[mehrdada]

> we pay very well

How do you know, objectively? Have you tried paying twice (or more) the current market rate, for instance, and binary search for a point where you have enough happy hires and failed? Perhaps the market rate is artificially lowered.

[jshen]

The problem isn't that good engineers turn done our offers, it's that very few good engineers come in the door. The ones that have were very happy with their offers.

Edit: Didn't realize you weren't the person I originally replied to. Let's reverse your question. What is the objective basis for the claim that engineers are asked to sacrifice to much for too little pay?

[mehrdada]

> it's that very few good engineers come in the door

I have one possible answer for this issue: Well, no one in the Valley (to best of my knowledge) really advertises that they are going to pay a meaningful multiple of what's considered the market rate to potential employees. So from the potential employee side, it is reasonable to assume that they are going to get paid around the "market rate".

The Valley seems to be at a point where "starting/not starting a startup" is becoming an IQ test (compared to "market rate") financially if you think you are reasonably good at doing stuff, so it is natural that good engineers wouldn't go and apply for a job, because the expectation for compensation is unlikely to be satisfactory anyway (or at least that's what they believe and prevents them from trying).

>And you dodged my questions.

Oh, I am not the OP and I'm not pretending to have the answers. I was genuinely interested in knowing how you measured that you are paying very well, except for the fact that they were competitive with what's considered the "market rate" which is the questionable piece of data here.

[jshen]

I think we pay very well because when we do find a good person, we offer them enough to get them unless there is some non monetary reason they went with another company. We do not have a problem with people turning down offers, we have a problem with finding enough good people.

Another interesting wrinkle to this is the fact that hiring someone at a high salary is a big gamble. How confident can you really be after interviewing someone?

[PhantomGremlin]

> we have a problem with finding enough good people

I'd love to see one of your job postings. I'd bet at least one of the following is happening:

1) unreasonable academic requirements

2) unreasonably broad list of required previous experience

3) unqualified HR people pre-screening and discarding resumes

You need to be willing to "kiss a lot of frogs", i.e. do phone screens and onsite interviews, of people who might generally be suitable. Then be willing to hire not-quite-perfect candidates who are willing to learn and are willing to work hard.

> How confident can you really be after interviewing someone?

I've seen an increase in contract employment postings. That might be a way to go. Start someone on a six-month contract. You might find some takers. Not everyone is ready to "get married" after a single days worth of job interviews.

[jshen]

The answer to all three questions is no.

[jacalata]

So you're asking people to apply for a job without telling them how much you will pay, and you think that this lack of information shouldn't affect whether they apply? Salary sensitive potential hires might be ruling themselves out at the application stage: for instance my assumption (as a software engineer) would be that if I have no idea what your salary offer will be, then it will be shit - if it's going to be decent then you'd advertise that publicly. Therefore people that actually apply to your company is the subset that either find out your salary beforehand (eg by knowing someone else there) or don't care what salary you offer or I guess there might exist people who think it makes sense to keep good wages secret.

[jshen]

Show me a company that advertises it publicly.

[jacalata]

1. http://open.bufferapp.com/introducing-open-salaries-at-buffe...

2. glassdoor.com

3. my network of people who work at various companies and will tell me what they make.

I'm assuming that you are a small company that doesn't actually show up in either of 2 or 3.

[mehrdada]

If no one is doing it, perhaps it's worth trying?

[droithomme]

Please state the salary you offer, the location of your company, whether or not you pay full relocation, and the skill set you are looking for.

[jshen]

We have engineers making up to $250k total comp most are in the $150-200 range, we have offices in LA, Palo alto, and NY, we pay relocation of some kind, and we want generalists that are really good.

[chrisbennet]

It sounds like your comp is great - as in truly competitive. That salary range would probably make you standout from the crowd. If only there were some way (short of interviewing and getting an offer) for a possible candidate to know that..

I see salary ranges advertised all the time in the New England area so its not impossible.

Like some else mentioned; when I don't see a salary range I assume it isn't great or maybe they don't want to piss off the current employees that are working for below market rate.

[firstOrder]

ExxonMobil brought in $469 billion in revenue last year, on which they made $44 billion in profit. It's not a big gamble for them at all if some programmer who gets $100k, $150k or whatever does not work out.

Of course, some bootstrapped company, or some company which had minimal angel funding or the like is taking more of a gamble, but everything is a gamble when you have no product/market fit and only 18 months or less worth of cash in the bank.

[jshen]

Exxon is in the top ten for revenue, that is not a good example on your part. also, $100k is not a large salary in my book. Doubling it is the sort of gamble I'm talking about.

[firstOrder]

The objective basis that you are offering engineers too little pay is that they are not taking your offers. Unless you don't believe in one of the first things they teach in modern economics - that at a certain value (price), supply will always meet demand.

[FLUX-YOU]

Could just be a run of bad luck or not enough advertising on their part. Supply can't meet demand if supply doesn't know demand exists.

[firstOrder]

I agree about making an effort looking for people. I know nothing about the company being discussed here. But for other companies, I know some that contact a (crappy) headhunter or two, or who post an ad on Craigslist, and then expect top tier candidates to roll in. For some CRUD job working in class C office space for relatively not much money etc. They're shocked when they don't have their pick from dozens of top tier candidates.

If your methods don't work - try going to a local programmer meetup. Chat up some of the programmers. Encourage them to apply. I go to programmer meetups as a programmer, and all the time I meet other programmers who are out of work, or who are unhappy at their job and looking to work elsewhere. Most are employed, but there's always a few who are looking.

What is happening is this - in 2008/2009 the economy was tighter, and employers could get by with a CL posting, or talking to a headhunter or two. Now that unemployment rate is less than 10%, you don't have dozens of good programmers checking CL for jobs every day. You have to do a little more work to find people. Just like THEY had to do a little more work when unemployment was double digit.

[jshen]

Not only do we go to meetups and conferences, we host them. At some point you may want to consider the possibility that I know what I'm talking about.

[jshen]

You fail at reading comprehension.