7 ms·

I love what Musk's companies are doing, but I would never actually want to work for any of them. They all heavily take advantage of passionate people by overwor

• yohannparis 6y ago
  Who knows what benefits Tesla employees get. In the U.S.A., retirement matching is not a requirement but a perk. Rolex does a 300% matching, doesn't mean that all Swiss companies do the same.
  • sschueller 6y ago
    City of Zürich also does 300%.
• throwaway12893 6y ago
  Wow, where do you work with a 50% no limit match?
  • lvh 6y ago
    (I'm not GP.) Latacora has a 100% no-limit contribution match and non-shitty funds (access to all of Fidelity's index funds), loan provisions, and all conversions unlocked for any reason, available on day 1, with all contributions immediately and fully vested. We also eat every fee we're allowed to eat.
    • CydeWeys 6y ago
      Wow, that's the dream right there. Do you also have access to after-tax contributions (mega back door)?
      • lvh 6y ago
        What do you think? :-) (FWIW: I am personally the trustee on the plan for effectively the same reasons. It's pretty tricked out, and I'm very proud of it.)
        • CydeWeys 6y ago
          Niiiice. It's hard to imagine a better 401k plan than what y'all have. Enjoy it. And I assume, based on everything else, that you have a reasonable low-fee provider like Vanguard or Fidelity with good low-fee fund options.
          • lvh 6y ago
            Fidelity, and every index fund Fidelity has to offer, yep. The QDIA is an automatically selected target date fund-of-index-funds, but I'm manually allocated.
  • ccn0p 6y ago
    /me sends resume there
  • kapilvt 6y ago
    I’m curious as well, as reference for another tech company, say amazon, it’s up to a 3% match but only vests after three years. Iotw tech is all over the map on 401k afaics.
    • CydeWeys 6y ago
      Amazon is pretty notorious about being stingy on perks, and this area is no exception. They're the worst out of all the FAMANG companies.
  • zippergz 6y ago
    To be clear, there is an implicit limit because there’s an overall limit on how much you can contribute to a 401k each year...
    • Jtsummers 6y ago
      The importance of a "no limit" match is that it disconnects your benefit from your salary. Most matching offers are limited by your salary so a lower paid worker gets less benefit than a higher paid worker.
  • IshKebab 6y ago
    Yeah "common in tech" my arse.
    • CydeWeys 6y ago
      Some of the very largest tech companies offer these kinds of plans. Google and Microsoft do. Facebook has a 50% match up to 7% of salary, so if you're making over $139k/yr (which every technical employee is) then it's functionally the same. Apple is 50% match up to 6% of salary, which equalizes at $162k/yr. Add all that together, plus all the smaller companies that also have great plans (like Netflix) and we're talking over a million employees in tech that all get the effective benefit of the company contributing 50% of the IRS personal contribution limit. I would call that common.
      • IshKebab 6y ago
        > Facebook has a 50% match up to 7% of salary > Apple is 50% match up to 6% of salary Err yeah. He said "no limit". 7% and 6% are limits. Very normal ones (5% is the most common limit in the UK). I've never heard of unlimited matching.
  • CydeWeys 6y ago
    Google.
    • throwaway12893 6y ago
      Ah, sadly I am in the "they already use my code but I can't whiteboard a binary tree inversion" camp.
• zpeti 6y ago
  So don't work there. But why criticise hard working people who want to work there or imply that they are victims of exploitation? Maybe they believe in the mission? Is anyone forcing them to work at Tesla? As far as I know Tesla doesn't use slave labour (not sure about China).
• drcross 6y ago
  Musk has stock options that he has to buy and he doesn't get a salary. He said he doesnt own houses or yachts and he works all the time. He's spending it on making humans interplanetary. Of all the billionaires to bitch about, Musk is clearly many standard deviations more industrious and capable than any of us, surely if there is financial allocation it should go to those who merit it the most? Would you prefer to have our lives set up in any other way?
  • BunsanSpace 6y ago
    He mentioned on the Joe Rogan podcast about owning 5 mansions and what he liked about each one. he's not humble in anyway, looking at his twitter he comes off as a real twat to boot as well.
  • zpeti 6y ago
    It doesn't matter any more unfortunately. Anyone with a billion dollars is now evil. There can't possibly be anything positive about a rich person. Oh America, how you have fallen.
    • StillBored 6y ago
      Personally I think Musk is more in the "accidental" billionaire category than many of them (by that I mean his wealth is heavily volatile with a lot of risk, and was hard to predict). That said, most of these billionaires have gotten there because they were able to abuse some part of the capitalistic society. The "quality product for a fair price" bit is warped in some way due to monopoly power, exploiting their workers, etc. Which is why a lot of people really dislike the Waltons, Bezos, etc billionaires. Its hard to answer why they should benefit so hugely when they could have cut into their wealth a little and given their employees a working wage, or slightly better benfits, etc. Instead they have created massive generational wealth gaps where their children/etc will effectively be royalty, and then cynically used propaganda to even neuter the government/financial system from ever re-leveling the playing field. And what for, so they can have tens of billions instead of tens of millions while something like 50% of the population lacks even basic healthcare, or for that matter food security?
