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

Zuckerberg says employees moving out of Silicon Valley may face pay cuts

cnbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 233 posts

Re: Zuckerberg says employees moving out of Silicon Valley may face pay cuts

#141

Post by 121789 »

mech422 wrote: post #104
121789 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's actually the opposite and I'd be wary of moving remote full time quickly at the moment. The face time with your boss while the rest of the team is remote would be hugely beneficial to your career.

Again, as I stated above...I've had the totally opposite experience. I've been promoted and survived layoffs multiple times while working 100% remote.

I understand and certainly see where that could be the case, especially for steady-state companies. All I'm saying here is that in the context of the current situation, where you have companies transitioning from non-remote to remote, it's likely in your best interest to wait a bit while the company has to deal with how to evaluate/train/communicate with a mostly remote workforce. In the worst case you have to deal with the office for another year or so with no change. In the best case, you are better positioned for a promotion/raise. Either way, you will learn how others are managing remote work throughout the year.

I'm on the long-term-remote path, but I want to see how this plays the rest of the year before making the jump.

Re: Zuckerberg says employees moving out of Silicon Valley may face pay cuts

#142

Post by mttddd »

volkk wrote: post #79
librish wrote: post #58

This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone who knows the general compensation strategy for all the major tech companies. They don't pay based either on value added or cost of living (which is why compensation is higher in the Bay Area compared to London). They pay based on market rate where the target is something like 95th-percentile based on market surveys they do. Presumably this hits some sweet spot in acceptanc…

> If you remove B you've massively increased the available talent pool. i'm not convinced this is the case. maybe by a bit...but massively? if you look at all of the places that all of the top paying FAANG companies are located--lets keep it within the US for simplicity's sake--you've got basically all of the major cities with the top talent. I'm not really picturing THAT many brilliant developers that fall under the…

I suspect you are right and most of the top talent is in major cities but even then most faang jobs are in the bay area. Anecdotally (and with all the caveats that go with that) I wanted to work for a faang but turned them down several times until an opportunity came up in DC. I have other friends in cities like NYC and Chicago in the same boat. They dont want to leave their current city and even if there is a faang presence it may be small (chicago) or their area of focus doesnt match with the teams in their local faang office (nyc)

Re: Zuckerberg says employees moving out of Silicon Valley may face pay cuts

#143

Post by pyuser583 »

Vysero wrote: post #61
Hamuko wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The $150k is not what your work is directly valued at, but rather an agreement of what it'll take for you to drag your ass to San Francisco, which is objectively a bad place to live if you're a human that has to make budgets, and come to work at Facebook. Also yes, if Facebook starts to hire remote workers, then your value will drop because they now have the access to a pool of workers who don't want to drag their as…

If the company was hemorrhaging money on employee salaries by being based in SF then why wouldn't they simply move the company somewhere else?

The bay area offers a guaranteed supply of qualified employees.

A tech firm in Boise might not be able to hire and Elixir developer at any price.

In SF, there will be employees as long as you have cash. Not so elsewhere.

Re: Zuckerberg says employees moving out of Silicon Valley may face pay cuts

#144

Post by waynesonfire »

kgin wrote: post #65
enitihas wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You've made a calculation: my value to the company is greater than $150K, and $150K is a price you're willing to pay to leverage that value. You are in for some surprises then. Companies don't pay you just in relation to the value you deliver. Most companies pay the least amount required to get the value you deliver. Now if you are competing against engineers who are willing to accept lower salary due to low CoL in…

This is the difference between being an owner and an employee. As an owner, your work is valued by the income it brings to the business. As an employee, your work is valued by the amount it cost to replace you with another qualified worker.

What's the insight here? Since customers pay the business (read the owners) the least amount it costs them to replace the company with another qualified business.

Re: Zuckerberg says employees moving out of Silicon Valley may face pay cuts

#145

Post by Vysero »

bcyn wrote: post #109
Vysero wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You mean to tell me that companies in the Bay Area never pull employees from schools outside of the Bay Area? I get the feeling there is a much more valuable reason for being based in the Bay Area than that.

Of course, it's not so cut and dry. It's sort of cyclical IMO: - There are already a ton of existing technology companies in the Bay Area, and also a ton of employees. - Students from schools around the country who are interested in tech might plan to move to the Bay Area due to the number of companies there. - If your company doesn't hire in the Bay Area, it may miss out on the chance to hire the employees in the gr…

So no tax or media related incentives to being in the Bay Area? You don't think it's worth more to Google to say: "Our headquarters are in SF" rather than: "Our headquarters are in podunk MT"?

I wouldn't be surprised to find out that 90% of the reason FANG companies operate in large metropolitan areas has almost nothing to do with employees and everything to do with global image.

Re: Zuckerberg says employees moving out of Silicon Valley may face pay cuts

#146

Post by zuhayeer »

An interesting thing about Facebook comp thus far has been that their pay bands for engineering were the same across the United States assuming wherever they had an office (unlike other large companies like Microsoft and Amazon). For reference check out https://www.levels.fyi/company/Facebook/salaries/Software-En.... Pay cuts would come as a pretty hefty change to those who have already moved or relocated.

At the same time, this is now an employers market. With remote work taking stride, pay cuts feel inevitable – why would companies pay top dollar for talent they have broader access to and who are willing to accept less. We'll have to wait and see how new offers start looking come August.

Re: Zuckerberg says employees moving out of Silicon Valley may face pay cuts

#148

Post by valuearb »

Jemaclus wrote: post #2

This is one of the things that's always bothered me. Let's say you hire me for your company in San Francisco and pay me $150K. You've made a calculation: my value to the company is greater than $150K, and $150K is a price you're willing to pay to leverage that value. In other words, the company will (eventually) make more than $150K per year off my contributions to the company. But now if I decide to move to Tulsa, O…

They can’t pay you less than your worth as a remote engineer. I’ve contemplated moving back to the valley but keep getting offered nearly as much money to work remotely from Arizona. If Facebook wanted me to work for less the answer is .. no.

On the other hand if I worked for Facebook I would strongly consider taking a payout if it meant I didn’t have to work in their open floor plan from hell environment.

Re: Zuckerberg says employees moving out of Silicon Valley may face pay cuts

#149

Post by mech422 »

121789 wrote: post #141
mech422 wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Again, as I stated above...I've had the totally opposite experience. I've been promoted and survived layoffs multiple times while working 100% remote.

I understand and certainly see where that could be the case, especially for steady-state companies. All I'm saying here is that in the context of the current situation, where you have companies transitioning from non-remote to remote, it's likely in your best interest to wait a bit while the company has to deal with how to evaluate/train/communicate with a mostly remote workforce. In the worst case you have to deal w…

Nothing wrong with being cautious...

While you're waiting, you might start planning _how_ you will work from home. A good home setup can make all the difference, and can involve expenses like good office chairs, desk, computer, upgraded internet service, etc.

Might be a good time to look around the house what you need, where you're gonna put it, etc.

Re: Zuckerberg says employees moving out of Silicon Valley may face pay cuts

#150

Post by kgin »

waynesonfire wrote: post #144
kgin wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the difference between being an owner and an employee. As an owner, your work is valued by the income it brings to the business. As an employee, your work is valued by the amount it cost to replace you with another qualified worker.

What's the insight here? Since customers pay the business (read the owners) the least amount it costs them to replace the company with another qualified business.

If you do work as an owner, your work is valued by the market value of the result of your work.

If you do work as an employee, the only thing that matters is the market value of your labor, regardless of the result. It doesn't matter how much business value you add.

Post reply on HN