[taylorhughes]

(fb employee here) fwiw I've heard of a ton of people continuing to pay housekeepers, nannies, etc. - I was going to pay our house cleaner to stay home anyway, but this removes any hesitation/excuse not to. I agree it's unnecessary, but it's a nice gesture and these FANG companies have the cash in the bank to help the Bay Area weather the storm safely.

[mgkimsal]

I'm confused on this. Are FB workers getting laid off?

Scenario: 1 month ago, you're an FB employee, and working, and you pay a nanny.

Today: you're an FB employee, and working, and you pay a nanny.

How is FB giving the FB employee changing anything at all? There's something I'm missing in this.

[gdubs]

Because people are going to have to keep paying for services they no longer get value from. Someone has to clean the house, watch and educate the kids, etc.

[mgkimsal]

because.... they're working from home? if that's the case, that was a piece of info I was missing.

I suspect even if they're working from home, having a nanny/cleaner/etc at home isn't "no value" just "less value".

But I still don't know why - if this is the case - why people who are still employed/working full time, getting their regular paycheck, just working from home, would feel the need to stop whatever domestic services they had in place.

[patejam]

>But I still don't know why - if this is the case - why people who are still employed/working full time, getting their regular paycheck, just working from home, would feel the need to stop whatever domestic services they had in place.

Because there's a pandemic going on and they don't want outside people in their house? Also, some of these services are now illegal in many cities including SF (Child/adult/senior care is still allowed. I'm assuming cleaners aren't.)

[regnerba]

Thanks for the response. That sure helps it make more sense. That extra bit to help make sure people like nannies are still employed but not working.