Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever • Hacker News Board

Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever

#741

Post by danielrpa » Wed, May 13, 2020, 3:19 AM UTC

nemothekid wrote: post #719

bachmeier wrote: post #697

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just want to point out that there's no rational basis for this argument unless the employee in SF is much more productive. To put it another way, do you currently see pay adjustments based on housing costs for employees living in SF? Have you ever heard of differences across employees simply because one of them has a more expensive house?

"Cost of Living" adjustments are a red herring, what they really are is really "competition density". There are plenty of tech companies paying great salaries in the bay because they have to, otherwise they would just go work for someone else. On the other hand, if you lived in Oklahoma you aren't going to say no to $LOCAL_OFFER+10k just because bay area salaries are $LOCAL_OFFER+90k. As long as this disparity exists…

FAANG doesn't determine salaries based on cost of living, but cost of labor, which maps to your concept of "competition density".

There is no rational reason for Google to pay bay area salaries for Indiana employees - will they really say no if Google offers 300K instead of the 500K they would get in the bay area? Sure, the person could reject it to make a statement, but most people would gladly take a salary that would buy them a small castle.

All FAANG needs to do is to beat local salaries by a significant margin to get well qualified employees - that would still make these people WAY cheaper than bay area employees.

Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever

#742

Post by Cookingboy » Wed, May 13, 2020, 3:21 AM UTC

echelon wrote: post #711

alex_young wrote: post #707

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The value of the valley has always been the hallway chat. You can't easily replicate that with a zoom culture.

> The value of the valley has always been the hallway chat. Is it, really? I always hear and read this, but I see very few anecdotes. In thinking through my own interactions, I'm not sure anything that happened in the hallway, break room, or at lunch table actually contributed much more to the bottom line than conversations I've had over VC and Slack.

Depends on you role and where you are in the ladder.

In my experiences, all the big decisions are already made before scheduled meetings take place. Spontaneous one on ones, hall way chats, coffee walks, etc are where those discussions are made, and very often meetings are just an official "let's get everyone on the same page for the record" exercise.

Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever

#743

Post by Thorrez » Wed, May 13, 2020, 3:25 AM UTC

ElysianEagle wrote: post #723

sizzle wrote: post #710

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's stopping someone from moving to SF for higher comp on hiring, then getting a P.O. box or friend's mailing address in SF and moving back to work from lower cost area after some time? Is your employer really going to decrease your salary after the fact? Can you file taxes in your lower cost of living state after you lock in your high SF comp package and never notify your employer but still pay your taxes in the…

I’m guessing you’re being downvoted by those who think your comment is encouraging unethical behavior. While I certainly don’t think it’s ethical to do so, I did wonder the same thing - would companies start putting measures in place to verify you’re working from the same general area as your initially provided address? Eg, sifting through VPN log files to geo locate IP addresses etc.

Note that that comment is identical to a different one posted by that user: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23162716

Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever

#744

Post by acituan » Wed, May 13, 2020, 3:30 AM UTC

product50 wrote: post #722

acituan wrote: post #664

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are overestimating the size of the eligible labor supply increase. Just for Google, for 2017-2019 the number of H1B workers sponsored was 22k. For the same period the increase in number of full time employees was 40k (couldn’t find the figure for US only but fair to assume majority is US-based). So more than half of the new employers are supplied internationally. Does the geo-unlocked US supply pose a sub…

Google files 6.5k H1-B applications per yr which includes transfers ( https://www.myvisajobs.com/Reports/2019-H1B-Visa-Sponsor.asp... ). To assume all of this goes to new employees is misleading since Google has attrition too. So assuming 10% attrition, Google needs to fill in that 10% and add more employees. Your argument conveniently assumes that H1s are only going to net new employees vs. those that fill the gap t…

> Your argument conveniently assumes that H1s are only going to net new employees vs. those that fill the gap too.

I also conveniently assumed that global 40k headcount increase was sufficiently representative of the US headcount increase, even though it inflates the denominator. It's the nature of back-of-the-envelope calculations to be convenient.

Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever

#745

Post by arbitrary_name » Wed, May 13, 2020, 3:44 AM UTC

dntbnmpls wrote: post #627

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe, but it would also be good if more (tech) companies offered a decent working environment. That's coming from personal experience btw, where most jobs / assignments I've had, it was usually open plan, flexible seat arrangements. I have a new job now where I have a fixed desk with a set of drawers. It's a breath of fresh air and honestly it sounds so stupid and trivial. But employers don't have their employees' b…

> My cynical take on this move is that the company doesn't have to pay as much for office space + worker transport anymore. Don't forget it removes the work/home barrier. Now you are at work 24/7 and on call at all hours. Work and productivity has consumed most of modern life. The last bastion of freedom from work/productivity was the home. Now people are celebrating the loss of that precious personal space. Strange.

