system can help to cut out at least some of the recruiter BS.

It's narrative

[rsilvergun]

We've always been at war with Eastasia. As long as the news media keeps telling Americans there's a 'recession' we won't start asking why we're not getting anywhere. I swear, Americans have the opposite of an entitlement complex. We don't believe we deserve anything.

The only thing we're 100% sure of is that somewhere is a minimum wage welfare queen that's the reason why we're broke all the time. Buddy of mine put it best after he was down on his luck and tried to get some help from the gov't: "If it's so easy to get on welfare and cheat the system why don't you do it?"

Re:It's narrative

[Zontar The Mindless]

Congratulations, and welcome to The Revolution of Lowered Expectations.

Re:It's narrative

[Anonymous Coward]

1 in 6 Americans get foodstamps. Google it. Apparently it's easy if so many people get their EBT.

Re:It's narrative

[KGIII]

I did Google, as you suggested, and that number is nearly 1 in 7. So you're not too far off.

Good timing

[rsilvergun]

Sunday afternoon. Just after a few major Whitehouse scandals and some general nastiness in the form of an armature terrorist attack and a kidnapper. This won't even slow down the call for more H1-Bs, despite the fact that we're told over and over that a worker shortage should _raise_ wages.

Re:Good timing

[Alex Belits]

armature terrorist attack

lol wut

Um.. I have actually

[rsilvergun]

For what it's worth read my sig :P. Moreover, I my point still stands. I can afford 10, maybe 20 failures for the 1 project that succeeds :).

Re:Um.. I have actually

[HornWumpus]

Do you have staff? It sounds to me like you've never worked with air thieves? One 'bad one' can wreck a project schedule. A staff of only 'bad ones' will result in no useful work. You won't get 1 project that succeeds and you will go crazy trying to manage the morons and the projects they work on.

I've seen people trying to build SQL statements ending up with string concatenation operators in the the SQL and not understanding. He tried to say the database server was broken. Assigning him any work was insane. You could do it all yourself in less time then he was going to spend asking you stupid questions and in the end, you were more or less going to have to spoon feed him the answer so he could type it in.

The world is full of net negative workers. When you get a bunch of them together (e.g. US Senate) they produce far more work to be done then they actually do.

Re:Um.. I have actually

[gbjbaanb]

I can afford 10, maybe 20 failures for the 1 project that succeeds

yeah, but not everyone can work for Google.

Many jobs aren't really about "skills" anymore.

[Anonymous Coward]

They're often about acting as an obsequious, obeident slave and saying the right things to the right people.

What could be more ludicrious than thinking that the "skills shortage" will be solved by
inexperienced, non-english speaking people from non-technical countries?

Historians will laugh their asses off at that one.

Re:I blame corn

[Anonymous Coward]

Porn is too expensive because of the porn monopolies! And porn is the basis of the American economy! And Slashdort is powered by porn, as is most of the internet! We need a nuclear internet to free our planet from the evil death grip of my hand while watching porn!

--
UNITE with the Campaign for a Free Pornonet because today, porn!

H-1Bs

[Anonymous Coward]

This seems like good evidence there is no shortage of high-tech workers and the H-1B program is completely unnecessary.

umm...yeah

[buddyglass]

As the recession continues...

The U.S. economy hasn't been in a state of recession since June 2009.

Re:umm...yeah

[iggymanz]

bullshit, recession lasted at least into 2012

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertlenzner/2011/10/08/the-2008-recession-never-ended/

even now the real unemployment rate is over 22% by the traditional measure abandoned during clinton years http://shadowstats.gov/

Re:umm...yeah

[Anonymous Coward]

A fucking lying Obama lapdog, you are.
 
I hope you rot in hell.

Re:umm...yeah

[buddyglass]

Lenzer is wrong from the first sentence of his column when he says, "For the recession of 2008 to have ended would have required the GDP to grow back to its former 2007 peak." That simply isn't true. At least, not according to the commonly accepted definition of "recession", i.e. a period in which the economy is contracting. If the economy is expanding, even at an anemic rate, and even if unemployment remains high and/or is slightly increasing, then the economy is not in recession. Even were I to accept the alternate measure of unemployment Williams' advances, it still wouldn't mean the economy remained in recession much after the official end date published by the NBER. But I don't accept that alternate measure. The unemployment rate is intended, conceptually, to measure the percentage of those who are both able to work and who want a job but who can't find one. Where Williams sees a category of "long-term discouraged" workers I see people who don't really want jobs anymore or else they'd have gone out looking sometime in the past 12 months. I'm fine with their being excluded.

