How Bristol Myers Squibb Pays

Professional ladder — EG80 through EG100

Dual track — EG110 through EG130

Leadership ladder — EG140 through EG160

Executive ladder — EG170 and EG180

Disclosed executive layer

Track divergence

Hierarchy qualifications and legacy structures

• Do not use the enterprise grade alone to price a role. Title scope, function, location and the posted salary range are far more reliable than an anonymous grade map, and BMS posts ranges in several United States states and in Poland.
• Software engineering is not a separate public ladder. Digital and technology titles sit inside the same enterprise-grade framework, and no BMS-specific staff, principal or distinguished engineer ladder was found in any reviewed source.
• Legacy Celgene integration is visible in the equity plans, not in a disclosed employee-grade conversion table. The 2014 and 2017 Celgene plans were assumed in the 2019 acquisition and later closed to new grants, but a legacy-band harmonisation schedule is Not publicly disclosed.
• The Senior Vice President and Executive Vice President layer is a corporate officer designation rather than a numbered grade, so this report keeps it in the executive section instead of extending the band ladder into it.
• Board directors are outside the employee ladder. Non-employee directors receive cash retainers and deferred share units under a separate structure, and no director row appears in the band chart.

Peer-level mapping

Office and market catalogue — calibration factors versus Princeton

BMS does not publish city-level headcount, so this catalogue cannot rank sites by employee count. The only site-level figures disclosed anywhere in the sources are more than 350 employees at Chester in the United Kingdom and approximately 246 Australian employees in a 2025 modern-slavery statement, more than three quarters of them at the Melbourne headquarters.

Princeton anchor medians — the basis of every modeled cell

• The Princeton column is the anchor. EG140 through EG160 come from current BMS Workday postings discounted to the New Jersey reference market, EG100 and EG120 from Indeed manager and senior manager averages of $119,162 and $153,972, and EG90 from official job material naming the grade.
• New Jersey is the reference market at a factor of 1.00, covering Princeton, Lawrenceville, New Brunswick and Warren. Cambridge, Seattle, San Diego and the Bay Area carry scientific and cost-of-labour premiums between 5 and 12 percent, while Tampa, Phoenix, Syracuse and Puerto Rico are discounted by 9 to 30 percent.
• India is not a client-delivery offshore model. Hyderabad is positioned as an innovation, technology, analytics and research hub, so its column uses directly observed Indian rupee salaries with Bangalore and Mumbai carrying 2 and 4 percent metro adjustments rather than a flat United States multiplier.
• India total compensation runs at roughly 16 percent of the Princeton anchor at EG80 and rises towards 48 percent at EG180, while base pay rises from 16 percent to 74 percent over the same span. Base and total therefore carry separate calibration factors that change with seniority.
• Named executive pay comes from the SEC Summary Compensation Table and is never generated from the band model. The Senior Vice President and Executive Vice President layer is deliberately excluded from the band ladder so that a single global officer figure cannot drag every city factor towards parity at the top.

Executive incentive targets — percent of salary

Named-executive outcomes

• The 85 million-share reserve was newly approved in May 2026, and no post-approval utilisation percentage was disclosed in the reviewed materials. Dividing historical grant volume by the new reserve would be misleading, so no utilisation figure is quoted here.
• The three-year average burn rate was disclosed at below 0.71 percent and total potential overhang at 5.9 percent using the company's own stated denominator. Both are company disclosures rather than calculations made in this report.
• At the $67.92 share price used for illustration the full 85 million-share reserve is worth about $5.77 billion. That is neither an accounting fair value nor expected immediate dilution; it is a scale marker only.
• About 22,800 of approximately 27,200 annually eligible employees received a 2025 award, roughly 84 percent. Broad eligibility is a plan characteristic, not an entitlement to a grant, and the split of awards by grade or country is Not publicly disclosed.

Equity plan capacity and grant activity

Vesting — common reported employee schedule

BMS states that employee restricted stock units generally vest ratably over three or four years, so the four-year ladder above is the longer of the two disclosed patterns and a three-year ratable schedule is equally common. Recurring named executive performance and market share units use a three-year cliff instead: the March 2026 grants vest in full on 10 March 2029. Earlier grants used different schedules, so the individual grant agreement always controls. Non-employee director deferred share units are generally deferred until board service ends.

Eligibility by hierarchy level

• Eligibility is broad and incidence is selective. The plan covers employees, officers, directors and other service providers, but BMS publishes no minimum grade for a grant, no standard award table and no guarantee that an eligible employee receives an award in any year.
• Award type is the clearest public hierarchy rule. Restricted stock units are the instrument for the general employee population, while recurring named executive long-term incentive is 60 percent performance share units and 40 percent market share units.
• Performance share units run a three-year performance cycle and can settle anywhere from 0 to 200 percent of target. Market share units are linked to BMY share-price performance, so both instruments carry outcome risk that a plain restricted stock unit does not.
• No executive option grants were reported for 2023 through 2025 even though the plan permits options and stock appreciation rights, so options should not be modelled as part of a current BMS package.
• Illustrative annualised grant values used in this report run from zero at EG80 to about $2,000 at EG90, $20,000 at EG120, $45,000 at EG140, $120,000 at EG160 and $500,000 at EG180. These are a planning model built from employee reports of roughly $4,000 to $5,000 awards in some 2025 cases at the lower grades, not a disclosed grant matrix.

Indicative annual grant value by band — Princeton

Annualized planning value (±25%), not the face value of every new-hire grant. Share equivalents use the $67.92 reference price at 25 August 2026 close and ignore plan valuation rules and PSU performance. Highlighted rows are disclosed grant-date stock awards.

