Amazon Raises Base Salary Cap To $350,000 For Corporate, Tech Workers (axios.com) 60
Amazon is more than doubling its maximum base pay for corporate and tech workers to $350,000 from $160,000. Axios reports: The move is intended to bring Amazon in line with competitors like Google, Facebook, Apple and Microsoft, and to help ensure the company retains employees and recruits top talent. "This past year has seen a particularly competitive labor market and in doing a thorough analysis of various options, weighing the economics of our business and the need to remain competitive for attracting and retaining top talent, we decided to make meaningfully bigger increases to our compensation levels than we do in a typical year," Amazon wrote in an internal memo to employees obtained by Geekwire.
The company said it plans to increase "overall compensation ranges for most jobs globally, and the increases are much more considerable than we've done in the past." The company said changes to base pay caps and compensation ranges will "affect every employee differently."
The company said it plans to increase "overall compensation ranges for most jobs globally, and the increases are much more considerable than we've done in the past." The company said changes to base pay caps and compensation ranges will "affect every employee differently."
Bah (Score:4)
Re:Bah (Score:5, Interesting)
This only applies to those whose job it is to find new and innovative ways to put other employees out of jobs.
You're not kidding. Amazon has such a high turnover rate they are worried about running out of workers [businessinsider.com].
One of the things I don't think we consider (Score:5, Interesting)
Think of it this way, the classic refrain to anyone complaining about their working conditions is to tell them to go find a new job.
Do you think Amazon hasn't thought of that? Articles like above show they clearly have. And if they've thought of it do you think their solution is just going to be the pay more? If you had as much power and influence as Amazon where would you spend your energy and effort? Would you earn more money so you could pay your workers better? Or would you game the system so that those workers didn't have any other options?
Re: (Score:1)
Are you implying Amazon has run out of shitty smelly H1B parasites hindu chimps to replace tech workers?
Here come the untalented bigot. Thing is, tech churn has happened in tech since forever, since I started in this industry decades ago and before the outsourcing boom.
But also, if you are competent enough, you will see yourself bouncing off a layoff (the inevitable feature of an industry living in the edge of tech), possibly with a better salary.
OTH, if you got hit so hard that you turn into a bigot, then accept that you were too incompetent to deal with the inevitability of change and that you lack the
Re: (Score:2)
Union busting (Score:1)
I'm sure there's lots more. My entire point is we're not thinking in these terms. But they are.
It's a thought (and a rather nasty and terrifying one) that only just recently occurred to me, and I don't recall ever seeing anyone else make it. Most of my better insights like this come from Beau Of The Fifth Column.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm sure that you're sure there's "lots more" but can you actually point to anything real as opposed to "thoughts" that you've had?
Re: (Score:2)
If we have proper journalists who could work full time I'm sure that there would be plenty more that could be uncovered but well, it's no c
Re: (Score:2)
Well, to be honest, that previous max base pay is too low for Silicon Valley for a tech office worker. Maybe not for pickers and delivery, but you try recruiting an engineer and you'd be out of luck I think. I assume that max cap didn't apply to peripherally related development in the valley, like Lab 126 or Zoox.
Re: (Score:2)
This only applies to those whose job it is to find new and innovative ways to put other employees out of jobs.
Make Horse Carriages Great Again!.
Anything that involves automation involves eliminating a type of job (which is not the same as eliminating an employee). It's been like that since someone invented the loom, water/wind mills and combustion engines (or heck, ever since someone invented the wheel.)
One would think that slashdot users would understand this, because, you know news for nerds and tech, etc.
I mean, like, duh, the title says it that it is for corp and tech workers, so how exactly Captain Obvio
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed.
Our entire civilization is largely based on ignorance of economics. We are ruled by socialists and Luddites, and we are also taught by the same, and, also, the media is run by the same. So it never surprises me to hear their propaganda repeated here.
While it is possible for anyone to educate himself or herself, and while even small children can understand the basics, it turns out that almost none of us actually do.
