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

TSMC’s Arizona Culture Clash

eetimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 303 posts

Re: TSMC’s Arizona Culture Clash

#171

Post by MR4D »

DavidPeiffer wrote: post #154
bob1029 wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many moons ago I used to work inside a samsung fab. At no point was I ever feeling a sense of outrage regarding having a literal 80s-style pager strapped to my body 24/7/365. A big part of why this didnt bother me was the scale/impact of what I was doing - I was responsible for the primary business interface used across the entire factory floor. Once you see a modern fab with your own eyes, it will change you in a de…

>Once you see a modern fab with your own eyes, it will change you in a deep way. I felt a sense of compassion for this incredibly complex and valuable thing that humanity is just barely able to scrape together. Nothing you see in media can prepare you for the real thing. I interned at Micron as an industrial engineer looking at capacity and equipment purchases. I can very much relate to that. The whole summer was my…

> Each additional 9 on yield is really expensive to add.

That’s a really good point. It’s crazy to think that as we get smaller processes that not adding additional 9’s gets you relegated out of the leading edge, and possibly out of relevancy.

Black magic indeed!

Re: TSMC’s Arizona Culture Clash

#172

Post by bravo22 »

avs733 wrote: post #146
neonihil wrote: post #137

It’s like: People: We want stuff cheaply, immediately and in immense volume! Production: Moves to Asia People: We want jobs! Production: Opens a new factory in the USA People: We don’t want to work that much! Production: increases pay, which increases product cost People: this is too expensive. Can we buy from overseas cheaply instead? Production: Closes USA factory, moves back to Asia. People: we want jobs…

or... "we want reasonable jobs that allow us to have a life and do not functionally make us the property of a corporate entity that does not share sufficient amounts of the gains of our labor with us and labels requests to be treated with respect as unintelligible" States/those with power claiming things are 'unintelligible' when in fact they just don't like them or want to treat them as valid is a classic form of co…

The power they have over the "corporate" entity is a function of what they have to offer relative to everyone else. A few decades ago when US corps made everything and the rest of the world bought them they could demand high paying union jobs and get them. The cost of this was subsidized by buyers from around the world and cheap input material and energy corps could get due to US's geopolitical position.

That ship has sailed.

Now they have to be more in line with the rest of the world.

What the "corporation" can offer and survive or stay ahead of the pack is a function of choices available to it. Which are different now than decades ago.

This myth that Americans can demand better things that the rest of the world can't needs to die. If they want to work less, great! They can. They need to become more efficient and produce more goods with less labor. Otherwise people in other countries will not want to trade with them. That is reflected to the American worker through the set of jobs and work conditions available to them.

Re: TSMC’s Arizona Culture Clash

#173

Post by davidjytang »

PragmaticPulp wrote: post #130
ascar wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Different positions may have different requirements, so work hours vary, according to the principal engineer. “An equipment engineer might start work at 8 o’clock in the morning and leave around 9 o’clock at night, but is it normal? This may happen two or three days a week. On a production line, the equipment must be maintained.” > “If you are a process engineer, it will be more stable. Maybe you can start work at…

> As an European these hours would be completely unacceptable to me unless it's 3 days on 4 days off, which it doesn't seem to be. Americans aren’t interested in 13 hour shifts, either, unless the pay is extraordinarily high. I agree: Something is missing from this article. If they’re running 3-on, 4-off schedules with these hours, that’s one thing. But if they’re asking 13-hour days and 5-day weeks then it’s an open…

Last year in Taiwan, their fresh-out-of-college employees were paid 13-month salary worth of year end bonus.

Some may consider it worthwhile in their stage of life.

Correction: 14-month worth plus additional performance bonus.

Re: TSMC’s Arizona Culture Clash

#174

Post by avs733 »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #163
avs733 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

exactly...compliant is a two way street.

Compliance assumes there is an underlying agreement or need to comply. Characterizing TSMC not being able to find sufficient people to accept their working conditions/pay as "US workers not being compliant" is a meaningless use of the word compliant in this context.

I'm talking about the article, I have little to no insight on TSMC beyond this article which says things I find to be highly suspect.

there is an underlying agreement...just because it isn't directly stated doesn't make them not real. Social contracts arise from cultural norms and very much are a thing.

