[HN Gopher] U.S. Tech Salaries Grow, but Not for Everyone
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       U.S. Tech Salaries Grow, but Not for Everyone
        
       Author : infodocket
       Score  : 61 points
       Date   : 2021-10-06 20:06 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (spectrum.ieee.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (spectrum.ieee.org)
        
       | rank0 wrote:
       | These numbers should be taken with a grain of salt. Which kinds
       | of people are participating in this IEEE study? I bet those
       | people fit into different demographics and receive different
       | compensation relative to the rest of tech.
        
       | arenaninja wrote:
       | Great summary and informative graphics. I wish it was
       | interactive!
        
         | jimbob45 wrote:
         | Honestly though, I can't even begin to evaluate the validity of
         | the study because they locked it behind a $125 paywall.
        
       | throwawayhacka wrote:
       | Heh. I guess I was around median in 1994 :)
       | 
       | Sometimes this stuff really bums me out..time to get on leetcode
       | I guess!
        
       | dudul wrote:
       | > And the gap between Caucasians and African Americans also
       | continued to grow
       | 
       | On the graph: White - 155k Black - 130k Asian - 156k
       | 
       | Is it time to talk about the gap between Blacks and Asians
       | instead?
        
         | didibus wrote:
         | > Is it time to talk about the gap between Blacks and Asians
         | instead?
         | 
         | The problem isn't so much what value you put on the groups, as
         | the gap itself.
         | 
         | Think of it more generically:                   gap<Race,
         | Salary>
         | 
         | Anytime you'd see a big gap, it would be cause for concern,
         | because we value that similar work should provide similar
         | compensation no matter your race.
         | 
         | And if you see that the gap is caused by the distribution of
         | the type of work, for example, raceX is more likely to do work
         | that pays more than raceZ. Well that's also an issue, because
         | we value equal opportunity between races, and the assumption is
         | if opportunity was truly equal, the data should not show a big
         | gap in the choices of work made between races, especially for
         | highly paid professions. At least it shouldn't show that
         | without a clear explanation as to why that might be, which we
         | don't have today.
         | 
         | I understand 100% where you come from with that comment, it can
         | get annoying to feel personally blamed for inequality, where
         | the real blame could be historical, or accidental, but I'd only
         | say to try and be the better man, and get past that, because
         | focusing on the "blame" both as a recipient or activist wanting
         | to lash it out is counterproductive, keep the focus on the
         | issue and discussions of solutions I think is the healthy path
         | forward for everyone.
         | 
         | And you're right, articles like this one could also try harder
         | at that.
        
           | mathverse wrote:
           | Whites not born in rich anglo countries are still perceived
           | as privileged despite a lot of them growing up in much harder
           | conditions than your average black person in tech.
        
             | ctvo wrote:
             | Citation required.
        
           | jjcon wrote:
           | > if opportunity was truly equal, the data should not show a
           | big gap in the choices of work made between races
           | 
           | I can understand that would be the case wrt race but what
           | about different cultures?
        
           | notshift wrote:
           | The variance of personality between individuals is around
           | 40-60% genetic in origin (i.e. genes have a huge impact on
           | personality). Given this, if you believe personality has any
           | impact on career selection at all, a differing distribution
           | of career selection between sexes and races would be an
           | expected outcome, no discrimination or bias necessary.
        
         | tentakull wrote:
         | Lol I love how anti Asian racism gets downvotes but what I
         | presume to be predominately white hacker news readers. Keep it
         | up white liberals.
        
         | victorhooi wrote:
         | This really does frustrate me - that racism is usually seen in
         | the spectrum of the "whites vs blacks" narrative - but Asian-
         | Americans are usually disregarded, or it's not "real" racism.
         | 
         | Sure, they don't have the same pay disparity as blacks
         | (although there is still inequality within the cohort itself) -
         | however, that's largely been a result of higher educational
         | attainment, and the work ethic of Asians - and ignores the
         | barriers they've had to overcome to get to that level.
         | 
         | However, there is still a level of casual racism - and even in
         | the last year, a lot of anti-Asian assaults across America.
         | 
         | Also, this is an anecdote, in many places I've worked at, it's
         | very common that management and above are mostly white males,
         | but all the Asians are non-management. I've wondered how much
         | of that is due to some cultural issue, versus how much is due
         | to some bias in the system.
        
