4 ms·

Measuring oneself as an engineer by the title of the salary band you're in is a disservice. I remember at Bell Labs they had one title: MTS (Member of Technica

Measuring oneself as an engineer by the title of the salary band you're in is a disservice. I remember at Bell Labs they had one title: MTS (Member of Technical Staff). You were an engineer, and that was that. (disclaimer: there were a handful of DMTSes (Distinguished Member of Technical Staff)). No one said, "I'm an E7" or "I'm a Staff Engineer II". Those statements strike me as distasteful. And begs the question if we're being suckered by Human Resource's gamification of work. I worked at a company, Pivotal Labs, where everyone's title was "Pivot". It made for an egalitarian workplace. That changed after the acquisition, and we got titles. My proudest moment? Not when I was promoted from Senior Engineer to Staff Engineer, but rather the after-hours work I did with Dimtriy to expand our offering to include IPv6. At my current startup, there are no titles, and I'm grateful for that.

almostgotcaught 11mo ago
> Measuring oneself as an engineer by the title of the salary band you're in is a disservice. It's really not that deep - people do this because both a title and salary are effectively money you can bank and that's the only thing that matters - we don't work grueling, stressful, tedious, jobs just the sake of "a hard day's work". > Not when I was promoted from Senior Engineer to Staff Engineer, but rather the after-hours work I did with Dimtriy to expand our offering to include IPv6. I wish people would introspect more deeply instead of perpetuating toxic relationships with corporations; you're basically saying your most gratifying experience at work (where you are given a small slice of the net on your labor) was when you did something completely abstract and not when you got more money, more status, more whatever? Ok that's like saying my most gratifying experience at school was not when I graduated but when I had to sit in detention. Note I could've said "when I discovered XYZ mathematical principle" but I didn't because they're both equally as arbitrary in the overall scheme (learn skills and move into the workforce).
- dmoy 11mo ago
  > are effectively money you can bank and that's the only thing that matters We may have to agree to disagree here. Not even just talking about the case where someone's worked in the tech industry long enough with a low enough expense lifestyle that money literally does not matter to them anymore... A lot of people will work specific jobs not because they're trying to optimize for the most possible money.
  - xp84 11mo ago
    I hope you’re not feeling superior to others because you’re able to have a “low expense lifestyle.” That tends to go right out the window if you have a spouse who doesn’t work in tech, and especially with children. Though I could just be a little biased because for a special needs child, basically take your expected ‘child expenses’ and square that number. Note: all of the above was my own choice, so I can’t complain. I only just want to point out that you can really only keep a true low-expense lifestyle as a single person, or as a childless couple if both of you share that frugality passion.
  - almostgotcaught 11mo ago
    > Not even just talking about the case where someone's worked in the tech industry long enough with a low enough expense lifestyle that money literally does not matter to them anymore... This is the most out of touch (and also irrelevant) take you can have. I work in FAANG in the bay. The people around me are solid upper middle class but mortgages, day care, regular cars, medical bills, aging parents, college tuitions, etc etc etc mean very few of them can retire today and continue to live in the same place. > A lot of people will work specific jobs not because they're trying to optimize for the most possible money. Then you just work in a completely universe than I do because at every single job I've ever had, from lowly bus boy to FAANG ML engineer, not a single person has ever said to me "I'm doing this for the love of it". Quite the opposite in fact - many people I know would quit at the drop a hat if not for "golden handcuffs".
