[AlwaysRock]

> This is all due to Microsoft contractors (who were treated like regular employees in the 80s and 90s) winning a lawsuit that retroactively forced Microsoft to give them a ton of stock.

This is all due to Microsoft who used contractors like regular employees in the 80s and 90s but did not compensate them like regular employees. It's not the workers fault.

[randomifcpfan]

The Microsoft contractors double-dipped. They got higher-than-employee wages during their contracts, and later got all the stock options they gave up by being contractors. Nice work if you can get it.

[falcolas]

I don't know the exact numbers for this case, but contractors always appear to be overpaid. What most people who call them overpaid miss is that contractors have to pay their own employment taxes, as well as any health benefits (including vacation time) they want out of that income.

If you consider those, the cost of your average employee to the company employing them is roughly 1.6x to 2x their gross income. An overpaid contractor would have to make well over 2x that of a normal employee.

[jedberg]

And the point of the person above you is that after the lawsuit, they had all those things retroactively paid for, so they ended up making more than they would have as employees.

[falcolas]

The parent makes no such claims. They claim that prior to the lawsuit they were being paid "higher wages", and stock options after. There is no mention of taxes, health care, vacation, etc.