           | 908B64B197 wrote:
           | It's interesting to see the achievement gap despite policies
           | at top institutions that are increasingly trying to get rid
           | of objective measurement, and instead focus on "holistic"
           | approach.
           | 
           | Lowell HS, here in SF, is a prime example [0], but also the
           | lawsuits brought against Ivy League institutions [1] [2] [3]
           | 
           | [0] https://www.sfgate.com/education/article/San-Francisco-
           | Lowel...
           | 
           | [1] https://spectator.org/asian-discrimination-sat-
           | requirements/
           | 
           | [2] https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/13/yale-illegally-
           | discriminates...
           | 
           | [3] https://www.cnn.com/2015/04/07/living/feat-mindy-kaling-
           | brot...
        
           | mrkstu wrote:
           | Microsoft, Google/Alphabet, Adobe, Zoom, NetApp- a who's who
           | of Silicon Valley. There is zero evidence of American
           | companies ignoring talented Asian executives- the shareholder
           | could care less as long as the stock progresses.
        
           | endisneigh wrote:
           | > and the work ethic of Asians - and ignores the barriers
           | they've had to overcome to get to that level.
           | 
           | Could you elaborate?
        
           | iammisc wrote:
           | Well of course, the anti-racists quite literally believe that
           | 'whiteness' is the gold standard by which every other race,
           | including the asians, who have far surpassed the whites,
           | ought to be held, because deep down inside they believe
           | whites are the ideal.
           | 
           | You see it everywhere. For example, the race chart here lists
           | whites first. For other charts where category has no
           | particular ordering (for example, technical competence), the
           | bars were ordered by current salary. It's not even by
           | relative share of the population, because there are more
           | hispanics than blacks I believe.
           | 
           | Also, I wonder how the presence of 'other' throws off the
           | numbers, because I bet many blacks are used to putting in
           | 'other'. I know as a minority myself, I often check 'other'
           | on these forms. It's no one's business and will only serve to
           | hurt you.
        
             | gremIin wrote:
             | Can you expand on what you mean when you say Asians have
             | far surpassed the whites? Are you strictly referring to
             | salary, or other things like power and beauty standards?
             | 
             | Last time I checked, white people in the US weren't
             | aspiring to attain Asian beauty standards.
        
               | iammisc wrote:
               | > Last time I checked, white people in the US weren't
               | aspiring to attain Asian beauty standards.
               | 
               | Really?
               | 
               | Androgenous / gender non-conforming dress originated in
               | KPop/anime/manga. Same with the slim aesthetic for men.
               | 
               | E-girls/boys are all the rage these days.
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-girls_and_e-boys
               | 
               | Asians are quietly, but strongly breaking in to the
               | charisma of the upper class. See the popularity of the
               | movie Crazy Rich Asians.
               | 
               | In terms of power, it's debatable, but China seems like a
               | more powerful nation than the United States every day
               | that passes.
        
           | bradleyjg wrote:
           | If whites have higher pay it's because of discrimination but
           | if Asians have higher pay it's overcoming discrimination.
           | 
           | Is your model of the world falsifiable?
        
         | project2501a wrote:
         | It is time to talk about unionization that would throw all
         | these bullshit inequalities out the window.
        
           | b20000 wrote:
           | why is this downvoted?
        
             | mrkstu wrote:
             | Because it would just replace one set of inequalities with
             | a different set?
        
           | tehjoker wrote:
           | They're not bullshit, they're secondary contradictions to the
           | primary contradiction of bourgeoisie vs proletarians. The
           | secondary contradictions do affect real people and are a
           | great way to rally people together by showing solidarity to
           | each other.
        
           | gruez wrote:
           | ...by replacing meritocracy with seniority?
        
             | Foobar8568 wrote:
             | It's already the case in most companies.
        
               | BurningFrog wrote:
               | That's why it's good we can switch companies!
        
             | b20000 wrote:
             | what meritocracy? are you saying that passing leetcode
             | interviews means you know your job?
        
               | jjcon wrote:
               | Plenty of us not in the Bay Area monoculture have never
               | been subjected to leetcode type interviews, I know I
               | never have.
        
               | emidln wrote:
               | You can also tell employers "no". I did it in the last
               | round and of 6 companies that tried a leetcode-style
               | interview, only 1 ended talks. I received offers from the
               | other 5 despite not giving them a bullshit timed algo
               | interview.
        
             | AnIdiotOnTheNet wrote:
             | If you honestly believe that companies operate as
             | meritocracies I have a bridge to sell you. Nepotism still
             | runs rampant, attractive people get more job offers,
             | promotions, and pay, networking still trounces experience
             | and credentials when it comes to finding work, and
             | credentials themselves are largely about wealth signaling.
             | 
             | Seniority is at least an objective measure, even if it is a
             | terrible one. Besides which, no one says that's how a union
             | has to work.
        