Which is why the luddites and socialists continue to rule and reign even though their
Well, of course ... (Score:3)
Gotta spend that Prime price increase [slashdot.org] from $119 to $139/y ...
Whatever (Score:5, Interesting)
Most people are looking for a new job.
Fixed Rate Mortgagors Rejoice! (Score:1)
It's a great time to have a big fat mortgage with a fixed interest rate. Vive l'inflation!
*knocks on wood it doesn't all implode*
Re: (Score:2)
Yep. I bought my new home shortly after Biden became president since I figured wages were all going to change.
That said, I still get hit by rising property taxes.
Re: (Score:2)
You probably bought near the peak of the market. Sorry to hear that. I did the same around 2006, just before the housing market collapse, erasing about 90% of my net worth in real dollar terms.
However, in inflationary times, and assuming you at least have a fixed-rate mortgage, (a) real estate holds its value better than dollar-denominated assets; and (b) the present value of the mortgage payments goes down over time, although, as you point out, property taxes often grow to make up the difference.
Question... (Score:5, Insightful)
This may be a stupid question, but why is there a 'cap' at all? Wouldn't a more newsworthy story be the raising of the 'minimum' salary?
Re: (Score:2)
The short version is because Amazon really pushes compensation in stock, vs cash, and having a cash limit across the board really makes the stock more incentivizing they think. Clearly though, inflation & competition being what it has been, given the deferred nature of stock, that can be harder.
Re: (Score:2)
Always get compensation in cash first. The stock is just a bonus, and one should never assume it will go up or be available at the price you want when you need it. Learn the Enron lesson.
If they need to hire a senior engineer and try to compete at startup wages it would be a hard sell I think. Maybe it works for the up and coming juniors though.
Re: (Score:2)
Always get compensation in cash first. The stock is just a bonus, and one should never assume it will go up or be available at the price you want when you need it. Learn the Enron lesson.
If they need to hire a senior engineer and try to compete at startup wages it would be a hard sell I think. Maybe it works for the up and coming juniors though.
This is good advice when dealing with startups. However, when you work with a mid or large cap blue chip company in the NASDAQ and DJ indexes, stock is not a bonus, but assets that beat inflation much better than salary increases ever would.
Hell, I wouldn't mind taking a 10%-20% decrease in base salary if they gave me the remaining in AMZN, APPL o MSFT stock. Even with the latest downturns, that shit is gold, especially if you aim to work for such a company for more than 5 years (long enough nullify the
Re: (Score:2)
There's a cap because it is a large company that has policies.
Normally different pay levels for different jobs levels.
Most companies will have something likes ...
level 4: 50k-75k
level 5: 70k-90k
level 6: 85k-110k
Whatever, these are just made up numbers. So if you want to hire a junior person, you tell HR that you're hiring a level 5 person. If you want to hire a senior, you ask them to hire a level 8 or whatever.
It also helps set team budgets. Your manager will be given a budget. Executives can get an 'estim
160k limit in Silicon Valley? Not. (Score:4, Insightful)
160k limit for base pay, even in Silicon Valley? I don't buy that. There's no way they didn't already have tech people with higher base pay. My guess, it was a policy that could only be exceeded with a certain amount of justification and EVP approval. There were probably so many approved exceptions they just decided to reduce the paper work. Probably won't really impact people's pay much, other than there will be some people who realize they are underpaid and will ask for more.
Re:160k limit in Silicon Valley? Not. (Score:5, Informative)
160k limit for base pay, even in Silicon Valley? I don't buy that.
Amazon currently relies on large bonuses and RSU's to make up often the majority of total pay for senior resources. A level 7 Principal Software Development Engineer is likely making $500k - $600k per year, with only $160k in base salary.
Re: 160k limit in Silicon Valley? Not. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Depends on the market. The cost of living varies a lot between, say, San Jose or NYC on one hand, versus Bumblefrack, Arkansas on the other.