• dominotw 6y ago
  50% match. wow. my current company has no match. previous had 4% match but i didn't get anything since i left before 4 yr match vesting. previous previous had no match.
  • madengr 6y ago
    A 50% match seems typical, up to a certain % of salary. No cap on the match is phenomenal.
  • frob 6y ago
    I believe the 50% match the GP is referring to is 50% of what you contribute, not 50% of base salary. For example, if they put in 6% of their base salary, the employer matches with 3%. I assume from context that the 4% you mention is a straight 4%. That is, if you contribute 3% of your salary, your employer will match with 3% as well, but once you pass 4, the employer stops there. So if you're putting in 10%, the employer still just puts in 4%.
  • CydeWeys 6y ago
    What was your company's max contribution? Typically an X% of salary isn't unlimited, it's up to a certain cap. E.g. let's say you're a director making $1M/yr, they're not contributing $40k/yr to your 401k (this would very likely violate the IRS's 401k safe harbor rules).
    • lvh 6y ago
      6% of compensation would still be a safe harbor plan, excluding the plan from ACP/ADP test requirements, so unfortunately it's quite possible that the director making ~$1MM annually in salary gets a ~$40k match (though not much more, because the total cap for 2021 is $58k, and that director is likely maxing out or close to maxing out, so $19.5k + $40k would cap them.)
      • CydeWeys 6y ago
        I looked into this more and the IRS apparently sets an "Employee compensation limit for calculating contributions", which is currently $290k. So 4% of your salary on a match ends up being $11.6k, which is slightly better for highly compensated employees than the max $9.75k for a 50% match, but of course is significantly worse for people making way under $290k (i.e. most people). Also worth pointing out that the all-source IRS 401k contribution limit is currently $59k/yr, so even with an insane 500% no limit match or something that manages to pass the safe harbor test, there still is a limit you'll hit eventually. It's high though.
• andrewmcwatters 6y ago
  No it isn’t. Edit: I don’t know what warrants this a downvote; you’re insulated if you think no-limit matches are common.
• sschueller 6y ago
  This is what is so disgusting in a way. People adore and worship a man for his wealth but not how he got there. Not paying your employees a fair share or securing their safety just because it's legal doesn't make you a great man.
• BellLabradors 6y ago
  >"while Musk and the big shareholders alone trap the lion's share of the rewards" I get you but I think Musk doesn't accumulate wealth in the way you are thinking here. And that in general he at least works the same shitty hours and conditions he expects others to work. A relevant interview: Döpfner: Are you looking for places? Musk: No, I'm not really buying any places. I stay at a hotel sometimes. Döpfner: Where are you sleeping tonight? Musk: I'm just going to be sleeping at the factory in one of the conference rooms. Döpfner: You'll be sleeping in a conference room in the factory? Musk: Yeah. Döpfner: Alone? Musk: That's my understanding, yeah. You've got to get a feel for the situation. Döpfner: You said, in a recent quote, that possession just weighs you down. And that's why you want to get rid of your possessions. And that's why you have literally started to sell property. You have sold belongings. Is it more a metaphor or are you literally selling your belongings? Musk: I sold my primary home. Döpfner: The one in LA? Musk: It was done two months ago. It was actually bought by a guy in China. And then I sold the house I own across the road, which used to be owned by Gene Wilder. It's very much his personality, and I sold it below market to his nephew who grew up there. And then we're in the process of selling my other houses. I guess I'll rent a place somewhere. Döpfner: So why are you doing it? Because it's too much of an obligation, or it's limiting your freedom? You are considered to be the second-wealthiest person in the world. And now you are getting rid of your property. Musk: In fact, I'll have basically almost no possessions with a monetary value, apart from the stock in the companies. So, if things are intense at work, I like just sleeping in the factory or the office. And I obviously need a place if my kids are there. So, I'll just rent a place or something. And a lot of the time it's just me, so I don't really need a big place. Döpfner: So, no art collection, no cars, no real-estate property, no other stuff that we usually associate with wealthy people. Do you believe that getting rid of all that makes you a free man? Musk: Yes, essentially, I think that also. Like the reason that I am accumulating wealth, if you will, which is really just stock in Tesla and SpaceX. The only publicly traded stock I own is Tesla. That's it. If Tesla and SpaceX go bankrupt, I will go bankrupt personally. One-hundred percent. But I also think, why should I try to have stock anyway. Why do I have all this stuff? Going back to what I was saying earlier, I think it is important for humanity to become a spacefaring civilization and a multiplanet species. And it's going to take a lot of resources to build a city on Mars. I want to be able to contribute as much as possible to the city on Mars. That means just a lot of capital. Döpfner: And you want to focus on that? Musk: Yes, and I'm also just trying to make clear that I'm serious about this. And it's not about personal consumption. Because people will attack me and say, oh, he's got all these possessions. He's got all these houses. OK, now I don't have them anymore. https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-interview-axel-springer-tesla-accelerate-advent-of-sustainable-energy?r=US&IR=T https://www.businessinsider.com/elon-musk-interview-axel-spr...