               | the_only_law wrote:
               | > attractive people get more job offers
               | 
               | Hey, I need a new webcam for interviews because this 720p
               | can't seem to get decent lighting really does a number ob
               | me there.
        
           | DaveExeter wrote:
           | Unionization would throw so much out the window!
        
             | FredPret wrote:
             | Window panes! What a capitalist decadence.
             | 
             | /s
        
             | syshum wrote:
             | That is good for the economy... Broken Windows are the
             | best... /s
        
       | WrathOfJay wrote:
       | Would have liked to see these numbers adjusted for cost of
       | living. Making $145,000 in silicon valley is not anywhere
       | comparable to making $145,000 in Podunk Florida, and thus I'm not
       | sure what value to derive from this data, with respect to my own
       | earnings.
        
       | jjcon wrote:
       | These numbers have more to do with who is responding to the
       | optional IEEE benefits survey (the IEEE target demographic) than
       | it does actual salaries.
       | 
       | There is a lot that seems odd with these numbers and they do not
       | appear to be not very representative as they are poorly sampled
       | and undersampled. the very first chart shows slow steady growth
       | and in the others we see tons of massive jumps - for instance
       | they show median male salary jumping from 112k in 2018 to 156k in
       | 2020. That would be an insane jump for an entire industry in 2
       | years (unless the sampling is poor as is the case here).
        
         | stagger87 wrote:
         | I think I agree. Non-costal _median_ salaries around 150k? Who
         | is responding to this? IEEE members at large companies in
         | senior positions is my guess.
        
       | readingnews wrote:
       | Geez, where the heck do any of these people work?!? I am a
       | unix/linux expert, Ph.D. in computer engineering, and have been a
       | tenure track professor (left to go back to systems administration
       | due to an emergency which caused a family move).
       | 
       | Honestly, I have a lot of good experience. I thought I had a good
       | job. I do not make anywhere near what the lowest of those
       | salaries are, and my B.S. is not only in EECE, but I have a lot
       | of analog design experience. Wholy mackerel, where do I sign up
       | for the bottom of the line entry level position at any of those
       | places?
        
         | the_only_law wrote:
         | Doesn't EE/CE stuff generally cap out lower than software?
         | 
         | But anyway in software devs you're experience in regards to
         | salary is going to depend on a number of different things like
         | the market/industry/domain you're in the market/industry/domain
         | you started or established yourself in, etc.
        
           | readingnews wrote:
           | Sure, but I did not think there was a $50k difference, and
           | that would be me picking a pretty low figure from those
           | graphs. I mean, the median given by the article is literally
           | $60k more than some of the higher paid people I know.
           | 
           | And I am not EE/CE, I teach CS and also work as a sysadmin!
        
       | eulers_secret wrote:
       | Does anyone know if these are base (W2 box 1) or "total comp"
       | numbers? If this is base, I need to push for a raise...
        
         | the_only_law wrote:
         | The industry pay seems a lot more bimodal (possibly multimodal)
         | than often portrayed by tech focused sites and communities,
         | based on a variety of different things.
         | 
         | Just for reference I wrapped up a job search recently, speaking
         | to a number of recruiters and employers. The highest potential
         | number given to me (base) was still around $10k under the first
         | quoted number. The jobs with a base salary in that range exist,
         | I saw a number of them, but they don't want to talk to me.
        
       | johnnyb9 wrote:
       | Crude analysis of gender pay gap. What is the difference in
       | experience level, hours worked, industry, etc.? Pay gap "headed
       | in the wrong direction" could easily be more women entering the
       | field at a junior level, which would actually be heading in the
       | _right_ direction.
        
         | chiefalchemist wrote:
         | It's also self-reported. Men, they say, in general are
         | "bolder". That translates to over-stating and/or those with
         | something to "brag" about are more likely to respond.
        
         | oingodoingo wrote:
         | don't forget that more women dropped out of work to handle
         | childcare during the pandemic
        
         | jldugger wrote:
         | More formally, this is the origin story for Simpson's paradox:
         | when you combine subgroups, trends can disappear or even
         | reverse. The more dimensions you analyze, the close to 'truth'
         | you can get.
         | 
         | This is why you have such varying claims about stuff like women
         | earning equal pay with men. People who want social change
         | (activists, politicans) group together the entire population,
         | and come to the conclusion that women make 83 cents on the
         | dollar. But when you break out along other dimensions (age/YOE,
         | occupation, hours worked), the gap is reduced. But never
         | eliminated!
         | 
         | What I'd really like to do some day is be smart enough to
         | replicate https://www.metafilter.com/126704/with-numbers-like-
         | these-wh... and see how more recent census data compares.
        
