Conference 7.286::digital

I've been told in the past that you can be told the salary range for your
current position as well as the next higher position.

/john

    This policy is better discussed with personnel. In some countries,
    this is a very sensitive issue. While other countries and companies
    may be more open, I don't believe it is appropriate for this
    conference.
    
    Therefore, I have marked this topic /nowrite.
    
    					-- the moderator

From:	PRSIS4::BURESI       "Marc BURESI, IS/ADG, DTN 858-5395, Paris"  2-JUN-1987 18:52

I've seen your replies to my notes # 320 and 321 in the DIGITAL conference. 
I understand your concern about not using this conference to provoke people 
into doing unconstructive comments.

My wish was to understand more the pros and cons of the policy I'm
mentioning, through the feedbacks of the DEC employees. I have a very good
communication with my managers and personnel reps, but they obviously only
can give me a partial viewpoint on the subject: the one of French 
employees.

Maybe could you just unwrite-protect the note, with a warning that the 
subject is sensitive, as you said it, and that you require people not to 
flame, but rather to reply in a constructive way. Feel free then to set 
hidden or delete any excessive reply, eventually to reset the note write 
protected.

Also, those of the readers who'd see your reply might think that the policy
of hiding the salary is more of a problem than it is really. On another 
hand, if people are allowed to reply, no doubt that many will give good 
reasons why the policy exists (after all, if it exists, it must have more 
good aspects than bad ones), and everybody will be happy :-)

    In Germany, every job has to be posted internally before external
    applicants can be taken.
    
    The internal postings contain both the job code & job level (and
    the job title, of course). So if you go to the place where the internal
    postings are, you can find out the job level of any open job (as
    well as implicitely finding out what levels are attached to what
    job codes/titles).
    
    Obviously, the salary itself is kept secret after the job has been
    filled.
    
    You are also entitled to know the salary range attached to your
    job level (as well as the next higher one I believe).
    

Note 322.0                      an answer to 321                      No replies
CHFV03::REDER "A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the " 4 lines   3-JUN-1987 01:05
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Your salary range and that of the next pay-grade is available without
    question from your manager.  I have asked for and received this
    information from my manager.
    

    Job requisitions here in the U.S. do show the job code but not the
    level.  With the new "job family" facility in the online VTX Jobs
    Book, you can look at all open positions within a given family or
    specify a job code.
    
    Marge

        I feel that pay scales for any position should be available
    to any employee. What any one person makes within that range should
    be between the individual and his/her manager. Knowing wage scales
    would help people plan the careers in DEC.
    	Where I work in the field, the software people always say that
    the hardware folks get all the money and the hardware engs. say
    its software who takes home the big paychecks. Why not be open about
    the wage scales. If the scales are setup properly I can see only
    positave things coming from making the numbers available.

    The salary ranges are identical across a given level.  So if you're
    moving from Software Services to Field Service, etc., you simply
    need to understand what code goes with what level.  The big difference
    is usually in incentives such as cars and relo allowances, etc.
    
    There are some organizations which utilize only certain levels,
    however.  So if you're at a level 7 in one organization, you may
    need to be a 6 or 8 when moving to another organization.  There
    is so much overlap between the ranges that this usually doesn't
    mean a salary adjustment.
    
    Marge
    

Could someone please post a definition of "level"?  I'm getting some idea
of what its about, but I'd like to be more certain.
				/AHM/THX

>    Knowing wage scales would help people plan the careers in DEC.

I think DEC's philosophy is that salary should not be the motivating factor.

You should choose the job you do because you like doing it and you do it well,
not because you know that, for example, a salesman makes more money than a
software specialist.

/john

    Alan, put simply, job levels increase as the level of responsibility 
    increases.
    
    It's not based on an individual's performance but rather the type
    of work which an individual in a given job code/title is expected 
    to perform. Everyone in that given job code is at the same level.  
    And across organizational boundaries, there is a corresponding job 
    code/title also at that level (perhaps several).
    
