5 ms·

Not sure why this has been posted but I will say that as someone who works in planning and development I wouldnt be surprised if we see a return to company town

Not sure why this has been posted but I will say that as someone who works in planning and development I wouldnt be surprised if we see a return to company towns soon. For all their faults they can potentially be hugely beneficial to employers and employees in driving down the amount of money put towards housing, avoid poor planning and design outcomes caused by the interface between government and developers and also can be planned for strategic locations where governments have not shown initiative. Public housing could do similar things (and as a case study was a major factor in the econmic success of hong kong - for all its faults) and isnt a million miles away in what it does although is often considered very differently, but most modern governments shy away from this.

naveen99 10y ago
I am not sure that a company can retain control of the town once a lot of employees start living there. The employees would control the government on the next election and start collecting tax from the company. This is probably one of the main reasons disney doesn't allow general employees to live in its company town next to Orlando. But universities run a nice little business with student dorms and graduate student housing. I don't see why companies can't build apartments...
- williamscales 10y ago
  In fact, I'm pretty sure that building apartments to rent to employees was part of Google's most recent proposal to the Mountain View city council.
  - raywu 10y ago
    Google's proposal (2015) for the new campus did not include housing: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/27/google-unveils-plan-for-new-corporate-campus/?_r=0 http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/27/google-unveils-plan... >>> One big issue is still outstanding: Google’s proposal does not include new housing for the area, but company executives have said on several occasions that they want to add housing near their campus. More recent article points to 9000 units proposed by anther company: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2016/01/13/sobrato-kick-starts-residential-in-mountain-views.html http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2016/01/13/sobrato-k... >>> Sobrato’s proposal — which is still in early form and could yet change — is the first application for a project that includes housing in North Bayshore, but others could follow. The council has identified roughly a half-dozens sites where housing is being studied, and has laid the groundwork for up to 9,000 new units. Most of those potential housing sites are owned by Google, which has publicly stated its interest in redeveloping at least some of them for housing, though it has not moved forward on any plans.
    - williamscales 10y ago
      Thanks I wasn't finding this when I was looking.
- mcguire 10y ago
  Whence comes this "election" thing you mention? The point of a company town is that the company actually owns the town.
pjc50 10y ago
Really? We're living in the age of Uber, when companies don't even admit they have employees rather than contractors rented by the minute. I can't see a company making the huge capital investment of fixed buildings which only make economic sense after a decade. It also makes it much harder to uproot the company and move it overseas in response to bad quarterly results.
- enraged_camel 10y ago
  In expensive housing markets like SF, companies will soon have a choice: provide subsidized housing to employees in the form of residential campuses (which are basically company towns in an exurban/suburban setting) or pay them more salary. I think they will go with the former.
  - pjc50 10y ago
    Would it really be cheaper to make a large capital investment out of VC money upfront to build housing, or just up the salaries? If we just run the numbers as an example, taking the 11000 Google employees at Mountain View, and assuming that each wants a ~$500k house, that's $5.5Bn of housing!
  - mason240 10y ago
    Or move to a different, saner city.
- icebraining 10y ago
  We're living in the age of Uber, when companies don't even admit they have employees rather than contractors rented by the minute. Or to put it another way, we live in the age of taxi companies not admitting they have employees rather than contractors paid per fare, just like they have always done since foundation.
yummyfajitas 10y ago
In India these are not super uncommon. They are usually run a lot better than comparable government towns, and are considered to be quite the employment perk.
- hiram112 10y ago
  I (an American) did almost a year as a 'corporate exchange' engineer in one of India's flagship campuses - an area where the young developers were trained, worked, and lived for the early part of their career. Honestly, it was far nicer than the average environment outside of campus so I believe many of the workers felt privileged to be there. I was older than most of these 'freshers', though, and really began to resent the amount of control the company had over my life 24/7. I don't think it was a matter of nickel and diming the workers on food or other supplies at the company's stores, just that it really blurred the line between work and non-work time and space. Long story short, I know this experience has really turned me off to offshoring, H1Bs, globalization, guest workers, etc. from places like India. And it has nothing to do with race or religion, but instead what's considered an acceptable relationship between labor and capital. Silicon Valley / the big tech companies are the biggest abuser of foreign workers (a large majority from India). I don't see it as a good thing for US companies to be building out living spaces for their employees as is done in places like India or China, even though I'm sure Google would build very nice and convenient apartments with all the amenities. This is definitely a bad thing for the working class. Instead I'd like to see India, China, and the US itself all rise up to the American dream of past decades - ability to support a family, house, cars and kids on one income, with less time devoted to work, as globalism promised.
colmvp 10y ago
> Not sure why this has been posted but I will say that as someone who works in planning and development I wouldnt be surprised if we see a return to company towns soon. It seems appropriate given Facebook's strategy of building apartments.
colmvp 10y ago
> Not sure why this has been posted but I will say that as someone who works in planning and development I wouldnt be surprised if we see a return to company towns soon. It seems appropriate given Facebook's strategy of building apartments.
jimbokun 10y ago
When I worked in Japan for one year, I lived in the company dormitory. Was much, much cheaper than renting an apartment would have been, and had a small cafeteria where breakfast and dinner were provided.

