Slashdot Mirror


$30,000 For a Developer Referral?

itwbennett writes "Are good developers really that hard to find? Cambridge, MA-based inbound marketing company HubSpot seems to think so. The company has upped its developer referral bonus from $10,000 to $30,000 — and you don't have to be an employee to get in on the deal. Beats a free puppy. What has your experience been with referral bonuses?"

189 comments

  1. Recruiter Commision by Frankie70 · · Score: 5, Informative

    If the company goes through a recruiter, they pay around 20-25% of the employee's annual salary to the recruiter (if the employee sticks around for 'x' months). So this may be reasonable for the company for a job which pays 100K to 150K annually.

    1. Re:Recruiter Commision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      2-3 months salary is normal around here for recruiter pay (Holland). But recruiters are rather vilified and not trusted. Most companies, large and small, I know don't work with independent recruiters. Don't trust them further than you can throw them.

    2. Re:Recruiter Commision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope you feel the same way about realtors.

    3. Re:Recruiter Commision by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 2

      Yep certainly had the Agencies cut taken off my agreed salary for three months before (I did complain). No mention of what Language/ALM they work with. Given that I know hundreds of Devs (Some of whom already live in commuting distance) it would be nice to know what skills they are looking for.

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    4. Re:Recruiter Commision by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 2

      The recruiter getting 20-25% of the employee's annual salary matches my experience, from both sides. Referral bonuses of $30,000 is unheard: I've seen plenty of referral bonuses offered of $500 to $1000 in the last year for work involving six figure salaries, including contracting work of more than six months duration.

      Both Cambridge, MA and Dublin, Ireland are very expensive places to live with some of the highest developer salaries I've seen offered. My colleagues and I have gotten recruiting calls for both areas with salaries consistently over $100,000/year, even during the recent bank crisis. But if you factor in high housing costs, very high vehicle costs, or the additional housing cost of easy commuting access, they become much less appealing.

    5. Re:Recruiter Commision by Minupla · · Score: 1

      We just doubled our internal recruiting bonus at work. Nothing like 30K but still, doubled.

      We find that people who are internally recruited have better retention rates and are less likely to be 'misrepresenting themselves' then candidates from recruiters, generally speaking.

      Min

      --
      On the whole, I find that I prefer Slashdot posts to twitter ones because I don't get limited to 140 chars before
    6. Re:Recruiter Commision by FreeUser · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yep certainly had the Agencies cut taken off my agreed salary for three months before (I did complain). No mention of what Language/ALM they work with. Given that I know hundreds of Devs (Some of whom already live in commuting distance) it would be nice to know what skills they are looking for.

      huh!?!

      I've worked with recruiters for years, in Chicago, New York, and London to name just three places. I've never, ever, had my pay docked because of the recruiter's fee. Never. And every job I've had beyond the first out of college has been through a recruiter (and they've all been excellent jobs, on both sides of the pond).

      The employer should always pay the recruiter's fee. You as an employee/candidate should never see the fee, probably won't know what the fee was, and shouldn't necessarily even be aware of the fee (other than in the most hypothetical sense).

      Having your salary docked for three months...that's just crazy. The only instance I know of where that's the norm is with talent agents in the media...a journalist I know at a New York radio station pays n% of his salary to his talent agent, but that's an entirely different can of worms. In technical recruiting, that should never happen. If your employer docked you, I'd say your employer is more than a little suspect and I'd get your CV/resume out. If your recruiter is collecting from you, then you've been suckered into the wrong kind of recruiter.

      --
      The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
    7. Re:Recruiter Commision by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      Everyone should.
      They are worse than used car sellers. The only folks worse are home inspectors. Even if you select one yourself, and pay him yourself he will still miss tons of stuff and try to give you the best impression of the house. This is because you are not likely to need future inspections but the realtor is. Also in many/most states they are only liable up to the cost of the inspection.

      Making realtors and home inspectors at least as liable for issues with the property as used car salesmen are would be a huge improvement.

    8. Re:Recruiter Commision by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      Obviously I've worked for some far shabbier employers than you :D

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    9. Re:Recruiter Commision by CastrTroy · · Score: 2

      I really don't see much wrong with home inspectors, Provided you can find a good one. Ask friends (and possibly your real estate agent, if you trust them) for referrals, and talk to a few before selecting one. While they may not be perfect, they certainly know a lot more than I do about houses, and will know what problems to look for. I'm sure there's plenty of bad ones out there, but you can basically say that about any trade/profession.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    10. Re:Recruiter Commision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's like there's a whole world out there, with different behaviors and customs.

    11. Re:Recruiter Commision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      $150k/year + $30k referral, then put the new employee in a noisy cubicle with a $40 chair and an outdated computer.

    12. Re:Recruiter Commision by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      You would be far better served by getting a plumber, a roofer, a HVAC tech, and a general contrator to look at the place. It would not cost you anymore either. The home inspector is just there to rubber stamp the house so you can get a mortgage. Anyone who is not willing to take some liability might as well not look at the place at all.

    13. Re:Recruiter Commision by wvmarle · · Score: 1

      The only instance I know of where that's the norm is with talent agents in the media...a journalist I know at a New York radio station pays n% of his salary to his talent agent,

      Which is sensible, assuming it is this journalist who asked the agent to get him work. So the talent agent provides their service to the journalist - and the journalist pays. This in contrast to when a company asks a recruiter to recruit someone for them, in that case the recruiter provides the service to the company, and the company pays.

      In case of your friend the recruiters fee is definitely included in the salary he asks, if he wants to make say $1,000 and the fee is 20%, he'd ask $1,250. So that after the fee, he still has the salary he wants.

    14. Re:Recruiter Commision by tnk1 · · Score: 1

      Part of the $150k they pay you for is the office survival skills where you know to steal the good chairs from the nice conference rooms for your desk. When they complain, if they do, you point out that your crappy broken chair is an OSHA issue and that really, you sit in your desk chair longer per day than anyone that sits in that conference room chair.

    15. Re:Recruiter Commision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Just take some of your $150k and go buy a nice chair. Really, take some of whatever you make and go buy the best chair you can possibly find. Before it's too late and you have back problems. Spending $1000 on a chair is a bargain compared to agonizing back pain.

    16. Re:Recruiter Commision by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      For a $30,000 referral bonus, though I would probably just stop doing my job and start recruiting people. On top of my salary, getting two people hired should be enough to cover the lack of raises for the past 7 years plus a little extra spending money to maybe take a vacation.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    17. Re:Recruiter Commision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You think you can get a plumber, roofer, HVAC tech and general contractor to a home for a few hundred bucks?

      I definitely see the conflict of interest, but there is another check on this: Your realtor knows this isn't your last home, and if they're interested in repeat business then they want you to find a home you're happy with and not just the first one they can get you to jump on.

      Our last experience with this went very well, and so we'll be back to the same realtor next time and we'll have him list our current home. The inspector informed us that the roof was shot on one side, that the home owner had done his own siding and did some of it wrong (although the problems were mainly with appearance), that the foundation needed columns, and that otherwise the bones of the house were good. We went purely on the realtor's recommendation for an inspector.

      But realtors are pretty independent and operate mostly on commission. So there's a wide variety from great realtors who aren't in it for a quick buck to realtors who just want to get into anything but home realty and need to make a name with a quick buck. Picking a good realtor from a slimebag can be tricky.

      tl;dr: Get a good realtor. My Gawd, you're paying him a flipping fortune.

    18. Re:Recruiter Commision by Altus · · Score: 1

      I have never had this experience with a home inspector. I pay them myself and select them myself and I have never hand anyone behave in less than a professional way. They certainly did not give me a rosy picture of the house I bought. 10 years after I feel like what they told me was quite accurate. I have had to fix the things they pointed out and very little else really.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    19. Re:Recruiter Commision by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      We are talking about $500-$1000. An HVAC tech will want about $100 to clean and inspect, the roofer and contractor about the same. The plumber will vary, but even with cameraing the main you are looking at no more than $300 for him.

      Why would you buy a home that is not your last?
      I have no intention to sell my house unless I am forced to move by my job. Perhaps more than the expected number of children could also motivate me to get another home, but unlikely. I shared a bedroom and my offspring could do the same.