    Your job level does not determine your salary but it does determine
    the upper and lower limits of your salary range.
    
    Marge
    
    

    Re: .11
    
> I think DEC's philosophy is that salary should not be the motivating factor.

    A noble goal but hardly a reflection of reality  :-)
    
    -  David

    First off, I have to say that salary in not my prime motivating
    factor. If it were I would have left years ago (in fact, having
    left once I would not have come back). It's hard for me to fully
    understand some peoples pre-occupation with knowing what others
    make.
    
    In the past, I've worked at other companies with different policies
    regarding people knowing what others made. At the first place I
    worked, all the individual contributors knew what the others made.
    We told each other. No one ever seemed to get real upset about what
    someone else made. Perhaps this was because since everyone knew
    what the others made any unfairness would be reacted to quickly.
    It was, after all, a very small company.
    
    At another company, Fortune 500, I did not know what specific people
    made but my boss did show me the salary ranges from my job up to
    the VP level. This is a bit more then DEC lets you see but I really
    don't see any advantage to knowing the range too high above ones
    own.
    
    It seems that secrecy of salaries is in the best interest of an
    employer. This way he does not have to explain any apparent
    unfairnesses. At the same time, if there is no unfairness in pay
    then there is no advantage to the employee to know what others
    make. For myself, I think I'm happier believing (true or not) that
    DEC pays everyone fairly then I would be fighting for fairness.
    
    
    			Alfred

    	Post all salaries on the buletin board.  Why not?  We did in
    the USAF!  The salary of a 4 star general was on the same sheet
    as mine...and I was a "2 striper".  He didnt mind...and neither
    did I!  It caused no problems I remember.  Also, was pro-pay, flight
    pay, housing for people on "separate rats", etc.  Yes, there would
    be a flurry for a few weeks...and then what?  Nothing.
    
    Keith

    I worked at a place where every employee was given a wallet-sized
    card listing all the salary levels and their ranges.  It was also
    legitimate to know what a person's job title and level was.  However,
    there was plenty of room in each level, and overlap between levels,
    so determining a person's actual salary was impossible from just
    that information.
    
    Based on my experience, employees should be told salary ranges,
    and possibly what other members of their group are making, but NEVER
    what individuals earn.  (To clarify, it might be very interesting
    to know that the salaries of the ten people in my group are $20.1K,
    $20.3K, $25.0K, etc., but never that Joe Smith makes $20K and Mary
    Doe makes $30K.)
    
    A related issue is what happens when the system of job classes,
    as opposed to job levels, becomes too complex.  It can be misapplied,
    or used to stratify workers.  This is how a hardware engineer could
    be paid more, on average, than a software engineer, or vice versa.
    Trying to straighten out that morass can take years.
    
    And, finally:  A previous reply pointed out that Digital doesn't
    consider salary to be the primary reward, or words to that effect.
    Someone then replied, "Dream on!"  I suggest that the notion of
    working for Digital being it's own reward is narcissistic; that
    strategy is a potential loser some time down the road.  If we're
    the best company, and we're the best workers, we should get the
    best salary, or something near it, or we should be getting bonuses.
    (I think the last would be fairest and probably the cheapest in
    the long run.)  It's a tough call, though; I'd prefer a more modest
    but secure income.  I've been laid off already, thank you!

    Re: Several
    
    If salary is not seen as a motivator by the Company, then what happened
    to "pay for performance"?  There seems to be a conflict here.

>    	Post all salaries on the buletin board.  Why not?  We did in
>    the USAF!  The salary of a 4 star general was on the same sheet
>    as mine...and I was a "2 striper".

There's a bit of a difference.  Military pay is not based on performance
reviews; it's based on grade and time of service.  It's voted on by Congress
and available in the Federal Register as well as most general purpose almanacs.