For now at least, my family and I are getting by here in "flyover country" (just outside Cleveland, Ohio) on significantly less. Not getting ahead, granted, but getting by.
Golden Handcuffs (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
They can of course make it up in RSUs, but 160k for salary is way out-of-line with the competition. I'd just be surprised if people hadn't been negotiating trading RSUs for salary. If I had 2 offers both worth a total comp of 400k, I definitely prefer the one that is 200k salary + 200k stock, vs 160k salary + 240k stock. In CA, this scenario also has a small tax penalty for getting more of your comp in RSUs.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, I agree that this low base pay limit is an overall hindrance to hiring for Amazon, which is likely why they are making this change. I was merely stating how Amazon has gotten away with this policy so far when it's obvious they would have a hard time hiring senior engineers with a $160k base salary limit.
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, well, my 10th-Level Warlock Blue Edition Platinum-Member Status gets a free Happy Meal every Tuesday!
Re:160k limit in Silicon Valley? Not. (Score:5, Informative)
I can believe it. Last round of interviewing I did had as much stock compensation as base pay in general, if not more stock. So I might have a base of say $220k, and bonus of $30k, but on top of everything else, $180k in restricted stock, with the proportion of cash to stock shifting dramatically in favor of stock the more senior the position.
So for first year, my compensation package may be considered $430k, but I'd 'only' be able to cash in $330k of it, with $100k held back in 6 month chunks (and each time $40k gets granted, another $40k is promised 4 years later to take it's place). over the next 3 years. At any time, leaving means forfeiting about $180k of pending restricted stock to take that new job. Kind of a reverse golden parachute.
Like the article states, $160k/year base compensation is still not competitive, but the tone in general at that tier is to look at the non-cash compensation more than the base salary.
Re:160k limit in Silicon Valley? Not. (Score:4, Informative)
I worked as a program developer at one of the fulfillment centers, so I'm not sure how much of this crosses over to the corp world. but we had a "Total Compensation Package" which includes base salary, and RSUs. They target a price then make it up with Base+RSU. Problem is, say total compensation is 200,000 and you get 100k base and 100k RSU (which take years to mature). Your next review your target is moved to 230,000, well your unvested stocks are now worth more, even though they aren't yours yet, but they count towards this years Total Compensation number, putting you over the target.
Re: (Score:1)
Thanks for sharing. I've heard of this second hand before. They could, of course, raise the target accordingly, but it's a kind of smoke and mirrors that obfuscates and makes it harder to compare compensation with other companies. So far, Amazon is the only place I've heard of playing that game.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:160k limit in Silicon Valley? Not. (Score:5, Informative)
Yeah, this is BS. I have a buddy in Menlo Park who was pulling down over $300k a year working as a software architect for Amazon like 5-6 years ago.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, this is BS. I have a buddy in Menlo Park who was pulling down over $300k a year working as a software architect for Amazon like 5-6 years ago.
That was his total comp, which includes RSUs, not his salary. The $160K salary cap was real ($185K in SF and NYC).
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:160k limit in Silicon Valley? Not. (Score:4, Insightful)
Sorry man, you're not going to "get off my lawn" me. Your UID isn't much lower than my own, and this isn't even my first UID. I owned and operated my own software company developing POS and check cashing applications for the IBM AS400 BEFORE Slashdot even existed. I am not a member of a "drifted audience", i'm the original audience.
The fact that I don't care about how a specific subset of current IT workers are paid enough to distinguish between salary and total comps isn't evidence of a lack of tech knowledge and not belonging here on slashdot. It just shows that I haven't had to sell my labor to someone else in the last few decades.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry man, you're not going to "get off my lawn" me. Your UID isn't much lower than my own, and this isn't even my first UID.
Appeal to (dumb) seniority much? Rather than comparing UIDs, debate on the merit of the observation. This is like, my third iteration/account in ./ (been here since 98.)