           | xenocyon wrote:
           | _" The more dimensions you analyze, the close to 'truth' you
           | can get."_
           | 
           | Data scientist here. The above is not the correct takeaway
           | from Simpson's paradox. It is not generally correct that the
           | trends seen in subdivided groups are closer to truth than
           | overall groups; sometimes the opposite is the case. It
           | depends entirely on what the divisions are and whether they
           | make sense.
           | 
           | With regard to gender-based pay disparity, there are a
           | multiplicity of factors, from the most obvious ("equal pay
           | for equal work") to other factors such as the fact that
           | professions largely staffed by women tend to get paid less
           | than professions largely staffed by men. For instance
           | childcare is miserably compensated, despite being a position
           | of high responsibility and impact.
           | 
           | The consensus regarding women during the pandemic (not
           | limited to tech workers) was that women have
           | disproportionately sacrificed their careers to cover the
           | needs of childcare and at-home schooling during the pandemic.
        
             | droopyEyelids wrote:
             | Should people who sacrifice their careers for noble goals
             | be paid less?
             | 
             | Not that I am demanding an answer from you specifically.
             | It's just a weird question in the context of a country
             | where wage labor is the only real source of income for
             | individuals.
        
               | AmericanChopper wrote:
               | What does "paid less" even mean in this context? If you
               | sacrifice your career, you sacrifice the remuneration you
               | were receiving from it. It's part of the career...
        
       | bsanr wrote:
       | Recognizing that the odds of this thread turning into a ****show
       | are high, a piece of general advice:
       | 
       | Note whatever you feel compelled to say within the first 5
       | minutes of your deciding to leave a comment here. Discard it.
       | Write an entirely new comment. Post that instead.
        
         | throwaway2048 wrote:
         | yep, its telling that most of the comments are rushing to make
         | excuses as to why what the article says might not be true.
         | 
         | Not to say the article is the gospel truth, and something
         | unexpected might be occurring, but the fact that it seems to be
         | poster's first reflex says a lot.
        
       | b20000 wrote:
       | while we are fighting over gender and race gaps, we fail to
       | notice the gap between tech salaries and salaries of marketing
       | and sales executives, C level roles, lawyers and so on.
        
         | tehjoker wrote:
         | It's true, but if we do manage to mostly equalize those (and in
         | an ideal world they would be!), it will really sharpen the
         | criticism of the top because there will be nothing left to
         | divide us.
        
           | gremIin wrote:
           | That is not realistic. Do I really need to elaborate?
        
           | llampx wrote:
           | There will never be a lack of divisions the elites can foster
           | in the populace. If you had told me that in the middle of a
           | pandemic, people would politicize medicinal measures and
           | vaccinations, i would have laughed.
        
             | tehjoker wrote:
             | We don't have to win over right-wingers, they're a lost
             | cause. I think among the broad left, the contradictions of
             | race and gender are healing slowly. For example, a black
             | marxist professor told me that in the 1960s white people
             | could not show up to a police brutality protest, but now
             | the George Floyd protests were fully mixed race.
             | 
             | The condition of the capitalist system is declining and
             | more people are feeling it. By removing things the elites
             | can point to, we narrow their ability to navigate.
             | 
             | The right wing is turning to conspiracy and nationalism as
             | they usually do. However, they are the minority of the
             | country (the friends and family of the ownership class is
             | necessarily smaller than the prolaterians), they just have
             | the ability to do a LOT of damage.
        
               | syshum wrote:
               | Wow.. Please leave your echo chamber.. Please
        
               | the_lonely_road wrote:
               | Isn't beloved white and left politician Bernie Sanders
               | famous for a photo of him as a young adult being dragged
               | away from an African American rights protest by police?
               | 
               | I spent just a few seconds looking at photos of 1960's
               | police brutality photos on Google and see white people in
               | most of them.
               | 
               | https://www.google.com/search?q=1960%27s+police+brutality
               | +pr...
               | 
               | Good time to also point out that conservative voters make
               | up something like 24-25% of the population and liberal
               | voters roughly the same. Half the population doesn't vote
               | in general though the numbers are higher for presidential
               | elections than your average election.
        