    20. Re:Recruiter Commision by 2fuf · · Score: 1

      You've never heard of a dev earning $120,000 then either?

    21. Re:Recruiter Commision by h4rr4r · · Score: 2

      Mine missed major issues.
      Main line had tree roots and the issue was apparent if you ran the water in two locations at once. So shower and sink near washing machine, for example, the water backed up into basement or at least flowed out very slowly. The furnace short cycled and had a cracked heat exchanger, which a carbon monoxide detector should have found.

      There were also many minor issues like the fact that the kitchen sink drain was improperly repaired and leaking. Also everything was done on the cheap by that last owner. So I have had to replace failing sink/toilet/fridge water lines and the like with steel or copper. These minor items are my fault for not noting during the walk through, but it would have been nice if he mentioned it.

    22. Re:Recruiter Commision by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      That does make sense then.

      Is there a reason you believe you will not want to stay in this home?

      I for instance bought a ranch, since stairs will become a problem with age. I have had many relatives forced to sell homes they lived in for decades for that exact reason.

    23. Re:Recruiter Commision by dj245 · · Score: 1

      You would be far better served by getting a plumber, a roofer, a HVAC tech, and a general contrator to look at the place. It would not cost you anymore either. The home inspector is just there to rubber stamp the house so you can get a mortgage. Anyone who is not willing to take some liability might as well not look at the place at all.

      Or possibly worse, the home inspector can go on a markup rampage, flagging absolutely everything and marking everything as "very serious" or "safety hazard" even when the problem is very minor. All to cover his own butt. The inspection is then basically worthless.

      --
      Even those who arrange and design shrubberies are under considerable economic stress at this period in history.
    24. Re:Recruiter Commision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep certainly had the Agencies cut taken off my agreed salary for three months before (I did complain). No mention of what Language/ALM they work with. Given that I know hundreds of Devs (Some of whom already live in commuting distance) it would be nice to know what skills they are looking for.

      huh!?!

      I've worked with recruiters for years, in Chicago, New York, and London to name just three places. I've never, ever, had my pay docked because of the recruiter's fee. Never. And every job I've had beyond the first out of college has been through a recruiter (and they've all been excellent jobs, on both sides of the pond).

      The employer should always pay the recruiter's fee. You as an employee/candidate should never see the fee, probably won't know what the fee was, and shouldn't necessarily even be aware of the fee (other than in the most hypothetical sense).

      Having your salary docked for three months...that's just crazy. The only instance I know of where that's the norm is with talent agents in the media...a journalist I know at a New York radio station pays n% of his salary to his talent agent, but that's an entirely different can of worms. In technical recruiting, that should never happen. If your employer docked you, I'd say your employer is more than a little suspect and I'd get your CV/resume out. If your recruiter is collecting from you, then you've been suckered into the wrong kind of recruiter.

      /sigh

      They don't dock your pay you potato head. The company you're working pays the recruiter, not you.

    25. Re:Recruiter Commision by Quirkz · · Score: 2

      The only folks worse are home inspectors.

      I had an awesome home inspector. He found all sorts of details, down to "this faucet drain doesn't quite close right" and "the window sills are kind of sticky and you'll probably want them cleaned." I've been in the house five years now and can't think of anything important he overlooked. Maybe he's a rare find and I got lucky, as he's the only one I've ever used.

    26. Re:Recruiter Commision by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      I am not sure how that is worse.
      I would imagine in a system with liability for a home inspector he would have to pay for the service call when the repair folks do their initial inspection and estimate. Since he would have cause unneeded work.

      In such a system the home inspector would get insurance and bad ones would not be able to continue to get those policies.

    27. Re:Recruiter Commision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You need to name them!

    28. Re:Recruiter Commision by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      You got very lucky.
      You should make sure to recommend him to people you know and review him online.

    29. Re: Recruiter Commision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You should get yourself a buyer's Realtor.

      They work strictly with buyers and don't sell any houses. They take part of the commission from the other realtor so you don't have to pay them out of pocket and they basically are there to help you because they know helping you out means you'll send friends and family their way and you'll go to them for your next house as well.

      They also know the best home inspectors because the more you like the house they found for you, the better it is for their business.

    30. Re:Recruiter Commision by Baton+Rogue · · Score: 1

      And every job I've had beyond the first out of college has been through a recruiter (and they've all been excellent jobs, on both sides of the pond).

      I had a recruiter help me get into a previous job. They were very persistent in contacting the employer to make sure that they were moving forward, and they were a huge help in getting me the job. That being said, that same recruiter was contacting me a year later asking if I was interested in another job at a different company...

    31. Re:Recruiter Commision by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      The realtor doesn't actually own the property, while the used car salesman's company actually does own the car, in regards to liability that's all the difference in the world.

      A seller on the other hand needs to fill out a full disclosure or they can get sued, so the laws are already in place?

      What I'd really like to see is less "as is" properties and banks taking more responsibility for the shortsales and bank owned properties they sell, "as is" just isn't good enough from a trillion dollar company imo. I guarantee they won't move an inch till the law requires them to do so however.

    32. Re: Recruiter Commision by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      I did.

      The simple fact is realtors motives do not line up with the buyer. A realtor wants you to buy any house as soon as possible. That way they spend the least amount of time for the commission. People do not turn over houses fast enough for it to be that common to use the same realtor again.

      Again more liability on their part would help line up their motivations.

    33. Re:Recruiter Commision by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      In what state?
      In mine you can pay $500 and not fill out a disclosure form or pay it and claim the disclosure is possibly wrong. Nearly all houses are sold that way. Since $500 is not a lot to avoid liability on the property. At the time that law was passed $500 was a lot of money. Today it is not.

      At least you can try to sue a bank. In many cases suing a previous homeowner is nearly pointless. They may not have the money to pay a judgement and you may not even be able to find them.

    34. Re:Recruiter Commision by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      are you talking about buying seller insurance? If so, the buyer is still protected here, the seller just passes on the liability. Pretty sure those require an inspection to be done too by the seller, or insurance company.

      Also, there are state and federal disclosure rules, lead based paint would be a federal disclosure applicable to all states.

    35. Re:Recruiter Commision by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      No, I am talking about disclosure.

      NY state allows you to pay $500 to the buyer and not do a state disclosure. Federal ones still do apply.

      http://rmfpc.com/bye-bye-buyer-beware-states-new-disclosure-law-on-property-sales-shifts-burden-to-sellers/

    36. Re:Recruiter Commision by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      I am so glad I don't like in New York anymore, we don't have that big gapping loophole in ours:

      http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/home-sellers-colorado-your-disclosure-obligations.html

      I guess the $500 can be seen as a red flag when purchasing, If was a buyer in NY I would ask for the disclosure, not the $500. The $500 seems like its to cover the BUYER's inspection expense, but if the buyer backs out after the inspection, the seller won't be crediting them the $500, which makes me thing this law was written by morons who don't know anything about mortgage liabilities.

    37. Re:Recruiter Commision by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      live in* New York.

    38. Re:Recruiter Commision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you even read either of the posts quoted in your post? This was exactly the point of the poster you're replying to.

    39. Re:Recruiter Commision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The sad thing is most companies won't negotiate with current employees for a raise of say 10k. They'll acknowledge that you're good but its company policy not to negotiate because all current employees have been priced into the contract already. From a business perspective its about sticking to the projection and making sure each pot of money is spent accordingly so that the project is profitable according to the model. However, this behavior is extremely short sighted. The 30k reward is nothing but the result of a bad feedback loop enforcing 'growth' while maintaining costs (employee salaries) at an acceptable level even if the net result is lower profitability. You know its bad when you leave a company and that same head hunter that originally helped hired you 3 years ago comes back and says 'you're a perfect match' and talks your ex company into rehiring you for more money than you asked for as a raise. Independent contracting seems to be a better gig anyway...

    40. Re:Recruiter Commision by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      It really can't be since it has become so common.

      Even the disclosure is near worthless since they can say Unknown to anything known to be bad and good luck proving it. I looked into this after I spent $3000 to replace main sewer line due to tree root infiltration.