naveen99 10y ago

I am not sure that a company can retain control of the town once a lot of employees start living there. The employees would control the government on the next election and start collecting tax from the company. This is probably one of the main reasons disney doesn't allow general employees to live in its company town next to Orlando. But universities run a nice little business with student dorms and graduate student housing. I don't see why companies can't build apartments...

williamscales 10y ago
In fact, I'm pretty sure that building apartments to rent to employees was part of Google's most recent proposal to the Mountain View city council.
- raywu 10y ago
  Google's proposal (2015) for the new campus did not include housing: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/27/google-unveils-plan-for-new-corporate-campus/?_r=0 http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/27/google-unveils-plan... >>> One big issue is still outstanding: Google’s proposal does not include new housing for the area, but company executives have said on several occasions that they want to add housing near their campus. More recent article points to 9000 units proposed by anther company: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2016/01/13/sobrato-kick-starts-residential-in-mountain-views.html http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2016/01/13/sobrato-k... >>> Sobrato’s proposal — which is still in early form and could yet change — is the first application for a project that includes housing in North Bayshore, but others could follow. The council has identified roughly a half-dozens sites where housing is being studied, and has laid the groundwork for up to 9,000 new units. Most of those potential housing sites are owned by Google, which has publicly stated its interest in redeveloping at least some of them for housing, though it has not moved forward on any plans.
  - williamscales 10y ago
    Thanks I wasn't finding this when I was looking.
mcguire 10y ago
Whence comes this "election" thing you mention? The point of a company town is that the company actually owns the town.

pjc50 10y ago

Really? We're living in the age of Uber, when companies don't even admit they have employees rather than contractors rented by the minute. I can't see a company making the huge capital investment of fixed buildings which only make economic sense after a decade. It also makes it much harder to uproot the company and move it overseas in response to bad quarterly results.

enraged_camel 10y ago
In expensive housing markets like SF, companies will soon have a choice: provide subsidized housing to employees in the form of residential campuses (which are basically company towns in an exurban/suburban setting) or pay them more salary. I think they will go with the former.
- pjc50 10y ago
  Would it really be cheaper to make a large capital investment out of VC money upfront to build housing, or just up the salaries? If we just run the numbers as an example, taking the 11000 Google employees at Mountain View, and assuming that each wants a ~$500k house, that's $5.5Bn of housing!
- mason240 10y ago
  Or move to a different, saner city.
icebraining 10y ago
We're living in the age of Uber, when companies don't even admit they have employees rather than contractors rented by the minute. Or to put it another way, we live in the age of taxi companies not admitting they have employees rather than contractors paid per fare, just like they have always done since foundation.

yummyfajitas 10y ago

In India these are not super uncommon. They are usually run a lot better than comparable government towns, and are considered to be quite the employment perk.

hiram112 10y ago
I (an American) did almost a year as a 'corporate exchange' engineer in one of India's flagship campuses - an area where the young developers were trained, worked, and lived for the early part of their career. Honestly, it was far nicer than the average environment outside of campus so I believe many of the workers felt privileged to be there. I was older than most of these 'freshers', though, and really began to resent the amount of control the company had over my life 24/7. I don't think it was a matter of nickel and diming the workers on food or other supplies at the company's stores, just that it really blurred the line between work and non-work time and space. Long story short, I know this experience has really turned me off to offshoring, H1Bs, globalization, guest workers, etc. from places like India. And it has nothing to do with race or religion, but instead what's considered an acceptable relationship between labor and capital. Silicon Valley / the big tech companies are the biggest abuser of foreign workers (a large majority from India). I don't see it as a good thing for US companies to be building out living spaces for their employees as is done in places like India or China, even though I'm sure Google would build very nice and convenient apartments with all the amenities. This is definitely a bad thing for the working class. Instead I'd like to see India, China, and the US itself all rise up to the American dream of past decades - ability to support a family, house, cars and kids on one income, with less time devoted to work, as globalism promised.

colmvp 10y ago

> Not sure why this has been posted but I will say that as someone who works in planning and development I wouldnt be surprised if we see a return to company towns soon. It seems appropriate given Facebook's strategy of building apartments.

colmvp 10y ago

jimbokun 10y ago

When I worked in Japan for one year, I lived in the company dormitory. Was much, much cheaper than renting an apartment would have been, and had a small cafeteria where breakfast and dinner were provided.