Full time Vs contracor and Big Vs small

joeyzhu

Sorry fot that i could not type chinese in company.

I am an IT developer and I just got an fulltime offer which is 100k base. I wonder what is the equal hour rate for contractor.

Another question is that I have been a contractor for couple of years and this is my first full time offer. I know permanent is good for career, i can get management experience and promotion while most developer contractors are still developers. And the pay is not bad for my experience (2 years in china and 3 years in australia). My concern (my friend's concern as well) is that the new company is not a big company, which has around 50 staffs in sydney (head) and a bit more than 100 globally. Currently I am working in one of the biggest companies. It is very good for resume. My friends suggested that "we should never work in small companies if possible. Since you could get at least 2 years contract extension, you should wait for the best chance for a permanent job in big companies."
Now i am in a bit dilemma. So what do you guys think? Take the job first, if it is no good then go for contractor again? or some other advice? Any advice will be much appreciated. thanks.

doublezz

1. You know that as a contractor the payment is about 30%-50% higher than a permanent.
Therefore 100K base equals to 130K -- 150K as a contractor which results in $68/hr -- $78/hr if people work 48 weeks per year and 40 hours per week.
2. I don't think permanent is better for career development since as a contractor you change jobs frequently that means you can move from junior developer --> developer --> senior developer --> team lead --> architect quicker than permanent. Besides that as a contractor you work with all kinds of people which improves your net work which will benefit your future business.
3. NEVER join a small company UNLESS they are nearly formed. A company has developed for many years (eg: 10 years) but still in a small scope means they must have problem either in management or in their market strategy.
Hope it helps.

joeyzhu

I am much appreciated for your reply. Here is my understanding.

For the payment, what you said about the contractor rate is including super but 100k is without super. Hence it should equal (68-78)*1.09=75-85. And this excludes 9 public holidays and 8 sick days. Am i right?

My below point is based on that the permanent has the same quality as the contractor.
For career, my understanding is it is easy to be senior no matter permanent or contractor. But senior to team leader (i am not talking about a company that most guys are contractors and this is impossible in top companies) is a bit difficult. In most scenarios, company only considers contractor in case there is no suitable permanent staff and they could not recruit permanent from internal/market. And what does suitable means? from my experience, that guy is not a moron and has been in the company for some years and company will provide the management training for him to be a team leader. Team leader to be architect is even rare. If you only have developer experience/background without real BA/PM experience and the company does not provide training/oppotunity, you have to spend much much more effort to be a architect.

i agreed with your third point. It is too difficult to progress a company' turnover from 10mor20m to 100m. But how about the company is bought out by another company recently?

doublezz

Yeah, plus the super the rate should be 75-85 if people work 48 weeks a year (the whole year has 52 weeks so let's say 4 weeks for public holidays and other personal leave), 40 hours a week

2 of my friends have moved from developer  to architect as contractor, they always work as contractor in the past, before they become architect, they are just programmer. And the company that they are working for currently are all big big organization.