I work for a company with well over 100,000 employees, but if I gave my salary, title, and years experience (and as someone else noted, especially if I added my location), I wouldn't be anonymous. To my employer, at least. It would be trivial for them to narrow down the information to being provided by a very small number of people - if not the exact person.
I don't see this flying, where I work though. Even among the people I'm closest to, I don't think they'd take to this sort of information sharing amongst each other. Even pseudo-anonymously. I'm not sure if that's because they'd feel it's tacky or if it's because it has been drilled into everyone from corporate culture that you _never_ talk about it.
As an aside, I would actually much rather know not what the guys I've been working alongside for the past decade are making compared to me, but what new hires in the same positions as us are being hired at. Especially when you throw in all the hiring freezes and pay freezes over the last ten years.
Just one correction: your employer will also know exactly who you are by just your salary alone. Chances are not everyone is making the same amount and if you say you make 100,760,000 rubles, it's easy enough to just look it up. Your co-workers of course don't have this info.
I personally liked the other trick better: the one that gives you the average salary. Or maybe median is more appropriate. The point is that it'd give you an idea of whether you are making more or less than at least half your co-workers.
I agree that there is too much information here to stay anonymous from your boss.
Instead, you could generate the histogram of the entire sample set, perhaps curve fit, so it's not obvious for small sample sizes, how many people contributed. Then you put a little red "You are here" dot on the histogram so they see how they compare. This robs the employer of any data they can use to see who partook in the experiment, while still giving the same information back to the employee.
You could fudge the title or years of experience slightly one way or the other. The point isn't to be exact, but to differentiate between associate developers 3 months out of college and staff engineers with 20+ years of experience.
I don't see this flying, where I work though. Even among the people I'm closest to, I don't think they'd take to this sort of information sharing amongst each other. Even pseudo-anonymously. I'm not sure if that's because they'd feel it's tacky or if it's because it has been drilled into everyone from corporate culture that you _never_ talk about it.
As an aside, I would actually much rather know not what the guys I've been working alongside for the past decade are making compared to me, but what new hires in the same positions as us are being hired at. Especially when you throw in all the hiring freezes and pay freezes over the last ten years.