3 ms·

I suspect this is a result of acquisitions. They buy some startup, bring them all under Meta's HR umbrella with all the rules and perks that comes with. Since t

I suspect this is a result of acquisitions. They buy some startup, bring them all under Meta's HR umbrella with all the rules and perks that comes with. Since these recently acquired guys are running out of random offices in random places they just give them a stipend rather than force them to all relocate to a campus with dining. Some people are happy, some are unhappy, some don't like their new overlords and don't feel bad abusing the system. That's just how it goes with these sorts of things. The $400k employee was probably a higher up (or key SME Meta felt they needed to put in golden handcuffs) at one of these acquired companies and was probably already on his or her way out or they were in a position of authority and encouraging/condoning abusing the system. You don't fire someone like that over ~$100/day unless there's more to the story.

mvdtnz 2y ago
That's a lot of assumptions.
s1artibartfast 2y ago
Every company I have ever worked at would fire employees for blatant and repeated theft.
- potato3732842 2y ago
  Of course but depending on how this was or wasn't messaged it probably doesn't fall into that category. At the very least using the word "blatant" is in error.
  - m463 2y ago
    It seems pretty blatant to me: Instead of using the $25 credit to buy dinner and have it delivered to the office, some Meta staff opted to buy items like toothpaste and wine glasses with the credit
    - withinboredom 2y ago
      If you give me 25 bucks for dinner, and I'm not hungry, am I obliged to not spend the 25 bucks?
      - s1artibartfast 2y ago
        no, This was a policy where you can get a voucher for food if you are staying late to work. I have a business travel card for food when I travel. I'm not "obliged" or permitted to use the travel card for my personal household expenses.
        withinboredom 2y ago
        I think I wasn't clear. What I meant, is that if I am working late, I am entitled to the voucher. If I get some toothpaste instead of eating ... is that theft?? I do agree that if you aren't working late, you aren't entitled to the voucher and that is clear theft. I'm talking about spending the money that you are entitled to on something different than the purpose of the money. I suspect in those cases, to most people, it is no different than saving for a trip and using the money on different expenses for _reasons_. If it is the case that people were entitled to the money, but then spent it on non-food, asserting that it is theft is just people trying to control people. You gave them money, they spent it on something you don't agree with, so you fire them. That's bullshit, you gave them the money. I also suspect that these are the same people that give beggars cash and complain when the beggar buys some shampoo and a beer instead of food.
        s1artibartfast 2y ago
        Maybe there is a context problem here from people not familiar with business expenses or these types of employee perk programs. Every program of this nature that I have had was clear that they arent giving you money, but offering to pay for a specific thing. There are clear rules for what they are willing to pay for and when. I dont think it is plausible these purchases happened by mistake.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    I think it probably does. My company has similar programs, and the purpose and rules are clearly stated.
questionableans 2y ago
At Meta, $400k would be high E4 or low E5. That’s someone earlier in their career who probably feels fairly anonymous and is used to taking all the deals they can get to live cheaply, even if they don’t need to anymore.
- firecall 2y ago
  Far out! Salaries in the rest of the world really can't compete can they!
  - questionableans 2y ago
    I’d honestly rather be paid less and have more equal pay across society, while not having to worry about age discrimination or medical debt or something wiping out my savings and throwing me out on the streets, however unlikely that may seem. In the US, basically all of my spending outside of the basics is on things you could classify as avoiding ever being poor/homeless. No vacations or eating out or streaming subscriptions or “toys” or whatnot. Maybe these kids feel that same pressure but took it too far, into fraudulent territory.
- potato3732842 2y ago
  When they say "making $400k/yr" I assume they're talking cash compensation which puts them well above E5.
  - questionableans 2y ago
    I’m sure they mean total compensation, as reflected in employee W-2 forms. Modulo a few details, public company stock-based compensation is as good as cash the moment it vests (and in fact is cash if you make an automatic sell-all election, which is not subject to trading windows).

mvdtnz 2y ago

That's a lot of assumptions.

s1artibartfast 2y ago

Every company I have ever worked at would fire employees for blatant and repeated theft.

potato3732842 2y ago
Of course but depending on how this was or wasn't messaged it probably doesn't fall into that category. At the very least using the word "blatant" is in error.
- m463 2y ago
  It seems pretty blatant to me: Instead of using the $25 credit to buy dinner and have it delivered to the office, some Meta staff opted to buy items like toothpaste and wine glasses with the credit
  - withinboredom 2y ago
    If you give me 25 bucks for dinner, and I'm not hungry, am I obliged to not spend the 25 bucks?
    - s1artibartfast 2y ago
      no, This was a policy where you can get a voucher for food if you are staying late to work. I have a business travel card for food when I travel. I'm not "obliged" or permitted to use the travel card for my personal household expenses.
      - withinboredom 2y ago
        I think I wasn't clear. What I meant, is that if I am working late, I am entitled to the voucher. If I get some toothpaste instead of eating ... is that theft?? I do agree that if you aren't working late, you aren't entitled to the voucher and that is clear theft. I'm talking about spending the money that you are entitled to on something different than the purpose of the money. I suspect in those cases, to most people, it is no different than saving for a trip and using the money on different expenses for _reasons_. If it is the case that people were entitled to the money, but then spent it on non-food, asserting that it is theft is just people trying to control people. You gave them money, they spent it on something you don't agree with, so you fire them. That's bullshit, you gave them the money. I also suspect that these are the same people that give beggars cash and complain when the beggar buys some shampoo and a beer instead of food.
        s1artibartfast 2y ago
        Maybe there is a context problem here from people not familiar with business expenses or these types of employee perk programs. Every program of this nature that I have had was clear that they arent giving you money, but offering to pay for a specific thing. There are clear rules for what they are willing to pay for and when. I dont think it is plausible these purchases happened by mistake.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  I think it probably does. My company has similar programs, and the purpose and rules are clearly stated.

questionableans 2y ago

At Meta, $400k would be high E4 or low E5. That’s someone earlier in their career who probably feels fairly anonymous and is used to taking all the deals they can get to live cheaply, even if they don’t need to anymore.

firecall 2y ago
Far out! Salaries in the rest of the world really can't compete can they!
- questionableans 2y ago
  I’d honestly rather be paid less and have more equal pay across society, while not having to worry about age discrimination or medical debt or something wiping out my savings and throwing me out on the streets, however unlikely that may seem. In the US, basically all of my spending outside of the basics is on things you could classify as avoiding ever being poor/homeless. No vacations or eating out or streaming subscriptions or “toys” or whatnot. Maybe these kids feel that same pressure but took it too far, into fraudulent territory.
potato3732842 2y ago
When they say "making $400k/yr" I assume they're talking cash compensation which puts them well above E5.
- questionableans 2y ago
  I’m sure they mean total compensation, as reflected in employee W-2 forms. Modulo a few details, public company stock-based compensation is as good as cash the moment it vests (and in fact is cash if you make an automatic sell-all election, which is not subject to trading windows).