Facebook announces that remote WFH employees will have salaries decreased to match local COL

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don’t know why Facebook is trying this—Facebook sucks. Who really WANTS to work there anyway now—except for the money? Most young techies feel it’s sort of embarrassing. It just seems like people are extrapolating that all highly paid tech workers are going to be screwed now. My point was that many big tech companies have had remote workers or workers in satellite branches for years now, and those workers are still highly paid. Are they paid as much as people working in Silicon Valley? No. There’s a COL difference, but it’s not THAT much. Whatever Facebook does, I don’t think more remote jobs are going to dramatically hurt salaries for engineers.

LOL.. someone is jealous. FB is doing this because they can. They want to give their employees options. That's more than most most employers are doing for their workers.

What are you talking about? My entire point is that Facebook is just one tech company. If you're in tech and don't want to work for a startup, a lot of people aspire to FANG companies...or have...Facebook's reputation has obviously suffered in the past few years. FANG=Facebook, Amazon, Netflix and Google. Some would argue Microsoft is included too. Facebook and Netflix don't really need remote workers for their business models. Facebook currently has about 45,000 employees. Netflix has 6,700. Google has 118,000 and Microsoft has 150,000. My ONLY point is that Facebook is just ONE tech company. LOTS of tech companies offer remote work and have been doing that for years while still paying high salaries to qualified applicants. It's 10 times harder to get hired at Google than getting into Harvard. So, if Facebook does this--who cares? It's not like Facebook employees won't easily be poached my other FANG companies who won't drastically slash their salaries for wanting to move to second tier tech cities.

I know for a fact that Google does not offer permanent WFH. They are required to come into the office x number of days per month, excluding covid crisis, of course. Google like collaboration, and the whole open office model. That will have to change obviously for the forseable future.

[Anonymous]

There is a vast difference between a superstar who wants to live on a mountain or something and ordinary rank and file. The tech companies have always hired the unique rare engineers who want to work from home full-time. This is entirely different because it's inclusive of everyone. Therefore, the policies will be different.

And as for "people" complaining, there are not a lot of actual FB employees complaining. The posters here who are complaining are almost certainly not FB employees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don’t know why Facebook is trying this—Facebook sucks. Who really WANTS to work there anyway now—except for the money? Most young techies feel it’s sort of embarrassing. It just seems like people are extrapolating that all highly paid tech workers are going to be screwed now. My point was that many big tech companies have had remote workers or workers in satellite branches for years now, and those workers are still highly paid. Are they paid as much as people working in Silicon Valley? No. There’s a COL difference, but it’s not THAT much. Whatever Facebook does, I don’t think more remote jobs are going to dramatically hurt salaries for engineers.

LOL.. someone is jealous. FB is doing this because they can. They want to give their employees options. That's more than most most employers are doing for their workers.

What are you talking about? My entire point is that Facebook is just one tech company. If you're in tech and don't want to work for a startup, a lot of people aspire to FANG companies...or have...Facebook's reputation has obviously suffered in the past few years. FANG=Facebook, Amazon, Netflix and Google. Some would argue Microsoft is included too. Facebook and Netflix don't really need remote workers for their business models. Facebook currently has about 45,000 employees. Netflix has 6,700. Google has 118,000 and Microsoft has 150,000. My ONLY point is that Facebook is just ONE tech company. LOTS of tech companies offer remote work and have been doing that for years while still paying high salaries to qualified applicants. It's 10 times harder to get hired at Google than getting into Harvard. So, if Facebook does this--who cares? It's not like Facebook employees won't easily be poached my other FANG companies who won't drastically slash their salaries for wanting to move to second tier tech cities.

Do you know for sure that the other companies named don’t offer locality pay? I’ve never looked into and just assumed they did (even tho their pay would still be well above local market pay).
-DP

I know the numbers for at least three of them. They have pay grades for major cities. I believe SF and NYC are on par with each other. DC and Seattle are also the same. But what counts as those cities can vary. It isn't a huge difference between locations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don’t know why Facebook is trying this—Facebook sucks. Who really WANTS to work there anyway now—except for the money? Most young techies feel it’s sort of embarrassing. It just seems like people are extrapolating that all highly paid tech workers are going to be screwed now. My point was that many big tech companies have had remote workers or workers in satellite branches for years now, and those workers are still highly paid. Are they paid as much as people working in Silicon Valley? No. There’s a COL difference, but it’s not THAT much. Whatever Facebook does, I don’t think more remote jobs are going to dramatically hurt salaries for engineers.

