Slashdot Mirror
Tech Startup Buffer Publishes Every Employee's Salary, Right Up To the CEO
Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "Paul Szoldra reports at Business Insider that Joel Gascoigne, CEO of social media startup Buffer, reveals his salary along with the salary of every single employee in the company, and includes the formula the company uses to get to each one. "One of the highest values we have at Buffer is transparency," says Gascoigne. "We do quite a number of things internally and externally in line with this value. Transparency breeds trust, and that's one of the key reasons for us to place such a high importance on it." Gascoigne, who has a salary of $158,800, revealed the exact formula Buffer uses to get to each employee's number: Salary = job type X seniority X experience + location (+ $10K if salary choice). Gascoigne says his open salary system is part of Buffer's "Default to Transparency" and says Buffer is willing to update the formula as the company grows but hopes that its focus on work/life balance fosters employees that are in it for the long haul. "In Silicon Valley, there's a culture of people jumping from one place to the next," says Gascoigne. "That's why we focus on culture. Doing it this way means we can grow just as fast—if not faster—than doing it the 'normal' cutthroat way. We're putting oil into the engine to make sure everything can work smoothly so we can just shoot ahead and that's what we're starting to see.""
The nation of Norway does this for every citizen. It seems to work out for them.
Salary = job type X seniority X experience + location
So I guess productivity and contribution to the business doesn't count. Great. Time to sit back and eat pretzels!
www.shortman.com.au - top shorted stocks on the ASX
Sounds like something they'd do to placate "dumb money" angel investors
I do invest in startups and most of the angel investors that I know are not dumb.
That guy is running a publicity stunt.
Transparency can only work up to a point before jealousy creeps in.
There is no way to run an organization with 100% transparency - people will start comparing each others' workload (and/or contribution) with the salary figure.
The art of managing is an ART and it's a very delicate task.
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
Do they also list the stock ownership ,stock options and bonuses of every employee too?
No snark, genuinely interested in how far transparency goes and how far it has to go before transparency is actually achieved.
And what is the goal?
I know some people that do the work of 4 of their colleagues, would it be wrong to pay them 4x more? Afterall, the company still saves on healthcare, parking spaces, and other redundant costs. What a person is worth is not always reducable to a position.
I believe salary = the most I can get for the work I produce.
have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
Is it respect for employee privacy or respect for being able to pay drastically different wages for the same job? A lot of times, company rules (official or unofficial) against discussing salaries protect the employer much more than the employees.
Sure, but first you have to invent the Star Trek replicator and holodeck. At a price that everybody can afford.
No sig today...
A lot of times, company rules (official or unofficial) against discussing salaries protect the employer much more than the employees.
Like my employer, for example (sub-sub-sub-subdivision of UTC). IMHO this rule is the same as the used-car salesman saying "OK, I can cut you this deal but you have to promise not to tell anyone about it." They hope to make each employee think he/she's got a better salary than the folks in the next cube.
One other thought: seniority should be a factor up to a point. Statistics show certain timeframes (e.g. 5 years' employment) at which people are more likely to switch jobs, so offering a seniority-based incentive to stay on at these junctures can help retain desired staff.
https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
Especially with this on their front page:
There are currently NaN people using Buffer who have shared 115,681,392 updates through Buffer.
Sounds like some top-notch talent working there!
While that's true, firms want to encourage employees (by and large) to stick around. Therefore making it attractive financially, in terms of some seniority element, is economically sensible.
--- My dad's political betting
OK, if you're the first to agree to clean out the sewage backup after the regular crew all left to be bartenders at Hooters.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
I have not seen this for over a decade. Almost every job change I make, I will come in at a salary that is equal to or higher than the guy that has been there for 10 years.
This might have been a reality in a distant past when management actually cared about employees and wanted them to stick around, but I noticed in the past 10 that most only care about the next quarter profits and to hell with anything else. I watched my company recently let a very good person walk out the door to a competitor because they would not give him a piddly 10% increase.
I really hope that companies come back to having real leadership, but I highly doubt it will happen in my lifetime.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
When asked for clarification, employee number six said:"I am not a number. I am a free man!"
It will be interesting to see if they keep this up when they're spending customer's money rather than investor's. A blank business with a set amount of money to spend is easy to model this way. Once you start to find the real value in your offering and determine how revenue is actually made, things get trickier. One or two stellar salespeople or engineers can be responsible for an outsize portion of the business. They need to be compensated appropriately.
-Chris
Personally, I'd rather not work for a firm where the quality of my work doesn't equate in the least with the pay calculations. Do I look like some unionist drone (at least in Europe, they are usually paid along the same sort of gridded scale).
Yes, of course, anyone rationalizing it will simply say "well, we only keep exceptional people" - to which, after 30 years in the workplace, I call "bullshit".
