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

Google is saving $1B per year as a result of employees working from home

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 355 posts

Re: Google is saving $1B per year as a result of employees working from home

#341

Post by cbozeman »

bradlys wrote: post #126
cbozeman wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Google pays enough for people to do that. No they don't. Go look up house prices right around campus on Trulia. I would say it's shocking, but disgusting is a more apt feeling.

Senior eng makes $400k+ TC. You're rarely buying a house alone. Most eng at FAANG end up marrying others who are similar. Easy to see $600k+ TC. You can buy a home nearby. Sunnyvale has homes for $2m or less and you can afford it at $600K household. Very reasonable commute. If you want 3000+ sqft and 5-bath homes then yeah, you're out of luck. Hit executive level or startup riches for that one. To act like Google doe…

> Senior eng makes $400k+ TC.

Good thing Google only employs senior engineers... eyerollsmiley-x1000.gif

> The whole reason the area is so expensive is because FAANG pays so damn much to keep pulling in more talent.

No it isn't. That isn't the reason at all. The reason is a bunch of literal rent-seeking wealthy old people who fight new housing projects at every possible turn so they can sell their house for $2 million, or die and leave it to their kids, who will then sell it for $2 million.

> Most eng I meet at FAANG have no interest in ownership out of principal.

Press X to doubt.

Re: Google is saving $1B per year as a result of employees working from home

#342

Post by jaegerpicker »

brianwawok wrote: post #42
jaegerpicker wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can assure you that a much larger cohort of employees are vastly more effective. No commute alone is a MASSIVE gain.

Live in an area with a better commute. Mine is 8 minutes.

I'll live where ever I want to thanks. I have ZERO desire to life close to anything and I can you do a great job at home. If you can't that's on you not me.

Re: Google is saving $1B per year as a result of employees working from home

#343

Post by comp_throw7 »

jjav wrote: post #254
txtx wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Senior engineers at Google/Facebook (L5) make at minimum $300K, and with stock appreciation / refreshers $500K+ is not uncommon. Netflix is also well known for paying essentially all of their engineers at least $400K. Principal engineers (L8) at Google/Facebook make around $1M a year, and $1.5-2M is not unheard of.

I have a lot of difficulty believing any of these numbers. Source: spouse is management level at G of FAANG. Those numbers don't match up with reality in general. For a few edge cases, sure. Not for most people.

As mentioned in several other places on this thread, you can check out levels.fyi (https://www.levels.fyi/company/Google/salaries/Software-Engi...) to see... nearly 500 reported TCs for Senior SWEs at Google. Median is indeed ~350k/yr. 320-380k seems to be the standard "initial offer" range for HCOL areas. These numbers don't include stock growth, stacked refreshers, or the new front-loaded 40/28/20/12 vesting schedule.

I also have multiple friends that work at Google, and can confirm that their numbers fall squarely into the bands described on levels.fyi. (In fact, they're often taking home considerably more, due to the aforementioned stock growth and stacked refreshers.)

Several possibilities:

1) your spouse is not in the engineering management track and isn't familiar with the payscale

2) your spouse works in an office with a lower payscale due to regional considerations (though this wouldn't make the numbers look realistic even in "LCOL" US offices, so it'd need to be international)

3) there's some misunderstanding about levels or something else. That Principal Engineers (L8 - three levels above Senior) make 900k-1M out of the gate isn't really disputed; they tend to make a bit more at Facebook, even.

Re: Google is saving $1B per year as a result of employees working from home

#344

Post by comp_throw7 »

comp_throw7 wrote: post #343
jjav wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a lot of difficulty believing any of these numbers. Source: spouse is management level at G of FAANG. Those numbers don't match up with reality in general. For a few edge cases, sure. Not for most people.

As mentioned in several other places on this thread, you can check out levels.fyi ( https://www.levels.fyi/company/Google/salaries/Software-Engi... ) to see... nearly 500 reported TCs for Senior SWEs at Google. Median is indeed ~350k/yr. 320-380k seems to be the standard "initial offer" range for HCOL areas. These numbers don't include stock growth, stacked refreshers, or the new front-loaded 40/28/20/12 vesting sche…

Also, Google has an internal spreadsheet where employees document their own compensation, which, according to the same friends, corresponds pretty well to the levels.fyi numbers.

