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

Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 543 posts

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#481

Post by chaostheory »

rcme wrote: post #464
chaostheory wrote: post #436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Workers would benefit much more from unionization than they would from holding the stock at a company without a union. Maybe this would work if the employees have some sort of monopoly like the people who work at the ports. However, with knowledge workers there’s a threshold when it’s simply cheaper to move states or even countries. Employees who are well compensated also do not have an incentive to form a union. Y…

Investment bankers job is to deploy capital. How would unionizing help them? Will unionizing increase the amount of capital? No, so no sane person would suggest that. Software engineers are primarily manufacturers. They make products. The barrier to entry is extremely low for this line of work. I get that you think you’re really smart, but there are tens to hundreds of millions of people in the world who could do you…

This is just really backwards

> I get that you think you’re really smart, but there are tens to hundreds of millions of people in the world who could do your job adequately.

This is my point, and you’ve just bolstered it. If knowledge workers ”band together”, the company will just hire elsewhere. Your arguments are terrible

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#482

Post by chaostheory »

rcme wrote: post #415
cscurmudgeon wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does employee owned stock magically not go up in value because "reasons"?

Of course the stock goes up. But the employees are an extreme minority shareholder, so they're totally beholden to the larger shareholders. If the company wants to layoff workers, they're powerless to stop it. Workers are also powerless to stop getting their pay cut. Go look at current job openings. Those cushy 500K total comp jobs are gone.

Rank and file employees owning hundreds of thousands of dollars or even millions of dollars of shares is not unheard of in companies like Google. It’s obvious that you havent worked in the tech industry because you really don’t know what you’re talking about.

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#483

Post by [deleted] »

polygamous_bat wrote: post #442
chaostheory wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You anti-work guys are again showing your ignorance. A large chunk of techie compensation is in stock.

> You anti-work guys are again showing your ignorance. Do you have an actual argument, or do you just plan on name-calling until people shut up and fall in line? > A large chunk of techie compensation is in stock. Oh ok, I guess they can fire Sundar Pichai/Mark Zuckerberg when he underperforms, then? What? They don't own enough stocks to do that? There you go. That's your problem.

[deleted]

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#484

Post by chaostheory »

polygamous_bat wrote: post #442
chaostheory wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You anti-work guys are again showing your ignorance. A large chunk of techie compensation is in stock.

> You anti-work guys are again showing your ignorance. Do you have an actual argument, or do you just plan on name-calling until people shut up and fall in line? > A large chunk of techie compensation is in stock. Oh ok, I guess they can fire Sundar Pichai/Mark Zuckerberg when he underperforms, then? What? They don't own enough stocks to do that? There you go. That's your problem.

> Do you have an actual argument, or do you just plan on name-calling until people shut up and fall in line?

It’s literally the 2nd sentence.

An ignorant person is someone who is lacking in knowledge. It’s pretty accurate in this case

> Oh ok, I guess they can fire Sundar Pichai/Mark Zuckerberg when he underperforms, then? What? They don't own enough stocks to do that?

What are you even trying to say?

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#485

Post by j7ake »

ulfw wrote: post #173
j7ake wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Their compensation doesn’t come from assuming more risk. They are essentially celebrities with a personal brand that corporations will hire to have the celebrity’s name as head the org. A good celebrity can bring fresh energy and new atmosphere to an organisation. It’s unclear whether the average CEO is worth their compensation, but what is clear is that bad leadership can tank an organisation to zero.

In what world was Pichai Sundararajan a celebrity? Before Google surely not and now you'd say he is one BECAUSE of the CEO job or?

Celebrity within their industry, or at least within their organisation.

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#486

Post by chaostheory »

sysstemlord wrote: post #275
chaostheory wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, having a counterpoint with a relevant data point that you missed is “weak” you are ignorant, making your argument weak and just plain wrong. Should people no longer point out when comments are really wrong? You’re also over generalizing while being completely incorrect ie making shit up

You don't know if he's ignorant based on his one comment, seems you are also over generalizing, also this comment isn't really ignorant. He did state issues that are conceptually accurate and generally describe the situation, regardless of whether the number in the yearly salary is a little different, this doesn't change the problem.