Incidentally, I'd be more inclined to give credence to data from shadowstats if he weren't charging $175 a year for a subscription.

Re:umm...yeah

[the eric conspiracy]

The article you linked to is what is bullshit.

The recession ended in 2009.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/20/AR2010092006355.html

Re:umm...yeah

[buddyglass]

In his defense, the date is somewhat mushy. The NBER uses a number of measures (gdp growth, unemployment, etc.) and comes up with a date, but one could reasonably disagree with those criteria and the date they come up with. That said, the Lenzer article is still way wrong.

Re:umm...yeah

[buddyglass]

Yeah. That's a totally commensurate response to my saying the recession ended in 2009. Good day to you sir, Mr. Anonymous Coward!

I don't doubt it

[bmk67]

I don't doubt it's true. Over the last 5 years or so, I've seen the purchasing power of my wages steadily eroding, even with a salary increase in every year except this one. The excuse given this year was "you are too close to the top of your salary range" - yep, the salary range that was established in 2002, and not adjusted for inflation, or for any other reason. In the four years prior, the maximum increase was a little more than 2%, which was quickly consumed (and then some) by increases in the employee portion of our heath care premiums.

That being said, I'm generally happy with the lifestyle my salary can purchase, and I'm not looking to make a move to another employer. Nor am I particularly well-positioned to do so - I'm old enough that I intend to exit the industry in less than 10 years, and there's certainly no lack of younger developers who would work for less. The value my employer gets from me is from some niche skills and knowledge that would not necessarily be very marketable elsewhere. I've kept my skills current, but that's not where the real value comes from - it comes from intimate knowledge of our business, products, and industry.

I'm fairly content, but I have a lot of sympathy for people who have recently started careers in software development, or who are planning to. It ain't all it's cracked up to be.

Re:I don't doubt it

[BonThomme]

by "the top of your salary range" did they actually mean the middle? I get that every year.

I'm "deeply penetrated". Seriously.

Re:I don't doubt it

[bmk67]

Well, they were saying that 5 years ago when I was a good $15K away, so yeah pretty much. Never mind the fact that the range was established 11 years ago (I have held the position since then), and hasn't changed since. Never mind that the value of the dollar has decreased significantly.

I don't expect to get an increase in any particular year, but please, have the balls to tell me the real reason - because you know, I know what it is already.

Re:I blame corn

[BonThomme]

it's taking all our cron jobs!

The US Senate does good work

[rsilvergun]

Just not for you and me. :P. For a small project like mine it's just myself really, but it does give me a sense of what goes into keeping a software project running. In small companies a few net negative guys will wreak the company, but in larger companies it's just sunk costs. You absorb it from the profits on other projects. In most things (like building bridges) you can't do that, but software's got such a low cost to begin with you can have a lot of failure before it matters. Look at the XBox 1. 4 billion down the hole, but they made it back on the 360 when Sony stumbled a bit.

Re:The US Senate does good work

[Gr8Apes]

For small projects like plugins, maybe you can fail 20 times before succeeding and still make ends meet. MS is still in the red on XBox, AFAIK. Real numbers are hard to come by, but a lot of cash flow from other divisions supported XBox, and not everyone can support such a cash negative project for so many years. In fact, there's only a handful of companies that can. But that's a red herring.

We're talking normal average projects of significance with timelines of between 6-18 months, with between 200K-600K LOCs of new code when complete. Something a very small team of talented individuals can pop out, or your 100+ code monkeys. Which do you think will be most likely to succeed, with a budget of between $2-4M for a new product? All projects I'm discussing here that I have personal experience with have between 5-45K concurrent users, usually multiple DBs / services involved, transactions, security, etc. SLAs are at least 3 9s, and several with 5 9s. You might even have visited a couple of the public ones. None of those were built with code monkeys. The "success" stories of the code monkey variety usually involved a minimum of triple the time and 5-10x the original cost to get a substandard product out the door minus several features, and with at least several major but not deal killer bugs slated for version 1.1. Almost every single one of the code monkey projects utilized Agile, because, you know, you can screw it up faster and with less money that way. Not a single one of the successful projects used Agile. (Note: success is not going live a year late and way over budget)

Re:The US Senate does good work

[HornWumpus]

Net negative guys are never sunk costs, they have to go. Project complexity/interactions doesn't just go up linearly with staff size. Air thieves are the death of projects. Of course they live on as zombie projects, sucking cash, but never to produce a working version.

