<p>She is not high tech manager as she quoted to a newspaper. It’s inaccurate and that’s what I think she purposely misleading people. I have no qualms about the fact that she worked as a contractor or not. But in my mind high tech managers are not the same as people who are working for human resources.</p>
<p>New long-term study–real info on majors and earnings. Eng good. Lib arts–not so good.</p>
<p><a href=“New data from Virginia agency tracks graduate earnings two decades later”>https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/09/09/new-data-virginia-agency-tracks-graduate-earnings-two-decades-later</a></p>
<p>“She is not high tech manager as she quoted to a newspaper. It’s inaccurate and that’s what I think she purposely misleading people. I have no qualms about the fact that she worked as a contractor or not. But in my mind high tech managers are not the same as people who are working for human resources.”</p>
<p>Senior, experienced human resource directors are worth their weight in gold. It’s no less serious of a job because it’s moving around people and not computer chips. </p>
<p>Whatever, barrons - we all know that engineers do better the first few years old, but big whoops. I’ve never really even seen an engineer make big money unless he / she moves beyond engineering. </p>
<p>I don’t have a problem with senior human resources either or their worth. I don’t think this person was either. I wished she could just say I was a contract person working at a tech company and that would have been more accurate. She should be proud of what she was. Everybody should be proud of what they do just like I’m always proud that I’m a lowlife engineer, I have no ambition to go higher. So what?</p>
<p>Because that’s not how people talk. She works for X. Whether it’s contract or employee is for her HR dept and her accountant to worry about. </p>
<p>My company has a couple of HR contractors who earn close to $300K per year (one will earn over that this year, earned a little less last year).</p>
<p>So which is it- humanities majors are losers who will flip burgers and fold sweaters for the rest of their lives, or humanities majors are big liars who call themselves employees and managers when they are really just contract people and therefore worthy of scorn and derision?</p>
<p>And what the heck is wrong with the engineers today hating on anyone who has managed to break through the glass ceiling at tech companies (even though it’s not them) ? </p>
<p>I’m proud of what I do. I’ve worked in tech, I’ve hired engineers, tech, actuaries, rocket science types for financial services, manufacturing, etc. Only on CC do people believe that everyone at a tech company is a CS major, or everyone at an aerospace company is an aero/astro engineer. </p>
<p>My posts are all related to post #34 where humanities majors are hired to work in jobs that are not tech related.
No I don’t ever believe only CS get hired by tech companies, for one I think CEOs are too smart, they won’t pay you one dime more if they don’t think you should get more. For example, they won’t pay admin the salary they pay CS majors.
There are nothing wrong with more female breaking the glass ceiling but I think it’s some what misleading to say CEOs love liberal arts majors more than they don’t love CS majors.
As far as contract jobs, there are reasons why they get paid that high because that’s the nature of contact jobs. No benefits.
I’ve done contact jobs before when my oldest kid was born. I did not want to work one hour overtime without getting paid, which is sometimes common on a small company. Just for reference that’s similar salary to what I received in the early 90s.</p>
<p>
I agree with your post #34, I did write that there are support functions at tech companies for liberal arts majors. Some of them are in sales, marketing, and human resources.
What I disagree with the article that that seems to imply tech CEOs love liberal arts as if they don’t love CS/engineering majors. I think that’s far from the truth. </p>
<p>Not all “support” jobs are divorced from the tech work. And plenty of them make big bucks. Sales and marketing are fine examples where the folks have to understand the technical nature and be able to trade tech talk with clients- who are also not always just peripheral. I can’t really get why you think the article puts CS folks down- it talks about humanities as offering something value-added.</p>
<p>I don’t think the article puts down CS folks, I think it exaggerates the love for liberal arts. All tech companies have functions that can be filled by liberal arts and non-liberal arts. It’s not just the liberal arts these tech companies are going after.</p>
<p>“did write that there are support functions at tech companies for liberal arts majors. Some of them are in sales, marketing, and human resources.”</p>
<p>In my world, brand management is the center and the R&D people are the support staff. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, Thomas J. Stanley found that “engineers produced about 22 percent more wealth per dollar of realized income than did millionaires in general” through more frugal spending habits and money management.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.thomasjstanley.com/blog-articles/343/Engineering_Economic_Productivity.html”>http://www.thomasjstanley.com/blog-articles/343/Engineering_Economic_Productivity.html</a>
<a href=“http://www.thomasjstanley.com/blog-articles/133/Even_More_Frugal_Than_One_Engineer.html”>http://www.thomasjstanley.com/blog-articles/133/Even_More_Frugal_Than_One_Engineer.html</a>
<a href=“http://www.thomasjstanley.com/blog-articles/444/A_Cure_for_a_Bad_Case_of_the_Spends.html”>http://www.thomasjstanley.com/blog-articles/444/A_Cure_for_a_Bad_Case_of_the_Spends.html</a></p>
<p>PG–data covers 20 years. That’s more than just starting wages. Many peak in their 40’s and go flat,.</p>
<p>PG, I’ve never known any engineers who didn’t make big money, beyond salary. The salary is just the stipend to live in expensive area. Maybe not in the Midwest but in Silicon Valley, it’s different.
EDIT to add houses in Silicon Valley wouldn’t be that expensive otherwise.</p>
<p>Well, I live in a world in which big marketing talent is well compensated, and like I said, the R&D people are the adjuncts and the support staff (which is not a “diss” of them at all, every company needs all types to make the world go 'round). </p>