> But their work is 1000 times more important, so it's worth 1000 times more.
This too is misunderstanding the value equation. The cost of replacement has to be part of this too. Engineering salaries are bid up in the market relative to other professions not because their work is more "important" than teaching or administration or whatever, but because engineers are hard to hire. Literally every software group, even now, has open spots where they'd like to put someone. There are never enough people.
And... is that true at the top of the hierarchy? Have you ever even heard of a company with a VP req sitting open for months for lack of candidates? That just doesn't happen. Senior positions seem to be drowning in competition[1]. And yet, their salaries aren't showing the result of that competition between candidates. Boards aren't going out to find a "better deal" on their CEO. Maybe they should, but they don't.
And I think it's worth asking why that is.
[1] In fact I think with the exception of a very small list of genuine innovators, even tech CEOs are mostly just replacement level players shepherding already-tuned organizations. You could dump Jassy or Nadella out on the street tomorrow and Amazon and Microsoft would be just fine with whoever stepped in.
This too is misunderstanding the value equation. The cost of replacement has to be part of this too. Engineering salaries are bid up in the market relative to other professions not because their work is more "important" than teaching or administration or whatever, but because engineers are hard to hire. Literally every software group, even now, has open spots where they'd like to put someone. There are never enough people.
And... is that true at the top of the hierarchy? Have you ever even heard of a company with a VP req sitting open for months for lack of candidates? That just doesn't happen. Senior positions seem to be drowning in competition[1]. And yet, their salaries aren't showing the result of that competition between candidates. Boards aren't going out to find a "better deal" on their CEO. Maybe they should, but they don't.
And I think it's worth asking why that is.
[1] In fact I think with the exception of a very small list of genuine innovators, even tech CEOs are mostly just replacement level players shepherding already-tuned organizations. You could dump Jassy or Nadella out on the street tomorrow and Amazon and Microsoft would be just fine with whoever stepped in.