    - brian_cunnie 11mo ago
      > not a single person has ever said to me "I'm doing this for the love of it". I'm doing this for the love of it. Maybe "love" is too strong a word, but I certainly "like" what I'm doing, and I "like" computers, and I have a computer side project that I "like" doing and don't get paid for. Heck, when I was a summer student at IBM I couldn't believe they were paying me for something that was so fun!
      - almostgotcaught 11mo ago
- Nevermark 11mo ago
  > Note I could've said "when I discovered XYZ mathematical principle" but I didn't because they're both equally as arbitrary Wow. I cannot relate to someone who only (mostly) view's their own accomplishments as bargaining chips for money/prestige. Even accomplishments that could have widespread benefit to others. But I accept productive people can operate in different ways.
  - almostgotcaught 11mo ago
    > Even accomplishments that could have widespread benefit to others. Which ones would those be? The ones where you optimized some process so your company could make 10MM more annually? I'm not a doctor/teacher/public defender. I write code that my company sells. I'm not benefitting anyone except myself and my company.
    - Nevermark 11mo ago
      > discovered XYZ mathematical principle As I noted, I wasn't critiquing you. > I'm not benefitting anyone except myself and my company. I don't know what you do, and all good work should be rewarded, but in most work third parties, such as customers or others benefit from work well done. But I strongly share your opinion that good work should be matched with proportional compensation. I had a similar problem. I was compensated well for what I could achieve, as a partner to a company, but after many good years, asymptotically prevented from achieving anything. The irony of being bought out of a contract for a price that reflected how much I could no longer achieve in those circumstances wasn't lost on me.
- AlotOfReading 11mo ago
  You're coming at the employer relationship from a fundamentally different place than the parent comment you're responding to. I'm assuming their age because of when Pivotal Labs was a thing, but there was a period from about the late 90s to the early 2010s where many people in the valley believed in an ideal of ascetic tech monks where we did this for the love of the work and not purely for status or money. It's not like those elements were ever wholly absent, but nominally egalitarian hierarchies weren't the weirdest things in hindsight.
  - brian_cunnie 11mo ago
    > ascetic tech monks where we did this for the love of the work and not purely for status or money And this is not limited to 2010s! My father worked as a software engineer in Poland in the 1960s, and the communist party had a problem: every profession had at least one member of the communist party except the programming profession. But the Polish programmers weren't interested in joining, not even with the perks of a bigger apartment or cars. Finally they got one programmer to join the communist party, but he wasn't interested in programming, and only became a programmer so he could join the communist party & get the perks.
thisoneisreal 11mo ago
I had the pleasure of working with a handful of Pivots for about 2 years, and I have to say that felt like the closest I ever got to a healthy engineering culture. Delightful people, superb engineers, always focused on working and learning together. I feel really privileged to have worked in that environment.
chermi 11mo ago
But you still had different pay, no? Seems like a clever way to make people less likely to complain about incentive package
cortesoft 11mo ago
For the first 10 years or so of my career, I didn’t even know my job title. I knew my pay, which is what I cared (and still care) about. They could call me the janitor as long as they paid me a good salary and the work didn’t change. It wasn’t until one of my startups was bought by a big corp that I came to learn my job title, because suddenly it was tied to compensation. That mattered.
koakuma-chan 11mo ago
[flagged]