In every group there are going to be achievers and slackers. Frankly, I want my compensation*/pay to be the highest I can compel the company to pay me, otherwise yeah, I will go somewhere else.
*note, compensation isn't pay - there are a host of other ways a company can compensate an employee that can be hugely beneficial that aren't cold, hard, taxable cash.
-Styopa
So you're perfectly happy to go into negotiations at a disadvantage, knowing that the employer has relevant information that you don't have?
You sound like a shitty negotiator.
Is it respect for employee privacy or respect for being able to pay drastically different wages for the same job?
It's recognition that you can have very different expectations and get wildly different results from two people (with different experience, intelligence, work ethics, and ambition) doing the "same job."
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Transparency can only work up to a point before jealousy creeps in.
Jealousy is only a major factor when the salary determination is kept secret. If there is a set formula, like for public workers or other unions, the jealousy is not a big deal. Everyone knows that their coworker who has been there two years longer is paid a little more. Or someone with a Masters degree is paid a little bit more than someone with a Bachelors. And these calculations don't have to be as simplistic and questionable as most current unions as even complicated formulas that include performance metrics, salary at previous company, commuting considerations, etc. are okay as long as it is transparent.
But in the private sector your ability to negotiate has a big impact on salary. And I mean huge, I have routinely seen people make 20% more than their initial offer (at least $10k more) just because they were willing to walk away from the job offer. This means they are effectively making around 20% more than some of their equally qualified peers just because they negotiated from a position of strength.
Pay discrepancies because of this are what create jealousy.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
So you're perfectly happy to go into negotiations at a disadvantage, knowing that the employer has relevant information that you don't have?
You can get information your employer doesn't have, such as what other companies are willing to offer you to jump ship and work for them. You can also do research online to see what salary surveys have to say. And finally, if you're willing to, you can also pay for the knowledge of payroll information by geo, title, responsibilities, etc.
Comparing yourself to your coworkers can be difficult, for the very reason that you're not as likely to know what they're doing or how well they're doing their jobs as well as your employer (i.e. managers) knows.
Of course, you can also talk to your coworkers to share information. Such as what reasons were given for such and such during salary reviews. Without getting into hard numbers.
It's mostly to avoid ugly scenes like this
Jim (to his manager): "Hey, I need to talk to you. There's no way Bob should be making $10,000 more than me."
Manager: "Calm down, Jim, what are you so upset about?"
Jim: "Look, I have a full breakdown here. <waves papers in manager's face> I write more code than Bob, fix more bugs, I cause fewer regressions, and I even take fewer sick days. I should be making WAY more than Bob.
Manager: "Jim, there's really no way to put this delicately, but you have to understand, Bob makes what he makes because he's regularly fellating the CEO."
Jim (still agitated, and riffling through papers): "I FACTORED THAT IN. Look here, line 12, 'special services'!"
Us freedom loving capitalistic pigs carved out our nation of like minded individuals, here in America. We're not interested in redistribution of wealth simply because the have-nots are most vocal.
By 'carved out' you actually mean 'engaged in redistribution of wealth by forcing prior residents off of their land'. You're in favor of the redistribution of wealth so long as it benefits you.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
How do you know they've verified your old salary via a background check?
(Posting anon for a good reason, see below)
That's a good point. Currently on the prowl, meself, so talking from recent experience here :) All the slave traders and prospective employers ask for proof of your current salary (latest salary slip). They've always done so. This is to provide an anchor point (preferably a low one) before any negotiations even start. What generally happens is that they then offer a salary not too far off the current one (say... +10%). Giving away the salary slip effectively ends the negotiation and caps the most that they are willing to offer you. Even if they were, for example, willing to offer R500k, but your current salary is R300k, they'd rather you walk away than take you at R400k (fully R100k below what they were initially prepared to pay). The reason for this is because a hard negotiator is a "problem" down the line, and not easily manipulated.
My, ahem, solution to all those jobhunters who are tired of getting hit with the anchor point tactic, is to simply photoshop the salary slip (they're all digital and emailed these days) with a higher salary. A simple spreadsheet formula calculates the correct value (to the cent) to put into all the fields so that it all works out correctly. Set the anchor point to around 115% of your current salary (don't want to make it too obvious, now do we?), photoshop all the fields in correctly and send them the resulting PDF.
The recipient can't actually double-check this because:
It isn't legal for them to contact my current employer and tell current employer that I am looking
Even if they did contact current employer, it's still a criminal offense for my current employer to reveal my salary
Personally, I'd prefer them to do so, as then I'll collect quite a windfall from the two criminal cases :)
(Current employer paid out around R200m in 2013 due to stupid HR not knowing the law - a fraction of that my way and I'll never need to apply for a job again)