How are these guys still in business?

Forums › IT Pro and developers › How are these guys still in business?

Lias

5655 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3978

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#312129 19-Mar-2024 22:34

A bunch of my IT friendss were laughing about "some company in Auckland that's offering pathetic salaries".

Turns out it's Mercury IT.. if they are offering peanuts like this it goes some way to explain how they got bitlockered a few years back.. but I'm kind of amazed they are still in business after getting a bunch of govt department clients crypto'd and paying like it's 2014.

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup. Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.

1 | 2 | 3

487 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 182

#3208264 19-Mar-2024 22:47

It seems pretty ok to me considering it looks like an intermediate position, and the current state of the IT market.

Lias

5655 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3978

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3208266 19-Mar-2024 23:11

I know it's not the heady days of 2022 when if you could spell Cisco you could name your price, but that still seems very low to me (and my peers) for a certified, experienced, multi discipline engineer.

Wombat1

586 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 409
Inactive user

#3208272 20-Mar-2024 00:11

$100K used to be considered a great salary back in 2007. Unfortunately, some companies think it is still 2007.

xpd

Geek of Coastguard
14115 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 4574

Retired Mod

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3208297 20-Mar-2024 07:28

Seen a lot worse...... one local company a few years ago, near me wanted someone with every cert under the sun, to work in their store, be on call, able to work at their 2nd store at no notice, and more, all for the great salary of.... $40k.

I wish I had screen grabbed the advert, it was like April Fools...

XPD / Gavin

LinkTree

johno1234

3352 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2843

#3208302 20-Mar-2024 07:58

Would have thought that was good money for someone with only 2 years experience.

To me it's more down to the ongoing professional development quality of the role and organisation.

cddt

1965 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1904

#3208313 20-Mar-2024 08:22

Seems reasonable if you have two years experience. Ten years? Not so much.

My referral links: BigPipe | Mercury

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

networkn

Networkn
32862 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15453

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3208319 20-Mar-2024 09:00

Lias:

I know it's not the heady days of 2022 when if you could spell Cisco you could name your price, but that still seems very low to me (and my peers) for a certified, experienced, multi discipline engineer.

What would you expect the salary range would be?

Lias

5655 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3978

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3208389 20-Mar-2024 09:42

johno1234:

Would have thought that was good money for someone with only 2 years experience.

To me it's more down to the ongoing professional development quality of the role and organisation.

It's _at least_ 2 years experience, but the wording of rest of it makes that a lie IMHO. "Extensive experience in cloud networking", "In-depth knowledge of and experience with major internet routing protocols; specifically, Understanding and experience with Internet peering ecosystems and Internet scale traffic engineering" , plus expecting them to be Cisco Certified, and an experiencinged Linux & Windows Server Admin on top. That's not someone with 2 years experience.

networkn:

What would you expect the salary range would be?

As above, I think the detail of experience makes it a more senior position which would make the salary 130k+. Even if they do want a more intermediate position but are just overreaching in the skills listed (not unheard of) I'd still say 100k at a minimum, realistically 110-120k. 80k for those skills would be low even by public sector/tertiary pay bands and a private sector MSP should not be offering those sort of bottom of the barrel rates.

Will someone take it? Possibly.. will that person actually be a talented, motivated engineer? Only if they are very desperate and they won't stay (been there, done that)

Lias

5655 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3978

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3208457 20-Mar-2024 10:47

As an addendum to the above..

My general rule of thumb is that the absolute minimum hourly wage for a position should be equivalent to a third of the reasonable charge out rate.

So for example if an employer is going to charge $150/hour for an engineer, I'd expect the engineer to be earning at least $50/hour (40 hours/week * $50 * 52 weeks = $104k per annum as the absolute minimum salary expectation)

Dynamic

4015 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1851

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3208469 20-Mar-2024 11:15

Lias:

My general rule of thumb is that the absolute minimum hourly wage for a position should be equivalent to a third of the reasonable charge out rate.

So for example if an employer is going to charge $150/hour for an engineer, I'd expect the engineer to be earning at least $50/hour (40 hours/week * $50 * 52 weeks = $104k per annum as the absolute minimum salary expectation)

@Lias, I have a couple of questions and I am genuinely interested in your answers. These are questions that tech companies ask themselves all the time and in my experience everyone has different answers, which may account for different pay rates.

I've been exposed to environments where engineers are responsible to nobody for their number of billed hours, and to environments where engineers were only permitted to go home after they had billed 8 hours. If this theoretical employee was charged out at $150/hour, what should a reasonable employer expect their minimum number of charged out hours be per day or week?

Training and upskilling. Should the employee do this on their own time to further their career, or should this be on company time? If on company time, what is a reasonable number of hours per month or year to allocate?

“Don't believe anything you read on the net. Except this. Well, including this, I suppose.” Douglas Adams

cddt

1965 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1904

#3208498 20-Mar-2024 12:08

Dynamic:

@Lias, I have a couple of questions and I am genuinely interested in your answers. These are questions that tech companies ask themselves all the time and in my experience everyone has different answers, which may account for different pay rates.

