Listed salaries are almost always what the employee pays, not what it costs the company. In the US, this includes the payroll tax, and cost of “benefits,” like healthcare and unemployment insurance, and is referred to as the burdened rate. This is separate from the income tax the employee has to pay to the government, mind you.
The burdened rate for most employees at the companies I’ve worked for in the US is like 20-50% higher than the salary paid. Not sure exactly how it works in France, but I do know there’s a pretty complex payroll tax companies have to pay. I think it’s something like 40% at the salary you quoted.
And a 80k$ salary in France amounts to around 125k$ cost for the employer.
So 170k$ isn’t that much - I actually know French developers and network engineers that make similar money.
The French ITsec architect I interviewed last year would have cost me (converted) around 150k$.
So 170k$ is absolutely not out of the normal range here.
Talking about France: The French government could start to properly support matrix.org as they use it for tChap. The same goes for Germany with the “Behördenmessenger”
You can’t at all compare unless you reference cost and standard of living. I’ve managed and hired people in multiple countries. It’s not as simple as salary X exchange rate.
Cost of living in the UK is about 12% lower than the US, including housing costs. But the average salary is about half of the US salary. So you can see that that doesn’t really cover it.
Why would someone choose a more stressful job for the same pay?
Because they don’t have a choice? Holy shit, you people are so disconnected from reality it’s not even funny.
People work significantly harder than this CEO for significantly less. If the CEO was forced to make less money, he could still do the job without an issue. But why would he when useful idiots will defend him making more?
If he’s not willing to do the job for less, then someone else would be willing to take over his role considering how many people already work way harder for way less.
170k for running a company? Shit. I wouldn’t do that. You can make just as much being a halfway competent developer, and it’s way less stress.
I guess you live in the USA? No one makes this amount of money
A Senior Developer in any major city makes that amount of money.
https://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/senior-developer-salary-SRCH_KO0,16.htm
Funnily enough, it shows the localised amount.
For me in France it shows 50k€ to 69k€, so $58k to $80k at current exchange rates
It just confirms that this is USA only haha
Btw glassdoor sucks. Forces you to have an account and register work shit
80k plus all of society’s trappings of France. Dude, it’s not even a comparison. Worker’s rights, healthcare, public transit, safety, security…
You can’t just look at the exchange rate. You have to look at cost and standard of living.
Someone in the US making 100k is not doing as well as someone in France making 70k€
Listed salaries are almost always what the employee pays, not what it costs the company. In the US, this includes the payroll tax, and cost of “benefits,” like healthcare and unemployment insurance, and is referred to as the burdened rate. This is separate from the income tax the employee has to pay to the government, mind you.
The burdened rate for most employees at the companies I’ve worked for in the US is like 20-50% higher than the salary paid. Not sure exactly how it works in France, but I do know there’s a pretty complex payroll tax companies have to pay. I think it’s something like 40% at the salary you quoted.
Plus you have to add in the amortized cost of legal, HR, etc for employees.
Not a big deal for 1-2 employees, but as you scale you need support employees
And a 80k$ salary in France amounts to around 125k$ cost for the employer. So 170k$ isn’t that much - I actually know French developers and network engineers that make similar money. The French ITsec architect I interviewed last year would have cost me (converted) around 150k$.
So 170k$ is absolutely not out of the normal range here.
Talking about France: The French government could start to properly support matrix.org as they use it for tChap. The same goes for Germany with the “Behördenmessenger”
Just looked on that link for the UK. The average is listed as £63k, which is $85k.
So you’re not exactly disproving the point that that type of high salary is a US thing.
You can’t at all compare unless you reference cost and standard of living. I’ve managed and hired people in multiple countries. It’s not as simple as salary X exchange rate.
Cost of living in the UK is about 12% lower than the US, including housing costs. But the average salary is about half of the US salary. So you can see that that doesn’t really cover it.
Source: https://livingcost.org/cost/united-kingdom/united-states
It must not be that stressful if you have $170k leftover to pay yourself.
Most people work more stressful jobs for considerably less. We should stop giving CEOs a pass.
This shouldn’t need to be said, but most people are useful idiots so here we are.
You’re missing the point. There are easier jobs in the same industry for the same pay.
We’re not comparing tech CEO to roofers. We’re comparing them to other people in tech.
Uhh, no.
This is directly the point: Most people work more stressful jobs for considerably less. We should stop giving CEOs a pass.
Oh, and don’t forget about this one!
Still not getting it I think.
Why would someone choose a more stressful job for the same pay?
This does not imply a lack of more stressful jobs that pay less. Obviously every idiot would take an easier job that pays more if they could.
I didn’t forget. I chose to ignore it because it makes you look tacky and I’m being polite. But if you insist on pressing the point, there you go.
Because they don’t have a choice? Holy shit, you people are so disconnected from reality it’s not even funny.
People work significantly harder than this CEO for significantly less. If the CEO was forced to make less money, he could still do the job without an issue. But why would he when useful idiots will defend him making more?
If he’s not willing to do the job for less, then someone else would be willing to take over his role considering how many people already work way harder for way less.
Thanks for proving my last point right, again.