It never occurred to me to go around comparing UIDs. That's like watching a pair of mandrills debating which one has the most engorged gonads.
Re: (Score:2)
This wasn't a dick measuring contest.
UID comparison is directly relevant when someone makes a comment about the changing audience of the platform. It's a way to show that I have been using the system consistently for TWENTY YEARS with this account so not only am I familiar with this site's content, but I am also part of the original audience and am able to judge what is and is not a sign of a change in the sites demographics.
The reason I did so was completely relevant to my argument that not being aware of
re: RSUs and so forth (Score:2)
I'd say the fact you made this comment just indicates you're employed by one of the Silicon Valley tech giants, as opposed to a professional in the field pretty much anyplace else in the nation, working for mid-sized or smaller companies or self-employed.
The "total compensation package" crap Amazon and others foist on people is a raw deal, all around -- and you're all suckers to think it's a new norm for working in the industry.
As just one example why it stinks? Say you want to refinance a house or purchase
Re: (Score:2)
People who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat it.
Stock prices go down, as well as up, and indeed most mature companies' stocks appreciate at most VERY slowly compared to inflation. They may be worth at least the net present value of the anticipated stream of future dividends, but Amazon stock does not pay dividends. Its value is based solely on anticipated growth, and, again, mature companies usually do not grow spectacularly.
And as you mentioned you don't get vested unless you stic
Re: (Score:1)
Ah! Here's the nugget. 160k wasn't a uniform cap. They had higher caps in certain markets. Then this makes more sense.
Re: (Score:2)
The other detail not mentioned is the 5/15/40/40 vesting schedule. Given how stock heavy the total comp is, the first two years you get a "sign-on bonus" to offset the late vesting schedule. At higher levels, this sign-on bonus can be substantial.
Just to make the numbers easier, let's say your total comp was $200k and your base salary was $100k. Your sign-on bonus during the first year would be ($200k - $100k) * 0.95 = $95k. For the 2nd year, it would be $85k.
There's a bit more to the formula used, but that
Re: (Score:2)
Yikes. No way I'd take that in SF or NYC. Maybe here where the cost of living is much lower. But absolutely not in a higher-cost city. $185k would barely cover housing and transportation costs (for a family) alone.
Basically, until it vests, that RSU is worth zero, and when it vests, it is worth some unknown amount that cannot be factored into planning one's cashflow in the here and now, nor, for that matter, at any time before it's vested AND cashed out.
If I want to be paid mostly in stock options of un
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
So how long do I have to work in the warehouse (Score:3)
to get to $350,000?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Starting at an entry-level position and eventually being promoted to a position where you earned a decent income was a ladder the boomers yanked up. Now it's go to college, into a trade, or suffer in abject poverty.
Re: (Score:2)
Or find some other way to make yourself more valuable over time.
People are often paid less than they are worth to their employer, but they are NEVER knowingly paid more.
Also: nothing wrong with college or trade school so long as you understand the impact of either on your potential earning potential. They are not a win for everyone, although they are for many.
Re: (Score:2)
Ten years, give or take
Re: (Score:2)
Ten years, give or take
but not 10 years of only moving boxes. It's 10 years of moving boxes and learning new skills, competing for promotion, and building networks of relationships. Believe it or not, it still works. However, 10 years of just turning a crank and going home has never worked and never will work.
Re: (Score:2)
No I mean like they'll have to literally work for 10 years to earn $300k, total.
Way to limit the talent pool! (Score:2)
Inflation (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's a bit more than that. It also means that both savings and debts are worth less over time, which encourages debt while discouraging savings and investment, and all of the economic growth that would otherwise occur, and all of jobs and other opportunities that otherwise would have been created.
Curing inflation requires raising interest rates, which in the short term does the same, by reducing the amount of money that can be borrowed and translated into economic growth. If you didn't live through the 70
Re: (Score:2)
Where Do I Sign Up? (Score:1)
How soon can I apply to work for these $350K jobs?