Anonymous wrote:I am shocked at how many people don’t understand a COL adjustment.

This is OPTIONAL, and you have months to decide if you want to move.

It’s necessary for FB to take the locality pay seriously because there’s real tax implications for both employees and FB.

The argument that a the job is unchanged and thus the pay shouldnt change is beyond stupid. By that argument, anyone who is recruited from Omaha at $80K shouldn’t make a penny more if they live in SF.

FB engineers are well compensated and in demand; market forces will dominate. FB isn’t going to offer someone $70K to work in Virginia who makes $250K in SV. Two very simple reasons: (1) If they did, competitors would just scoop that talent up, and (2) If they did and no one took the offer, they’d save nothing.

This is win-win. Half of you people are insane.

$250 in SV is likely south of $200 in the DMV. Nobody said it would be $80.

And come Jan 21, they’ll start RIF’ing people if they don’t meet their target. They aren’t doing this to promote remote work or work/life balance. Rather, it’s a strategic approach to look intentional to investors since a RIF now would tank their shares.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I see no problem with this policy applying to new employees, that said, so long as they go in knowing what the policy is.

No.. they have till Jan 2021 to decide whether they want to wfh permanently or not. Announcing the col adjustment now means they have the knowledge in hand before they make the decision. You are misinformed.

Yes, when things take a down turn, employers benefit. For decades in SV, it's been an employee's market, rather than an employer's market. No different to how real estate prices work, or any thing else. It's called supply and demand.

What I don't understand is, won't a ton of FB employees WFH while staying in the Bay Area where they likely have spouses with jobs and kids in schools? Seems like this is to address a small number of people who will move to lower COL areas.

There were a lot of people who left California or the coasts entirely to shelter elsewhere just like New Yorkers left Manhattan.

Other people were thinking about never coming back or not doing so for half a year or more. With schools closed, there was nothing forcing them too.

I'm seeing a lot of new SFH listings in San Francisco and in the Bay Area as well.

Facebook decided to get out ahead of the bullrush. People can still leave -- they just won't be taking those lucrative paychecks with them.

They will still come out ahead even with the locality adjustment. Unlike what our comp expert above is trying to claim, FB isn’t going go pay their engineers 80k.

OK, then why are some people so outraged over this? FB is giving them to Jan.2021 to make this decision. They have a half a year to decide, and that is pretty generous.

Well anytime you adjust someone’s comp down the person isn’t going to say, thank you sir may I have some more? If you shift someone from 350k to 280k, that’s still a significant loss. Do you really need that spelled out?

And those on this thread are pretty obviously uneducated as to how these programs really get implemented. Re-read the person who keeps posting about hiring a comp consultant. This board is also overwhelming used by Feds or lawyers. Neither have been through something like this.

I have worked in high tech for 20+ years (in SV) and I think the comp consultant poster is off-base.

Anonymous wrote:I am shocked at how many people don’t understand a COL adjustment.

This is OPTIONAL, and you have months to decide if you want to move.

It’s necessary for FB to take the locality pay seriously because there’s real tax implications for both employees and FB.

The argument that a the job is unchanged and thus the pay shouldnt change is beyond stupid. By that argument, anyone who is recruited from Omaha at $80K shouldn’t make a penny more if they live in SF.

FB engineers are well compensated and in demand; market forces will dominate. FB isn’t going to offer someone $70K to work in Virginia who makes $250K in SV. Two very simple reasons: (1) If they did, competitors would just scoop that talent up, and (2) If they did and no one took the offer, they’d save nothing.

This is win-win. Half of you people are insane.

You are correct and also wasting your breath. When someone can’t understand why FB employees would be upset at the change, that means this thread is a lost cause...

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I see no problem with this policy applying to new employees, that said, so long as they go in knowing what the policy is.

No.. they have till Jan 2021 to decide whether they want to wfh permanently or not. Announcing the col adjustment now means they have the knowledge in hand before they make the decision. You are misinformed.

Yes, when things take a down turn, employers benefit. For decades in SV, it's been an employee's market, rather than an employer's market. No different to how real estate prices work, or any thing else. It's called supply and demand.

What I don't understand is, won't a ton of FB employees WFH while staying in the Bay Area where they likely have spouses with jobs and kids in schools? Seems like this is to address a small number of people who will move to lower COL areas.

There were a lot of people who left California or the coasts entirely to shelter elsewhere just like New Yorkers left Manhattan.

Other people were thinking about never coming back or not doing so for half a year or more. With schools closed, there was nothing forcing them too.

I'm seeing a lot of new SFH listings in San Francisco and in the Bay Area as well.

Facebook decided to get out ahead of the bullrush. People can still leave -- they just won't be taking those lucrative paychecks with them.

They will still come out ahead even with the locality adjustment. Unlike what our comp expert above is trying to claim, FB isn’t going go pay their engineers 80k.

OK, then why are some people so outraged over this? FB is giving them to Jan.2021 to make this decision. They have a half a year to decide, and that is pretty generous.

Well anytime you adjust someone’s comp down the person isn’t going to say, thank you sir may I have some more? If you shift someone from 350k to 280k, that’s still a significant loss. Do you really need that spelled out?

And those on this thread are pretty obviously uneducated as to how these programs really get implemented. Re-read the person who keeps posting about hiring a comp consultant. This board is also overwhelming used by Feds or lawyers. Neither have been through something like this.

I am shocked at how many people don’t understand a COL adjustment.

This is OPTIONAL, and you have months to decide if you want to move.

