(no title)
academia_hack | 1 year ago
Your typical hands-on-keyboard blue team engineer in federal government is a GS-12 getting paid around $68,000 per year (or $99k in very high cost of living areas like DC). They have expensive health benefits, 13 days of PTO a year, put a huge chunk of their paycheck (almost 5%) into a mandatory pension plan that consistently underperforms the market, and can literally go to jail for making mistakes at work depending on the statutory context they work in.
The best people in these jobs burn out fast and quit or they end up having to abandon IC work for GS-14/15 jobs (max pay is around $190 for those) in order to keep up with cost-of-living and justify their careers.
As a result, you have almost zero genuinely capable principal/senior engineers in government who have the authority to architect complex IT systems for security. Instead you get contractors who charge the taxpayers enormous overhead costs and cut corners wherever possible.
If there's one letter to write your congress person to improve government - my vote would be for civil service reform to attract and retain actual top tech talent. They've done it for doctors and lawyers (both of whom can get paid well above the $190k GS pay ceiling), but engineering is still not treated as a comparably skilled professional trade.
autoexecbat|1 year ago
yimmothathird|1 year ago
treesknees|1 year ago
A nice balance might be working somewhere as a civilian contractor for those government projects.
radpanda|1 year ago
One valid sounding concern that I’ve heard is that the WASHINGTON-BALTIMORE-ARLINGTON, DC-MD-VA-WV-PA GS Locality Area underpays folks in DC by including farflung areas like PA and WV that skew the cost-of-living analysis. Whether that’s an intentional cost-cutting move or bureaucratic incompetence I’m not sure, but in the end the DC-area federal government pay ranges I’ve seen have struck me as quite low.
2OEH8eoCRo0|1 year ago
I do largely agree with your post but I'm also suspicious that stratospheric civilian tech compensation is a bubble.
academia_hack|1 year ago
ImPostingOnHN|1 year ago
But I'd need to be paid more to suffer though any enormous bureaucracy, so it tends to balance out to needing market rates.
ch4s3|1 year ago
loa_in_|1 year ago
ForHackernews|1 year ago
devwastaken|1 year ago
Tech could drop salaries to 40K/year and get just as many resumes discarded in the trash.
redwood|1 year ago
christophilus|1 year ago
dylan604|1 year ago
ccorcos|1 year ago
DANmode|1 year ago
csa|1 year ago
> They have expensive health benefits
Hmm… maybe more expensive when compared to private tech industry jobs, but cheap compared to owning your own business.
> 13 days of PTO a year
Starts at 13 days for first 2 years, then is 20 days from 3-15, then 26 days from 15 on.
Plus medical leave.
Plus it’s usually easy to get people to donate leave in the event of a medical emergency.
> put a huge chunk of their paycheck (almost 5%) into a mandatory pension plan
Not mandatory at all. The government puts in 1% for folks automatically. They match up to 5% total.
> that consistently underperforms the market
It literally is the market. They have funds for S&P 500 and Dow total market, plus a few others, all at super low fees.
None of these funds are speculative other than the total market that the fund represents.
academia_hack|1 year ago
* Federal Pay (GS-12): $100,000 * Startup Pay: $150 base + $25 k bonus + equity
* Federal Health Insurance (United mid-tier plan, no family): $2,500/year * Startup Insurance (United mid-tier plan, no family): $0/year
* Federal Leave: 20 days (after 4 years in federal government) * Startup Leave: Unlimited
* Federal Sick Leave: 13 days * Startup Sick Leave: Unlimited
The pension I'm talking about actually isn't the TSP (which is fine, but slightly more expensive than comparable Vanguard funds).
All federal employees must contribute 4.4% of their salary to the FERS now which is taken out of their base pay just like their health/dental/fegli. It used to be 0.8% but congress gutted it a few years ago.
FERS takes decades before it's more than pocket change and the same money invested in the market would yield higher expected returns without requiring you to work 20 years in gov to benefit from it.
wredue|1 year ago
I guarantee that someone in the org saw a password file and said “yo? wtf? Let’s get a proper secrets vault going we can do it ov…..” *punched in the clit, thrown out a window*
booi|1 year ago
technofiend|1 year ago
SkyPuncher|1 year ago
https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/former-federal-government...
Yes, he shouldn’t have accepted bribes, but in the private sector this would have been extremely unlikely to result in jail time.
Even if jail time isn’t a common thing, it’s far closer to happening to the average person working in the government than it is to those working in the private sector. The private sector simply fires bad employees. The government seeks to be made whole.
shrimp_emoji|1 year ago
academia_hack|1 year ago
Right now if a government agency wants to do something like make a webform where you can apply for a passport, they have zero web developers on staff who can do it. Instead they must pay a team of non-technical officials and lawyers to make and adjudicate an RFP. Then pay a contracting firm to put a developer behind a government computer to do the actual work. Putting this contractor in a seat can easily cost the taxpayer $500k a year despite the contractor only receiving $130k of that money. The rest goes to the HR department, IT Department, C-Suite, lawyers, lobbyists, and shareholders at the contracting firm. The government has their own HR/Lawyers/IT too, but the contractor can't use those so the tax payer ends up double-paying overhead and missing out on economies of scale on every contract.
This is one of the many reasons government websites are always $50 million dollar boondoggles that an intern could have done better. The government ends up spending millions of dollars feeding leeching middle-men before they can hand that money to a mediocre dev deep in the bowels of Accenture's cheapest subcontractor.
If an agency just could hire a few strong web developers directly and then assign them to whatever task is needed during a particular sprint, we'd see a massive reduction in cost and increase in the quality of engineers working on our country's most important work. But most agencies are literally not allowed to spend more than $120k on an in-house engineer, while no one bats an eye on them spending 5 times that on an Accenture contract placement.
Vicinity9635|1 year ago
ForHackernews|1 year ago
fxtentacle|1 year ago