The worst case is an air thief in management. To provide themselves cover, they hire more idiots. That case is doomed from the start.

Re:The US Senate does good work

[Anonymous Coward]

Wasn't this all reiterated when you ran for the senate in 2006?

Even WWII wasn't enough without a fight

[as.kdjrfh sxcjvs]

For a lot of WWII the Feds (mostly) had to fight to get some employers and other unions to let in female and black workers.

Re:Even WWII wasn't enough without a fight

[ebno-10db]

For a lot of WWII the Feds (mostly) had to fight to get some employers and other unions to let in female and black workers.

You're right - I forgot about those cases. It was probably easier when the feds could tell anyone who wouldn't hire 'em that they were impeding the war effort.

Re:Even WWII wasn't enough without a fight

[as.kdjrfh sxcjvs]

Easier, and the labor market was tight which should have made it easier still, but it still took *years*.

There's a great series of posters -- WPA? American Legion? -- hammering on the theme that the USA is fighting to be unlike the racist Axis and we'll win when everyone is working. This is the only one I can find offhand:

http://about.usps.com/who-we-are/postal-history/images/government-poster-1942.jpg

gotta love rich people whining

[decora]

fuck, what the hell, do they have to cut down from three cars to two?

Re:gotta love rich people whining

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah, they have to go to one.

Technology becoming easier to implement?

[dgharmon]

"technology is becoming easier to implement without having an IT professional, he said. Also, the option of turning to outsourcing creates less pressure to increase wages"

Such analysis dreamed up by delusional management everywhere, how to get rid of their own IT staff and since they don't understand IT, it must be easy !

Obviously we need more H1-Bs then

[WOOFYGOOFY]

Because economics which says wages rise when there is s shortage of labor and falls when their is a surplus is for the Little People ; when you're a multi-national, Special Reverse Economics are applied.

Omarbah74@live.com

[tijanbah]

Hello Gretting to the family Omar bah

what this really means is...

[kcmastrpc]

more jobs are being filled outside of silicon valley. there is a definite upsurge in hiring the past few years, and most notably several of them are outside of the "sunshine" state. you could not pay me enough to move there, taxes, traffic, and high cost of living - no thanks. i enjoy not having an income tax, nice roads, and a 17 mile commute that takes no more than 20 minutes in either direction.

H1-B

[Anonymous Coward]

Treehuggers in the Pacific Northwest used to say "Stumps don' t lie".

Big business whining did not make the clear cut disappear. The signal remained for all to see.

Tell me again why I need a higher H1-B quota raise?

Not exactly accurate

[Anonymous Coward]

What you are actually seeing is that the job market for developers is so large and the available developers are so few that companies are hiring more developers from outside the skill set. Well, when they hire outside the skill set, they are going to pay lower wages.

Experienced Developers = Salary Increased for these developers and positions
Non-Experienced Developers = Lower salary

If you add also that Graphic Designers who work with HTML and CSS are now being called "Front End Developers" and added to the Software Developer pool, and graphic artists have historically been paid pretty low, you realize the fallacy of this data.

And maybe because...

[whitroth]

1. They're hiring H1-B visa holders at 50% of what you're getting.
2. They're finally hiring moderate-term unemployed (long term unemployed still aren't being hired) at 60% or 67% of what you're getting.
3. ROI, baby. I mean the company's got to show increasing profits every year; good isn't good enough, and the CEO and other major shareholders are just barely getting by at $15M/yr, plus options and bonuses, you need to take less away from them.
4. You don't believe in unions....

                    mark

Re:And maybe because...

[cheatch]

Funny how some software developers are usually the biggest GOP dickheads you'll ever meet.

Yes

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes. It is.