3 ms·
The key informations are here : > Fast offered $200-240K/year in base salaries with full remote work > Sign-on bonuses were common and large. Those who asked
by IMTDb 5y ago
The key informations are here :
> Fast offered $200-240K/year in base salaries with full remote work
> Sign-on bonuses were common and large. Those who asked for almost always received sign-on bonuses of $20-50K as a one-off payment
> Equity issued was lavish and presented as potentially life-changing
> A good part of people are echoing how working at Fast was an amazing experience. People liked the culture, and how employee happiness was a priority.
What's not to like here ? Working for huge amount of money, in a company whose culture puts employees happiness first, and provides an amazing working experience.
Management did "all the right things" : remote ? check ! competitive salaries ? check ! amazing experience working there ? check ! employees-first culture ? check !. Why would you even need to look elsewhere.
And when it all crashed and burned, the feeling is :
> There are people who are frustrated and disappointed with company leadership, and how the bust came out of nowhere.
Trick is that it did not come out of nowhere, people just chose to look away. It's easier to blame management (which is definitely at fault as well !) than to say "I was paid way too much compared to the actual value I was providing". When you are paid $200k / year, you should easily be able to justify that your work generates more than several thousands of USD alone, if you are unable to do that, you need to have a conversation with your mirror as well - or just accept the fact that you are benefitting from a system, which may crash and burn if too many people are in this situation, or keep on living if you are an exception.
- deltarholamda 5y ago>When you are paid $200k / year, you should easily be able to justify that your work generates more than several thousands of USD alone Revenue per Employee used to be a real metric that people used. Of course, P/E ratios used to be sane as well.
- dymk 5y ago> What's not to like here ? I think as a serious counter to that, look at the offers that a FAANG will give you - similar base salary, similar sign-on bonuses. Generally WLB is fine. The real differentiator - they're offering you equity which is liquid right now. If one is risk averse, one wouldn't touch Fast with a ten foot pole.
- IMTDb 5y agoSome reasons : - FAANG aren't/weren't remote - The appeal for working at a startup vs an established company, and the sense of freedom associated with that - Some guys that would love the idea behind FAANS...but would not like the management/process in place there (OKR, reviews, career ladder) - Some guys that would love to work for FAANG... but didn't pass the interview (either failed or didn't try)
- enra 5y agoI think Fast actually built out an office just before COVID hit, they weren't remote. They had bunch videos from office with the employees that they used for recruiting. They only moved to remote with COVID like everyone else did. Seems like the kept the office these 2 years, probably few million a year. ($85 per sq ft x 125 sq ft per person x 100-450 employees = $1M - $4.7M). A tweet from 3 weeks ago: https://twitter.com/gordoncching/status/1504641710776721409 https://twitter.com/gordoncching/status/1504641710776721409