Named executive target equity

Cristian Massacesi's 2025 row is the one that needs care. His $388,462 salary is a partial year, his $1,125,000 cash bonus is a separate award rather than an annual incentive payout, and his $7,853,994 stock figure is the second largest in the table despite the short service period. That pattern is consistent with a make-whole or new-hire component, and the proxy confirms that sign-on and make-whole awards can materially change first-year compensation for strategic hires. Executive salary changes for 2025 took effect on 1 April 2025, recurring long-term incentive was granted in early March and annual incentives were paid in March following year-end.

Board compensation framework

Director compensation is a governance package rather than an employment band and is deliberately excluded from the band chart. No stock options were granted to directors, and Christopher S. Boerner received no separate non-employee director compensation while serving as both Chief Executive Officer and Board Chair.

Not publicly disclosed

Modeled promotion planning timeline

Off-cycle adjustments can occur for promotion, expanded responsibility, retention or market correction, but BMS publishes no standard percentage schedule for any of them. Public evidence supports cost reduction and role elimination rather than a broad salary cut or a formal enterprise pay freeze: no reviewed source records either. Restructuring is the complication that matters most for progression, because management-layer reduction and site consolidation can shrink the number of open roles even while selected hubs such as Hyderabad and the new Houston-area campus expand.

Dataset summary

City-level H-1B wage history

All-years aggregates. P25/P75 are rounded reconstruction values marked modeled; medians and record counts are the stronger fields.

Selected title / worksite records

Evidence classification

Explicit “Not publicly disclosed” index

Known gaps and diligence before relying on a cell

1. 1The Senior Vice President and Executive Vice President cohort is deliberately excluded from the band ladder and carried in the executive section only. Including it would have anchored the top of the location interpolation on a single global officer figure and pushed every offshore market towards parity at the top of the ladder, which is exactly the distortion that produces an Indian officer priced on a United States officer base. The ladder therefore ends at EG180 Vice President with a seniority of 11.
2. 2The source model computed total compensation as base plus target incentive plus annualised equity plus a notional employer benefit load of roughly 12 percent of base in the United States and 15 percent in India. That load is employer cost rather than pay, so every total in this report has been rebuilt from its own components and no figure here matches the source bundle's headline totals. The Princeton EG140 total is $261,000 here against $283,000 in the bundle for exactly this reason.
3. 3India's geographic compression is convex rather than linear. Observed Indian base pay runs at 16 percent of the Princeton anchor at EG80, about 27 percent at EG120 and 74 percent at EG180, but the report engine interpolates linearly by seniority between the junior and senior factors. That overstates modelled Indian base pay in the EG110 to EG130 range by up to roughly 45 percent against the observed local medians, and the observed figures should be preferred over the interpolated cells in that window. Indian total compensation fits the linear interpolation closely and needs no such caveat.
4. 4Only one research bundle exists for this company, so there is no second model to cross-check against. Where the bundle itself flags conflicting evidence, chiefly the EG100 to EG180 grade mapping and the Princeton H-1B median and record count coming from different windows, the conflict is preserved rather than resolved.
5. 5The visa extracts disagree materially. H1B Salary Lookup gives a $148,703 median across 214 combined FY2025 and FY2026 records, MyVisaJobs a $154,159 FY2025 average across 247 filings, and H1BGrader a $166,187 average across a 63-record FY2026 legal-name subset. Each is preserved separately rather than averaged, and city quartiles outside New Brunswick are reconstructed from the company-wide spread.
6. 6Named executive annual incentive targets are not stated as percentages anywhere in the reviewed extract. The 150 percent chief executive and 100 percent other-officer targets shown here are implied by dividing the disclosed payouts by the disclosed 157.66 percent Company Performance Factor, and are labelled as implied throughout.
7. 7Committee chair and lead director retainer amounts are disclosed in the proxy but were not captured in the reviewed extract, so the board table names the retainer without a value rather than estimating one.
8. 8BMS discloses no geographic revenue split in any reviewed source, so the regional revenue panel is omitted entirely rather than repurposed to show something else.
9. 9The source model priced 54 markets including Argentina, Colombia, Brazil, Mexico, New Zealand, South Korea, Hungary, the Czech Republic, the Nordics, Belgium, the Netherlands and the United Arab Emirates. This report keeps 30 markets where a static foreign-exchange conversion remains defensible and where the source recorded a traceable factor, and drops the high-inflation and thinnest-evidence markets rather than publishing figures that will be stale or unsupportable.
10. 10The 2024 year-end headcount of about 34,100 includes acquired workforces as well as organic movement, so the 2023 to 2024 rise and the 2024 to 2025 fall are not a clean like-for-like series.
11. 11No companywide salary hike percentage, pay freeze, salary cut, campus offer revision or off-cycle correction schedule was located in any source, for either 2025 or 2026.

FX rates used — 1 USD equals, snapshot 2026-08-24

Single-date conversion layer for comparability; it ignores payroll-date FX, tax, purchasing power, benefits valuation and hedging. Compensation intelligence, not legal, tax, investment, immigration or employment advice.

Source register — 16 sources

The 2024 rise and the 2025 fall are not a clean like-for-like series, because the 2024 increase reflects acquisition and integration effects on top of organic hiring. Site-level quarterly headcount and voluntary attrition are Not publicly disclosed anywhere, so the only geographic signal in the filings is the roughly 54 to 46 split between the United States excluding Puerto Rico and the rest of the world.