Re: TSMC’s Arizona Culture Clash

#175

Post by phkahler »

neonihil wrote: post #137

It’s like: People: We want stuff cheaply, immediately and in immense volume! Production: Moves to Asia People: We want jobs! Production: Opens a new factory in the USA People: We don’t want to work that much! Production: increases pay, which increases product cost People: this is too expensive. Can we buy from overseas cheaply instead? Production: Closes USA factory, moves back to Asia. People: we want jobs…

>> It’s like:

That's cute, but not what actually happened. It started with:

Company: We want more profit

Production: Moved to Asia

Other Companies: We can't compete any more

Other Production: Moved to Asia

Companies: Oh crap, we need production back in the US (for various reasons)

Production: Oh shit that's right, we moved because it cost less with no labor or environmental protections and we could work the shit out of people.

Companies: Let's call it a "Culture Clash".

Re: TSMC’s Arizona Culture Clash

#176

Post by long_time_gone »

HPsquared wrote: post #158
neonihil wrote: post #137

It’s like: People: We want stuff cheaply, immediately and in immense volume! Production: Moves to Asia People: We want jobs! Production: Opens a new factory in the USA People: We don’t want to work that much! Production: increases pay, which increases product cost People: this is too expensive. Can we buy from overseas cheaply instead? Production: Closes USA factory, moves back to Asia. People: we want jobs…

People want to have their cake and eat it too.

Seems like companies want that as well. Fortunately for them, they actually get it (if their stock price is any indication).

Re: TSMC’s Arizona Culture Clash

#177

Post by long_time_gone »

neonihil wrote: post #137

It’s like: People: We want stuff cheaply, immediately and in immense volume! Production: Moves to Asia People: We want jobs! Production: Opens a new factory in the USA People: We don’t want to work that much! Production: increases pay, which increases product cost People: this is too expensive. Can we buy from overseas cheaply instead? Production: Closes USA factory, moves back to Asia. People: we want jobs…

Note that in this telling of the story "People" are the antagonist and the $600B company is the protagonist.

Re: TSMC’s Arizona Culture Clash

#178

Post by CivBase »

Veen wrote: post #148
neonihil wrote: post #137

It’s like: People: We want stuff cheaply, immediately and in immense volume! Production: Moves to Asia People: We want jobs! Production: Opens a new factory in the USA People: We don’t want to work that much! Production: increases pay, which increases product cost People: this is too expensive. Can we buy from overseas cheaply instead? Production: Closes USA factory, moves back to Asia. People: we want jobs…

One factor you are missing in that analysis: TSMC is very profitable—about $5 billion per quarter. Better working conditions don't have to mean more expensive products; it could instead mean reduced profits. https://focustaiwan.tw/business/202110140010

Where do those profits go? Presumably TSMC doesn't just sit on it. Surely they either invest it back into their business to stay competitive or deal it out as compensation.

Re: TSMC’s Arizona Culture Clash

#179

Post by defterGoose »

CivBase wrote: post #178
Veen wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One factor you are missing in that analysis: TSMC is very profitable—about $5 billion per quarter. Better working conditions don't have to mean more expensive products; it could instead mean reduced profits. https://focustaiwan.tw/business/202110140010

Where do those profits go? Presumably TSMC doesn't just sit on it. Surely they either invest it back into their business to stay competitive or deal it out as compensation.

That's a very charitable view of capitalism-driven wealth concentration.

Re: TSMC’s Arizona Culture Clash

#180

Post by coldpie »

neltnerb wrote: post #138
ianai wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah agree. After reading more of the article I’m wondering if it’s more of a hit piece than anything else. Az has plenty of semi industry. TSMC may just want to back out. Edit-or maybe TSMC wants pretext for some eventual reason like backlash. Edit 2-or it could merely be an author looking for a story or a competitor looking to smear TSMC. People do have a way of seeming All around horrible until some missing criter…

I think they are just unrelated... I don't really see it as a hit piece, all sides here sound reasonable. It will be interesting to see what the end solution is. I think that the author would have shown a strong opinion on how to resolve it if it was a hit piece.

I agree. As usual, the headline overstates the article. The actual article (mostly sourced from anonymous online comments...) doesn't sound nearly as alarmist. Just a new business unit working out the kinks.
Post reply on HN