5 ms·

What? They quit the company because they no longer got free sodas? I'd rather have an extra 300$ of salary per year, than free cans of Sugar all year. And, i

What? They quit the company because they no longer got free sodas? I'd rather have an extra 300$ of salary per year, than free cans of Sugar all year. And, if the best developers have so much bargaining power as to leave, just because of sodas, why aren't they leaving toxic work places like Amazon in droves? Other places are cutting cost in far more profound ways: laptops and computer equipment, etc.

anthony-james 10y ago
I think it's more of anticipation for the future. If a company cuts overhead for something big, say, a corporate holiday party from $100k to $80k, some may be frustrated, but it's probably because they recognize the waste in hosting at the Ritz instead of the Hilton. It doens't necessarily mean salaries, benefits, or other, smaller, things will be cut, but it's sending a message that the firm cares about fiscally sustainable operations. If a company cuts costs of the little things, all of a sudden everything is put on the table. Stock options, salary, benefits, perks, headcount. It sends the message that the company cares about operating today more efficiently than it cares about growing (because no company would stop investing in employees if it could still grow, because good employees make good products). Companies cut small costs because they believe that their product/market fit has reached the final destination and the only way to grow profits is by cutting. The best firms (and by extension, employees) realize that the best way to grow is always up.
gdulli 10y ago
> why aren't they leaving toxic work places like Amazon in droves? They are leaving Amazon. http://www.ibtimes.com/amazoncom-has-second-highest-employee-turnover-all-fortune-500-companies-1361257 http://www.ibtimes.com/amazoncom-has-second-highest-employee... The point here is that it wasn't the sodas that made them leave. The sodas were a tangible, visible thing that made them evaluate everything else, which also wasn't good.
zhemao 10y ago
Did you read to the end of the article? > The engineers focused on building product never noticed when the company had grown into something different than what they first joined. The sodas were just the wake-up call. As for why engineers aren't leaving Amazon in droves, Amazon actually has pretty high turnover. The average employment term for engineers is 18 months. So engineers are leaving, but there are more engineers replacing them. Newly graduated engineers join big name tech companies like Amazon, Google, and Facebook to boost their resumes before going on to do other things.
garysieling 10y ago
I think that's probably over-estimating the case value by a fair amount, because the company should be buying in bulk. They also would take the expense off their taxes, whereas if you buy soda, both of you pay taxes.
- pascalxus 10y ago
  This is a good point. But, there's also some inefficiencies that creep in because like a centrally planned ecomonomy, the company can not adequately predict the demand for each free snack, food and drink, leading to excess waste (at least for perishable items). personally, I would rather have teas and vitamin waters, rather than cans of sugar.
jawnv6 10y ago
Giving you an extra $300/year was never on the table and it's kinda ridiculous you'd call them equivalent. They're spending $20 a week at wholesale to give 80 engineers ~2 cans a day. Your share would be $12.50/year.

anthony-james 10y ago

I think it's more of anticipation for the future. If a company cuts overhead for something big, say, a corporate holiday party from $100k to $80k, some may be frustrated, but it's probably because they recognize the waste in hosting at the Ritz instead of the Hilton. It doens't necessarily mean salaries, benefits, or other, smaller, things will be cut, but it's sending a message that the firm cares about fiscally sustainable operations. If a company cuts costs of the little things, all of a sudden everything is put on the table. Stock options, salary, benefits, perks, headcount. It sends the message that the company cares about operating today more efficiently than it cares about growing (because no company would stop investing in employees if it could still grow, because good employees make good products). Companies cut small costs because they believe that their product/market fit has reached the final destination and the only way to grow profits is by cutting. The best firms (and by extension, employees) realize that the best way to grow is always up.

gdulli 10y ago

> why aren't they leaving toxic work places like Amazon in droves? They are leaving Amazon. http://www.ibtimes.com/amazoncom-has-second-highest-employee-turnover-all-fortune-500-companies-1361257 http://www.ibtimes.com/amazoncom-has-second-highest-employee... The point here is that it wasn't the sodas that made them leave. The sodas were a tangible, visible thing that made them evaluate everything else, which also wasn't good.

zhemao 10y ago

Did you read to the end of the article? > The engineers focused on building product never noticed when the company had grown into something different than what they first joined. The sodas were just the wake-up call. As for why engineers aren't leaving Amazon in droves, Amazon actually has pretty high turnover. The average employment term for engineers is 18 months. So engineers are leaving, but there are more engineers replacing them. Newly graduated engineers join big name tech companies like Amazon, Google, and Facebook to boost their resumes before going on to do other things.

garysieling 10y ago

I think that's probably over-estimating the case value by a fair amount, because the company should be buying in bulk. They also would take the expense off their taxes, whereas if you buy soda, both of you pay taxes.

pascalxus 10y ago
This is a good point. But, there's also some inefficiencies that creep in because like a centrally planned ecomonomy, the company can not adequately predict the demand for each free snack, food and drink, leading to excess waste (at least for perishable items). personally, I would rather have teas and vitamin waters, rather than cans of sugar.

jawnv6 10y ago

Giving you an extra $300/year was never on the table and it's kinda ridiculous you'd call them equivalent. They're spending $20 a week at wholesale to give 80 engineers ~2 cans a day. Your share would be $12.50/year.