Zuckerberg says employees moving out of Silicon Valley may face pay cuts • Hacker News Board

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

#61

Post by Vysero » Thu, May 21, 2020, 8:53 PM UTC

Hamuko wrote: post #23

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…

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?

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

#62

Post by whateveracct » Thu, May 21, 2020, 8:53 PM UTC

martythemaniak wrote: post #10

I've been mostly reading the WFH debates here on HN and this seems to have come as a shock to many advocates. You know, companies already had offices in different places you could already move out of SF to elsewhere and this was part of the deal. This isn't anything new, there was never the option of taking your Bay Area salary and living it up in Laos.

It was an option to live wherever in the United States though. Every place I've worked remotely based in SV/SF has paid accordingly despite me and the other engineers not living there. Startups & BigCos alike.

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

#63

Post by dudul » Thu, May 21, 2020, 8:53 PM UTC

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…

Salaries are mostly driven by how hard it is to find an employee, not the value they produce. If the model is to hire someone to be in the office, you obviously need to pay based on your location and local cost of living to be attractive. Completely logical to pay $300k in SF and $90k in Tulsa.

Now, if you really go all in with distributed workforce, the problem becomes "why pay $300k for the guy in SF while I can hire the 'same' guy in Tulsa for $90k?"

Instead of the guy in Tulsa being upset that they're not being paid as much as their buddy in SF, it's the one in SF who should wonder if they'll be able to keep their salary at $300k for long.

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

#64

Post by causehealth101 » Thu, May 21, 2020, 8:54 PM UTC

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…

Let me preface by saying this policy is a serious threat to my compensation - so I hear you loud and clear!

That said: this is the reality and, as unfair as it sounds from the employee's perspective, it makes perfect sense. Facebook does not pay Bay Area compensation to its employees in other parts of the world. It should be no different for those in different COL areas around the US.

Not only does this suck for current employees, but new hiring will be a nasty wake-up call. If a candidate in a different city thinks they'll cross their arms and demand Bay Area pay, there will be multiple other qualified candidates in that city & around the country more than happy to accept a competitive offer tied to their COL.

*Spelling

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

#65

Post by kgin » Thu, May 21, 2020, 8:54 PM UTC

enitihas wrote: post #9

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…

> 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.

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

#66

Post by bradhe » Thu, May 21, 2020, 8:54 PM UTC

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…

> I am still worth the same amount as I was before!

True, unless the company thinks you're more valuable by having you on-site.

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

#67

Post by taude » Thu, May 21, 2020, 8:54 PM UTC

renewiltord wrote: post #43

dqpb wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> one-sided in favor of the businesses Remember how Adobe, Apple, Google, Intel, Intuit, Pixar, Lucasfilm, and eBay colluded to suppress wages of Software Engineers? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...

Remember how Facebook (the subject of this thread) chose not to?

FB was at least a few years away from growing into a Public company when all this went down.

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

#68

Post by lowiqengineer » Thu, May 21, 2020, 8:54 PM UTC

nostromo wrote: post #7

People should be warned that working remotely has been career suicide for as long as I've been in tech. Being "out of sight, out of mind" from management generally means you're passed over for promotions, and often the first to get cut during layoffs. It's just human nature. It's easier to layoff the person that's been working from across the country (or another country) than it is to layoff the person at the desk ne…

I'm __guessing__ that Facebook will have fully remote teams and orgs where this is less of a problem and will have ample opportunities to come to HQ. They fucking send their interns to other offices multiple times during an internship!

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

#69

Post by bcyn » Thu, May 21, 2020, 8:54 PM UTC

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?

Because the Bay Area is one of the only places where the supply of potential employees is high enough to meet the company's demand.

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

#70

Post by brmgb » Thu, May 21, 2020, 8:54 PM UTC

jpeg_hero wrote: post #41

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…

I always see comments like this from individual contributors. I'll give you the managers perspective. You may be worth $150k, any one individual engineer could be worth multiples of that! Look at your entire engineering team, from best to worst. Is not there some inflation of salaries in the SF Bay area? The bootcamper that is making $110k out of bootcamp? Are they really 73% as effective as you? The marketing person…

That has absolutely nothing to do with what he said which is in no way linked to its status as an individual contributor.

The real point is it's not about what you are "worth" but about your market value. If you are away from Silicone Valley where you could find a similarly paid job, your options are more limited. That's a loss of bargaining power and Facebook thinks they can get away with paying you less.