People in public service are employees of the general public and their salaries
should be public knowledge.  The same is not true in private industry.

/john

re: 320.14

>					    It's hard for me to fully
>    understand some peoples pre-occupation with knowing what others
>    make.

I didn't think that this was what was being asked for.

For the purposes of your own career planning, wouldn't you be interested in 
what Digital was willing to pay for different jobs?

If I were equally interested in, say, designing power supplies and doing 
financial modeling, it would be useful to me to know how much I could
expect to make at each before I chose one path to follow. 

Ray

    RE: .18
    
    	I beg your pardon!  Salary in the USAF, at least when I was
    in, was based a heck of lot MORE on performance than I've seen in
    the last 10 years with DEC.  I'm not saying that's wrong...but in
    DEC salary is based a lot on COOPERATION!  In the service I could
    take a test or go to a special school and it didnt make a darn
    difference what my boss thought of me...I could get a promotion!
    Now, that's based on performance, dont you think.  As soon as you
    have a local mgr involved in your "rating" you've lost most of your
    possibilities of raise or promotion...unless he likes you.
    
    	I dont think #.18 has ever been in a "performance" situation.
    
    KMP
    
    

	Speaking from the officer-experience side of the USAF, John is 
basically right.  Keith is right about the enlisted.  The officers career is 
dependent on WHO they know, and WHEN they know them.  Some maxed performance 
reports signed by a full bird or brig will carry a lot of weight in a promotion 
board.

	Otherwise, you just sit in grade, pick up the "fogies", and hope you 
don't get rif'ed.

	As for John's "performance", I've known him for over 10 years, even 
back so far as when was clean-shaven, reasonably well trimmed on the noggin, 
and even wore a coat and tie (with SHOES!) to work.  I'd want John on any team 
I was fielding!

.15>	    Post all salaries on the buletin board.  

    RE: John being "clean-shaven, reasonably well trimmed on the noggin,
    		    and even wore a coat and tie (with SHOES!) to work"
    
    	That I would have to see to believe..
    
    	:-)
    
    							mike

In the U.S. military, PROMOTIONS are based on performance.  But SALARY is
is purely a function of current rank (which everyone can see) and years of
service (which is not hard to find out).

At DEC, two Senior Market Analysis Implementors, who have both been with
DEC for 7 years, could be paid quite differently.  As it should be, if
their performance is different.  But not everyone might agree about which
one is the better performer.  Posting salaries on the board could cause
needless hassle.

/john

    ! So it seems that DEC wins by not posting salaries because
      there is less bickering about the "fairness" of unequal pay !

    ? And the employee wins because his/her "right to privacy"
      concerning matters of money is preserved by the company ?

    | and career planners who wish financial information as a guide
      in decisions where their interest level is equal ask personnel. |

    I think DEC puts a fair amount of effort into trying to make things
    equitable but it's impossible due mainly to two things:
    
    1) There is a shortage of skilled labor.  Thus we tend to hire
    according to qualifications - if a warm body who can do the job
    comes along, we only look very grossly at the salary requested,
    adjusting it only if it's severely out of line.  Therefore people
    doing the same job start with skewed salaries before they ever get reviewed.
    
    2) The review system is extremely subjective. (You wouldn't want
    a gov't type GS42=28,326.41 per annum compartmentized system).
    Thus things get even more skewed over time.  Plus people move around
    a lot, so there is very little change for anything to reach some
    kind of equilibrium.

    My personal attitude toward this is that a salary is a private deal
    between employer and employee (relatively) unrelated to the private
    deals between the employer and the other 99999 employees.  If someone
    can get more than I can for doing the same work, then good for him/her.     
       

    The Psychology of Salary
    
    One of the things that has been somewhat overlooked is how the company
    attempts to combine the psychic and monetary compensations of the
    job into a total package. This insight came to me when I, as a SW
    Specialist out in the field, wondered why in the world sales reps
    are routinely paid more that SWS people. We could outprogram,
    outpresent, and generally outqualify those folks any day. 
    
