jlol@remus.ee.byu.edu (Jay Lawlor) (01/31/91)
Not too long ago there was a request for information by someone who was compiling a salary survey for system administrators around the country. I can't remember which group it was in but I've been assigned to find the results of such a survey. If anyone out there can help me, please send me email to jlol@ee.byu.edu Thanks. Jay
et@tornado.Berkeley.EDU (Eric Thompson) (01/31/91)
In article <9101302243.AA00495@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> jlol@ee.byu.edu writes: >Not too long ago there was a request for information by someone who >was compiling a salary survey for system administrators around the >country. I can't remember which group it was in but I've been >assigned to find the results of such a survey. I started the survey about a month ago, and got quite a few responses since that time (about 30-40). However, there isn't a summary. How is that, you might ask? The account I'm using is on UC Berkeley's Open Computing Facility (OCF) cluster of computers. They decided to do an OS upgrade over winter break (over the last month). In the process of upgrading, they removed all the accounts from disk to tape. And in the process of restoring the accounts, they deleted one of the backup tapes that had accounts for two of the machines. Unfortunately, my account was on one of those machines. Bottom line: I have no files, no mail, nothing. Needless to say, I was extremely PO'd.. however, since the account was provided free in the first place and the OCF gets no money from the university to do things like backups, I suppose "I got what I paid for"--i.e. nothing. However, from the responses I received, I can recall some items which seem to affect salary the most: * Geography: salaries in urban areas, especially high-tech areas, were higher than those of less-urbanized/less-tech areas * Education/Professional: people working for universities and other educational institutions were paid less than those working in the industry or as professionals * Degree of Management: people who did the dirty work themselves were generally paid less than people who supervised the people who did the dirty work * Number of machines supervised: more machines usually == more $$$; see next item though * Type(s) of machines supervised: people who supervised several different kinds of machines/architectures were usually paid more than those with just one type of machine, especially if different architectures were networked * Type/Number of Users: more users usually == more $$$; however, this varies depending on how technically inclined the users are. If the users only know how to log in and read their mail and use the word processor, and anything else is "Unix" which has to be referred to the sysadmin, then the sysadmin usually got more $$$ * Specialization: if the sysadmin is expected to know everything about everything (i.e. all aspects of all applications, programming, networking, hardware, etc., etc.) then salary is higher than if they work in a specialized area (X, C, networking, etc.) There may have been other factors I don't remember offhand, but of course, I have nothing to refer to anymore. If you would like a description/salary of the sysadmin job at the firm I work, please send me your address again and I'll send you one. I'd like to thank everyone who participated and I hope that if another survey is conducted in the future that the turnout is just as good or better than what I received. Thanks again. -- "I'd rather be no one than someone with no one to love" | Eric Thompson --Stone Roses | et@ocf.berkeley.edu