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

191–200 of 232 posts

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

#191

Post by ryanwaggoner »

bcantrill wrote: post #65
dsfyu404ed wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a fire-hose of Californians directed at CO. In a decade or two they will have recreated the place they left.

You're either new to Colorado or ignorant of your (adopted?) state's history: this phenomenon is as old as Colorado itself, dating back to the Colorado Gold Rush of 1859. You're welcome to complain about the people who followed you, of course (a phenomenon that's also as old as Colorado), but please do not pretend that you have an exclusive concession on a state that its inhabitants have been redefining since before…

It's not just CO. It's literally every growing area, ever.

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

#192

Post by ryanwaggoner »

dgfgfdagasdfgfa wrote: post #113
dbcurtis wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's already happened. Colorado politics has already moved sufficiently from libertarian to leftist that I would no longer consider moving there.

It depends entirely on where in the state you are—the liberal places are mostly Denver, Fort Collins, and Boulder. Colorado springs is one of the most conservative cities in America. In fact, I'd argue it's more libertarian than ever—hence the weed.

Sorry, but no. CS is uber conservative, but not remotely libertarian. They're fine with using the government to enforce morality, the antithesis of libertarian ideals. And the weed was definitely NOT driven by CS. The conservatives there think it's ruining their state.

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

#193

Post by chasb »

chrissnell wrote: post #143

As someone who works remotely and who posts remote-friendly openings for his team in the Who's Hiring HN thread, it's kind of amazing to me that more people aren't actively looking to get out. I live and work in a small midwestern town because my wife's military job has us here. If I was single, however, I would make the most of my remoteness and try working from a variety of towns. Here's some places that I would tr…

I lived in Denver for 2 years, and now Portland. Bend, SLC/Sandy, Jackson, Durango, Steamboat, the list goes on.

edit: I'm CEO at Aptible, where we recruit for remote. Personal freedom is a nice perk.

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

#194

Post by dgfgfdagasdfgfa »

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #192
dgfgfdagasdfgfa wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends entirely on where in the state you are—the liberal places are mostly Denver, Fort Collins, and Boulder. Colorado springs is one of the most conservative cities in America. In fact, I'd argue it's more libertarian than ever—hence the weed.

Sorry, but no. CS is uber conservative, but not remotely libertarian. They're fine with using the government to enforce morality, the antithesis of libertarian ideals. And the weed was definitely NOT driven by CS. The conservatives there think it's ruining their state.

Sorry, the antecedent of "it" was "colorado" there, not colorado springs.

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

#196

Post by WalterSear »

andrewflnr wrote: post #171
WalterSear wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If the satellite offices are in Seattle, and the main offices are in the bay area, where are most of the jobs?

Now you're just moving the goalposts. You don't need most of the jobs to have enough .

Fair enough.

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

#197

Post by stale2002 »

bsder wrote: post #170
rifung wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes it is separate. At Amazon the signing bonus you owe if you leave within one year but the relocation bonus you owe if you leave within two; both are prorated

> At Amazon the signing bonus you owe if you leave within one year but the relocation bonus you owe if you leave within two; both are prorated Um, wow. Yet another reason not to work at Amazon. How does Amazon still get employees when they just seem to pile these kinds of irritating, anti-employee behaviors up one after another?

The bonuses are quite high, is the reason.

Amazon pays competitive salaries.

They are probably a bit below Google or Facebook salaries, but compared to an average SF startup, they pay literally 50-100% more. (the offer I just got from them was 80% more than my SF startup salary).

Some of their behavior is indeed "annoying" ie they have a weird stock options vesting schedule, but if you actually do the math, and think with your head, you see that their total compensation is quite competitive.

The moral of the story is, if you care about compensation, don't work for startups. Even the "less competitive" companies like Amazon, with "scummy" behavior like claw backs, are still miles ahead of the average startup, in terms of compensation.

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

#198

Post by winslow »

chrissnell wrote: post #143

As someone who works remotely and who posts remote-friendly openings for his team in the Who's Hiring HN thread, it's kind of amazing to me that more people aren't actively looking to get out. I live and work in a small midwestern town because my wife's military job has us here. If I was single, however, I would make the most of my remoteness and try working from a variety of towns. Here's some places that I would tr…

Do you have a job board with these postings? I'd be quite interested in researching something like that. Recently was trying to do that with the company I worked for and they were a little timid to do it I also had another offer I wanted them to match so I think the combo made them timid to counter.

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

#199

Post by mrep »

sidlls wrote: post #89
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 te…

Seattle is pretty close on salary/jobs and cost of living is much lower/no state income tax.

Although there are some people that seem to only find enjoyment bitching about the weather which I find hilarious coming from the midwest where the temperature can swing 60 degrees in a day, summers are so hot that you sweat sitting down, and winters are so cold that you only see bundles of clothing walking around. I'll take mild temperatures, mountains, lakes/oceans, and a little bit of overcast over wild temperature swings, flat land, no water, and a bit more sun anyday.

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

#200

Post by WalterSear »

uiri wrote: post #87
WalterSear wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.…

It's complicated. I wrote a paragraph or so about it and deleted it, thinking the reasons were either obvious or too specific to their situations. Over five years, I guess they've lost what network they have from when they lived here - I definitely hear and see them less and less, and for the last few years it's really just been about seeing if I have any leads for them :|

I don't think they are being dinged explicitly for their location, but they aren't getting the attention that I do. There are reasons enough for that, that don't involve prejudiced recruiters, though I do think they are being judged as second tier due to their current employment, and their employers location. Their employers are definitely down market. Moreover, their skillset has certainly atrophied over they left. So much so that I can no longer send jobs their way - there isn't a fit. Things are starting to look a little Willie Loman-esque.

Is all of this because they moved out of the valley? They would probably have similar struggles here, but they would also have recruiters banging down their door.

Post reply on HN