    The answers as I saw it were twofold. Firstly, sales reps' performance
    is easily measureable on a continuous basis. Either they make budget
    or they don't. Every quarter or whatever. Not only that, but some
    of them seem to ask for and make bigger budgets that others. Now
    of course it's not that straightforward, as an add-on sales rep
    has a generally harder row to hoe than a General Motors Ntl Accnt
    Mngr, but the concept is there. As a SWS person, do I finish my
    projects faster because I work faster or because I get easier projects
    than the other guy? All SWS people have a pretty good idea of the
    relative merits of the others, but a real "Specialists Contest"
    ala the 4H'ers and FFAs in Agriculture USA is never really done.
    Field Service is in somewhat the same boat, but less so as systems
    tend to fail in similar patterns and the mean time to fix these
    patterns of failure can be determined. So some differences in
    performance levels can be evidenced over time, even though FS folks
    have to fix power problems masquerading as bus problems as an irate
    customer can't get his payroll out.
    
    The second issue has to do with the psychological factors involved
    in the job types. To once again catagorize rashly, sales reps are
    movtivated my money and SWS and FS types by technology and solving
    problems. A joke - If you gave out $50.00 for every soda can collected,
    sales reps would be scouring the landscape for them whilst Services
    types would drink soda out of bottles as a symbolic protest for
    the perceived dumbness of the task. But those kinds of folks make
    sales, and since they're turned on by money they get compensated
    in that way. Because if you don't pay them what they want, they'll
    go out there and sell real estate or pet rocks or something that
    makes *lots* of money.
    
    This I think explains why the different job scales of different
    jobs should be public knowledge. They are different, and people
    should think about the reasons for those differences. One of the
    reasons that we're not the East Bloc is that if you decide that
    you and your six kids need a bigger house, you can turn into a sales
    rep and make it happen. If you really like making stuff, go into
    Engineering and make less. If you like making stuff and hate working
    in the same place every day, go into Field Service and make less
    but get a car and some degree of freedom. But learn about the jobs
    and make a choice.
    
    One final comment. I belive, after a lot of thought about it, that
    one of the real reasons that DEC as a company generally makes better
    equipment than IBM is that IBM tends to get and promote people who
    know how to meet time and money budgets and satisfy customers'
    immediate needs. In other words, a sales rep mentality. DEC tends
    to get people who tend to give you the proper engineering solution
    to a problem and think rather strategically. As I read about IBM
    major product's histories, I was shocked to see that they all seemed
    to begin a short-term solutions to some major customer's problem,
    and then they grew into spaces they were not meant to occupy. DEC's
    products traditionally solve no exact problem real well, but the
    solution space that they can be adapted to is immense. As DEC moves
    to sell to traditional IBM customers, it will be interesting to
    see if we can merge these two corporate philsophies into a coherent
    whole.
    
    		Have Fun,
    
    		BLH
    

    Is a level  consistent across geographical areas?  Based on hearsay,
    it seems that people in New England and California make more money
    to do the same job than people in Colorado do, for example.  This
    is due to the astronomical cost of living, especially housing, I
    would imagine.  And people in the US appear to make more than their
    UK counterparts doing the same job, I hear.
    
    How do they work the levels when different regions and different
    countries have salaries somewhat adjusted for the cost of living.
                                     
    -------------
    It bothers me that I cannot officially find out what the pay scales
    are for jobs beyond the next level.  I have found out what the level
    16, 12, 9, 6 and 3 pay scales are because people in those job levels have
    told me what they are.  And what they make.  Getting this information
    is a function of one's informal network.  Therefore the information
    is more accessible to those higher up in the system, with managers
    and supervisors (and conversely, secretaries) having access to the whole
    salary scale document.  
    
    I would rather not see people making career planning decisions on
    the basis of hearsay and rumor, but that is the only choice we have
    if salary is a factor we want to consider.
    
