5 ms·

Not OP, but here's a link to their job listings for AZ. I checked a few random job descriptions and none of them mentioned hourly wage/salary, which is usually

Not OP, but here's a link to their job listings for AZ. I checked a few random job descriptions and none of them mentioned hourly wage/salary, which is usually a bad sign. https://ro.careers.tsmc.com/search/?createNewAlert=false&q=&locationsearch=AZ https://ro.careers.tsmc.com/search/?createNewAlert=false&q=&... On an interesting note, I did notice the wording of what was said in the article was odd > [...] skilled workers and technicians needed to move equipment into the facility. > [...] specialized expertise required for equipment installation in a semiconductor-grade facility This doesn't sound so much like the day-to-day factory work that they struggling to hire for, but more so something like: delivery of equipment, warehouse receiving, and equipment install & maintenance personnel.

metaphor 3y ago
> I checked a few random job descriptions and none of them mentioned hourly wage/salary, which is usually a bad sign. It's simply not a legal requirement in Arizona to disclose wage/salary range on job listings. You need to look at TSMC listings in states like California[1] or Washington[2]. [1] https://ro.careers.tsmc.com/search/?locationsearch=CA https://ro.careers.tsmc.com/search/?locationsearch=CA [2] https://ro.careers.tsmc.com/search/?locationsearch=WA https://ro.careers.tsmc.com/search/?locationsearch=WA
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  Which is an even worse look for TSMC. They could easily do it, since they already do for other states, but they want to pay bottom dollar so much that they would rather retain that card (a relatively minor one for an employer) in their hand than play it.
  - metaphor 3y ago
    Is Intel voluntarily disclosing in Ohio job listings? Nope. Is Samsung voluntarily disclosing in Texas job listings? Nope. A "worse look" argument simply has no basis in reality when this corporate behavior is effectively status quo across all relevant competitors in the industry.
    - registeredcorn 3y ago
      I'm not saying such a thing isn't status quo, but simply that, if TSMC wishes to be perceived as "competitive", then an exceedingly easy way to that is to buck the status quo by listing their salary ranges - a competitive action. It seems disingenuous that they would prefer to have it both ways, to cry that they are struggling to attract/keep employees in those positions, yet choose not compete with other companies in that area, by listing information they aren't required to supply. It just seems like that classic quote, "We've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas." That is what makes it a bad sign - they're excited to complain, but (apparently?) completely incompetent when it comes to fixing the problem they're in.
    - lotsofpulp 3y ago
      Relevant competitors would include higher paying software technology businesses because a smart enough person to work at TSMC doing advanced microchip work will instead choose to go into a different field.

metaphor 3y ago

> I checked a few random job descriptions and none of them mentioned hourly wage/salary, which is usually a bad sign. It's simply not a legal requirement in Arizona to disclose wage/salary range on job listings. You need to look at TSMC listings in states like California[1] or Washington[2]. [1] https://ro.careers.tsmc.com/search/?locationsearch=CA https://ro.careers.tsmc.com/search/?locationsearch=CA [2] https://ro.careers.tsmc.com/search/?locationsearch=WA https://ro.careers.tsmc.com/search/?locationsearch=WA

lotsofpulp 3y ago
Which is an even worse look for TSMC. They could easily do it, since they already do for other states, but they want to pay bottom dollar so much that they would rather retain that card (a relatively minor one for an employer) in their hand than play it.
- metaphor 3y ago
  Is Intel voluntarily disclosing in Ohio job listings? Nope. Is Samsung voluntarily disclosing in Texas job listings? Nope. A "worse look" argument simply has no basis in reality when this corporate behavior is effectively status quo across all relevant competitors in the industry.
  - registeredcorn 3y ago
    I'm not saying such a thing isn't status quo, but simply that, if TSMC wishes to be perceived as "competitive", then an exceedingly easy way to that is to buck the status quo by listing their salary ranges - a competitive action. It seems disingenuous that they would prefer to have it both ways, to cry that they are struggling to attract/keep employees in those positions, yet choose not compete with other companies in that area, by listing information they aren't required to supply. It just seems like that classic quote, "We've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas." That is what makes it a bad sign - they're excited to complain, but (apparently?) completely incompetent when it comes to fixing the problem they're in.
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    Relevant competitors would include higher paying software technology businesses because a smart enough person to work at TSMC doing advanced microchip work will instead choose to go into a different field.