    41. Re:Recruiter Commision by james_pb · · Score: 1

      Knowing something about _houses_ is almost irrelevant. Knowing something about _land_ is useful.

      The sticks you pile on your investment are not the investment. The land is.

      Whether or not it's a _good_ investment is a different question.

    42. Re:Recruiter Commision by Antique+Geekmeister · · Score: 1

      I certainly have, but they were very skilled in multiple fields, filling particular niches for the products that are the core of a company's business. And they worked very hard.

    43. Re:Recruiter Commision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really don't see much wrong with home inspectors, Provided you can find a good one.

      I don't see much wrong with tautologies, provided you can find a useful one.

    44. Re:Recruiter Commision by PingSpike · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure I'd say they were all bad based on your experience. Mine ran all of the water in the house at the same time almost the entire time he was there to try and force any drainage issues to the surface. At the time I wouldn't have thought to do something like that.

    45. Re:Recruiter Commision by doyin92 · · Score: 1

      its nice,its we serve as a motive and encouragement to the workers

    46. Re:Recruiter Commision by FreeUser · · Score: 1

      Obviously I've worked for some far shabbier employers than you :D

      But now you know, and armed with new knowledge you can avoid such in the future. I wouldn't have known the first time I used a recruiter either...I just had better luck than you. This is a real case where knowledge (in this case, of empoyer and recruiter codes of conduct and norms) is power.

      --
      The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
  2. If I refer myself by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can I get $30k *and* the job?

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:If I refer myself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      If a good friend refers you :)

    2. Re:If I refer myself by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Can I get $30k *and* the job?

      What you need to do is find someone else to refer you.

      Have your lawyer write up a contract that they will pay you 95% of the referral fee; and/or any amounts paid to them by the company or as a result of you being hired, and that also prohibits them from disclosing the details of the deal, or that there was a deal, or that there was any reason for referring you other than they had evaluated your work in the past.

      In exchange, you will allow them to refer you, and you will provide them the details.

      So they get $1000 bucks, you get $29000; the employer gets a great developer, who's really happy to work, especially with the extra cash, and boosted ego

      Now, this only works if you get hired and stay on for the 120 days.

    3. Re:If I refer myself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, you don't really get $29,000 since you have to pay the lawyer. Actually you get the chance at $29,000 on the off chance that you are hired. Your co-conspirator gets a chance at $1000 if you are hired. Your lawyer gets his $1,000 (or so depending on his rate and billable hours used) whether you are hired or not. As usual, the lawyer always gets paid.

    4. Re:If I refer myself by tgd · · Score: 3, Informative

      Can I get $30k *and* the job?

      While you may have been joking, that was not at all uncommon during the dot com boom. You'd basically negotiate the recruiter's fees into the signing bonus and grab $60-$80k in signing bonuses. If you were a particularly shrewd negotiator, you'd get 1/3 up front, the second 1/3 after 90 days or something and the rest at 6 months.

      Those were the days ...

    5. Re:If I refer myself by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I won't be referring you then. 95% of $30000 is $28500. If you can't do basic math you probably aren't a good developer.

    6. Re:If I refer myself by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      And, who pays the taxes on the $30k?

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    7. Re:If I refer myself by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      Well, If they usually pay recruiters, I don't see anything wrong with this. When my friend bought his last house, he didn't use a real estate agent. So very early in the negotiations, he basically dropped the price of the house by 2.5%, because the commission on a house is usually 5% split between the agent of the seller and the buyer, and it's paid by the seller. If they don't have to pay that half of the commission to the other real estate agent, it should be subtracted from the price of the house. Same thing goes here. If the company usually pays $10,000 to a recruiter, and you manage to find the company yourself, the company should give you a $10,000 signing bonus.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    8. Re:If I refer myself by Shados · · Score: 1

      They're called signing bonuses. Happens all the time in the big IT markets (in Cali, Mass, NY...)

      If you're actually good, take a job in one of the big cities that house the top employers (even if you don't take a job with them...companies in the area have to compete somehow), and don't get a sign on bonus, you're negotiating wrong (or you're not as good as you think you are).

    9. Re:If I refer myself by tnk1 · · Score: 2

      He writes code to do that silly math for him.

    10. Re:If I refer myself by tgd · · Score: 1

      Well, If they usually pay recruiters, I don't see anything wrong with this. When my friend bought his last house, he didn't use a real estate agent. So very early in the negotiations, he basically dropped the price of the house by 2.5%, because the commission on a house is usually 5% split between the agent of the seller and the buyer, and it's paid by the seller. If they don't have to pay that half of the commission to the other real estate agent, it should be subtracted from the price of the house. Same thing goes here. If the company usually pays $10,000 to a recruiter, and you manage to find the company yourself, the company should give you a $10,000 signing bonus.

      Interesting your friend was able to do that -- generally its a 5% commission, which the seller's agent splits with the buyer's agent. Usually if there is no buyers agent, the seller's agent keeps all of it. (Which is why, as your friend did, its best to push on it... its possible the seller in that case did drop the price 2.5% and still got stuck paying their agent the 5%!)

    11. Re:If I refer myself by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      its possible the seller in that case did drop the price 2.5% and still got stuck paying their agent the 5%!)
      That is probably correct. Although in my common experience in several U.S. states, it is usually 6%.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    12. Re:If I refer myself by ninlilizi · · Score: 1

      I'd imagion the level of developer worth 30k, also has the smarts to >/dev/null the taxibility of their income.

    13. Re:If I refer myself by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      That wasn't the dev pay, it's the referral bonus

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    14. Re:If I refer myself by dcw3 · · Score: 1

      Realized after submitting that I may have just misread your intended meaning.

      --
      Just another day in Paradise
    15. Re:If I refer myself by mysidia · · Score: 1

      And, who pays the taxes on the $30k?

      In this kind of arrangement, where the developer got someone to sign your contract, to agree to take the referral bonus and pay 95%, in exchange for the details of the bonus and the opportunity to refer you; the person who signed the contract with the developer and made a referral has an inflow of $30k (from the referral business), and a matching expense of $28,500; if they are paid the referral, and pay out the portion agreed.

      Some portion of the $1500 profit from this transaction may become taxable income for them.

      For the developer, they have simply an outflow in fees to their lawyer, then an inflow of $28,500 related to this venture.

      Some portion of the $28.5k in profit after subtracting the lawyers' fees may be part of the developer's taxable income.

      In either case... both developer and person referring them, may be able to find other deductions to subtract from the amount which will be taxed.

      For example; to collect this referral bonus, the developer had to travel to the interview... there might be other permissible business or other expenses which match this revenue, because the expenses were required in order to generate it.

      There might also be other items such as charitable donations made in the same year, that are allowed to subtract from income by way of deductions.

      For example... if the developer then donated the $28,000 to a non-profit charity, the bulk of the proceeds would be wiped out for tax purposes.

    16. Re:If I refer myself by mysidia · · Score: 1

      I won't be referring you then. 95% of $30000 is $28500. If you can't do basic math you probably aren't a good developer.

      I think you missed the point; as in what i'm talking about flew way over your head. 95% zequals 96.66667%

      The time you spent composing your post + the time I spent reading it + the time to reply to your post, probably adds to a dollar amount in time value greater than the difference between 96.7% and 95%.

    17. Re:If I refer myself by mysidia · · Score: 1

      Well, If they usually pay recruiters, I don't see anything wrong with this.

      There might be different tax implications for the employer; whether they pay it to a recruiter, or whether they pay a bonus to the employee.

      Taxes don't have to be witheld on a referral payment. For a Bonus to an employee (Supplemental wage, as it's called); social security and medicare taxes have to be withheld; which includes an employer match.

      That means, for them to be on "equal footing"; the bonus paid to the employee would have to be reduced in amount, to compensate for the employer match on taxes, then reduced further by required witholding.

    18. Re:If I refer myself by doyin92 · · Score: 1

      if you are focus and determined

  3. Wow, $30k eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My company just dropped its referral bonus from $2,000 to $500.

    Needless to say, if I find a good developer I'm referring them to HubSpot.

    1. Re:Wow, $30k eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But do they even operate in Canada?

  4. Referral bonuses ? Seen them offered. by vikingpower · · Score: 1

    Never seen them awarded. Baked air, most of the time. YMMV, though.

