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

At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

301–310 of 335 posts

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#301

Post by MagnumOpus »

setr wrote: post #240
maxxxxx wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what you get when you have fixed quotas for firing people, e.g. bottom 10%. After a few rounds you have some very good people left and either you fire good people that are hard to replace or you hire people to fire them. I don't understand how the top guys don't see that dynamic.

That's only true if the population is static: if you fully replenish, and then discard the bottom 10%, on repeat, then your overall quality should be going up. If you only make new bad hires, the 90% good population will stay the same, and the newly hired 10% will be fired. If you make n good hires, such that that they're better than some peer in the previous 90% population, then the worst n peers will be shifted int…

Also assumes less than 10% voluntary high-quality leavers, which is a big weakness of the strategy. (Because it is likely true for almost all firms who cannot afford Netflix-level compensation.)

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#302

Post by dunpeal »

notyourday wrote: post #299
dunpeal wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> to the management you are a very expensive line item which needs to be minimized. "Expensive" is relative, though. The top places are growing and in constant need of great new employees. Firing an engineer making $250k just to hire a replacement making the same amount is actually highly expensive and wasteful - firing and recruiting can easily cost as much an annual salary. Recruiting is really expensive. > Google…

Stories about Uber's toxicity started popping up when it became unclear that all of those working for it would become multi-millionaires next two years. Stories of Zenefits ickiness started popping up when it became unclear that those working for it would become multi-millionaries in next few years. Stories of Netflix culture toxicity started popping up when it became no longer clear that Netflix will continue to eat…

Oh, yeah, I totally agree with that.

People tend to work hard and accept a lot of crap as long as they are making a lot of money, or hoping to.

Once those prospect dim, hell does tend to break loose. People suddenly lose patience with bad policies, with politics, with people they only barely tolerated before, with high levels of stress at work...

The same people who soldiered on like good boyscouts when the money was pouring in, will become fed up and recalcitrant once they run out of financial reasons to take shit from management.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#303

Post by jaster »

jaster wrote: post #217
Hasknewbie wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I assume the GP, like me, is not American: in most cultures the very notion of made-up taboo words (i.e. words that are forbidden regardless of what context/sentence they're used in) is considered a decadent aberration. Whether you call it "taboo word" or "reclaimed slur" makes no difference.

Sorry I am not American, but in my (European) culture there are some taboo words that are definitely not okay. The equivalent of the American "N-word" being one of those. This is considered to be normal, and people that publicly use this kind of words are generally viewed with contempt. And it could be a reason to get fired from your job. I believe this to be common across Western European countries (even with the cu…

Damn, my knee-jerk reaction got the best of me and I missed the full context of that what discussed and replied without nuance.

Since I cannot edit anymore, let me correct it here:

In the country where I work, using such words in a professional context, even for illustrative purpose such as described in the article, would be rather uncommon, would definitely feels weird and at least raise a few eyebrows.

But I have to say I don't think it would usually result in immediate outrage and for the speaker to be fired (I can still see this happening, but it would definitely be the odd occurrence). It would probably be considered more of a well-intended-but-slightly-misguided attempt.

So we definitely have such taboo words outside the US, but maybe they are not as strong a taboo here...

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#305

Post by barrow-rider »

dunpeal wrote: post #213
throwaway359087 wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just cash. Plus another 5% in free options. It’s a ton of money. No bonus, no RSUs or stock, just straight cash salary. And I didn’t write books on the language I used or anything, in my opinion I’m just a regular developer.

Hate to break it to you, but $360k total comp for a senior engineer (the only type Netflix hire) is at best on par with FAANG.

It may be on par, but that's total comp. My understanding is that the 'Flix doesn't do bennies, matching, vesting over time, etc., they just throw straight cash at you.

Reduces their overhead -- no plan administrators, etc. -- and no abstractions or surprise fine print in the 401k matching or classes of stock or whatever.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#306

Post by jhall1468 »

chrisweekly wrote: post #169
jhall1468 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want cash it is. Netflix salaries are generally $350k+. They only hire seniors, but that can mean 4-5 years of experience. Not even Google pays that kind of comp in salary.

"not even Google pays that kind of comp in salary" -- maybe not a deliberate equovocation, but total comp ("salary" plus stock) at google is definitely at or above that range.

I pretty explicitly said if cash is your goal (which has an impact outside of just take-home [401k]). And the 350k is at the low end (probably 3-4 years experience). $400k is typical. Google is pretty close at the Senior level to Netflix, but the all-cash comp is valuable to some people.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#307

Post by jhall1468 »

dunpeal wrote: post #182
chrisweekly wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"not even Google pays that kind of comp in salary" -- maybe not a deliberate equovocation, but total comp ("salary" plus stock) at google is definitely at or above that range.

Netflix apologists in this thread love to use words like "salary" and "cash", then compare against the base salary of other FAANGs. Effectively what they're doing is comparing total comp at Netflix with base salary at other FAANGs, which is very misleading.

First, I'm not a Netflix apologist, second, I explicitly said that if cash is important and third, I never compared it with the base salary of any other company. So what exactly was the point of this post?

You can't compare base salaries, you can compare the benefits of all cash vs stock awards (401k, higher monthly income, no market emphasis on income). That was my entire point, so this diatribe about Netflix apologists has no business in this thread.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#308

Post by jhall1468 »

dunpeal wrote: post #216
Avshalom wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know shit about Netflix vs Googles comp but there is a lot to be said for cash: there's no vesting period ; it's dependable, there's no weird dips because an investing firm got spooked; it's liquid, you can spend it at the bar tonight, right now; taxes are straight forward. That said -- I mean this with all sincerity -- it does my commie heart good to see that absolutely no in this thread is buying Netflix's…

> there's no vesting period ; it's dependable, there's no weird dips because an investing firm got spooked; it's liquid, you can spend it at the bar tonight, right now; taxes are straight forward. For the most part, these are all benefits of RSUs at a company like Facebook or Google. They're totally liquid. They "vest", but in short order. This isn't startup equity. It's very much real money.

They are "totally liquid" after 6 months which isn't totally liquid. And those 6 months are subject to the stock market so they inherently carry more risk than base (and higher potential rewards).

You seem rather... aggressive with how much you want to downplay the differences and your entire contribution to this thread has been attacking "Netflix apologists" and defending any argument for cash-based salaries. It's fine if you don't like their culture/comp structure, but you sure seem to have an agenda here.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#309

Post by jiveturkey »

jlawson wrote: post #282
jiveturkey wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

only incidentally. whereas it is literally HR’s job.

Come on, be fair. There are tons of administrative tasks that HR takes care of that have nothing to do with liability.

sure. those are the incidental parts of their job.

Re: At Netflix, Radical Transparency and Blunt Firings Unsettle the Ranks

#310

Post by flashgordon »

agret wrote: post #220
flashgordon wrote: post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can share (without giving away names) what strategies you used to suss this out? One thing I am very terrible at is actually sussing out unhealthy behaviour and cultures in an interview setting and it would be great to see how you guage both the answers and the cues.

> Can share (without giving away names) what strategies you used to suss this out? > I had the extraordinary opportunity to talk to the manager for the role, their manager, and two people who had previously been in the role (Netflix wasn't aware that I knew those people). He knew people that worked there already.

Ah interesting. Yeah this is definitely the biggest signal. Networking and relationship building is absolutely critical in any job hunt and this is a hugely overlooked insight!
Post reply on HN