Pay disparities – contractors vs. full time
I’m the head of an engineering organisation, leading multiple backend teams for a relatively successful and established startup, based in London, with millions of users and a workable business model.<p>I’ve been there for several years, starting as a senior engineer, and progressing fairly rapidly from there. While I absolutely can’t claim to have single-handedly saved it from a quagmire of technical debt and bad descison making, I’d like to think that I’ve played a non-insignificant part in steering it towards into the engineering company it is today. I’ve definately bled for it over the years, and for the most part have enjoyed every minute.<p>In London, the contractor market is much stronger remuneration-wise than the permanent market (as well as being personally more tax efficient). In part due to hiring challenges, we’ve recently changed our policy around contractors, and seem to be freely engaging with contractors on a long term basis, even hiring back some previous full time engineers who left to go contracting, now as contractors.<p>The other day I negotiated an increase for one of our contractors, that took his yearly take-home pay to 70% greater than my own, even taking into account 8 weeks of unpaid leave&#x2F;year.<p>I don’t feel that I’m badly renumerated when compared to senior or lead engineers who are also full time employees, and also more generally when compared with market rates for full-time engineers in London.. But when faced with a 70% gap between myself and a direct report, though I’ve got a few share options, I’m left feeling somewhat disillusioned and wondering if I’ve made the right descision to stay a loyal employee.<p>Had anyone else found themselves in this situation? How would you address this with your manager? I can’t see asking for a 70% pay rise going down particularly well.