    --
    Religous speak to God. Insane are spoken to by God. When all shut up, one can finally hear Shostakovich in peace
    1. Re:Referral bonuses ? Seen them offered. by macson_g · · Score: 2, Funny

      I cashed in 5000 GBP for referral once. At the rate the US dollars are being printed currently, it should be equal to the amount mentioned in the article soon :)

    2. Re:Referral bonuses ? Seen them offered. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't make investment advice based on the financial 'insights' of random loonies, a quick check of the exchange rate tells me that the pounds sterling has been fairly steady when compared to the dollar for the last few years.

    3. Re:Referral bonuses ? Seen them offered. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you will find that you are printing money almost as fast as the Americans. Which is why it is so sweet to be a Pommie Aussie right now.

  5. Referral "bonuses" by spamchang · · Score: 1

    Maybe they've loaded the contractual clauses with fine print to help them avoid paying out $30k. Maybe the only bonus is $30k, which might be cheaper than any other headhunter's usual contract. Someone at HubSpot should think about contracting out to Bengaluru or Mumbai.

    1. Re:Referral "bonuses" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they've loaded the contractual clauses with fine print to help them avoid paying out $30k

      Maybe? Of course they have. There isn't a hope in hell of anyone receiving that bonus, it's just PR fluff to make headlines.

      $EMPLOYER has a referral 'bonus' but I Idon't know a single person who has received it. There is always some reason they decline to pay; perhaps the candidate only had 10 years enterprise experience with .Net 3.5 instead of 4.0.

    2. Re:Referral "bonuses" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...Someone at HubSpot should think about contracting out to Bengaluru or Mumbai.

      Someone should probably realize they probably have tried already...and failed to find the talent they need.

      The solution isn't always to replace one good developer with ten bad ones just because it's affordable. Time has a cost too.

    3. Re:Referral "bonuses" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Good point about the contract. If AT&T offered such bonuses for referring developers, I'd refer someone, then tell them that person couldn't start working unless they paid me the $30,000 plus a $0.61 administrative fee.

    4. Re:Referral "bonuses" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      That's a wonderful canary (in the coal mine) for when to get out of a company. If they offer their employees large cash bonuses and then weasel out with fine print (as opposed to clear and reasonable reasons), you should thank $EMPLOYER for being so explicit in their messaging to run away from them.

    5. Re:Referral "bonuses" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      oh come on, you can't have administrative costs that low.

    6. Re:Referral "bonuses" by HaZardman27 · · Score: 1

      It seems foolish to use such a large number for the bonus. I would expect most people would immediately be suspicious of that amount. My company pays $2,500 for referring an employee who gets hired on and stays at the company for at least 90 days (any type of employee). To me, that is a very good number for a bonus; it entices employees into referring people, but the number isn't suspicious and probably less than what it would cost the recruiters to find a person of equal qualifications.

      --
      Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
  6. Recruiters can easily cost this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I have been in the situation where projects/orders had to to be refused because there just weren't enough people to handle it. If you have a choice between paying 30k so you can accept a 300k project... that is pretty easy.

    Mind you, as others have noted, getting these bonuses is usually impossible. Personally I think it is red flag. It is not like developers are impossible to find but the good people tend to avoid the bad companies. If they got to offer this much, just how much do they suck to work for? I betcha a google doesn't have to do this kinda of stuff.

    1. Re:Recruiters can easily cost this by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      >> 30k so you can accept a 300k project... that is pretty easy.

      Yes, it is easy: don't take the project. 10% (basically your profit) burned just to fill a seat. Hopefully you won't ever become a CFO.

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    2. Re:Recruiters can easily cost this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if you're a contractor and this is your foot in the door with a new customer, it's worth burning the profit at times. money isn't the only thing of value. sometimes just getting the contract is worth it on its own, even without the profit.

    3. Re:Recruiters can easily cost this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope you're not in charge of anything, let alone becoming a CFO.

      You have no idea what the profit margin would be on his 300k project and if you think a software development project can be handled with a 10% profit margin, you are delusional.

      It is nice however how you went out of your way to be an asshole though, your reward is people like me showing what it's like to have some fucktard come along and start insulting you. Of course you asked for it, the AC that you responded to was minding their own business when you responded.

    4. Re:Recruiters can easily cost this by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      Oh look a sandy mangina! I am delusional btw about the 10%... many profit margins are slimmer than that.

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    5. Re:Recruiters can easily cost this by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      One can add many caveats as to why loosing money is worth it in the long run. But the reason given above is not one of them.

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
  7. Of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    The conclusion repeatedly reached by academic researchers in software engineering is that there is an 'order of magnitude' difference among good and mediocre developers, and good developers are perenially in short supply.

    So the answer is yes, it's absolutely worth the money.

    1. Re:Of course by Sperbels · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think the adjective you're using is quite right. The word to use here is exceptional. The whole industry is plagued by this idea that only the superstars are any good, while the people who do the bulk of the grunt work are mediocre. Well, among those mediocre people are good, mediocre, and bad developers....and nobody seems to acknowledge that.

  8. Good employees are scarce and may get scarcer by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Yes, good developers are hard to find. Ditto good sysadmins, business analysts, project managers, architects, etc. In larger corporations there's a strong movement to work around that scarcity by compartimentalizing the jobs, turning the whole into an assembly line, also because good people are not only hard to find but harder to manage as well. Not that the people themselves are difficult, but in most cases a group of excellent people will not have a uniform set of skills, so making the most of them requires individual talent management and more complex work planning.

    What they end up with is sometimes called "predictable mediocrity". Just like having a mechanical assembly line, you'll have more control, easier planning and a predictable quality, at the expense of flexibility, innovation, sometimes cost, and excellence (your quality will be more predictable but I've rarely seen the average go up or even remain the same). What is also does is breed excellence out of the workplace: experts will be too expensive, they will not enjoy the nature of the work, and you will find it hard to offer a viable career path to talented workers. So I expect real talent to become even scarcer and more expensive.

    --
    If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    1. Re: Good employees are scarce and may get scarcer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless you work for a Facebook pre iPo or some other hot company where you will get paid a lot via stock options, being a 24 hour working hotshot is not worth it

      I would rather spend time with my kids. Even then I've seen people with kids control their hours and once the kids grow up they work more to show off

      Everyone has different priorities. Once the 20 something's of today start to get married and have kids in a few years watch all the hot shots vanish and calls for family friendly workplaces to start up again

    2. Re: Good employees are scarce and may get scarcer by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      >> Once the 20 something's of today start to get married and have kids in a few years watch all the hot shots vanish and calls for family friendly workplaces to start up again.

      Oh there are always freshly minted grads to exploit... and former 20 something hotshots to lay off.

      Hey what'd those all nighters getcha? A nice fat pink slip!

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    3. Re: Good employees are scarce and may get scarcer by SABME · · Score: 1

      The problem is that a new generation of hotshots will just come along to replace the ones that have grown up and want sane working conditions.

    4. Re: Good employees are scarce and may get scarcer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because there won't be a hot batch of freshly-minted 20-somethings to replace them?

    5. Re:Good employees are scarce and may get scarcer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      One reason why good employees are scarce is that everyone has a different idea of what one is. You may have a clear idea but is it the same as the one your boss has, or your boss' boss? Probably not. Your boss probably wants someone who will make him/her look good, makes conservative project plans and nearly always finishes on time (as opposed to promising the Next Big Thing and finishing six weeks late), is good at training new hires, pleasant to be around, and does not cause problems with paperwork or vacations.

      It gets even more complicated with job interviews when multiple interviewers are involved. Each of them has ideas of who would be a good fit and it's not necessarily who would be the best designer and coder in whatever languages and platforms you work with. They're all thinking "do I come to work every day with this person over in the next cubicle"? That's a fair question, but it's not necessarily the same as asking who would do the most for your company's technology or bottom line.