almostgotcaught 11mo ago

> Measuring oneself as an engineer by the title of the salary band you're in is a disservice. It's really not that deep - people do this because both a title and salary are effectively money you can bank and that's the only thing that matters - we don't work grueling, stressful, tedious, jobs just the sake of "a hard day's work". > Not when I was promoted from Senior Engineer to Staff Engineer, but rather the after-hours work I did with Dimtriy to expand our offering to include IPv6. I wish people would introspect more deeply instead of perpetuating toxic relationships with corporations; you're basically saying your most gratifying experience at work (where you are given a small slice of the net on your labor) was when you did something completely abstract and not when you got more money, more status, more whatever? Ok that's like saying my most gratifying experience at school was not when I graduated but when I had to sit in detention. Note I could've said "when I discovered XYZ mathematical principle" but I didn't because they're both equally as arbitrary in the overall scheme (learn skills and move into the workforce).

dmoy 11mo ago
> are effectively money you can bank and that's the only thing that matters We may have to agree to disagree here. Not even just talking about the case where someone's worked in the tech industry long enough with a low enough expense lifestyle that money literally does not matter to them anymore... A lot of people will work specific jobs not because they're trying to optimize for the most possible money.
- xp84 11mo ago
  I hope you’re not feeling superior to others because you’re able to have a “low expense lifestyle.” That tends to go right out the window if you have a spouse who doesn’t work in tech, and especially with children. Though I could just be a little biased because for a special needs child, basically take your expected ‘child expenses’ and square that number. Note: all of the above was my own choice, so I can’t complain. I only just want to point out that you can really only keep a true low-expense lifestyle as a single person, or as a childless couple if both of you share that frugality passion.
- almostgotcaught 11mo ago
  > Not even just talking about the case where someone's worked in the tech industry long enough with a low enough expense lifestyle that money literally does not matter to them anymore... This is the most out of touch (and also irrelevant) take you can have. I work in FAANG in the bay. The people around me are solid upper middle class but mortgages, day care, regular cars, medical bills, aging parents, college tuitions, etc etc etc mean very few of them can retire today and continue to live in the same place. > A lot of people will work specific jobs not because they're trying to optimize for the most possible money. Then you just work in a completely universe than I do because at every single job I've ever had, from lowly bus boy to FAANG ML engineer, not a single person has ever said to me "I'm doing this for the love of it". Quite the opposite in fact - many people I know would quit at the drop a hat if not for "golden handcuffs".
  - brian_cunnie 11mo ago
    > not a single person has ever said to me "I'm doing this for the love of it". I'm doing this for the love of it. Maybe "love" is too strong a word, but I certainly "like" what I'm doing, and I "like" computers, and I have a computer side project that I "like" doing and don't get paid for. Heck, when I was a summer student at IBM I couldn't believe they were paying me for something that was so fun!
    - almostgotcaught 11mo ago
Nevermark 11mo ago
> Note I could've said "when I discovered XYZ mathematical principle" but I didn't because they're both equally as arbitrary Wow. I cannot relate to someone who only (mostly) view's their own accomplishments as bargaining chips for money/prestige. Even accomplishments that could have widespread benefit to others. But I accept productive people can operate in different ways.
- almostgotcaught 11mo ago
  > Even accomplishments that could have widespread benefit to others. Which ones would those be? The ones where you optimized some process so your company could make 10MM more annually? I'm not a doctor/teacher/public defender. I write code that my company sells. I'm not benefitting anyone except myself and my company.
  - Nevermark 11mo ago
    > discovered XYZ mathematical principle As I noted, I wasn't critiquing you. > I'm not benefitting anyone except myself and my company. I don't know what you do, and all good work should be rewarded, but in most work third parties, such as customers or others benefit from work well done. But I strongly share your opinion that good work should be matched with proportional compensation. I had a similar problem. I was compensated well for what I could achieve, as a partner to a company, but after many good years, asymptotically prevented from achieving anything. The irony of being bought out of a contract for a price that reflected how much I could no longer achieve in those circumstances wasn't lost on me.
AlotOfReading 11mo ago
You're coming at the employer relationship from a fundamentally different place than the parent comment you're responding to. I'm assuming their age because of when Pivotal Labs was a thing, but there was a period from about the late 90s to the early 2010s where many people in the valley believed in an ideal of ascetic tech monks where we did this for the love of the work and not purely for status or money. It's not like those elements were ever wholly absent, but nominally egalitarian hierarchies weren't the weirdest things in hindsight.
- brian_cunnie 11mo ago
  > ascetic tech monks where we did this for the love of the work and not purely for status or money And this is not limited to 2010s! My father worked as a software engineer in Poland in the 1960s, and the communist party had a problem: every profession had at least one member of the communist party except the programming profession. But the Polish programmers weren't interested in joining, not even with the perks of a bigger apartment or cars. Finally they got one programmer to join the communist party, but he wasn't interested in programming, and only became a programmer so he could join the communist party & get the perks.

thisoneisreal 11mo ago

I had the pleasure of working with a handful of Pivots for about 2 years, and I have to say that felt like the closest I ever got to a healthy engineering culture. Delightful people, superb engineers, always focused on working and learning together. I feel really privileged to have worked in that environment.

chermi 11mo ago

But you still had different pay, no? Seems like a clever way to make people less likely to complain about incentive package

cortesoft 11mo ago

For the first 10 years or so of my career, I didn’t even know my job title. I knew my pay, which is what I cared (and still care) about. They could call me the janitor as long as they paid me a good salary and the work didn’t change. It wasn’t until one of my startups was bought by a big corp that I came to learn my job title, because suddenly it was tied to compensation. That mattered.

koakuma-chan 11mo ago

[flagged]