Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A CEO Who Pays Employees to De-Locate from the Bay

blog.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 232 posts

Re: A CEO Who Pays Employees to De-Locate from the Bay

#81

Post by r00fus »

5706906c06c wrote: post #71

Once you leave the Bay Area, it becomes exponentially more difficult to come back, so the what-if scenario of this employment expiring becomes a real threat to financial viability.

Not if you keep your house (assuming you own) and rent it. Many lucky folks can rent for significantly more than cost/PITI, adding another passive income stream.

So the pitch is: 1) De-locate to a more reasonable real-estate market where you can actually buy the house you want/need. 2) Rent-out your existing SFBay property if you own, and get additional income (even minus property management cut) 3) Get a bonus 4) Maybe move closer to family outside of SFBay.

What's not said: 1) Career mobility is limited to whatever market you move to and within Zapier. 2) Salary probably likely won't make same leaps as if you stayed 3) You might have family in the SFBay - could be a downside to move away

If you're career-stable and open to move it can be a good deal.

Re: A CEO Who Pays Employees to De-Locate from the Bay

#82

Post by briandear »

cryptoz wrote: post #61
tonyedgecombe wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From someone outside the US, I'm amazed that states vary their income tax so much, I would have thought it's a magnet for fraud and corruption.

> From someone outside the US, I'm amazed that states vary their income tax so much, I would have thought it's a magnet for fraud and corruption. It is. Roads in the Bay Area are among the worst in the country, despite this region producing enormous corporate profits. Nearly all the companies here operate in an eternal tragedy of the commons, whereby nobody will pay local taxes because nobody else does. All the compa…

How does that cause income inequality? Taxes ought having nothing to do with income equality. The purpose of taxes is to pay for the operation of government, not to “solve” income inequality. Taxes are meant to pay for government. The United States isn’t socialist. I also don’t think you understand how corporate taxes work. A Delaware company operating in California does pay California taxes.

Re: A CEO Who Pays Employees to De-Locate from the Bay

#83

Post by briandear »

cryptoz wrote: post #78
ringaroundthetx wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> All the companies in California are actually Delaware companies, and the income inequality and quality-of-life disparity is a direct result of this kind of corruption. Why would you call that corruption? Corruption from whose perspective? How much impact do you think that has on roads being maintained or not (or more generally, local/state funding and budget management)?

Look at the corruption like gerrymandering. Systematic wealth collection by mega corporations and individuals, structured to increase their wealth and the expense of the poor. A structure that allows for this is a corrupt structure. To answer your question, I would say this has has high impact on the quality of life here, including the roads, education systems, policing, safety, and everything else in society. Everyt…

The Bay Area has some of the best schools in the country. Cupertino public schools for example. As far as roads, I don’t think you’ve ever driven in New Jersey: they have really high taxes and really terrible roads. Driving through Jersey City was like driving through Beirut – despite extremely high property taxes. Road quality has nothing to do with Delaware corporations.

Re: A CEO Who Pays Employees to De-Locate from the Bay

#84

Post by aetherson »

tehlike wrote: post #31
zitterbewegung wrote: post #14

So by giving them a $10k carrot they can basically lock them in to the company because it would be much more difficult to interview for competitors or even start startups. That's pretty genius.

The reason is probably super inflated salaries in bay area due to high cost of living. Lock in has probably less to do with this than pure money aspect.

They aren't reducing people's salaries who "de-locate." So if they're clawing back any salary, it's long-term by giving them lower raises. It takes a while for that to kick in.

I think it is lock-in. Not just because it makes it somewhat harder to get in front of other companies, but because making a Bay Area kind of salary in a place with a non-Bay-Area cost of living sounds like the kind of thing that could make an employee very comfortable and very unwilling to go looking for another job. If you're getting like an equivalent of +$30k (or more), even if another company says, "Oh, sure, we'll hire you for $20k over your current salary... but you'll need to move back to the Bay Area," that's an offer you're much less likely to take than if you were already in the Bay Area. And local companies in your new place-of-work are unlikely to be able to match your existing salary.

Re: A CEO Who Pays Employees to De-Locate from the Bay

#85

Post by codingdave »

alexbanks wrote: post #13
s73ver_ wrote: post #11

Ok, so I "delocate". Do I then have to take a pay cut because I'm now somewhere else? Spreading the tech sector out around the country even more is great, and things like this can be a step in the right direction. But a big part of why the Bay Area is what it is has to do with funding. Most VCs are there, and don't seem to be willing to move away. Hell, YC requires you to be there, at least during your time with them…

> And the concentration of tech talent means that it's always easy to find a new job, or even to start your own company. I've never been there, but I see this echoed a lot. Is it actually true? I'm interested in both, but I'm wary of the exaggeration that may be "it's easy".