I've been exposed to environments where engineers are responsible to nobody for their number of billed hours, and to environments where engineers were only permitted to go home after they had billed 8 hours. If this theoretical employee was charged out at $150/hour, what should a reasonable employer expect their minimum number of charged out hours be per day or week?

Training and upskilling. Should the employee do this on their own time to further their career, or should this be on company time? If on company time, what is a reasonable number of hours per month or year to allocate?

Not being facetious, but how long is a piece of string? This is where good management comes in.

I worked at a place once where you could bill 100 hours one week, then if you billed 20 hours the next week you would get dragged over the coals in front of your peers for not meeting the minimum 80% billable rate.

My referral links: BigPipe | Mercury

New World

Shop on-line at New World now for your groceries (affiliate link).

MikeAqua

8024 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3817

#3208504 20-Mar-2024 12:17

We pay new deckhands with zero qualifications or experience more than the bottom of that range. Within two years they'd be above the range altogether.

Mike

johno1234

3352 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2843

#3208507 20-Mar-2024 12:27

MikeAqua:

We pay new deckhands with zero qualifications or experience more than the bottom of that range. Within two years they'd be above the range altogether.

Supply and demand. And it seems quite hard to find people who are prepared to work hard in outdoor environments these days.

You should see the starting wage for freshly minted drainlayers. Holy hell, $120k and a vehicle is common! It's a tough gig for apprentices who get to do the literal spade work but once you have your ticket they do a lot of work with small excavators these days.

marpada

487 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 182

#3208513 20-Mar-2024 12:31

Lias:

As above, I think the detail of experience makes it a more senior position which would make the salary 130k+. Even if they do want a more intermediate position but are just overreaching in the skills listed (not unheard of) I'd still say 100k at a minimum, realistically 110-120k. 80k for those skills would be low even by public sector/tertiary pay bands and a private sector MSP should not be offering those sort of bottom of the barrel rates.

Will someone take it? Possibly.. will that person actually be a talented, motivated engineer? Only if they are very desperate and they won't stay (been there, done that)

You have to consider the economic situation, not only in NZ but worldwide: Continuous layoffs of IT engineers, growing unemployment, cost of living crisis,... In the recent years skilled professionals have had the upper hand in the job market, but unfortunately the shoe now is in the other foot.

Lias

5655 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3978

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#3208527 20-Mar-2024 12:50

Dynamic:

@Lias, I have a couple of questions and I am genuinely interested in your answers. These are questions that tech companies ask themselves all the time and in my experience everyone has different answers, which may account for different pay rates.

I've been exposed to environments where engineers are responsible to nobody for their number of billed hours, and to environments where engineers were only permitted to go home after they had billed 8 hours. If this theoretical employee was charged out at $150/hour, what should a reasonable employer expect their minimum number of charged out hours be per day or week?

Training and upskilling. Should the employee do this on their own time to further their career, or should this be on company time? If on company time, what is a reasonable number of hours per month or year to allocate?

With the giant caveat that I while I've done a few management papers I have not been an employer in the IT space. I am merely an engineer who at times (depending on the role) been heavily involved in technical leadership, team mentoring and interview panels etc, but here's my 2 cents.

I think expecting 8 hours billable per day is nuts. Employees, no matter if they are are being charged out or inhouse, need time for admin, meetings, shoulder taps, professional development etc. In my experience, employers could reasonably expect 75% productive/billable time (6 of 8 hours/day, 30 of 80 hours/week). Expecting 8 hours a day billable is going to lead to employee burnout, staff turnover, more human error and customers being overcharged, none of which I suggest are actually good for a business.

Using my hypothetical employee above who I shall name "Bob", and assuming I've got my math right.

The minimum leave entitlements by law are 20 days annual leave, 10 days sick leave, and 12 public holidays for a total of 42 days leave out of 260 days in 52 5 day weeks. Assuming Bob utilizes all 10 sick days, and with annual leave and public holidays, he's working for 218 days/year. If he achieves a billable/productive rate of 6 hours a day, he will generate approximately 192k income for the organisation. Every business obviously has overheads, and desires to turn a profit, but on a salary of 104k, Bob is contributing 88k above his salary. If the business is not profitable with Bob providing that level of contribution, I'd humbly suggest there is something horribly wrong with the senior leadership team, not with Bob's contribution.

With regards to training and upskilling, both but with some caveats. IMHO a good employer should always provide time for professional development and keeping abreast of relevant developments. An employee should be able to gradually advance their career without sacrificing their personal time, but the flip side of that is employees who are actively trying to progress should expect to spend some of their own time to do so. One of my personal giant ticks in interviews, is when a candidate starts enthusiastically telling me what they are working on in their home lab / spare time. To me that shows not only drive and initiative, but that they are someone who embraces life long learning and is passionate about technology. As for a set number of hours, I think that's very hard to define, and is going to vary depending on the role and the employee. If I had to pull some numbers out of my head, somewhere between 40-80 hours/year (1-2 hours/week) is a good baseline, but more senior employees or those with a broader technical mandate could well need more.

1 | 2 | 3