    6. Re: Good employees are scarce and may get scarcer by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 0

      If you prefer a job where your individual talent and contributions matter rather than one where you're doing 9-5 assembly line work, you are more likely to find it in smaller companies. Such companies (especially startups) do tend to place more demand on your time. But there are also some companies where working at a highly individualized job doesn't mean you have to put in extra hours. For the past decade I've always managed to find jobs that were more or less tailored to my particular talents rather than to a generic "developer level x" profile, and while I do put in overtime when needed, on the whole these have been normal 9-5 jobs without any pressure to exceed normal working hours.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    7. Re:Good employees are scarce and may get scarcer by umghhh · · Score: 2
      I salute you Sir.

      Not that I am that excellent but I am good enough and I see few of those better than me suffering from insults from below (refuse to improve the product and then scolding because somebody else did etc) all the time as well as from (hopefully only moderate) idiocy of management stuff too.

    8. Re:Good employees are scarce and may get scarcer by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      I disagree that good employees are scarce. The fundamentals of the marketplace just don't bear it out:
      1. There are more unemployed admins, developers, project managers, architects, etc than there were about 6 years ago.
      2. There are more H1B visas than ever before, so if there weren't talented Americans there are certainly enough talented foreigners out there.

      Now, is it true that the majority of those who are unemployed are probably not that good? Yes. But a few of them likely are really good, and offering a good price and perks and referral bonuses is a good way to get them interested in working for you.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    9. Re:Good employees are scarce and may get scarcer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When a company starts giving out big referral bonuses there is usually a reason they cannot find employees. They also display high churn in their workforce. A 30k referral bonus for a good developer at a marketing company says to me that there is a problem with the business model or management that may drive away good employees.

    10. Re:Good employees are scarce and may get scarcer by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 2

      from my POV (bay area) the unemployed engineers _are_ quite good. they tend to be older and more expensive (and US born); all of which the companies do NOT want anymore.

      there's tons of talent out there waiting to be hired.

      problem is, companies are now 'broken' and spoiled by the greed of h1b servants. getting hired as an older US citizen is near impossible these days. ask me - I know this first-hand.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    11. Re:Good employees are scarce and may get scarcer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > good people are not only hard to find but harder to manage as well.

      You don't manage good people, you empower them. E.g. I am quite free to do what I want at work, as long it is related to certain project. Both customer, managers and colleagues are happy with my work. (Yes, that is an indirect way of saying that I'm among the good).

    12. Re:Good employees are scarce and may get scarcer by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      The older part is really the depressing thing: some of the best people I've ever been involved in hiring were in their 50's or 60's.

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    13. Re:Good employees are scarce and may get scarcer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen, brother. I'm a web content editor now...because I gave up! :(

  9. Save The Puppies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Beats a free puppy."

    Seriously, who writes this shit?!

  10. one time my apartment complex gave me $50 by decora · · Score: 5, Funny

    for referring my buddy dave.

    turns out dave was doing a shake-n-bake meth lab in the back of his pickup. one night it exploded right there in the parking lot. a huge fireball lit the sky. my next door neighbor, doreen, thought iit was jesus come back for the rapture.

    anyways. they wanted the $50 back. i said, i already spent it. i took the ex-inlaw's to the Golden Corral buffet, and at ten dollars a head, well, that money is clean gone.

    they said, damnit, that sumbitch dave blew a hole in the parking lot.

    i said no problem. i know a guy, ronnie earl, who works on the pothole truck for the city. ronnie knew how to get the hole fixed. he filed a pothole report but he used the name of his rich uncle as the report filer. his uncle, you see, owns 5 chevrolet dealerships and is the richest sumbitch this side of caw valley. (we used to call it squaw valley, until my brother bobby went and married that indian girl... it wouldnt be nice to call it that no more)

    anyways. when it comes to referrals, you better get yourself some kinda papers saying they cant get it back if you accidentally misjudge someone's character. like ol' shake-and-bake dave.

    1. Re:one time my apartment complex gave me $50 by arkenian · · Score: 1

      So, every company I've ever worked at, the employee had to be a successful employee for (usually) about 6 months before you got your bonus. That means both a.) the employee will likely stick around, and b.) they have time to decide if your judgement was worth crap.

    2. Re:one time my apartment complex gave me $50 by Thing+I+am · · Score: 3, Funny

      Dad?

      --
      That sucking sound you hear is my bandwidth.
    3. Re:one time my apartment complex gave me $50 by Atzanteol · · Score: 3, Funny

      My KINGDOM for some mod-points!

      --
      "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

      - Charles Darwin
    4. Re:one time my apartment complex gave me $50 by dkleinsc · · Score: 1

      Dave?

      Dave's not here!

      --
      I am officially gone from /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
    5. Re:one time my apartment complex gave me $50 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      cool story bro

    6. Re:one time my apartment complex gave me $50 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You should have asked another $50 for referring Ronnie Earl.

  11. Stay away by Charliemopps · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In my experience, they offer a large referral bonus when they have a bad reputation. The bonus is designed to bribe at least 1 person to say good things about them.

    1. Re:Stay away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In my experience, they offer a large referral bonus when they have a bad reputation. The bonus is designed to bribe at least 1 person to say good things about them.

      Having just hired someone away from there ... you're absolutely right.

    2. Re:Stay away by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Maybe it could be a good approach for someone like me who has no reputation. It would be a fair price to pay for being able to stay off social media.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    3. Re:Stay away by BVis · · Score: 1

      Please share. For some reason it's perfectly ok to trash a bad employee, but finding information about a bad employer is difficult.

      --
      Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
    4. Re:Stay away by Charliemopps · · Score: 1

      Usually places like that just engender distrust between employees, anger, resentment... a toxic place to work is just that. People there end up having bad things to say about you, and new employers know they have problems with people that they've hired from there in the past. Stay away imo. The good employers, the ones you want to work for, usually don't even have to put up want adds... they have so many pending applications all the time they never need to announce they are hiring. My companies somewhere in the middle. It's a nice place to work, mostly friendly (always a bad apple right?) but they don't pay a lot. I probably get paid 10% less than I should (everyone in my company is underpaid), but my chances of getting laid off are almost 0, which really is a rare find in todays world, I actually have a pension (say what?!?) and my middle management knows I could leave for more money at any time so they treat me very well in every other aspects of the job that they can.

    5. Re:Stay away by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Management is centered around playing favorites and politics. The CEO doesn't believe in HR and only hired people to do HR duties (under bullshit techie titles) after they started screwing up things like maternity leave.

      It's one of the main east-coast homes of brogrammers

      Here's how QA works at HubSpot:
      - Moron ships broken untested code to production
      - The entire company falls down, including sales and marketing thanks to all the dogfooding
      - Marketing, the real power arm of the company (it is a marketing company, after all), pitches a fit
      - Dev decides to create a QA team
      - Testing slows down new feature rollouts
      - Marketing complains that new features aren't rolling out fast enough and pitches a fit
      - QA gets shoddy, then all the QA devs are moved out of QA, fired, or treated like shit until they leave
      - Moron ships broken untested code to production, 20 GOTO 10

      If you're a Ruby dev, don't even bother. Almost every Ruby dev, even those good enough to work outside of Ruby, got flushed out. Philosophical issues.

      Looking for challenging, interesting problems to work on? All of HubSpot's problems involve how to expand and improve invasive tracking of people who visit its customers' sites and how to run email right up to the bleeding edge of CANSPAM.

      Company is fully invested in perks that keep you in the office late (the old Web 2.0 beer fridge/ping-pong/pizza party trifecta) and peer pressure to keep you from going home or not working weekends, and frames their lack of benefits as benefits ("unlimited vacation" = no vacation, no parking or transit stipend = "bike friendly").

      I hope you have Twitter, Facebook, and G+ accounts, and you use them frequently and have followers, as that's part of the interview process and you're expected to post and re-post whatever management tells you to post and re-post.

    6. Re:Stay away by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      In my experience, they offer a large referral bonus when they have a bad reputation. The bonus is designed to bribe at least 1 person to say good things about them.

      well

      another thing is, if you're buying services from them, they're at least 30 000$ per year overpriced.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
  12. Great bonus... have fun collecting by gatkinso · · Score: 5, Informative

    I worked for a place that had a great referral bonus (cough cough... BAE Systems... cough). Operation Eagle Eye they called it.

