[TriLUG] Positions with Google in NC

[Aaron S. Joyner]

bak wrote:
> Magnus wrote:
>> Aaron, thank you so much for your thoughtful contributions to this
>> thread.  I've personally found it very interesting to read, from both
>> sides.
>>
>> Just an unsolicited $0.02:
>>
>> Aaron S. Joyner wrote:
>>> So, base salary isn't what one might typically expect.  And even from
>>> the offer letter, it's sometimes hard to make an accurate assessment of
>>> what the compensation package provided by Google really is.
>>
>> Bang.  Right there you've got a big red flag for geeks that are
>> further along in their careers... maybe someone like me who is
>> supporting a wife & three kids.  Guys like me would much rather have a
>> "sure thing" that may or may not be less than an income that can vary
>> widely depending on how your own performance is perceived, how the
>> company performance is measured by the bean counters, and how the
>> compensation plan itself is inevitably going to be restructured as the
>> company matures.
>>
>> A lot of us got burned, badly, during the heady dot-com years when so
>> much of our compensation was based off of company performance, stock
>> options, and so on.  These days, it is a lot more attractive to be
>> able to bank on getting $X per paycheck rather than a substantially
>> lower number with *potential* for a balloon payment annually of
>> unknown value.
>>
>> These flexible compensation packages are probably more attractive to
>> people right out of school, dual income families, single adults, or
>> childless couples.  I do think that this sort of package would tend to
>> repel breadwinners from single income families or families with a
>> number of children.
> I have to concur with Magnus here.  The job I had as an SA before this
> one regularly came with a "base" bonus of 20%.  I always made at least
> that.  Why did I hate getting a bonus, then?  Because when you accept it
> in lieu of being paid a salary -- as deferred compensation, or
> what-have-you -- it is no longer a bonus.  It's if-we-feel-like-it
> salary on the part of management.  If they take it away -- and they
> won't hesitate to do so, if they really need to -- boom, you're suddenly
> working for WAY below market rate for your skills, and good luck
> convincing your next company that you're worth (your salary) *
> (1.bonus).  Will this happen at Google?  Damned if I know -- and that's
> the point.  But this is just a feeling on my part, based on my
> experience; Aaron obviously feels that it was well worth the risk, and I
> certainly can't say he was wrong.

Perhaps I wasn't clear.  I was simply saying that I did take a hard look
at the base salary, and the other unlikely-to-change benefits of the
team I would be working with, etc - and decided that was enough for me
to make the decision to move to CA and work for Google.  It was only
after-the-fact, that I figured out that it was even possible that my
monetary compensation would be in the realm where I would be grinning
from ear to ear, instead of simply happy and making a good living.  :)

As for the "stable paycheck vs unstable compensation" thoughts, I'm
definitely not in the "has a large family to support" category.  I
honestly don't think I would have uprooted my family and moved 3,000
miles across the country if my wife and I had kids.  The opportunity
came at just the right time in my life, and for that I am grateful.  On
the flip side, I come from a rather conservative family, and have a very
conservative financial mindset.  I have been in a position where I was
essentially running a small business doing consulting work, with a truly
unstable source of income.  It's not a job I would look forward to doing
again until I'm independently wealthy.  :)  If it comes down to personal
advice, I would suggest doing as I did, and ensure you can make the
monthly budget work on the offered base salary, and nothing else.  The
rest is icing on the cake.  It's just a matter of considering which
icing you'd rather have, a few extra K guaranteed per year, or a really
awesome group of guys to work with and the possibility of huge
truckloads of cash.  :)

At least that's my world view,
Aaron S. Joyner


> So: I did not consider bonuses as a numerical part of my salary at the
> jobs I was considering in 2006, as all the companies I had an interest
> in were "large" (more than a couple thousand) and publicly traded.  I
> might consider it for a small, flat company where I had a distinct and
> measurable influence as an employee.
> Guess what I heard?  No bonus for IT in 2006 at my old company.  I hated
> to be proved right for the sake of my ex-co-workers.  Perhaps working
> there had this cynical influence on my attitude which you all in TriLUG
> land are probably contrasting with Aaron's at this very moment.
> 
> Aaron, you made a bunch of other interesting  and valid points which I
> will respond to at some point in the near future.  Any other almost-was
> Googlers on the list?  I'm getting quite curious, now.