Ultimately, it seems, the compensation was just always lower than industry norms.

GS-15 is more than many pay, maybe not bay area or top, top companies. But I had friends there who made $160k-ish and had a hard time moving back to SF to mid-size startups because he would have had to take a pay cut (but with equity filling the gap). Plus it was pretty high impact work, and the ability to work remote on demand, so was hard to find something comparable if you're very mission driven or want a more "relaxed" lifestyle.

I was a GS-15 (Step 5) at 18F based in SF, so near the pay cap when you factor in the location adjustment (the government considers the Bay Area the most expensive region in the nation).

Pay was about similar to Twitter (not counting sizable stock based compensation and bonuses, so of course a big pay cut all in all). Pay was significantly better than startups. When I worked at Google I was leveled quite low, so the comparison wouldn't be fair.

Zero perks (no free coffee, etc). Retirements benefits only kick in after 3 years of government service.

I definitely didn't join 18F for money. I was in for the mission and potential impact. I also liked the idea of being able to move around the country if necessary while keeping the same job.

It's not a bad deal if you're young and single. It wasn't tenable for me to bring my wife and daughter to share a townhouse with a bunch of other USDS [+] staff making $130k/year.

[+] I'm aware that USDS and 18F are independent branches.

Yeah that probably depends on your personal situation of course. But I met many 18F'ers and USDS'ers through my friends, lots of people coming on between startups for a few months, some staying for years. They seem to match your current salary up to the federal civilian max, which appears to be $161,900. So that's not exactly a small amount, especially considering the additional benefits like excellent health care and blameless vacation-taking. Though you won't be getting catered lunches or free drinks/swag. Really just seems to depend on what you value. I've considered joining myself.

The median household income in DC is 75k. So you are making 130-160k you are way above the median. Everyone doesn't make 300k. Its like HN exists in its own universe.

The median household income also includes many people doing unskilled labor. Attempting to compare skilled labor to unskilled labor like that only serves to drive down wages.

No one is saying you can't afford to live on $160K GS-15 pay. They are saying it's hard to walk away from $200K-$300+K pay of a webtech job.

Regardless of whether you're making above the median and your skills have more value, that should not require you to suffer a pay cut to spend 1-2 years doing thankless work.

Regardless of DC median wages, housing is very expensive to be reasonably close to where you'd be working onsite for 18F or USDS assignments.

Being a little less rich than possible is a relative loss, but it's not "suffering". Nor is it more "thankless' than being a cog at a tech company.

It's not bad if you're just comparing base salaries, but it's hundreds of thousands lower than quite a few private sector jobs if you compare total compensation.

Of course given the compensation and maximum length of tenure I imagine that most people are not doing it for the money.

Woah, in all seriousness please let me know where $161k + great benefits is "hundreds of thousands" lower than similar private sector SWE jobs in total comp. I will be applying today. (I'm obviously assuming you're not comparing compensation for a swe at 18F with head of BeyondCorp or something, because that would be disingenuous and you seem like a reasonable person)

You can use Facebook's annual report to find that the average annual stock based compensation at Facebook is around $188k. That's real, liquid stock that you can turn around and sell. It's not monopoly money. Add salary and bonus and you're well over $300k in total compensation.

Is it hard to believe that some are going to be hitting more than $200k above the 18F numbers?

Note that we're comparing the absolute max for GS employees to the average at Facebook.

> Is it hard to believe that some are going to be hitting more than $200k above the 18F numbers?

"Some people at Facebook" is a much smaller set than "quite a few private sector jobs", which the statement GP was responding to.

Some people at Facebook can be extended to some people at other companies too. I specifically picked a large, visible example where the information is publicly available.

Perhaps GP misread "quite a few private sector jobs" as "most private sector jobs"?

"hundreds of thousands" is a bit of a stretch, but SWE w/security clearance at a small outfit will net you significantly more. Lots of tiny PO Box'd contractors around DC.

Funny, in 15 years as a SwE with a clearance (not in DC) I never broke $100k total comp.

Also, "hundreds of thousands" is a gross exaggeration. Most software engineers nationwide don't make that to begin with.

> SwE with a clearance (not in DC) I never broke $100k total comp

YMMV of course, but even without a clearance you are selling yourself short here.

I wasn't selling myself anything. I could barely get non-government contractors to even give me an interview, and nobody in the government space offered me anywhere near that much. I managed to get to $95k via same-company salary progression before I escaped to the private sector (and a better metro area).

Can you give an example? For a GS-15 Making max salary, which is 164K. That is the base. It goes up quite a bit if you include 5% 401k match and retirement. So the total compensation is quite more than just 164K.

So what's total comp as a GS-15? At megacorp I was making a bit more than $164k, but total comp worked out to over $210k.

I've commented on the who's hiring thread about the US Digital Service's post. GS-15 base pay doesn't seem so bad, but drug testing, no relocation stipend (work from DC only), and no bonuses were all pretty big black marks.

I work at 18F. I have never been drug-tested. It's not a requirement for the job.

I thought it was done as a kind of 'tour of duty' equivalent in public services, where you'd leave your company for a few years, and then go back, so you only took a salary hit for a short time?

Exactly. The attrition rate part of the article is wrong. 18F hires on two year terms renewable for a second two years. At the end then, you are required to leave. So by definition the minimum attrition rate is 25%.

But during the Obama administration, they were backfilling. It sounds like a lot of people are electing not to do that second term, and they're not backfilling open positions.

Are you sure you mean to use the word "but" here. What you're saying, true or not, does not contradict what I said.

I did mean to use the word "but". Like I said, during the Obama administration, they were hiring to replace the people who were termed out, or simply did not renew for a 2nd term. That's not happening now.

Compensation in government jobs is almost always lower than what the same person could make in the private sector.

18F's problem is that the appeal of government work is in benefits other than salary: solid health coverage, a pension, job security. But those are really only of interest if you're planning on staying there long term, and 18F's pitch has always been "take a year or two off from your real job and come work with us." It's the Peace Corps for techies, and nobody joins the Peace Corps for the retirement plan.

You cannot stay at 18F for the long term. These are limited term, 'non-competitive service' positions.

* Job security only for your 2 year term (unless you renew by another 2 for a max of 4 years). After that, you need to leave government service

* Health care coverage was similar to major tech companies in the Bay Area. However, vision / dental benefits were worse.

* Pension benefits only start after 3 years of government service, so most working for 18F will likely not receive these.

But I agree that for other government positions these are good perks.

The fact that the current administration put a full hiring stop, and that 18F had everyone on 2 year contracts, seems to have been much more important.

If everyone’s contracts run out after 24 months, and you can’t re-hire them, of course you’ll lose 50% of employees in 12 months.