    Well I found a developer that fit all the criteria. Filled out the paper work, got him interviewed and hired.... then all of a sudden email went quiet on the issue. Repeated emails to HR went unanswered. So finally I went down there in person to ask about the referral bonus. We'll get back to you. I got back to them (in person). Excuses: oh this facility doesn't participate in that program (so I went into the hall and pulled the poster off the wall and showed it to the HR rep). Oh your hire doesn't fulfill the requirements (so I got the requirements off the intranet site and checked them off). Oh that's right we didn't end up hiring him (he sits in the office next to mine). Finally I subtlety hinted that I would quit.

    They then sent me half the advertised bonus... four months after I was supposed to get it... and withheld over half of it in taxes AND deducted my 401K percentage contribution from it (oh sorry that was an error by finance we can cut you a new check on 60 days).

    So. Beware if this crap.

    --
    I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    1. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FWIW HR saved you a headache by deducting the taxes up front and unless you were already set to max out your 401k for the year they did you a favor there too. Can't speak to the rest of the story...

    2. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1, Funny

      You think that sucks, you should see what happened to the people your products were used on.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    3. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by Chelloveck · · Score: 1

      Meanwhile, those of us working for reputable companies have had no trouble getting the referral bonuses for people we've recommended.

      Oh, wait... "inbound marketing company" Yeah, you may have a point.

      --
      Chelloveck
      I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
    4. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by swillden · · Score: 1

      They then sent me half the advertised bonus... four months after I was supposed to get it... and withheld over half of it in taxes AND deducted my 401K percentage contribution from it (oh sorry that was an error by finance we can cut you a new check on 60 days).

      Well, the rest of it is crap, as is giving you half the bonus, but the taxes are just reality and it's hard to see why the company would intentionally misdirect the cash to your 401K. It's not like they get any benefit from doing that.

      My experience at IBM was that I got paid promptly and in full -- though taxes took a big bite, much of which I got back on my tax return. I expect the same would be true of my current employer (Google), but I haven't yet managed to get a referral hired.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    5. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by Xest · · Score: 2

      It's because it's one of those things that companies advertise but never actually plan on having to do in practice, so they have no process or procedure in place as to how to file in the accounts that you just gave someone $5k for a referral and admin staff being admin staff figure rather than deal what is to them a relatively complex problem compared to the simple word processing they normally do prefer to make up excuses as to why you can't have it.

      I've actually seem companies like this with other policies too, even when it comes to such common place things like bonuses, where they advertise "up to 25% bonus" but don't ever actually pay out bonus regardless of performance simply because they've not bothered to sit down and figure out how it's calculated, how it's paid and what pot it comes out of. The net result being that it's just an advertising scam.

    6. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by Xest · · Score: 1

      Have any of BAE systems products ever actually been used? I tended to think they were in the business of producing ships, planes and vehicles that don't actually have any relevance in the modern world and were mostly just for show and profit like the F35 that barely even flies, the dogfighting Eurofighter for all that air combat we don't have nowadays and the Type 45 destroyers that don't actually have any weapons yet.

    7. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      >>Well, the rest of it is crap, as is giving you half the bonus, but the taxes are just reality and it's hard to see why the company would intentionally misdirect the cash to your 401K. It's not like they get any benefit from doing that.

      1) they admitted they over withheld taxes, even taking into account additional withholding for bonus pay
      2) 401K is a stated coporate policy to not withhold that from bonus pay

      The upshot is that they wanted as little $ in my pocket as possible. While it sounds petty and too much trouble for a large corporation to go through... if you have ever worked for BAE you know that this is simply the way they are. And they aren't alone.

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    8. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      Some got their picture taken from above, and some avoided IED's. Horrible, I know.

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    9. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by GameboyRMH · · Score: 1

      Their missiles and drones do get used...but yeah those fighters and ships are all for the theoretical WW2-style WW3. A Eurofighter was used to escort down a plane recently.

      --
      "When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
    10. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More like, beware of BAE. It is puzzling how HR would bitch over this like it came out of the staffers own pocket. Sociopaths working in HR there, no? You should probably quit anyways.
      In any case, thanks for the heads-up. And yes, taxes withheld is to be expected, but not the 401k deduction of course.

    11. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      Don't confuse BAE Systems Plc (UK) with BAE Systems Inc (US).

      While Inc is owned by Plc, they are in effect totally different companies.

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    12. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You work for the military industrial complex. Scamming is Job One. If you work on a project that helps kill innocent people, then you got at least what you deserved.

    13. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I got someone hired at Google... I trained them on some systems so that their team could take support and as soon as I was done training them they ran away with their new found skills and experience to Google. Then I had to train their replacement.

    14. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by CAIMLAS · · Score: 1

      I've never personally gotten a referral bonus, but I've been the reason someone else was supposed to get a bonus several times.

      In my experience, the bonuses have not been that large - $500 has been the 'standard' new-hire bonus. Twice it was with smaller companies, once with an international corp. The international corp paid out but the smaller companies, lacking HR processes, shorted or delayed the payouts.

      I've been shorted my "stay 6 months and get a bonus/raise" as well, even when it's been in writing. Be sure that shit is iron-clad - and of course, it's all meaningless in a right to work state.

      --
      ~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
    15. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are doing you a favor by withholding for 401K -- a double favor if they have some type of matching program.

      S

    16. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by HaZardman27 · · Score: 1

      I expect the same would be true of my current employer (Google), but I haven't yet managed to get a referral hired.

      I'm sure there are plenty of people here that would love to help you out with that.

      --
      Apparently wizard is not a legitimate career path, so I chose programmer instead.
    17. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      Actually, I don't work for them any more. I left and went to work for NASA.

      We were a small shop that created very stabilized extremely high definition airborne and spaceborne cameras for NASA, NOAA, and ESA... until BAE came along and bought us out. Then, DOD was the main (not only) customer. But nice try at clumping anyone that works for a company like BAE together as part of the evil empire. I also know some folks who work for Northrup Grumman... the run the main data center for Medicade. Are they also part of the MIC?

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    18. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      There was a match there, but it was not applied to bonuses.

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    19. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That divisions HR was (then) headed by a gay man who was extremely bitter over the fact that he could not marry his partner. So whenever a heterosexual employee would try to get help with an issue for his/her spouse or kids, he would give it low priority (if he dealt with it at all).

      The little tidbit above just scratches the surface of the neurosis at that company.

    20. Re:Great bonus... have fun collecting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and withheld over half of it in taxes AND deducted my 401K percentage contribution from it...

      I think your expectations need adjusting.

  13. Learning to do more in 8 than most do in 16? by raymorris · · Score: 2

    Some would say that if you spend 30-60 minutes per day actively learning, that's the equalivent useful knowledge of adding a new postdoc degree every few years. I could see such a person easily producing twice as much value per hour.

    How many times have you had to completely rewrite someone else's code, or spent so much time on it that you might as have rewritten it? The "typical" developer creates enough future problems by poorly thought out systems that their net productivity approaches zero. It's not that hard to be twice as productive as the guy whose code only survives a year or two. Just learn to build systems that a) actually work b) for at least four years between major overhauls.

    1. Re:Learning to do more in 8 than most do in 16? by gatkinso · · Score: 2

      Personally a big red flag for me is when a dev says "I have to completely rewrite this persons code."

      Not saying it doesn't happen, but a decent developer should be able to deal with other peoples work.

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    2. Re:Learning to do more in 8 than most do in 16? by Atzanteol · · Score: 1

      Sometimes you realize that the long-term maintainability of the re-write is worth it though. Especially if the original is confusing or buggy.

      --
      "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"

      - Charles Darwin
    3. Re:Learning to do more in 8 than most do in 16? by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      Sometimes... but rarely. Usually (not always) if it is that bad it won't be accepted in the first place. Software is the only system that gets better with time and use. Rewriting from scratch (as opposed to an intelligent refactor) totally negates that, not to mention flushed a companies investment in developing it right down the toilet (not that I really care about that).

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    4. Re:Learning to do more in 8 than most do in 16? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The way I usually handle it is in two phases:

      Phase 1: Make an attempt to maintain and even clean up and optimize the existing codebase. This is a total pain in the ass, but it usually wins a lot of goodwill from the client. If they see some improvement in performance or usability, they'll be happy to keep paying you to do more of it. And that's the hook being set in their jaw. They get "addicted" to that ever-increasing improvement in their software, and they want more. They always want more. And at a certain point, more can't happen. (This holds true even for your own software. Never forget that.) When you hit this wall, sell them the re-write. They'll probably go for it.