               | AnimalMuppet wrote:
               | You are badly mistaken if you think the right wing is
               | only, or even primarily, "the friends and family of the
               | ownership class".
        
             | Mountain_Skies wrote:
             | Communities of color are the least likely to be vaccinated
             | and have good reason to distrust the medical establishment
             | and the government. Call that politicization if you want
             | but their reasons go back far beyond the start of this
             | pandemic.
        
               | [deleted]
        
           | refenestrator wrote:
           | Dude, the git master branch is divisive, somehow. There will
           | never be an end to it, it's an entertainment/outrage complex
           | with billions in funding.
           | 
           | Ignoring class divisions and real-world material conditions
           | while we get rich and kibbitz about trivialities is the whole
           | point, you can't run out of trivialities.
        
             | iammisc wrote:
             | > you can't run out of trivialities.
             | 
             | Spot on. I'd add... you can't run out of irrelevant
             | trivialities.
        
         | didibus wrote:
         | Agree completely, that's why they say the biggest decline in
         | recent years has been the middle class, so much attention in
         | making sure everyone in the middle is equally in the middle,
         | and less focus on the fact that the middle is itself on a
         | decline.
        
           | syshum wrote:
           | There is a decline to the middle class, however that is
           | because most of the middle class moved to the upper classes,
           | not down to the lower class..
           | 
           | https://youtu.be/4J5s6aZCPSg?t=499
        
             | havelhovel wrote:
             | You can't just define the middle class according to
             | arbitrary income bands, as the presenter in your link does.
             | The middle class is an ideal: a single family home, yearly
             | vacations, pensions, etc. The presenter is pretending like
             | we're complaining about the cost of Netflix subscriptions
             | when we're actually complaining about major expenses like
             | housing and education being less affordable relative to
             | wages over time. I stopped watching after the presenter
             | started comparing silent films to the MCU to prove how
             | great our quality of life is today. It's a wildly
             | disingenuous take and misses the entire point.
        
               | californical wrote:
               | I don't think it misses the point at all. The world is
               | amazing today, and a larger number of people than ever
               | get to experience an extraordinary standard of living.
               | 
               | And I totally think it's true that people don't realize
               | how much they're spending on modern conveniences that
               | could be easily cut out if they wanted to live more
               | cheaply.
        
               | dack wrote:
               | How do you know they are being disingenuous rather than
               | just ignorant / incorrect?
        
               | didibus wrote:
               | He might not be, but the way he is giving a talk, wearing
               | a suit, has the video up on YouTube, and speaks as if he
               | is very knowledgeable on the matter, if he were to be
               | incorrect or ignorant, it would still have a disingenuous
               | effect on the viewer, even if he doesn't know that he's
               | wrong or ignorant and totally believes his own body odor
               | smells of roses.
               | 
               | And notice I said "if he were to be incorrect or
               | ignorant", I have not tried to fact check or anything
               | what he's saying in the talk, and so I'm making no claim
               | to the accuracy and veracity of it.
        
               | havelhovel wrote:
               | Besides the convenient mischaracterization of claims that
               | the middle class is shrinking, I assume a "Milton
               | Friedman Distinguished Fellow at the Foundation for
               | Economic Education," with a Ph.D. in Economics, would be
               | aware of everything I wrote above and focus on those more
               | important aspects.
        
               | Gunax wrote:
               | Are you sure you cannot define it that way?
               | 
               | Not saying youre wrong per se, but the problem with these
               | sorts of loose definitions is that one can bend the
               | definition to make whichever point one wishes to.
        
         | bpodgursky wrote:
         | Most sales reps are not especially well-compensated... it is a
         | brutal job. The sales superstars and sales execs earn a lot but
         | IMO absolutely deserve it. Any of those guys work WAY harder
         | than any software dev. And have no idea how much money they're
         | going to make until last day of the quarter. Rough stuff.
         | 
         | Lawyers I can see the case against, but remember that they are
         | paying off a ton of debt, and missed a couple years of earnings
         | in law school.
        
           | ghaff wrote:
           | And the reason you don't see sales rep interview drama is
           | that it's pretty simple. You hire people out of school or
           | based on previous record and if they don't make their numbers
           | even if mostly based on customer issues outside of their
           | control, they don't get their bonuses or get let go.
           | 
           | The relevant quote I've heard is that "Sales managers have no
           | trouble firing people."
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-10-06 23:01 UTC)