Hmmm. I work a little less than before due to fewer distractions. I shut my laptop and don't keep any work apps on my phone. Take a stand and hold it.

Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever

#746

Post by senderista » Wed, May 13, 2020, 3:45 AM UTC

kbenson wrote: post #670

hintymad wrote: post #665

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Personally I would not move away from west coast. Mediterranean weather is gift from god. Plus it's so close to many good ski resorts. Being able to enjoy outdoors throughout the year and being able to go out to ski every week is priceless.

There's a lot of area on the west coast a couple hours from the major metro areas that's much more affordable. I was born, raised, and have worked all my life in Sonoma county an hour north of SF, and even that is expensive. If I could move another hour away for significantly reduced cost of living while still having the security I enjoy now (where I know likely at worst I have to deal with a commute to SF for some o…

I live about an hour from Seattle, and while our rural area is beautiful and much cheaper than the city, it's as red as Eastern WA around here.

Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever

#747

Post by arbitrary_name » Wed, May 13, 2020, 3:46 AM UTC

ram_rar wrote: post #172

dddbbb wrote: post #137

I work at a large tech company on a young team (average age is late twenties). In my experience many don't view working from home regularly as a benefit. I understand that must change drastically when you're middle aged, have a family to live around and a spacious house in the suburbs. But most younger people want to live in the middle of the city (i.e. small, often shared apartments but a short commute) and have no…

I perfectly fit the profile you described. I live in SF in a small apt. I can easily afford a much bigger place for the same amount. But working with collegues @ office is a soo much fun. if the company gets fully remote, its really hard to connect with coworkers and hangout.

I used to rock climb around lunch time, do yoga at 3 and go for a cycle with some people in my neighborhood during my last remote setting. Was more social than any office setting.

Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever

#748

Post by laurencerowe » Wed, May 13, 2020, 3:52 AM UTC

Tiktaalik wrote: post #54

chrisseaton wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand why? Salaries are high because you're competing for the same small group of talented people. They aren't high due to the location.

I'm pretty sure the salaries are heavily dependent on location related cost of living requirements. Aren't salaries different in different locations? (ie. same company with offices in Vancouver Canada vs Seattle vs SF?) I've heard they are... If pay was purely about talent, everyone would be paid the same.

Cost of living looks higher in Vancouver than Seattle while salaries look higher in Seattle that Vancouver...

High pay requires a competitive job market (employer can't find anyone else to do it to the same standard for less) in a profit making industry (it's worth staying in a line of business even with higher wage costs.)

Honestly I'm quite surprised how little salaries at big tech companies vary by location within the same country. The bigger difference seems to be in opportunities for career advancement with more post-senior roles available at head offices.

Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever

#749

Post by rtkwe » Wed, May 13, 2020, 4:03 AM UTC

nhumrich wrote: post #663

daenz wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had a related thought: is it ethical to pay a person less based purely on where they live? I understand that there are different cost of living factors for different places, but that's on the employee's side and should be none of the employer's business. If they employer can pay $200k/yr for a remote employee, it shouldn't matter where they live, and so scaling that value seems discriminatory to me. Anyone have…

Just playing devils advocate: is it ethical to pay someone SF salary despite them living in a third world country where they are essentially richer than kings and can wreak havoc on the economy/culture if they themselves aren't ethical (paying off government, etc). Salary is not a number, its a "standard of living". But paying two engineers in two different zip codes the same number, you are technically paying the pe…

My main PoV for this is it doesn't particularly matter to the business where the employee is if they're working 100% remote, they're getting the same value out of the same employee regardless of where they happen to live. Trying to judge how much a salary is worth to the person just lets businesses justify getting similar value for lower cost when they're already coming out way ahead.

Re: Twitter Will Allow Employees to Work at Home Forever

#750

Post by dntbnmpls » Wed, May 13, 2020, 4:04 AM UTC

A lot of people seem to support this, but what if the headline was "Twitter Will Allow Employees to Live at Work Forever"?

Isn't living at work and working at home two sides of the same coin? Is the merging of work and home really something we should aspire to? One of the basis of a healthy work/life balance is the separation of work and home.

In an era of mass surveillance and privacy loss, the home is the last private space we have. Is it wise to let work invade that space? Just things to think about.