      Phase 2: Re-write the app from scratch, using all of the knowledge you gained from the old code. This is essentially greenfield development, but on a system you're already somewhat familiar with. You're basically making a v2.0 without having to do the initial development on 1.0. Just don't get too attached, since nothing is "right" until 3.0.

    5. Re:Learning to do more in 8 than most do in 16? by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      The few occasions where I have rewritten someone's code has been because it was initially very closely tied to some specific hardware (a couple of times), a tied to specific OS (a couple of times), or is no longer doing what it was originally intended to do (once). It isn't something that I do regularly as it does need consideration but when bringing something over to new hardware or a new OS it is worth looking at the time it would take to make the old code work or restart from scratch and correct the limitations of the original.

      --
      Time to offend someone
    6. Re:Learning to do more in 8 than most do in 16? by Sperbels · · Score: 1

      Software is the only system that gets better with time and use.

      Are you sure you're a real e developer? This statement is totally wrong.

    7. Re:Learning to do more in 8 than most do in 16? by bzipitidoo · · Score: 1

      You ought to consider what the developers of Doom and Quake said, which is that you shouldn't get too attached to existing code. If you want the best code, you should throw everything away and start over, repeatedly.

      Lest you think that rule of thumb can only apply when you need lots of optimization, and most code is hastily written garbage that is only worked on until it is barely good enough to do the job and doesn't need any more work than that, you ought to think about design. Hastily written is also hastily designed. No amount of patching can fix a bad design, you have to start over to do a different design.

      Two examples: A company I was at had a dangerous and cumbersome process for updating the software on a website. The process was 1) log into machine with the repository, 2) launch the install script, giving the name of the target computer as a parameter, whereupon the script 3) shut down the services and deleted the existing version from the target computer, 4) extracted the latest source from the repository and copied that over to the target, 5) built the application on the target, 6) started the services back up. Then it was pray that the new version works, and if it didn't, the developers might hack the code right there on the production machine, and ask the system administrators to copy the changed files to where they could add the changes to the repository. (Why they couldn't do that themselves, while they were right there hacking? But the company wasn't insane enough to give all the developers access to the production machines.) It was a monolithic script, and it had a mess of conditional things to do depending on which machine was the target. Now, can you see that this design has tons and tons of problems? Not least is that the website had to be taken down for about 20 minutes during this update process. If the new version didn't work, and couldn't be made to work with a few hacks, it was another 20 minutes to restore the old version. The worst happened when a developer mistakenly aimed at the wrong target, meaning to update the demonstration site, but instead updating the production site. Wiped the company's production database. (The developers had insisted that the database have no password, for their convenience, and over the strenuous protests of our DBA. A password could also have stopped this disaster.) We were lucky to get the company's website back up at all, let alone in only 1 day. I thought about it and decided the only thing to do was start over from scratch and design a completely different process. What would you have done?

      In the other case, they had another script that went through the web server's logs to extract useful information such as the number of unique visitors, time spent on each web page, and so on. This script worked at first, but began to fall behind. It began to take longer than 24 hours to process 24 hours worth of logs, and I was called in to deal with the problem when the backlog had built up to about 3 days. First thing I saw was a crazy design decision to just simply go through all the logs each day, redoing all the work it had done the day before, then doing the current day's work. It was doomed to break down as the logs grew. We were not about to throw out old logs, just to accomodate this quick and dirty design. It was easier to just start over, rather than try to fix the existing script as it was full of routines that assumed all the logs were being processed every time it ran.

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
    8. Re:Learning to do more in 8 than most do in 16? by Maudib · · Score: 1

      Often dealing with is knowing when to discard.

    9. Re:Learning to do more in 8 than most do in 16? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...it is worth looking at the time it would take to make the old code work or restart from scratch and correct the limitations of the original.

      There is also the time spent just figuring out what the old code does if it's poorly written, not commented, etc. Even if it *seems* obvious and clear, you're assuming that the previous coder was competent and there aren't any major bugs in the old code. I know the level of code quality that I write - it's a full two steps above dodgy. So when I see really dodgy code, the question is whether the amount of time it would take me to rewrite it is more than the time it would take to read it, test it, and really know that it's not a bug-filled clusterfuck.

    10. Re:Learning to do more in 8 than most do in 16? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Software is the only system that gets better with time and use." I find myself strongly disagreeing with this. Additional features and changing developers tend to make code more confusing. Many times developers build abstractions based on guesses as to how the products requirements will develop and are wrong. The actual requirements lead in another direction forcing hacks around meaningless structure.

      I agree that intelligent refactoring is superior, but many projects use very old technology and refactoring isn't always the best option. Refactoring your VB6 code isn't going to make it suddenly turn into Java, C#, or Ruby. Many companies develop with new technologies leading them to have an array of different technologies which are much harder to maintain than a single technology. Refactoring working code is great, but many times management will not want you to touch code because of QA costs associated with it.

      If the cost of maintaining an existing code base is greater than developing something new than you should develop something new. The tricky part is estimating all these costs.

    11. Re:Learning to do more in 8 than most do in 16? by tompaulco · · Score: 1

      Sometimes... but rarely. Usually (not always) if it is that bad it won't be accepted in the first place. Software is the only system that gets better with time and use. Rewriting from scratch (as opposed to an intelligent refactor) totally negates that, not to mention flushed a companies investment in developing it right down the toilet (not that I really care about that).

      It happens quite frequently where i work that lazy ex-developers will code exactly to the specification given, hardcoding bits of information that should be a configuration option or a lookup, tying it so completely to the present implementation that to add another customer onto the product requires completely changing the code. I have rewritten dozens of applications at my company because the applications were so strictly hardcoded to certain situations that the original developers couldn't figure out how to make them work more globally. Plus they had the whole stinking program inside a giant try catch block, there was no checking of database return codes to find out if a deadlock or timeout could be retried, not transactional integrity, so files could en up halfway loaded into the system. A complete and utter mess. But I'm sure other companies don't have this problem.

      --
      If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.
    12. Re:Learning to do more in 8 than most do in 16? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yet, this is how it's done in the industry routinely. Not because employees are "bad developers", but the priority to spend time on rewrite is just not there.
      Unless you enjoy working overtime for free (sucker) that is.

    13. Re:Learning to do more in 8 than most do in 16? by ranton · · Score: 1

      Software is the only system that gets better with time and use.

      Are you sure you're a real e developer? This statement is totally wrong.

      I think it is more accurate to say most production code becomes less buggy with time and use. But it also becomes less maintainable with time and use. It is a difficult balancing act to determine when you should continue with stable code that is hard to change, or risk decreasing stability to improve your ability to add new features.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    14. Re:Learning to do more in 8 than most do in 16? by stanlyb · · Score: 1

      There is really big, red, flag, but on you. I yet have to see program that does not need to be rewritten completely at least 2 times. In the best case scenario. The problem is that most of "developers" hardly manage to write down the program at all, after which they sit on their assses, and you could not imagine what a fight it is, to defend their "precious" badly written, inconsistent code...

  14. Side Track by Murdoch5 · · Score: 1

    Funny thing is that most of the "all-star" developers I've worked with actually suck.

    1. Re:Side Track by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Being called an "all-star" developer must be worse than being called a three-star developer, no?

      http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ThreeStarProgrammer

    2. Re:Side Track by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not easy to work with Baba(*). They know all and often think that (their) technical excellence is enough. Also not always who they tell you is Baba, is really an expert and wo-/man of knowledge. I think it is difficult to integrate Babas into a team. Takes a Baba of group dynamic and psychology. They are needed tho. You need a company like google to make teams of Babas work. In normal case two babas in one team is causing serious trouble. Humans are such weird creatures.

      Baba is almost as good as Guru but not quite. S/he is possibly a Guru in making.

  15. Please Don't Beat the Free Puppies by happy_place · · Score: 3, Funny

    I don't think companies should be free to beat puppies in order to convince employees to join their company. I mean, that's like extortion, "If you don't scrum with us, we'll beat these puppies senseless!"