• bonestamp2 6y ago
  I assume that "50% no limit match" is for 401K contributions? In which case, I guess it still has an IRS backstop of $9750 if you max out your 401k contributions?
  • CydeWeys 6y ago
    Correct. The no limit means that the employer's contributions aren't arbitrarily limited by some percentage of the employees' salary, which has the effect of hurting lower income employees.
    • bonestamp2 6y ago
      I wonder how they do that and stay compliant with IRS non-discrimination testing. Our company capped 401K contributions for "Highly Compensated Employees" (HCEs are $125K/yr+ according to the IRS) a couple years ago to stay compliant with IRS non-discrimination testing. From what I understand, a certain percentage of 401K contributions have to come from non-HCE employees, otherwise the HCEs get capped.
      • CydeWeys 6y ago
        The HCE test is complicated, but it basically amounts to ensuring that the disparity between 401k plan usage isn't too great by compensation (so like a Gini coefficient for 401ks). The way Google satisfies the test probably comes down to three factors: 1. All employees are opted into the plan at hire at 10% of salary, possibly even with a default 1% contribution increase per year (I'm unsure). 2. It's actually not exactly 50% match; it's 100% match on the first $3k and then no additional match on the next $3k, or in other words, it's 100% match that smoothly decreases down to 50% match by $6k and then stays at 50% all the way up to the IRS limit. This helps reduce the 401k "Gini coefficient"; it's progressive contributions. 3. A lot of the lowest rungs of jobs are TVCs, not employees, so they don't even count for this test because they're technically employees of another company (which itself would have a much worse 401k plan than Google's, if any). It's not great but it's relevant here :/
• noch 6y ago
  > Musk is the world's richest person now, but he can't even help fund his employees' retirement Tesla provides all its employees with stock options[0] and has had one of the best performing stock prices in the market. Why on earth would I want a 401k when I can own Tesla stock at a discount? Musk is making all his employees wealthy. [0]: https://electrek.co/2020/07/06/tesla-meteorite-rise-employees-very-rich/ https://electrek.co/2020/07/06/tesla-meteorite-rise-employee...
  • Qwertious 6y ago
    >Why on earth would I want a 401k when I can own Tesla stock at a discount? Because investments should be stable and at least partially reliable as a backup plan - if Tesla goes bankrupt and ceases to exist then not only do you lose all your Tesla stocks, but you're also out of a job at the same time.
    • noch 6y ago
      > Because investments should be stable and at least partially reliable as a backup plan - if Tesla goes bankrupt and ceases to exist then not only do you lose all your Tesla stocks, but you're also out of a job at the same time. Presumably, a company with Tesla's market cap does not go bankrupt overnight. Even Google, which is no longer the place where the best and brightest want to work, is nowhere near financial decline. Employees, being insiders have plenty of time to prepare for a large company's collapse. (Black Swan events notwithstanding.) As for investments: I'd much rather trust myself than trust a money manager who's been outperformed by my boss for over a decade.
      • EForEndeavour 6y ago
        > Google, which is no longer the place where the best and brightest want to work Where would I go to verify this claim? It feels vaguely believable to me, but that feeling is likely from reading similar unsourced claims in forums like this one.
        • noch 6y ago
• xnx 6y ago
  "no limit" seemed amazingly generous until I realized the total annual contribution limit is $19,500 (exceptions apply), so this benefit would be valued at about $9,750. Still very generous, but should be factored with other benefits when evaluating total compensation.
  • madengr 6y ago
    That’s a pre tax limit. You can go post tax almost up to $50k.
  • CydeWeys 6y ago
    Yeah, the company doesn't put a limit on it but the IRS of course still has a limit. The IRS limit goes up with every passing year though, and thus the company contributions do too.
    • jsight 6y ago
      The limit actually didn't go up this year.
      • CydeWeys 6y ago
        To restate: It goes up over time, not necessarily strictly every year. Though this year the all-source contribution limit went from $57k to $58k, which benefits those of us taking advantage of megadoor 401ks. And while the IRS is trying to match inflation, companies aren't necessarily, so having no limit lets you march along with inflation whereas having a defined limit that your company isn't increasing to keep pace with inflation will leave you falling behind.
• mam2 6y ago
  But they have stock options no ? They must be happy at tesla