Microsoft staff created their own salary spreadsheet, which reveals two companies.

      Approximately 600 Microsoft employees have contributed their salary information to a crowdsourced spreadsheet shared internally, painting a picture of a company compensating two distinctly different groups. Base salaries range from $111,000 at level 59 to $280,000 at level 67, with roles in Cloud and AI reaching as high as $450,000. This data reflects the inquiries from Microsoft employees who have sought transparency since the company removed the pay question from its internal survey.

      Raises in this sample varied from 0% to 3.5%, which typically hovers at or below inflation rates, while cash bonuses went from $2,000 to $110,000. Compensation in stocks reveals a significant division within the company. Annual stock awards ranged from $10,000 to $1.4 million, with the higher amounts concentrated in Cloud and AI, where such equity substantially alters the nature of a job rather than merely its financial compensation.

      The reported trend indicates that engineers working on generative AI projects receive larger initial stock grants and more frequent additional refreshers compared to their counterparts in traditional software roles at the same levels. Consequently, level classifications no longer effectively convey income.

      This marks a significant shift from Microsoft’s historical approach. The level system was intended to ensure that a level 65 in one area could be compared to a level 65 in another, but a substantial difference in annual vesting at the same level undermines the system's significance.

      On the other end of the spectrum, Xbox shows lower base salaries, capping at around $218,000 in the sample—significantly less than what similar senior positions earn in Cloud and AI, particularly surprising given the gaming division's recent strategic importance, represented by $69 billion in acquisitions.

      Out-of-band refreshers, which are additional stock grants awarded outside the annual review, play a crucial role in this salary disparity. These grants are typically offered to retain employees who may be pursued by competitors, favoring those whom the market currently values rather than those who excel in performance.

      The repercussions of this are felt by a significant number of employees. Engineers who maintain Windows, developer tools, and established cloud services generate the revenue that supports AI infrastructure investments, yet many are being asked to enhance their products with generative features without any accompanying compensation adjustment.

      This situation is not exclusive to Microsoft; companies like Anthropic are offering some of the highest salaries in the industry, with its CEO surprised that employees prioritize financial compensation. The entire sector has been competing for a limited pool of researchers for two years.

      What distinguishes Microsoft is its contrasting payroll activities. The company has conducted layoffs, introduced its first voluntary retirement program, and followed a broader trend in Big Tech of reallocating salary expenses towards AI capital investments.

      In this context, a 0% raise takes on a different significance, especially in a year marked by extensive infrastructure spending and high-value compensation packages available just a few levels away.

      Pay transparency laws have also shed some light on these discrepancies. Several U.S. states now mandate salary ranges in job postings, allowing employees to discern what new hires are being offered for the same roles, making it easier to calculate the difference from their last raise.

      However, it is important to approach this sample with caution. Six hundred responses represent far less than 1% of Microsoft’s approximate 223,000 employees, the data is self-reported and unverified, and those with extreme salary outcomes have more incentives to participate in such a survey compared to those in the middle.

      Microsoft has not issued any comments on this matter. Crowdsourced pay data like this typically emerges when employees lose faith in official channels, and a company that has eliminated the pay question from its own survey has little justification to object to staff seeking the information independently.