    --
    http://www.beanleafpress.com
    1. Re:Please Don't Beat the Free Puppies by Gr8Apes · · Score: 2

      I don't think companies should be free to beat puppies in order to convince employees to join their company. I mean, that's like extortion, "If you don't scrum with us, we'll beat these puppies senseless!"

      So the question becomes "Are you willing to sacrifice yourself in place of the puppies?"

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    2. Re:Please Don't Beat the Free Puppies by Minwee · · Score: 1

      Not beating the puppies is something we can put off until the next sprint.

    3. Re:Please Don't Beat the Free Puppies by doyin92 · · Score: 1

      that is worst

  16. So.. by bytesex · · Score: 1

    You find three people in a year, and then you have to do nothing else?

    --
    Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
    1. Re:So.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One at least now understands the motivation for recruiters to machinegun spam to anyone with a resume that looks remotely technical.

    2. Re:So.. by BVis · · Score: 1

      Five, if you live on a coast.

      --
      Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.
  17. Should be by hsmith · · Score: 1

    Yet again, I get endless emails from lazy recruiters via LinkedIn begging me to refer my friends for their worthless jobs. Hey, how about you do your own job.

    1. Re:Should be by porges · · Score: 1

      Sadly, I think that is their job.

  18. Referral Bonus? BONUS? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ahahahahahaha!

    No, seriously, that was a good one.....As if any company is willing to give bonuses to their employees these days. I'd just kill for a reasonable paycheck.

  19. Carrot on a stick by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My company offers a referral bonus ($3k for any full-time exempt position that is listed on the career site), but they have 100 different ways they can get out of paying it. Just getting eligible for it is a nightmare in and of itself - the candidate has to apply online, and enter your information in the box, and it has to be spelled correctly, and have your correct email and phone - any typos and you lose eligibility. Then, you have to take a vacation day the day the candidate interviews, to ensure you have no contact with them or the interviewers on the day of the interview. Then, if the candidate is hired, there is a 90 day evaluation, which they have to score better than 4.0/5 on (and hardly anyone ever does).

    Then, if all of those hoops-of-fire are jumped through, the referrer is invited to submit documentation that they were actually a personal acquaintance of the candidate. If HR is not convinced you actually had a personal relationship with the candidate, you lose eligibility.

  20. Referral Bonuses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't speak for companies, but my experience in the UK is that recruitment agents NEVER come good on promises of referral bonuses. I know the idea that "recruitment agents are all liars and cheats" won't come as news to anyone but it's always worth repeating.

  21. Pfft by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For a marketing company they lack imagination.
    All they need to do is give my firm a call and we'll put a whole team together for them.
    But noooo, they like all of their ilk want little drones to commute into their little offices so the CEO can feel "dynamic".
    And guess what, not everyone lives in (or wants to live in) Boston or Dublin.
    For solutions they need only look to themselves.

  22. Yes, "have to" is different from "most efficient" by raymorris · · Score: 1

    > Personally a big red flag for me is when a dev says "I have to completely rewrite this persons code."
    > Not saying it doesn't happen, but a decent developer should be able to deal with other peoples work.

    Indeed there is a big difference between "I have to" (because I don't understand the pattern or idioms) versus "It would be best to rewrite" (because the architecture or data structures are wrong).

    Atzanteol mentioned another common case "if the original is confusing or buggy" and in that case a refactor is likely the best option.
    I've done major refactoring of my predecessor's code of the type where I didn't attempt to understand the code confusing, buggy code until much of the refactoring was done. Just by mechanically breaking up the 200-line functions with variables like $bob and $fred into 15-line functions with variables named $radius and $scrollheight, the code was made much less confusing and the solutions to bugs were then obvious. That mechanical refactoring process ensured that it continued to work the same way, though, so I wasn't rewriting any logic, only reorganizing it to be more maintainable.

  23. Read that headline wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Did anyone else read that as "$30,000 For a Developer Funeral"?

  24. they may get some recruiter BS and or fake people by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    they may get some recruiter BS and or fake people / resume padding.

    Some recruiters do edit people resumes / pad them out.

  25. Not so good by Larry_Dillon · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I left a great job for a lousy one because of a former co-worker at the new place who was singing the new companies praises -- just to get the referral bonus.

    --
    Competition Good, Monopoly Bad.
  26. I need a headhunter by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 1

    Heree I am, send me to the west coast!

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  27. Christ, it's HubSpot again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You guys are easy to game. This company is just an SEO magnet and you gave it a fresh link for a two-year-old referral program. (It made the news for being $10k back then.)

    Care to hazard some guesses why, despite their profile, they have to throw this much money (and have had to throw five figures for years) to get developers? Try asking any of them who were pushed out or fired, including nearly every Ruby dev they had--it's a bubble-era clusterfuck of management, retention (namely getting stock options instead of salary in a company who keeps threatening to IPO but never does), and decision-making issues.

    The best thing you can do with these fools is game them for the $30k.

  28. Where do you work that bad code isn't accepted? by raymorris · · Score: 1

    So where you work, bad code that appears to work isn't accepted? Where is that? Are you hiring?

    I thought I worked at such a company once, where I was the one deciding what was accepted and what was not (as well as doing most of the software architecture).
    Over time, I had to work on code I'd approved or even written 5-10 years before. I'd learned enough then to know that what I once thought was good was actually pretty awful.

    That said, while all of the COMPANIES I know produce some pretty gnarly code, I've worked on a couple of open source projects which have fairly high standards.
    The Linux kernel, of course (my names is in changelog exactly ONCE), the Apache web server, and parts of Moodle. It takes three rewrites to get accepted by one of the Moodle maintainers.

  29. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  30. Not to mention State Income Tax in MA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    5.25% state income tax (the last time I checked) vs. 0% for Texas,

  31. That seems pretty high by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

    I've mostly seen referral bonuses in the range of $1000 - $5000, rarely above that.

  32. Definition of mediocre, competent IS much better by raymorris · · Score: 1

    > The whole industry is plagued by this idea that ... the people who do the bulk of the grunt work are mediocre

    Which is true by definition:

    me·di·o·cre [mee-dee-oh-ker]
    adjective
    1. of only ordinary or moderate quality; n

    Indeed, the bulk of the grunts are "of only ordinary or moderate quality". "The bulk of" and "ordinary" mean pretty much the same thing, don't they?

    The mediocre generally know enough to do the task, badly. They screw things up pretty badly by making it "work" just enough so that on the surface, it appears to work most of the time. If your car crashed once a week, that would be the worst car ever made. An operating system that crashed once a week became the market leader, and by a large margin.

    The quality of "professional" software shows us that the ordinary, average (mediocre) developer is, unfortunately, not quite competent. There's a huge productivity difference between mediocre developers and competent developers, much greater than the difference in their salary cost. That's where "The whole industry is plagued by this idea that only the superstars are any good" comes from. What you call "superstars" are those fully competent people who make stuff that actually works, reliably and robustly. Because they cost only 20% more than the mediocre ones, only those people are a good hire. Hiring a mediocre person for 20% less is almost always a bad decision.

  33. Re:Definition of mediocre, competent IS much bette by stanlyb · · Score: 1

    There is only one thing that is worst, hiring mediocre developer with a "superstar" salary. Yes, it sound ridiculous, but yes, it is the norm these days.

  34. Re:Definition of mediocre, competent IS much bette by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think your bar for mediocrity is far too low. The majority of "competent" developers are mediocre. This is what they are if they are not outright incompetent or a superstar.

  35. Re:Definition of mediocre, competent IS much bette by Sperbels · · Score: 1

    And thank you for perpetuating the myth that on superstars are good programmers. You're exactly the kind of person I was addressing.

  36. Learning works better than whining by raymorris · · Score: 1

    Spending 30-60 minutes per day learning so you become competent yourself works a lot better then whining about people knowing that you're not very good yet. So does finding where your talent lies, if programing isn't something you can learn to do well.

    I am in process of learning myself. I would like to be a competent kernel programer and competent to code on world class projects like Apache. So far, I'm a competent business applications programmer.

  37. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion