More Details on IT Salaries
Let's examine some of the basic statistics pointed out by this article. The main point of the article seems to be that IT pay is improving. The following quote attests to that fax: "According to the Yoh Index of Technology Wages, hourly pay increased by 3.1 percent to an average of $30.27 per hour between October 10, 2005 and November 6, 2005."
Now, this may indeed be the case. But a lot of folks I speak with on a daily basis seem to indicate that pay is stagnant. I guess both of these trends can be true. Perhaps pay does increase for those bold enough to venture out and seek new jobs. For those who stay the course with their present company, though, raises are likely to be anemic. I'd guess perhaps maxing out for most at 3% to 4% (and maybe being less for a lot of folks, too). Of course, I have no hard facts to prove those figures - it just seems right based on anecdotal evidence.
But what of the data professionals? It seems that organizations are showing the value they place on data by paying data folks more than the average worker. If you check out the linked article above, you will see that the data-focused professions have a higher average pay. FOr example, consider the average base pay for the following jobs:
Data Manager ($45.06/hour) - I'm not sure I know exactly what a "data manager" is, but I can guess that it "manages data." I don't know that I've ever come across this job title in my many years in the business, though. Anyone out there know what the responsibilities for this job might be?
Data Warehouse Architect ($69.03/hour) - Here is a position that requires the worker to be knee-deep in data. It usually involves moving data from operational to analytical systems, cleaning and scrubbing data, loading and unloading data, querying and analyzing data, and ensuring the appropriate infrastructure is in place for doing all of the above.
Oracle Database Administrator ($55.82/hour) - Ah, yes, the much in-demand Oracle DBA. Everyone wants to know him (or her); many want to be her (or him). It seems like the pay is still good for this position. Assuming 40 hours per week and 50 weeks a year we get a salary of over $111,000. Not bad for a DBA. (Of course, we all know that 40 hours a week is a dream, DBAs work longer hours; we also know that a full-time employee is not paid an hourly rate, but a salary. So it might be wise to do a little bit of due diligence on how these numbers were compiled before using them to set a salary - even though the article states that this data is used to set salaries for Fortune 500 companies.)
It is also interesting to note that three of the most "in demand" positions require heavy data management. The top five "in demand" positions are listed as: SAP functional consultants, data warehouse architects, CRM managers, hardware/firmware engineers and project managers. The first three of these I rate as being heavy in data management requirements.
So what do you think? Are these figures anywhere close to being reality for you? And do you think that companies actually do pay a premium for those who can master data?