    IN the womannotes file, someone recently said that she pushed on
    a manager to give her at a better raise than originally offered
    by pointing out that co-worker A and co-worker B were making N-thousand
    dollars a year, and that she was doing similar work.  The manager
    agreed to this.  It's a great technique, but getting that kind of
    information is also a function of one's informal network and one's
    ability to gather that type of information.  I would love to have access
    to that type of information!

    There is no salary range difference between states for a given 
    job level...they are identical.  The question you might ask is whether
    there is a geographical tendency toward placing people into lower
    or higher job levels.  And if so, whether the re-evaluation that
    is currently happening will address this.
        
    It is my understanding that the entire job code/range situation
    changes when you cross country borders (as well as the benefits
    package).
    
    Marge

    DEC has repeatedly said that the salary ranges are across the industry,
    not geographical, for salaried jobs; the theory is supposed to be
    that the people being hired for these jobs come from all over the
    country so that it is a US-wide (anyways) job market.  As someone
    who lives and works in EXPENSIVE Massachusetts, I think it would
    be nice if I were paid more to reflect the higher cost of living
    where I work...I can see their point, though.

    
    
    I found that cost of living makes quite a bit of difference. Last
    year I transferred from Mass to Ill. Besides the cost of living
    being cheaper in Ill. the difference between the state tax rate.
    The difference was considerably enough that it was almost like getting
    a mini-raise. Although my salary was the same my take-home increased.
    
    

    Salary ranges differ across geographies. UK salaries are about 2/3
    US salaries.

    Now, Andy, if you could only have our salarys and we could have
    your bennies... :^)
    
    Grins

  I think salaries for the same job within the U.S. should be vari-
able from one region to another to allow for differences in the
cost of living, including taxes. The argument that we are in a 
"national job market" doesn't make sense. DEC facilities in high-
cost states such as Mass. are at a disadvantage in recruiting people
from inside and outside. They can try to lure people by offering
considerations other than salary such as a better work environ-
ment, in-house exercise rooms, etc. but a regional salary differ-
ential would be more effective.

        I have looked several times at attractive opportunities in
        the 'greater Maynard area', but the next step is to look
        at the cost of living (housing especially!) and there is
        just no way I can transplant the family at that cost.
        
        I'm probably one of the few 'southerners' that would love
        to move north and work in the Digital heartland - I just
        can't afford it.
        
        from the sunny (and cheap) South,
        mark

Re: .-1

The same problem exists in Britain.  Here the cost of some things - such as
houses - varies massively.  If you work in London you do get a supplement,
but I don't think it really covers the additional costs of living there.

jb

	It seems that all previous arguments are going for a region by
	region subsidy to allow greater intra-company mobility.

	Why can't Digital compute the base level for a position in
	a specific area and then compare all other areas against it?

	Specific example. Let's say our base was Kansas City, Kansas and
	its cost of living index was 0. Then compute all area such as
	MA, NJ, NY, CA against it. As the cost of living changed, the
	index would change. This index would not be the CPI, but could
	contain items which compose the CPI.

	This money would not be salary, but simply a cost of living
	differential. If you moved from a high to low cost area the
	subsidy would be reduced to that area's subsidy. The key is
	to differentiate between salary/subsidy.

	In this way, the company can move talent wherever necessary
	without the stigma of the cost of living. If I was to move
	to an area with a lower cost of living, I would receive an
	instant raise since it would cost less to live. Not very fair
	to the other employees who worked in that office for years?

    Minor point on levels:
    
    While a job level has the same salary range across the country,
    different job tracks may have different level equivalences.
    
    For example, a Level 12 in engineering is roughly the same range
    (give or take 1) of a Level 10 in sales.  (Sales in particular is
    above the rest.  It lets them go higher on top with the no-commission
    structure, where we've got to keep top salesmen somehow.)

