Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by m0zg 1662 days ago
People often react with incredulity about FAANG comp, while forgetting that the company makes several times as much per employee as mean comp package (2/3rds of which isn't even cash). All of that value is generated by employees. Is this a fair split? I suppose we'll find out soon. Someone has to blink, and then everyone will blink. Google did blink circa 2011, and raised its (until then) fairly modest comp something like 30%.

I think a cool and "googly" thing for Google to try would be to do what one of the companies in the article did: reduce the work week to 4 days while keeping the same pay. All tech companies should do that. Working the same hours as factory workers did 100 years ago is absurd given the productivity improvements in the interim.
1 comments
tonyedgecombe 1662 days ago
It would be nice if things were fair but that isn't how the market works.
link
m0zg 1662 days ago
That's exactly how the market works, in the absence of collusion. Which has been demonstrated several times among big tech behemoths [1]. That is also how it'll work this time, assuming there is no collusion, which there may still be.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...

link
tonyedgecombe 1662 days ago
No it isn't. Without collusion the market rate is determined by the supply and demand of and for employees. This has nothing to do with the value created.
link
sokoloff 1662 days ago
I agree with your second sentence, but disagree with your third. The demand for SWE (or any other kind of labor) is itself some (often complex) function of value created.

If you employ N software engineers and an infallible oracle told you that you’d create more value if you hired 2 more, you’d try to hire 2 more. If the oracle told you you’d create more value with 2 fewer, you’d try to get to N-2, making your demand for SWE labor a function of value created.

link
tonyedgecombe 1661 days ago
That may well be the case but you still have to deal with the realities of the market which doesn't give a hoot about your profitability.

Of course if you aren't making enough then you won't be able to afford to hire somebody but that has nothing to do with the market rates.

link
sokoloff 1661 days ago
The market is nothing but the sum of all the actors in the market. If the value created by SWEs doubled (even if only for 10% of participants), the market equilibrium would be higher because of the increased demand for SWEs. If it was instead cut in half (even for only 10% of participants), the market equilibrium would be lower due to decreased demand.

I can’t see any reasonable way that the market for SWEs “has nothing to do” with the value created by them.

link
m0zg 1661 days ago
Sounds like supply/demand is in their favor at the moment. Some readjustment is due.
link