Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Easily move down to Richmond area, mainline PA, Delaware, North Carolina, Georgia, parts of Ohio, Tennessee, or Arkansas to save on COL.
You forget that you will need to send your kids to private school
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Easily move down to Richmond area, mainline PA, Delaware, North Carolina, Georgia, parts of Ohio, Tennessee, or Arkansas to save on COL.
You forget that you will need to send your kids to private school
Ridiculous. Richmond area, some parts of PA and Ohio all have excellent public schools, some much much better than what we have here. FFX and MoCo are downright crappy compared to Wellesley, and Lexington in MA.
But then you would be living in Wellesley and Lexington, which doesn't appeal to me.
Anonymous wrote:Perhaps a dumb question, but wouldn’t you need to know the pay cut before determining if the new location really has a lower cost of living to justify the salary cut?
Having been involved with salary studies for satellite offices, I can report that professional consultants for such things price out salaries at ridiculously lower targets even in high cost areas. They priced out San Diego lower than our Midwest HQ—it was ridiculous.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Easily move down to Richmond area, mainline PA, Delaware, North Carolina, Georgia, parts of Ohio, Tennessee, or Arkansas to save on COL.
You forget that you will need to send your kids to private school
Ridiculous. Richmond area, some parts of PA and Ohio all have excellent public schools, some much much better than what we have here. FFX and MoCo are downright crappy compared to Wellesley, and Lexington in MA.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Easily move down to Richmond area, mainline PA, Delaware, North Carolina, Georgia, parts of Ohio, Tennessee, or Arkansas to save on COL.
You forget that you will need to send your kids to private school
Ridiculous. Richmond area, some parts of PA and Ohio all have excellent public schools, some much much better than what we have here. FFX and MoCo are downright crappy compared to Wellesley, and Lexington in MA.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I don't really understand all of the outcry here. I would have interpreted this policy as saying something like "we don't really want people to work at home, but we're willing to let them do it if it will save us money." Which sounds fair enough. I'm not sure why anyone would want to move from SF to middle-of-nowhere, USA, personally, but maybe it works for some.
That's fine if you make the announcement BEFORE approving WFH/remote plans. It sounds like FB decided to cut salaries AFTER telling people they could work remotely. That's just a sht thing to do (in addition to sounding like it would violate an employment agreement). And is the sort of thing that makes people go looking for new jobs.
Look: people working for companies that are facing hard times seem unhappy but willing to accept pay cuts, if it means keeping their jobs. People working for companies doing better than ever should expect they won't be treated like crap by that company, financially, I think.
I see no problem with this policy applying to new employees, that said, so long as they go in knowing what the policy is.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I don't really understand all of the outcry here. I would have interpreted this policy as saying something like "we don't really want people to work at home, but we're willing to let them do it if it will save us money." Which sounds fair enough. I'm not sure why anyone would want to move from SF to middle-of-nowhere, USA, personally, but maybe it works for some.
That's fine if you make the announcement BEFORE approving WFH/remote plans. It sounds like FB decided to cut salaries AFTER telling people they could work remotely. That's just a sht thing to do (in addition to sounding like it would violate an employment agreement). And is the sort of thing that makes people go looking for new jobs.
Look: people working for companies that are facing hard times seem unhappy but willing to accept pay cuts, if it means keeping their jobs. People working for companies doing better than ever should expect they won't be treated like crap by that company, financially, I think.
I see no problem with this policy applying to new employees, that said, so long as they go in knowing what the policy is.
What? You are confused. FB had NO company-wide WFH policy before this point. So nobody lost anything, because they didn't have remote work options before (except for a few superstars who can dictate terms). Now they have announced that people can WFH and they have to notify the company by Jan. 2021. But if those employees choose to work remotely, there may be a COL adjustment. I don't see how you get to the idea that this is taking away anything. This is entirely new.
Note that high-tech has has COL adjustments for years for employee-initiated moves. You move to the Austin office by your choice, you get a pay cut. But if the company sends you from SF to Austin (not your choice), you are not very likely to get a COL adjustment. It's traditionally been relatively unusual for high tech to have a lot of company-driven transfers, though.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I don't really understand all of the outcry here. I would have interpreted this policy as saying something like "we don't really want people to work at home, but we're willing to let them do it if it will save us money." Which sounds fair enough. I'm not sure why anyone would want to move from SF to middle-of-nowhere, USA, personally, but maybe it works for some.
That's fine if you make the announcement BEFORE approving WFH/remote plans. It sounds like FB decided to cut salaries AFTER telling people they could work remotely. That's just a sht thing to do (in addition to sounding like it would violate an employment agreement). And is the sort of thing that makes people go looking for new jobs.
Look: people working for companies that are facing hard times seem unhappy but willing to accept pay cuts, if it means keeping their jobs. People working for companies doing better than ever should expect they won't be treated like crap by that company, financially, I think.
I see no problem with this policy applying to new employees, that said, so long as they go in knowing what the policy is.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I don't really understand all of the outcry here. I would have interpreted this policy as saying something like "we don't really want people to work at home, but we're willing to let them do it if it will save us money." Which sounds fair enough. I'm not sure why anyone would want to move from SF to middle-of-nowhere, USA, personally, but maybe it works for some.
That's fine if you make the announcement BEFORE approving WFH/remote plans. It sounds like FB decided to cut salaries AFTER telling people they could work remotely. That's just a sht thing to do (in addition to sounding like it would violate an employment agreement). And is the sort of thing that makes people go looking for new jobs.
Look: people working for companies that are facing hard times seem unhappy but willing to accept pay cuts, if it means keeping their jobs. People working for companies doing better than ever should expect they won't be treated like crap by that company, financially, I think.
I see no problem with this policy applying to new employees, that said, so long as they go in knowing what the policy is.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Easily move down to Richmond area, mainline PA, Delaware, North Carolina, Georgia, parts of Ohio, Tennessee, or Arkansas to save on COL.
You forget that you will need to send your kids to private school
Anonymous wrote:I don't really understand all of the outcry here. I would have interpreted this policy as saying something like "we don't really want people to work at home, but we're willing to let them do it if it will save us money." Which sounds fair enough. I'm not sure why anyone would want to move from SF to middle-of-nowhere, USA, personally, but maybe it works for some.
Anonymous wrote:Easily move down to Richmond area, mainline PA, Delaware, North Carolina, Georgia, parts of Ohio, Tennessee, or Arkansas to save on COL.