It’s necessary for FB to take the locality pay seriously because there’s real tax implications for both employees and FB.

The argument that a the job is unchanged and thus the pay shouldnt change is beyond stupid. By that argument, anyone who is recruited from Omaha at $80K shouldn’t make a penny more if they live in SF.

FB engineers are well compensated and in demand; market forces will dominate. FB isn’t going to offer someone $70K to work in Virginia who makes $250K in SV. Two very simple reasons: (1) If they did, competitors would just scoop that talent up, and (2) If they did and no one took the offer, they’d save nothing.

This is win-win. Half of you people are insane.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
I see no problem with this policy applying to new employees, that said, so long as they go in knowing what the policy is.

No.. they have till Jan 2021 to decide whether they want to wfh permanently or not. Announcing the col adjustment now means they have the knowledge in hand before they make the decision. You are misinformed.

Yes, when things take a down turn, employers benefit. For decades in SV, it's been an employee's market, rather than an employer's market. No different to how real estate prices work, or any thing else. It's called supply and demand.

What I don't understand is, won't a ton of FB employees WFH while staying in the Bay Area where they likely have spouses with jobs and kids in schools? Seems like this is to address a small number of people who will move to lower COL areas.

There were a lot of people who left California or the coasts entirely to shelter elsewhere just like New Yorkers left Manhattan.

Other people were thinking about never coming back or not doing so for half a year or more. With schools closed, there was nothing forcing them too.

I'm seeing a lot of new SFH listings in San Francisco and in the Bay Area as well.

Facebook decided to get out ahead of the bullrush. People can still leave -- they just won't be taking those lucrative paychecks with them.

They will still come out ahead even with the locality adjustment. Unlike what our comp expert above is trying to claim, FB isn’t going go pay their engineers 80k.

OK, then why are some people so outraged over this? FB is giving them to Jan.2021 to make this decision. They have a half a year to decide, and that is pretty generous.

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

Not on the mainline

Anonymous wrote:My company has done this for years. We have a mix of onsite and remote workers. Remote workers salaries are based on their actual physical location and not the office that their business unit or team is technically assigned to.Being able to go from onsite to remote is a privilege that comes with costs.

Why is it a privilege?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think that’s fair. Your doing the same job. Not all people pay housing expenses . COL doesn’t effect everyone.

Exactly. Are you decreasing salaries for people who have spouses that work? Increasing salaries for people with kid - or decreasing salaries for those who don't have kids?

You can do this so long as your employees aren't going to jump ship. My last employer cut my salary by $10k because of where I lived. Well guess what - I still have to pay my student loans and my mortgage, and I took another job that paid more when I got the opportunity.

Uh huh - and you did that because you lived in an area with a great job market.

Try moving to Savannah, GA or St. Louis, Missouri and finding a new job for a tech company's skillset.

Half the companies won't allow remote work and will require a SV residence and the other half that do like Facebook/Google/Microsoft will cut your salaries because they CAN.

Huh. So say, I work in McLean for XYZ big company and decide I want to live in Damascus and commute. Can they lower my pay?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That seems reasonable to me. In my organization salary is based on locality, including for remote workers. One worker moved from DC to CT to telework full-time and had her salary adjusted downward. She was fine with it, as she had a lower COL.

almost every company adjusts your salary based on the col of where you live. Why are some people upset that FB is doing this? The fact that FB is giving workers a choice is pretty great, IMO.

They thought they'd still be making high six-figures and moving to Boise or Charlotte.

Facebook said - not a chance.

They could lie?

Anonymous wrote:It is obvious to me that very few people in this thread understand how COL adjustments work.

How they typically work, or how they work when a company that went overboard to provide perks to lure workers to come into the office (think: free cafeteria and shuttles) will implement this as they suffer major budget issues?

It is obvious to me that very few people in this thread understand how COL adjustments work.

Anonymous wrote:I don't know if someone's said this already, but I think they should have a single, across-the-board pay cut (e.g. $20k) for everyone who wants to work full-time remotely, including those that are staying in silicon valley. I think it's a can of worms to reduce people's salary based on their living expenses.

I do think for all new remote hires, they can base the salary on location simply because it's part of the negotiation equation. If you're facebook, you can offer a competitive salary to a new hire in a LCOL area that is still far below a competitive salary in the bay area.

What? FB doesn’t care about their employees living expenses.

I don't know if someone's said this already, but I think they should have a single, across-the-board pay cut (e.g. $20k) for everyone who wants to work full-time remotely, including those that are staying in silicon valley. I think it's a can of worms to reduce people's salary based on their living expenses.

I do think for all new remote hires, they can base the salary on location simply because it's part of the negotiation equation. If you're facebook, you can offer a competitive salary to a new hire in a LCOL area that is still far below a competitive salary in the bay area.

Many people so gladly take a pay hit to move out to a LCOL area. Wow, you make a lot of money in the bay area? So what? My buddy works at a hedge fund in SF. Sure, on paper he makes lot. He could only afford a @800 sq ft home that cost $1.5 million. He still has to drive 60-90 minute with Bay bridge traffic go get to and from work. He did the math. When you factor in CA's insane taxes for income, sales, and property, he has to work almost half of the year entirely for free. And he loves in a small house for that price that needed additional huge investment for renovations. At some point the financial math just becomes so ludicrously stupid like SF that even a huge pay cut is still worth taking to move out to a lcol area where you don't need to drive 80 minutes each way to work just so you can afford a place to live for the ludicrous price of $1.5 million.