[bbeneschott]

Unfortunately, I think this is pretty misleading and incomplete. We do not set anyone's hourly rate, but if you come in expecting $250/hr and there isn't much on your profile to justify that, we will push back to figure out why you think clients will hire you at that rate. Ultimately, your rate is up to you, but it doesn't do anyone any good if you're sitting in Toptal un-hirable. Clients won't hire you if your rate doesn't match your abilities or if there are other people similarly capable but with very different rates from you.

Being spied on? I don't know what that is referring to.

The circumvention clause is real, though we've never even come close to needing to enforce it.

Re refunding all fees: We've never even come close to needing to enforce this, but if someone really botched an engagement, this is a possibility. However, part of the benefit of joining Toptal is that you have the entire network and core team going to bat for you. Good people wouldn't stay long if we were taking all their compensation from them.

[idlewords]

You've said 'misleading and incomplete' to two substantive posts in this thread. That's tantamount to calling people liars.

[rattray]

I think in both cases the people were essentially lying. (EDIT: probably unintentionally).

I applied to toptal (never did dev work through them, but I would) and after I was accepted, was asked to name my rate - at the time, it was US$60/hr and they said I'd likely find work at that (this is correct, by the way - I did find work at that through them but decided not to take it for unrelated reasons).

In regards to the other comment where bbeneschott used that language, the person was also flat-out wrong. When I applied, step one was a phone call with a person, step two was an automated quiz, step three was a live-coding session over skype with an engineer, step four was an app to build at home, and step five was another skype session with an engineer to review that application. Onerous? maybe, yeah. But definitely not inhuman or automated. Sounds like the other person bbeneschott "called a liar" simply didn't make it through step 2 (I can understand why they'd be upset).

disclaimer: I know bbeneschott personally (through toptal). But I don't earn through toptal anymore and have no financial incentive I can think of to support them.

[tptacek]

First, there's no such thing as "unintentional lying".

Secondly, w/r/t/ the person who did their FizzBuzz question in Mathematica: you're trying to suggest that maybe they weren't able to implement FizzBuzz in Mathematica?

[rattray]

Fair point. They were wrong, not lying, and I only used that word because it was the one @idlewords used. Perhaps you're right that I should have corrected @idlewords that accusing people of being wrong is not the same as accusing them of lying. But I love the prose @idlewords writes so I didn't feel that it was my place to correct him on English, when I feel his is better than mine.

I do think it's entirely plausible that an automated coding test could be "failed" by a competent programmer in any programming language, because many automated coding tests are bullshit. It's not Toptal's fault that the state-of-the-art in automated programmer assessment is sub-par. Isn't that the problem Starfighter is solving -- better automated assessment of programmer ability? There's a reason it needs to exist.

[spitfire]

> It's not Toptal's fault that the state-of-the-art in automated programmer assessment is sub-par.

Yes it is.

They choose the tools they use, they take responsibility for their results. It is their business, they are responsible for everything that happens on their behalf.

[Radim]

It can be hard when people attack your baby publicly :)

For a company of TopTal's size, I guess they could (should) give their C*Os a training on PR, or at least a damage control manual!

[um304]

I agree TopTal needs PR training. Their CEO's response here is a case study of how a CEO shouldn't respond:

http://yuriybabenko.com/blog/my-experience-joining-toptal

[tptacek]

Wait: your CEO replied to this blog post saying that the refund was for billing mistakes. Now, your comment says that it's for if someone really botched an engagement. Which is it?

[MichaelGG]

I'm curious, if you're only doing the top 3%, shouldn't all the work being done be around or above that amount $200+/hr)? I'm probably in the top 3% of devs if we include the mass of people that do any such work. While I don't do hourly, I'd not consider any new projects that don't end up earning at least that much.

Top 3% is sort of a useless metric, isn't it? I'd not be surprised to find that, since most people suck, 97th percentile is a minimum you need to get anything done properly. But within that, there's probably at least an order if magnitude difference in capability (and rates).

[Madmallard]

Relative perception of others' proficiency for a particular skill is something that subjectively changes as you become better at it. Things you might consider absolutely necessary for a project may not be considered that way for others, and potentially not even recognized by those below your skill level. Projects can ship as a mess of unmaintainable code, after all.

[rattray]

It's the global 3%, not the US 3%. I think they get that stat from the percentage who apply and fail.

[mdpopescu]

I have close to 25 years of experience; I was told the $100 / hour I was asking for was too much for my region and my rate was set at $50 / hour. I still have an account there, though I didn't yet get any job through them. (So maybe they were right and people thought even $50 / hour was too much?) C# backend programmer.

[I will admit that I blame @patio11 for the $100/hour and "charge more" ideas. /grin]

Oh, edit: I had absolutely no problem with the onboarding process, I think it was just fine. It's only the "no you can't set your own rate" part that I disliked.