7 ms·
Silicon Valley has a weird relationship to capitalism. They sometimes like to pretend to themselves that work isn't about money, and the laws of supply and dema
by dyno12345 14y ago
Silicon Valley has a weird relationship to capitalism. They sometimes like to pretend to themselves that work isn't about money, and the laws of supply and demand shouldn't apply to labor.
You should work for us because, it's, like, really great! You should want to work 55 hours a week because you really want to! The fact that you're creating stockholder wealth is merely incidental.
Every company in the valley seems to pay "market wages" and then complain that there's simply not enough talent out there. It shouldn't be about the money for them. They should want to work here, because it's so great!
People should be paid what's "fair" and should want to work as much as is practical. Some kid out of college should be paid what's fair for them as a person - it's like a moral issue - not according to the value they create for the company, which can be enormous even if it's just a kid of school. And we need rock stars, not warm bodies, even if the gain to the company from hiring each non-rock star is still enormous.
I am familiar with several SV firms that would make like $400,000 per year per new hire, but insist on paying "market wages" based on experience, and then complain it's impossible to find enough people to hire. You think if we were on wall street a firm would hesitate to double someone's salary if the firm thought they could make double that by hiring them? No one in SV wants to compete on pay. Everyone wants to convince themselves that they've created the greatest place on earth to work, and that everyone should work there because it's so great. The fact that they create wealth for the stockholders is a benign coincidence.
If SV ran the retail industry, everyone with the same job titles would make pretty much the same amount of money working at either Saks Fifth Avenue or Old Navy. What if Saks wanted to hire someone away from Old Navy? They would try to convince them that Saks is really great!! Not because Saks could see that it could gain more from the person working for them than at Old Navy than Old Navy would and can therefore pay them more. That's economic efficiency. But it seems kind of crass, doesn't it? You should want to work for us! Because it's so great, and we'll give you a tiny, tiny, tiny percentage of the equity.
What if I went around telling employers I wanted a strict 40 hour work week? How suddenly would they forget about that hiring shortage? Wanting to work less shows you don't care. You should want to work here. Not because by you working here it creates more wealth for us than we're going to pay you. You think that multiple still doesn't apply if someone is working 13% less hours!? But someone who wants to work less doesn't care, and you should want to work and want to work here as much as possible.
I get six dozen recruiter emails a week. All of them sound exactly the same - you should work here because it's so great! None of them want to compete on fundamentals - pay me more and give me more vacation time. How distasteful! As a result I am completely indifferent between all of them. Everyone likes to pretend it's not about money and there is no price curve for labor. It's weird.
- rayiner 14y ago> Silicon Valley has a weird relationship to capitalism. They sometimes like to pretend to themselves that work isn't about money, and the laws of supply and demand shouldn't apply to labor. What's amusing is that SV is also a place bankrolled by VC, and the VC firms don't buy into that stuff at all. They have no problem paying huge bonuses to lure people away Morgan Stanley, Goldman, etc. But you'll rarely hear them espouse for engineers the mantras they believe for financial professionals: you gotta pay those big bonuses if you want to get the "top talent."
- zenbowman 14y agoExactly, lol. Of course they want engineers to be desperate, it's a lot cheaper that way. This idea that the best ideas come from desperation isn't necessarily accurate anyway, builders want to build, its in their blood. It's why I hack on the weekends and played with breadboards and legos as a kid. Having enough money allows me to focus on doing what I love best: building stuff. I want to be a part of building the Holodeck, paying me less won't make me want it more.
- eli_gottlieb 14y agoIt's perhaps difficult to quantify the marginal contribution of your latest hire. However, almost all companies are keeping track of their revenue-per-employee, and it's fairly common around here to remark that your company is not yet doing well until that number hits about $200,000/man-year. Apple and Google and the like have about double that. At that level of revenue, yes, there are taxes and capital costs to pay, but you can also afford damn fine salaries, too.
- bravohippo 14y agoYou're my favorite HN poster and I've read all your comments going back tens of pages. Marry me?
- eli_gottlieb 14y agoI'm already engaged to someone, and sorry, but I really do feel pretty uncomfortable with open fanboyism. I guess for a better response I might paraphrase Marx: the development of you is the basis for the free development of us.