    Re .-1
    
>    For example, a Level 12 in engineering is roughly the same range
>    (give or take 1) of a Level 10 in sales.  (Sales in particular is
>    above the rest.  It lets them go higher on top with the no-commission
>    structure, where we've got to keep top salesmen somehow.)

    Is that really true. Can anybody verify that? It was my impression that
    the salary range for a job level n was the same whether you were
    an engineer, marketeer, salesman or janitor (although I doubt that
    there is a janators code that is job level 10).
    
    I know that similar sounding job titles don't have the same levels
    eg a
    
    Principal Software Engineer
    
    does not have the same job level as a Principal Hardware Engineer.
    A Principal Software Engineer is a job level 10.
    
    Before anybody jumps on me, I feel quite OK in saying that a Principal
    Software Engineer is a job level 10 because I am one and if anybody
    asked me I would feel free to tell them. But since if I went down
    to personel and asked what level a Principal Hardware Engineer
    is they wouldn't tell me I don't feel free to 'guess' here or pass
    on what one has told me.

    Dave

    Principal Software  Specialist in the UK = level 8 !!
    
    

    Principal Engineer (hw or sw) is a 10
    Principal SWS (US or UK) is an 8
    
    						=maggie

Hmmm, this is interesting.  I am not sure what harm there is in knowing
salary ranges.  I suppose most managers would show you the charts if 
asked.  Given the fact that the ranges seem to vary 50% over the base salary, 
it is possible (perhaps not likely) for a level 10 to make less than a level
6.  If the intent is to discern the salary "pecking order" within an 
organization, knowing the range of a level does not facilitate this.  I 
would hope that this is NOT the motive, however.

In response to Mr. Covert's statement about salaries, he is partially
correct - if you are compensation oriented, DEC is not the place for you.
But while compensation should not be the *ONLY* job satisfaction criteria, it
most certainly is *A* satisfaction criteria.  Knowing the range of levels
above you is certainly going to be a factor in determining basic career 
goals.

In General Electric, for example, the salary ranges of all exempt levels is
public knowledge.

    I hope that Digital is moving towards an ever-simpler set of job
    levels.  For example, at Apollo Computer (once upon a time), hardware
    engineers, software engineers, and technical writers all had the
    same job titles, levels and salary ranges, though individual salaries
    of course varied.  At Honeywell, after years of bitter struggle,
    the technical writers' job levels were made equal to the engineers';
    that is, a senior writer was paid within the same salary range as
    a senior engineer, and a principal writer on the same scale as a
    principal engineer.  This is fair, and easier to administrate too.
    
    The alternative, many job levels, invites inequity and discontent.
    You know, when the nurses find out their pay scales are lower than
    the janitors' -- that sort of thing.  (And let's all give a big
    raspberry to the person who replies to this note with, "Surely you
    don't think job A is as important as job B!"  Better yet, let's
    all send the person nasty mail.)
    
    Footnote:  I am a (principal) technical writer, aware of our long
    struggle for professional equality.  Your interest may vary.

    I think what everyone is missing when they talk about variable
    'ranges' for different geographical areas is that where a person
    falls within the salary range can vary.  Therefore someone in level
    7 in California would be boosted to the high end of the range while
    a person in an area with lower Cost of Living would be at a lower
    percentile of the salary range.
    

    re -.1:
    
    	Cost of Living differentials are not accounted for in salary
    planning.  So I disagree with your point that someone in a high-expense
    geography "would be boosted to the high end of the range".  Simply
    not true.  Not a factor.
    
    	Performance and "time-in-grade" are what boost you within a range.
    Any other factors are an anomaly.
    
    Marge
    

-1 is correct.  Your performance evaluation yields a number which indicates
a range of percentiles where your salary should fall within a given level.
This translates to about 35% of the range.  Once the performance number is
known, arriving at a salary is fairly mechanical.  There is not an enormous
amount of room for discretion on the part of your manager.

