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

Oxide pays all employees $191,227 (Bay Area startup)

oxide.computer

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 202 posts

Re: Oxide pays all employees $191,227 (Bay Area startup)

#71

Post by ClumsyPilot »

rubiquity wrote: post #29
btheshoe wrote: post #4

Very interesting approach to gaining a comparative advantage in the labor market: pay everyone less.

Pay has never been an accurate reflection of skill and skill has never been an accurate reflection of what a person can bring to a company. Big Tech thought they could use a combination of paying more and a stringent interviewing process to get the best talent. It turns out in the era of gamified interviewing (LeetCode and friends) that they were wrong and now are laying off tens of thousands of people. Having done o…

>It turns out in the era of gamified interviewing (LeetCode and friends) that they were wrong

Interviews were gamified for thousands of years, there are private tutors that will teach your child how to pass interviews into the most elite institutios.

Leetcode just made it accessible to unwashed masses.

Re: Oxide pays all employees $191,227 (Bay Area startup)

#72

Post by Firmwarrior »

refurb wrote: post #33
mroche wrote: post #24

I only spent 6 months in the Bay Area in 2019 for an internship, so I don't have a strong understanding of the cost of living other than "it's expensive". For a family of 5 (two adults, three kids) what do folks perceive to be the minimum base annual salary (with no other compensation) to support such an environment in the Bay Area comfortably and without, as put by the author, financial distress?

My perspective is the COL difference is mostly housing. There are other things that are more expensive than MCOL cities like gas, utilities, childcare, but it's pretty much housing that makes up most of the higher costs. And housing costs are quite different between the peninsula south of SF and the East Bay, so it's not easy to answer your question. But if the expectation is that a family of 5 owns a home and the 3…

That fits my experience. If your W-2 income is 200k+ you should be able to afford everything including a place to live (old beaten-down shithole house in a bad neighborhood with a long commute, or old beaten-down tiny shithole condo close to work)

Of course, it's easy to look at that and say "Oh, I'm coming out way ahead by making 150k in $NormalCity instead", but realistically _everything_ after that base 200k is going straight into liquid net worth. So if you're choosing between 400k in Mountain View and 300k in $NormalCity it's an interesting decision, but 400k in Mountain View means you're going to retire way earlier than you would with 200k in $NormalCity

Re: Oxide pays all employees $191,227 (Bay Area startup)

#73

Post by jedberg »

firstlink wrote: post #48

> Oxide not only offers the best healthcare plans we could find, but we also pay 100% of monthly premiums – a significant benefit for those with dependents. I confess I read TFA just to see when the other shoe would drop, and there it is: compensation varies depending on number of dependents. Yes it's hidden from the paycheck but insurance premiums are absolutely part of compensation. Yet the author openly praises th…

Even if you have three kids and a spouse, this still only translates to maybe 5-10% difference in total comp.

Where the real variation is is in the stock comp, which seems to be variable.

Re: Oxide pays all employees $191,227 (Bay Area startup)

#74

Post by kamranjon »

mstipetic wrote: post #49
eyelidlessness wrote: post #17

> The truth is that companies pay people less in other geographies for a simple reason: because they can. We at Oxide just don’t agree with this; we pay people the same regardless of where they pick up their mail. So, look. I completely agree with this, and it’s an admirable ideal. If I were in a position to make this kind of decision, I’d make the same decision or one that looks a lot like it. But if you’re anticipa…

I’m trying to understand - what’s your point here?

I'm not sure I totally understand what they are trying to say, but it sounds like - if you pay people more money in areas where they don't usually get more money - it is bad for those places?

The more interesting part of the quote from the article for me was this:

"Companies spin this by explaining they are merely paying people based on their cost of living, but this is absurd: do we increase someone’s salary when their spouse loses their job or when their kid goes to college? Do we slash it when they inherit money from their deceased parent or move in with someone? The answer to all of these is no, of course not: we pay people based on their work, not their costs."

Re: Oxide pays all employees $191,227 (Bay Area startup)

#75

Post by epolanski »

ivraatiems wrote: post #43
cat_plus_plus wrote: post #27

"Everyone paid same as CEO" seems great as a morale boost at a startup of 23 employees. Even if it's not a lot, startups are often not flush with extra cash and equity is the main incentive to join one rather than a tech giant. I like the mature "this may not scale and it doesn't have to for now" admission.

"Everyone gets the same amount of equity as the CEO" would be a morale booster. "Everyone gets paid the same as the CEO" is at best a nice-to-have.

I think the letter addresses this perfectly: equity depends on risk you take, the earlier you joined the more you get seems very reasonable.

Re: Oxide pays all employees $191,227 (Bay Area startup)

#77

Post by CobrastanJorji »

firstlink wrote: post #48

> Oxide not only offers the best healthcare plans we could find, but we also pay 100% of monthly premiums – a significant benefit for those with dependents. I confess I read TFA just to see when the other shoe would drop, and there it is: compensation varies depending on number of dependents. Yes it's hidden from the paycheck but insurance premiums are absolutely part of compensation. Yet the author openly praises th…

If it turns out that they also offer a vision plan, are you going to describe it as discriminatory against the eagle-eyed? Or would you be mad if you find out that their healthcare covers women's reproductive health?

Healthcare in this country comes from employers, and so if you've got kids, you've mostly gotta get it from your employer, and everyone with kids needs healthcare for those kids. So if you cover healthcare for your employees, that includes their family. Good system? Hell no. But it's not a trick's trying to punish the folks without kids.

Re: Oxide pays all employees $191,227 (Bay Area startup)

#78

Post by ocdtrekkie »

btheshoe wrote: post #4

Very interesting approach to gaining a comparative advantage in the labor market: pay everyone less.

This is significantly more than a lot of people who will read this thread makes. Might want to check your obviously insane amount of privilege.

I hope to make this much annually sometime before I die, but I am not totally confident I will get there.

Re: Oxide pays all employees $191,227 (Bay Area startup)

#79

Post by selljamhere »

rvnx wrote: post #54
cat_plus_plus wrote: post #27

"Everyone paid same as CEO" seems great as a morale boost at a startup of 23 employees. Even if it's not a lot, startups are often not flush with extra cash and equity is the main incentive to join one rather than a tech giant. I like the mature "this may not scale and it doesn't have to for now" admission.

191'000 USD / yr "even if it's not a lot" ?

I think they meant that, in general, startups are not able to compete purely on salary. I don't think they're saying that Oxide's salary is not a lot.

Re: Oxide pays all employees $191,227 (Bay Area startup)

#80

Post by armadsen »

rvnx wrote: post #54
cat_plus_plus wrote: post #27

"Everyone paid same as CEO" seems great as a morale boost at a startup of 23 employees. Even if it's not a lot, startups are often not flush with extra cash and equity is the main incentive to join one rather than a tech giant. I like the mature "this may not scale and it doesn't have to for now" admission.

191'000 USD / yr "even if it's not a lot" ?

I’m a software engineer, live in an area with a way lower cost of living than the Bay Area, work for a company almost exactly the same size, and $191k would be a significant pay cut for me. It really isn’t a lot depending on your role, level of experience, etc, and that’s extra true for the Bay Area.
Post reply on HN