Re: Google is saving $1B per year as a result of employees working from home

#345

Post by katbyte »

bootlooped wrote: post #136
katbyte wrote: post #128

You know what WFH is way WAY more for efficient and good for? A employees health, wellbeing and happiness! which imho is more important than profits or the company.

That's not a universal opinion. All of the people on my team would prefer to be in the office 2 or 3 days a week. Some people find it's positive for their mental health to see and interact with other people, in person, regularly.

Before the pandemic WFH means I saw my friends and family far far more often - work with them during the day, more time to hang out, travel with them. And even co workers we’d arrange to work at a cafe or park. I socialized far more then at any office

Re: Google is saving $1B per year as a result of employees working from home

#346

Post by ryandrake »

PoignardAzur wrote: post #255
Google234 wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you live 2 hours away?

Property prices, I assume?

Obviously! I would love to live closer to work, if I could afford it. I can maybe afford a tent in Fremont and a shoebox in Palo Alto. Nothing in the South Bay or Peninsula in my price range screams "quality of life".

Re: Google is saving $1B per year as a result of employees working from home

#347

Post by jp0d »

mcbain wrote: post #263
jp0d wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's just nonsense. Australia has had one of the harshest lockdown measures in the developed world and we're quite Corona free at the moment. We're living in our own little bubble. Everyone who could, had to work from home during the lockdown. Everyone else was supported by a salary equivalent payment from the govt. Now, people are back at work. But when it can be done from home, most people are still choosing to d…

I think it will be interesting to see how some of the companies in Australia with head offices in the US go over the next year. There are signs from the FANG (well “GA” here, the rest effectively don’t exist) will push for people back in offices. On the flip side Atlassian just came out and said the reverse. https://www.smh.com.au/business/small-business/four-times-a-...

yeah, there is some push by the city's business lobby groups to get people to offices as businesses that supported these offices are losing a lot. But it's upto the private companies to decide. Most employees like me have quite good home setups like standing desks, coffee machines etc and can do most of the things from home. It'd be interesting to see what approach other companies will take. I've heard stories about some of the American and Indian/Asian companies starting to ask their employees to get to office. It all depends on the work culture . I work at Xero and they've been quite cool with flexibility even before Covid.

Re: Google is saving $1B per year as a result of employees working from home

#348

Post by jp0d »

a2tech wrote: post #282
mcbain wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it will be interesting to see how some of the companies in Australia with head offices in the US go over the next year. There are signs from the FANG (well “GA” here, the rest effectively don’t exist) will push for people back in offices. On the flip side Atlassian just came out and said the reverse. https://www.smh.com.au/business/small-business/four-times-a-...

Microsoft has also said that they're envisioning a permanent work from home setup. Some people I know just gave up their apartment in Washington and moved to our small city in the midwest because even after MS adjusted his salary down he's coming out way ahead.

I don't see why MS would adjust his salary. He is still doing the exact same work. If anything he is paying the rent, electricity and internet bills that MS otherwise would pay for him! Am I missing something? I understand that living costs could be lower in his small city. But how is that MS's concern. He get's paid for his work/talent! It's not an attack on your statement. I'm genuinely curious.

Re: Google is saving $1B per year as a result of employees working from home

#349

Post by dang »

fidesomnes wrote: post #166
newusr429 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was the biggest advocate for WFH in the last year but recently I feel pretty down. Life feels so repetitive. Part of it is possibly lockdown, but a bigger part I think is that I have way more free time to think about things. All the shitty things about open office and commuting seemed to serve as a distraction that kept me more occupied. It's weird. I'm not saying WFH is bad, but there are definitely some effects t…

then go drown your tears in triple distilled vodka you big baby.

We've banned this account for breaking the site guidelines. Not cool.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Google is saving $1B per year as a result of employees working from home

#350

Post by wolverine876 »

Google could 'save' even more by firing all its employees and selling all its assets. Expenses are there for a reason; they are investments that earn a return. If you cut the expense, merely to 'save', you are ignorant of a fundamental of business. A similar argument is made about taxes: they are described as only expenses when the issue should be discussed as investments (i.e., 'is the return high enough on this investment of our collective money?').

If these expenses were so obviously unproductive, Google would have cut them already.

Post reply on HN