This was an incredible opportunity and it's an absolute shame that internal protests killed it. Yes, you get less pay and a smaller stock refresh, but I know a few people who's careers began with this residency and they'd still be struggling without it.
I don't even know how to describe this. You get less pay but an amazing opportunity, and then you look back and are upset that you weren't given more? Google took a large risk on these candidates with the assumption that they'd fail and eventually have to be let go. But they did it anyway just to create opportunities.
That said, as a side note, I do think articles like this tend to sensationalize Google as a whole as the "bad guy". Try to remember, Google is a huge company with lots of people managing its many parts. I personally feel there was a failing here, but if so, it was the fault of a relatively small number of people, not "Google". Even most of the people running this program were good, and the program itself was great (as you said) other than what I said above. There's hundreds of thousands of decisions happening every day at Google. If just a couple bad ones get to define the company as a whole, then no large company can ever be good, no matter how good all the rest of those decisions are.
The only room for negotiation is being willing to walk (usually because you have an offer somewhere else).
Otherwise, it's not negotiating, it's just begging.
I don't think that's really true.
I'm not arguing that there aren't SWEs whose total comp is $600k. There definitely are. However, those people aren't really SWEs. They're managers, architects, and strategists. They have a lot of people reporting to them, they make decisions about very high level things that are only tangentially related to code, and they work on guiding other engineers to find solutions to hard problems. No doubt being a developer before getting to that role is incredibly helpful and makes you better at it, but if you're earning $600k I very much doubt you're spending more than 25% of your time sat at a keyboard with an IDE open.
If you want to earn that much after a decade in work you'd be much better off polishing your management and strategy skills than learning how to write better code.
And yes, I realise I'm totally falling in to the 'no true Scotsman' trap here. But sometimes a Scotsman is just an MBA in a kilt. :)
Just like stores have "up to" 70% discounts. One item is marked off that much, and the rest are given modest discounts.
We shouldn't normalize this number as some plain old average, it'd be aspirational for many.
Using StackOverflow's [0] aggregated statistics of pay based on experience + location we can get some rough estimates
Over a 5 to 10 year span as a developer at Google you'd probably touch: Java, Golang, C++, Python, and some part of GCP (or very similar tech). Pay is also different from market location so if we look only at the USA we can look at SF and Manhattan.
5 years:
- NYC 25% 96k, 50% 126k, 75% 166k
- SF 25% 113k, 50% 149k, 75% 197k
- NYC 25% 107k, 50% 141k, 75% 186k
- SF 25% 126k, 50% 166k, 75% 219k
Some more data can be gleamed from here: https://www.levels.fyi/
500k+ is L6+, while very difficult to obtain, seems doable if you are determined, know your stuff, know how to find the "right" projects, and are also an inspiring leader.
IME the "unique backgrounds" are "doesn't have a CS degree or a couple years of experience at a big software shop".
discrimination can either be legal or illegal. google legally discriminates by giving offers to those who get the hiring committee's approval. i think getting the hiring committee's approval is a form of legal discrimination.
This seems at odds with the article:
>Nearly all residents converted to regular employees, according to the presentation
So people from underrepresented backgrounds should be paid the same as top engineers regardless of output.
Where? lol
I'm really struggling to see the injustice of this program. It seems to me that axing it only leaves the people who used this role as a stepping stone to reach a full time role with no opportunity to get their foot in the door.
Personally, I don't buy this because the alternative is not that these Eng Residents would have been given entry level roles at google with the commensurate pay and benefits but rather no role at google.
When you converted to being a regular SWE, they gave you a BIG pay bump -- comparable to a new-grad starting salary, but rather higher than average. My comp the year after Eng Res was higher by 20-40% than my friends who started at Google right out of school.
So ... leave?
Put a couple years of FAANG on your resume to bootstrap and then bail out to the job that pays correctly. That's what everybody has to do to keep their salary from lagging.
If the analysis only includes those who haven't bailed at least once, it's for sure going to have lagging salaries.
A more interesting question would be what those who bailed and then came back to Google are making.
You might not ever catch up to someone who started higher (and certainly won't for the integral of compensation), but the gap should narrow over time.
For all of this she was paid £25,000 (USD 35,000) / year.
The injustice is that software engineers and the tech sector in general are being so insanely rewarded as most of the rest of society stagnates and living standards fall (I say this as an insanely rewarded software engineer).
This will not end well.
Google was 51.7% white in 2020, down from 54.4% in 2019 *. The US is 61.5% white, meaning whites are under-represented at Google, and increasingly so. How can one then argue they are favored? Why do reporters not apply even the smallest degree of scrutiny to such claims?
* The critics are talking about Software Engineering (~1/3rd of the company?), whereas the source you cited is about all of Google. I wouldn't be surprised if the White/Asian/Male splits are far worse when you only look at software engineers.
* Google has many international offices (e.g. there's > 1000 employees in Google Japan).
It's closer to 2/3.
*Ballpark white global population.