Why does the biggest and richest company in the world ever have to suffer from talent leaving because they don’t get paid enough? It just doesn’t make any sense.
My dad used to tell a story when as a kid he worked at a gas station. Guy shows up with a Ferrari, asks for a full tank, pays with a large note and my dad asks him to keep the change.
The guy replied
- boy, I got a lot of money
Really, a lot. You know how I got them? I never gave anything away for free. Hand that change over.
That just illustrates that a lot of rich guys are entitled assholes. The correlation between assholery and driving an expensive car in particular has been studied.
I worked in the service industry in UK for a few months for the richest and most privileged people out there. I got the chance to work in events where members of the royal family were present or events where the most famous and rich people in the world were the guests.
My observation is, the assholes are everywhere but also the nice and polite people. I can't really generalize it for rich or poor, I did not see that simple pattern.
At that time my hourly wage was about 8 pounds and a lady at an extravagant event gave me 5 pounds and told me to keep extra good care of the table. She somehow expected to have private waiter for the night for 5 pounds sterling but I took extra good care for about 45 minutes and when she asked me why I wasn't working for her specifically any longer, I explained that 5 pounds will do just that much and she agreed.
I recall once a very rich person screaming at the waiter because did not like the foam of the coffee and a few instances of rudeness but overall these were rarities.
If anything, the managers were much much bigger arsholes towards the employees because they could afford it(because the employees were mostly students or immigrants like me who need the money to sustain life until they find a proper job). Employees with higher status were big assholes towards the more junior ones.
Most social interactions with the rich or famous that I had or have seen were very positive and polite.
In some instances I was at fault and they were very understanding and tolerant. Once I failed to deliver the coffee of a famous F1 racer at breakfast and he didn't make a big deal of it(If I was him, I would probably be much more rude). Victoria's Secret models were just fine too when received flat champagne.
I'm not convinced that rich people being assholes in social interactions is a real thing. IMHO the pattern is, people who are privileged in their own social group are the assholes.
> I can't really generalize it for rich or poor, I did not see that simple pattern.
My SO works as a consultant in a bank here in Rome, Italy.
She moved from a bank in the periphery to a very central one in the Parioli neighborhood.
There was a night and day difference between her old and new clients in wealth (with the Parioli ones being largely millionaires).
Old clients would treat her with the utmost respect and call her doctor, "dottoressa", and always listen to what she had to say. New ones were on average much more rude, pretending and overall uneducated. She would have to explain them that she couldn't activate them some service because she needed their signatures and they would go all mad and call her director or some friend in the bank.
They are on average much worse people and they're also much more money aware.
Another anecdote she recalled me was how some rich woman wanted to set up a bank account for a no profit to send money to some african country. Not only there was no way to explain her that it was not that easy to do such operations, especially for large sums because this would have to automatically trigger money laundering controls, she would just not listen and blame her, but the client was MAD she had to pay 8 euros commissions on 60k+ euros wire transfer, pretending it to be free because it was a "no profit".
Yes, there's good and bad people in each wealth tier, but rich people on average are much worse assholes. There's no comparison.
When working with money, the rich are also more likely to hit the countless rules and limitations the banking regulations impose on us "for our own good".
Just like as a programmer I am going mental when encountering absurd and ineffective account password rules lets say (one special char, one upper case, one non-letter, etc) while a lay person would just sigh and comply.
People in privileged positions often have the support of others like themselves. "Enablement" is probably a more accurate term.
There's an old family in my town that came from the kind of wealth that had each of their children for a few generations married into important or powerful families across the state. Today, the main family has no income other than from what they inherited, but they maintain their position and membership in society through being horrible to deal with. The center of the family is a vile gossip and has nothing but time to hear about everything that happens and think up ways to use it to her advantage.
They're notorious for showing up to functions uninvited, sitting at your table and ordering, and leaving before the bill comes. They hire the best local artisans and builders, complain to everyone about how shoddy the work is until they get extra for free, and then never pay, threatening to sue for imagined problems. When the grand children were in school, the family would try to walk into functions without tickets because "their child was performing", as if no one else's were.
When their daughter married a pro athlete, no one in town would build them a house, so they had to hire from other parts of the state. Their reasoning? No one in town was skilled enough to build them what they wanted.
They wrote a letter of complaint to the White House about a cavalcade driving through town during a family member's wedding reception and were sent an apology and a bottle of champagne by the POTUS. The family apparently sent back a letter letting him know that they didn't vote for them.
No one here even needs TV. Just hold a dinner party at a place they like and they'll show up and entertain for the cost of a few drinks and a meal.
Instead, computers will keep the change without asking and point you to an unreachable (or unhelpful) customer support number. You’ll either give up on trying to recover your change or you’ll regret not having done it sooner, after spending more of your time and sanity than the money was worth.
Interesting. Was it common in the past, or in your region, for the service worker to actually ask for the change? I've never heard of that, or experienced it in my own life. Usually the customer plays the only active part in the "keep the change" interaction.
Why would compensation be the decisive factor for top talent in a highly compensated field? They have probably already made enough money that they don't have to work for living, and they are probably genuinely interested in their work because they made it to the top. Apple processors are already in the market, so the most interesting work is done, and it may be time to start looking for new challenges.
The article specifically lists culture and money as the reasons people are leaving. It also adds that there is a need for a challenge amongst a successful and accomplished group.
“ The bleeding hasn’t stopped in recent years as Apple’s work culture simply isn’t the best and other firms, namely the hyperscalers such as Google, Microsoft, Amazon, and Meta, are paying more than Apple was to poach talent.”
If you consider Maslow's hierarchy of needs, you have "esteem" at a high place. Money becomes a proxy for that.
Big management negotiate higher pay all the time not because there is a difference between earning 30 or 40 millions, but because they need to feel their own "value" go up.
This is discussed at length in "thinking fast and slow", iirc.
Spending goes up with compensation in general. Then it becomes the norm and you don't want to lose it. Sure you can retire but probably not at a level where you can fly first class everywhere, stay in five star hotels and stay on private islands.
That aside once people have kids the sky is the limit for giving them the "best life possible." Nanny, private tutors, private schools (and/or a house in Cupertino since it's Apple), college funds, house with good amenities nearby, etc. I probably missed some costs in there.
Private schools aren't the norm in the Bay Area, they just fund their local public schools more and then keep out anyone they don't like via NIMBYism.
They're more normal in SF because of the school lottery system which can assign you to a school whether or not you can actually get there on time every day.
Depending on how you define richest Apple could very well be the richest. It has something like 200 billion dollars in cash in hand. I would be surprised if any company could match that.
Repatriating cash earned outside the U.S. involves a hefty tax (afraid I don't recall the number). Occasionally the government offers a tax holiday to encourage companies to do so.
So, rather than bring the money home at the high rate, Apple has been taking on debt for U.S. operations while waiting for (and perhaps lobbying for) another tax holiday.
* you attract/retain more people that are interested in money/status.
* the employees become entitled.
Also, just like Apple's customers are OK with paying a premium price because it's Apple, employees are OK with paying a premium price to be an employee of Apple (by accepting lower salaries).