Starting a company is easy. Making that company succeed is difficult. Finding a job is easy. Being happy in that job long-term is difficult.

So yes -- the statements are true. But not the slightest bit profound.

Re: A CEO Who Pays Employees to De-Locate from the Bay

#86

Post by mychael »

Pros/Cons of living in the Bay Area for most tech workers:

Pros

- Proudly displaying "San Francisco" in your Twitter bio.

- An abundance of career opportunities.

Cons

- Making six figures, but still living with roommates.

- Commuting to work in awful public transportation.

- Becoming desensitized to poverty and fecal matter on the streets.

- Feeling unwelcome by locals.

- Not being able to afford to live in a cool part of town.

- For straight men: Unfavorable male/female ratios at bars & nightlife.

- Monoculture.

Re: A CEO Who Pays Employees to De-Locate from the Bay

#87

Post by uiri »

WalterSear wrote: post #62
lostcolony wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's silly. Find a job elsewhere willing to pay them to relocate again.

And interview, how? And find it, how? Who will recommend them? You're asking why they don't just eat cake. These things aren't impossible, just so much harder that my friends (One in Idaho, one in Kansas) haven't been able to manage it, and not for lack of trying. It has been hard to watch them floundering and begging for help I don't have to give.

I don't mean to minimize your friends' difficulties, but these are solvable problems. I am also not the person to whom you are replying.

Don't include a mailing address on the resume. If you can past the resume screen, the company may be more amenable to a non-local candidate.

Most of Idaho is fairly close to Portland, OR and Seattle, WA. Paying for non-local candidate's flights, meals, and hotels is fairly standard. Kansas is a bit more difficult obviously since it is farther.

Did they lose their whole network when they moved away from the Bay Area? Or did they never live/work in the Bay Area in the first place? It is still possible to leverage one's extended network for opportunities.

Re: A CEO Who Pays Employees to De-Locate from the Bay

#88

Post by aphextron »

alexbanks wrote: post #13
s73ver_ wrote: post #11

Ok, so I "delocate". Do I then have to take a pay cut because I'm now somewhere else? Spreading the tech sector out around the country even more is great, and things like this can be a step in the right direction. But a big part of why the Bay Area is what it is has to do with funding. Most VCs are there, and don't seem to be willing to move away. Hell, YC requires you to be there, at least during your time with them…

> And the concentration of tech talent means that it's always easy to find a new job, or even to start your own company. I've never been there, but I see this echoed a lot. Is it actually true? I'm interested in both, but I'm wary of the exaggeration that may be "it's easy".

>but I'm wary of the exaggeration that may be "it's easy".

It really is. It's why I cant bring myself to leave this place even with all it's warts. Knowing that you can just screw off and do whatever you want for a year then have a dozen interviews lined up for six figure jobs with nothing more than a few emails is really empowering, actually. I can't imagine the anxiety of living somewhere else and being dependent on a single good job no matter what the relocation bonus is.

Re: A CEO Who Pays Employees to De-Locate from the Bay

#89

Post by sidlls »

mychael wrote: post #86

Pros/Cons of living in the Bay Area for most tech workers: Pros - Proudly displaying "San Francisco" in your Twitter bio. - An abundance of career opportunities. Cons - Making six figures, but still living with roommates. - Commuting to work in awful public transportation. - Becoming desensitized to poverty and fecal matter on the streets. - Feeling unwelcome by locals. - Not being able to afford to live in a cool pa…

You forgot at least two pros:

- Large salaries lead to higher savings rates

- Opportunities are just not comparable almost anywhere less expensive: there are tens of thousands of jobs from hundreds of employers here in the Bay Area for technology that pays well, compared with hundreds or maybe a few thousand jobs for maybe a dozen or few tens of employers

Also the "monoculture" dig applies to tech specifically: in terms of actual cultural diversity very few places are as interesting.

Re: A CEO Who Pays Employees to De-Locate from the Bay

#90

Post by ryandrake »

WalterSear wrote: post #62
lostcolony wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's silly. Find a job elsewhere willing to pay them to relocate again.

And interview, how? And find it, how? Who will recommend them? You're asking why they don't just eat cake. These things aren't impossible, just so much harder that my friends (One in Idaho, one in Kansas) haven't been able to manage it, and not for lack of trying. It has been hard to watch them floundering and begging for help I don't have to give.

Yea, that's why I live in the Bay Area. Not because I'm so in love with it but because if I move to Flyover, Arkansas, and end up losing/hating the job, where the hell am I going to go? That's right--moving again!
Post reply on HN