LOL.. someone is jealous. FB is doing this because they can. They want to give their employees options. That's more than most most employers are doing for their workers.

What are you talking about? My entire point is that Facebook is just one tech company. If you're in tech and don't want to work for a startup, a lot of people aspire to FANG companies...or have...Facebook's reputation has obviously suffered in the past few years. FANG=Facebook, Amazon, Netflix and Google. Some would argue Microsoft is included too. Facebook and Netflix don't really need remote workers for their business models. Facebook currently has about 45,000 employees. Netflix has 6,700. Google has 118,000 and Microsoft has 150,000. My ONLY point is that Facebook is just ONE tech company. LOTS of tech companies offer remote work and have been doing that for years while still paying high salaries to qualified applicants. It's 10 times harder to get hired at Google than getting into Harvard. So, if Facebook does this--who cares? It's not like Facebook employees won't easily be poached my other FANG companies who won't drastically slash their salaries for wanting to move to second tier tech cities.

I know for a fact that Google does not offer permanent WFH. They are required to come into the office x number of days per month, excluding covid crisis, of course. Google like collaboration, and the whole open office model. That will have to change obviously for the forseable future.

They did not as a general rule, but yes that's obviously changing. It wasn't a hard and fast rule, though. And now that they are competing with Microsoft and Amazon for cloud services, that's likely to change because they will need more offices around the country. That doesn't mean that those positions will all be WFH, but most of the "remote" jobs at those companies are in sales, which are often of WFH anyway.

[Anonymous]

This can all be found online or on Blind. HackerNews has like four threads about this topic there right now.

[Anonymous]

In fact, here:
https://www.levels.fyi/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I don’t know why Facebook is trying this—Facebook sucks. Who really WANTS to work there anyway now—except for the money? Most young techies feel it’s sort of embarrassing. It just seems like people are extrapolating that all highly paid tech workers are going to be screwed now. My point was that many big tech companies have had remote workers or workers in satellite branches for years now, and those workers are still highly paid. Are they paid as much as people working in Silicon Valley? No. There’s a COL difference, but it’s not THAT much. Whatever Facebook does, I don’t think more remote jobs are going to dramatically hurt salaries for engineers.

LOL.. someone is jealous. FB is doing this because they can. They want to give their employees options. That's more than most most employers are doing for their workers.

What are you talking about? My entire point is that Facebook is just one tech company. If you're in tech and don't want to work for a startup, a lot of people aspire to FANG companies...or have...Facebook's reputation has obviously suffered in the past few years. FANG=Facebook, Amazon, Netflix and Google. Some would argue Microsoft is included too. Facebook and Netflix don't really need remote workers for their business models. Facebook currently has about 45,000 employees. Netflix has 6,700. Google has 118,000 and Microsoft has 150,000. My ONLY point is that Facebook is just ONE tech company. LOTS of tech companies offer remote work and have been doing that for years while still paying high salaries to qualified applicants. It's 10 times harder to get hired at Google than getting into Harvard. So, if Facebook does this--who cares? It's not like Facebook employees won't easily be poached my other FANG companies who won't drastically slash their salaries for wanting to move to second tier tech cities.

Do you know for sure that the other companies named don’t offer locality pay? I’ve never looked into and just assumed they did (even tho their pay would still be well above local market pay).
-DP

I know the numbers for at least three of them. They have pay grades for major cities. I believe SF and NYC are on par with each other. DC and Seattle are also the same. But what counts as those cities can vary. It isn't a huge difference between locations.

Weren’t all four of them accused of colluding on salaries a few years ago? The Feds claimed they created a monopoly?

[Anonymous]

Yes. I think they were supposed to stop it? Did they? I don't know. Some give more stock than others. They all have reputations--mostly that Amazon is the worst and Google is the best.