    I think (I is a manager and hav dun revews) that a review
    rating is much more likely to effect the percentage of a
    raise than it is actual salary.
    
    Eventually this tends to position folks in ranges, but it
    takes years.
    
    - gerry

    re -1:
    
    yes, the terminology used frequently is "over time"...

    I don't see any reason why the levels as such should be secret.
    They aren't here, anyway, as I stated previously. I juest went to
    the pinboard (it happens to be just a few yards from my office)
    where the internal postings are; every single one has the job level
    on it. e.g.
    
    Associate SW specialist  3
              SW specialist  5
    Senior    SW specialist  7
    Principal SW specialist  8
              SW consultant  9
    
    E.g. a senior product manager seems to be at 12, etc.
    

The latest issue of 'Betriebsrat informiert', the publication of the
Works Council of Digital Germany, includes a rather comprehensive
description of job codes, job levels and associated salary ranges.

I do not type all of it into this note, because it is pretty long.
Also, I do not know whether and how it applies in other countries.
However, this is a publication that gets mailed to all DEC Germany
employees and is at least potentially available to any DEC employee
worldwide.

The table below includes the job level, associated range (for DEC
Germany, in kDM) and some examples of job codes/titles associated.
The middle number in the range is the midpoint (arithmetic average of
the low and hig end) of the range.

level      range        associated job codes
-----      -----         --------------------
 14     160-200-240     F80 Snr marketing Mgr, S20 Sales exec III
 
 13     136-170-204     S10 sales exec II, R04A distrct SW mgr
 
 12     124-155-186     F15 marketing consultant, S11 Sales executive I,
                        R12 SW Consultant III
 
 11     107-134-161     S12 Senior Sales rep, R4A SW Consultant IIA
 
 10      97-122-146     TF3 FS Mgr IIA, R04 Snr SW Consultant
 
  9      88-110-132     F04 Marketing Mgr I, R07 SW Consultant
  
  8      80-100-120     T8K Cust Support Systems Engineer, RA1 Princ SW Spec
  
  7      79- 90-108     S16 Sales Rep I, R10 Snr SW Spec
  
  6      64- 80- 96     S14 Assoc sales rep,  T7S Support Engineer II
  
  5      57- 72- 86     R11 SW Spec, G59 Senior Exec secretary
  
  4      52- 65- 78     G58 Exec secretary
  
 F3      48- 60- 72     S30 Sales trainee, R13 Assoc SW Specialist
 
 E2      42- 53- 64     R1B SW Trainee
 
 D1      37- 47- 56     G55 secretary
 
 C       34- 43- 52     DA52 Computer operator II
 
 B       31- 39- 47     G54 Junior secretary
 
 A       28- 36- 42     DA40 Terminal operator
 
 A1      26- 33- 39     G49 Office Junior
 
I have made every attempt to reproduce the information accurately, but
cannot guarantee that I haven't made any typos. The levels and ranges
should be correct, though.

The current exchange rate is around DM 1,80 for 1 US$.

This table contains some extracts for Source Engineering's 1987 Metropolitan
Engineering Salary Survey.  Keep in mind that these numbers are salaries earned
by individuals who, for whatever reason, have contacted Source for help in
locating a new job.  I don't have any answers to the questions this data raises.

Design and Development		Boston	New Hamp  Wash DC  Chicago  San Fran
Associate Engineer
1-2 years			  27.5	   26.5	    30.2     29.5     29.5
2-4 years			  31.2	   29.0	    30.7     30.0     33.5
Engineer/Senior Engineer
1-2 years			  30.0	   30.5	    35.0     32.0     35.0
2-4 years			  32.6	   34.0	    35.5     37.0     38.0
4-6 years			  37.6	   37.5	    38.0     38.0     39.0
Over 6 years			  45.0	   43.0	    45.0     41.2     46.0
Principal Engineer		  42.7	   45.0	    50.8     42.5     55.0
Group Leader			  54.5	   60.0	    53.5     52.0     59.0
Engineering Manager		  60.0	   62.7	    65.0     60.0     66.5
Director of Engineering/VP	  74.0	   71.7	    74.0     72.6     85.0