No, he was not accurate. There’s also a large difference between $300k in compensation and $150k. Unionizing will not help with that

You guys are just continuing to help prove my point

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#487

Post by quesera »

justinclift wrote: post #336
mrdrqr wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why even write 2IC if you then have to explain what it is?

Because it's a term familiar to some, and not to others. What were you thinking the answer would be?

The better question is why did you use "eg" when you meant "i.e."? :)

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#488

Post by mitthrowaway2 »

__pache__ wrote: post #480
mitthrowaway2 wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm very happy, because my wife is a wonderful person and I love my family, and that's what matters most. Wish we could provide our kids with their own bedroom, but still, life is good. But sorry, wait, that has nothing to do with what we are talking about. I was answering why money, despite not being everything, enables one to spend their time much more freely, and I would gladly invest a few years playing CEO of Al…

For all intents and purposes you likely have more free time than the CEO. No one sane wants the responsibility: that's why it's so valuable. It's not evil. Glad you're counting you're blessings, now you can stop worrying about CEOs!

I know some retired CEOs, and they are not very busy.

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#489

Post by rcme »

chaostheory wrote: post #481
rcme wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Investment bankers job is to deploy capital. How would unionizing help them? Will unionizing increase the amount of capital? No, so no sane person would suggest that. Software engineers are primarily manufacturers. They make products. The barrier to entry is extremely low for this line of work. I get that you think you’re really smart, but there are tens to hundreds of millions of people in the world who could do you…

This is just really backwards > I get that you think you’re really smart, but there are tens to hundreds of millions of people in the world who could do your job adequately. This is my point, and you’ve just bolstered it. If knowledge workers ”band together”, the company will just hire elsewhere. Your arguments are terrible

It’s very difficult to just up and move a company. When the employees are unionized, the company is not able to leverage the knowledge of some workers to facilitate the transition.

If the reason not to unionize is that the company will just move, how much job security do you have without the union? As soon as it’s cheaper to do your job elsewhere, your job will be gone. At least with a union, you have a hope of protecting your livelihood.

Re: Sundar Pichai received $226M compensation, boosted by a triennial stock grant

#490

Post by rcme »

chaostheory wrote: post #482
rcme wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course the stock goes up. But the employees are an extreme minority shareholder, so they're totally beholden to the larger shareholders. If the company wants to layoff workers, they're powerless to stop it. Workers are also powerless to stop getting their pay cut. Go look at current job openings. Those cushy 500K total comp jobs are gone.

Rank and file employees owning hundreds of thousands of dollars or even millions of dollars of shares is not unheard of in companies like Google. It’s obvious that you havent worked in the tech industry because you really don’t know what you’re talking about.

1 million on 1.36T (Google’s market cap) is 0.00007%. Let’s say Google has 25,000 engineers and they each own 1 million. That’s less than 2% of the company. And obviously 1 million is unlikely to be the average engineer ownership stake.

You’re conflating two things: earning a decent salary and having power with management. Current Google engineers have good salaries, but they hold no power with management. Their positions could eliminated without them having a say.

I highly recommend you look at other industries. How many people are earning 500K? Not many. Do you really believe software engineers are so special? No. We existed in a specific period of time: explosive economic growth, coupled with low interest rates, coupled with low supply of software engineers. The industry is maturing. Money is no longer free. Tens of thousands of software engineers are pumped out of universities every year. The writing is on the wall. The lifestyle software engineers have come to enjoy is under threat. Why will software look any different than any other professional industry?

Probably you’ll answer with something like: “software has 0 marginal cost so software engineers have extreme productivity numbers.” That’s true, but your wage, absent a union or scarcity of skill, is not tied to your productivity. Take construction nail production. Nails used to be made by hand. Now someone with some rolls of steel wire and a machine can make hundreds of thousands of nails in the time it took to make a few by hand. Yet the person making nails probably earns less than the person who made them by hand. The surplus value is captured by the owner of the machine.

You, as an engineer, are not special. You have no moat. From this conversation, I get the impression you’re not even particularly intelligent. Get over yourself.

Post reply on HN