Sales/Marketing
Applications Engineer		  34.5	   38.2	    46.9     34.0     39.2
Product Manager			  51.0	   45.0	    40.0     46.0     50.0
Sales Engineer			  36.5	   45.0	    47.8     40.5     48.0
Sales/Marketing Manager		  62.0	   57.0	    55.1     65.0     71.0
Sales Director/Marketing VP	  70.0	   74.0	    80.0     81.2     75.0

    I assume these are annual salaries, in US$?
    

    I was reading The College Edition of the National Business Employment
    Weekly this weekend, which had the following chart that I thought
    others might enjoy looking at...  This edition is put out by the
    Wall Street Journal...
    
Average Starting Salary Offers (Source: College Placement Council September 
					         1988 Salary Survey Report)

BACHELOR'S DEGREE CANDIDATES 

Occupational Title		Starting Salary Offer	% Change from 7/87

Administrative and Management
   Accountants/Auditor		   $23,952		+10.0
   Business Administrators	    20,376		+2.8
   Consultants			    26,988		+4.3
   Financial Analysts		    25,368		-4.6
   Human Resources		    20,076		+7.6
   Management Trainees		    20,892		+4.5

Computer and Mathematical
   Computer Programmers		    26,892		+4.3
   Systems Analysts		    27,540		+2.3
   Mathematicians/Statisticians     26,988		+4.5

Marketing and Sales		
   Advertising/Marketing	    21,948		+1.2
   Retail/wholesale sales           21,600		+6.0
   Technical Sales		    24,312		+5.4
   
Other Occupations
   Communications		    20,256		+11.7
   Engineers			    29,244		+3.1
   Health Related		    28,392	        +17.6
   Insurance			    21,612		+2.2
   Real Estate			    22,692		+2.1

MASTER'S DEGREE CANDIDATES

Business
   Accounting			    27,468		+5.8
   MBA - Nontechnical (By years of experience)    
   Less than one year		    33,468		+5.0
   From one to two years	    40,632              +13.6
   From two to four years	    41,952              +5.4
   More than four years		    43,128		+11.4

   MBA - Technical (By years of experience)    
   Less than one year		    38,388 		+12.1
   From one to two years	    43,152		+15.0
   From two to four years	    44,028		+5.1
   More than four years		    45,456		+10.4
   MS - Business		    31,596		+10.4

Engineering
   Chemical			    34,256		+1.6
   Civil			    30,396		+5.0
   Electrical			    36,132		+1.8
   Industrial			    33,756		+9.6
   Mechanical		            34,116		+0.3
   Metallurgical		    34,080		+5.1
   Nuclear			    32,856		+0.3

Sciences
   Chemistry		            31,572		+12.8
   Computer Science		    34,560		+2.3
   Geology			    29,808		+12.9
   Mathematics			    29,640		+6.1

    Gee, that list really shows inflation at its finest - entry-level
    salaries have more than tripled in this field since I got my BS degree
    in 1974.  Maybe we should just revalue the dollar and be done with it?

Gee, they didn't go up that much since I got my degree in 
1981 (EE, University of Pittsburgh)

My starting Salary was $23K in my first job.  The chart shows
the salaries for EEs are now at $36K, a 50% increase in 7 years
(which is probably about a 5-6% increase per year, compounded
over 7 years)



-bill

    This topic beats any of the DEC jokes, clearly indicating, how
    "effectively" we work.
    One has to dig across 49 uninteresting replies since .50 is the
    very first adequate reply for the question of .0!

You dredge for information in a note that's 7 years old, 
and complain that people worked "ineffectively" then?
Take a look in the mirror...