Economics just isn't this simple. I wish that people who wanted to use this simple definition would admit that they're incentivized to do so because it benefits them in their current situation. It's okay. Just call it what it is.
Many employers are absolutely selling a lifestyle. Why does it make sense for an employer to upgrade their healthcare plan when the actual work hasn't changed? Because it's something their employees value and raises their standard of living. It makes the company more competitive.
Why does it make sense for a company to move to open a new office in a different location or even relocate the whole company. Part of the calculus is always that folks in that area will accept less money because they can still achieve a similar lifestyle there.
If you want more money while staying in a cheap area, just say that. It's okay. It sounds awesome and it's not a mystery why you would want it. We don't have to go through all these mental gymnastics. We don't have pretend that the value of money isn't relative.
They're is a real conversation to be had about people who do knowledge work. If money is a measure of how valued you are, it is difficult to know if you're being valued the same as your peers when you're in an environment of differentiated pay. That's real.
We can have that conversation without all this other stuff. There are ways to solve for that problem without fixing your mouth to say a dollar in SF is the same as a dollar in Kentucky or a dollar in Portugal. It's just not. And we have to contend with that.
Cost of living is not the same as cost of labor. This is an incredibly important distinction. And understanding it will really help you build a more accurate mental model of how the economics of compensation works.
That's not at all meant to be condescending though it may come across like that. I'm being dead serious. If you're confusing cost of living for cost of labor, your model of how compensation decisions are made is flawed. And your arguments are likely to be equally flawed.
When I first because a manager and started to have to reason about compensation, I got this wrong a lot. I'm not blaming anybody for being ignorant here. Learning about cost of living becomes common knowledge, while the other stuff is not. It's a gap in our understanding.
Simple math suddenly gets real hard for people when it means they have to accept less money.
People really tell themselves they're being "logical" and "fair" about who gets what money. It's just not true. Humans become the *most* irrational when it comes to things like money. Money equals life and livelihood. We are constantly battling being selfish af about it.
This is an argument worth hearing, though I don't think I agree right now. I do think the atmosphere we are in is one where tech employees with high leverage are actively *trying* to make that true.
The only thing I'm saying right now is that I wish more people would approach money conversations being more self-aware about their biases and their own personal incentives. But then I wish they'd approach every conversation that way, and I'm frequently disappointed.
I mean we haven't even gotten to the other stuff. Like how humans refuse to allow the cost of many goods and services to be differentiated. I pay the same for netflix in SF as someone in Kentucky does. Even though the cost of that choice is not the same.
Most people outside of SF completely ignore the fact that there are hyper localized reasons why compensation in SF is so high. We are in a housing crisis. Rent and real estate prices are out of control. And *only* tech companies with deep pockets are able to compensate for that.
Taken our *broken* comp levels and exporting them to the rest of the country/world means exporting a *problem* that shouldn't exist.
It also means if we ever fix this problem y'all will start taking a pay cuts. You gonna act like you're okay with that? Make it make sense.
When people talk about paying the same everywhere, they rarely address this reality. We will eventually move to a world of *downward* pressure on our wages. That is the norm. But folks in tech have convinced themselves that we're somehow immune. It's gonna be a rude awakening.
It's worth riding this gravy train for as long as it lasts. But what we shouldn't be doing is using simplistic arguments in an attempt to secure short term (and shortsighted) gains. Focus on making things more equitable. Not more "equal and fair".
This isn't even hypothetical. People are actively ignoring the whole era of aggressive outsourcing of tech to lower wage nations. *Nobody* was saying this at that time. Instead it was "here's why teams in india aren't as good as me".
Being aggressively ahistorical is one of the core ways people seek to be selfish while trying to maintain that they're "just being rational". It's wild to me. But you will never get away with it on this TL. I'm not the one.
Told you. History is a hell of a thing. It will have you out here looking foolish real quick.
Congrats, you've described the inevitable failure mode of "pay everybody the same". It will literally just shift the locus of which regions get all of the hiring.
Folks in this convo are also talking into he trap of marking "SF engineers" as an elite class who can readily be sacrificed. San Francisco is people's home. It's where my daughter is growing up. I'm not a fucking boogeyman. I'm a human who is also just trying to live.
Yes we make a lot of money. We made our own sacrifices and trade offs to be able to do so. My family is in Georgia trying to survive covid with no health insurance. Fuck you if you think my salary is just about me trying to live some luxurious lifestyle.
I'm officially done with this conversation because I'm annoyed. I hope at least some of y'all are starting to understand why the world is so complicated. A big part of it is that people are selfish as fuck while they insist on pretending they're not.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
"...even with artificial intelligence and third-party moderators, the company was 'deleting less than 5% of all of the hate speech posted to Facebook.'" buzzfeednews.com/amphtml/ryanma…
"The implicit vision guiding most of our integrity work today is one where all human discourse is overseen by perfect, fair, omniscient robots owned by Mark Zuckerberg."
That's a hell of a sentence.
I was debating this with @operaqueenie. She says facebook is a big problem, but not the only problem. And I found myself making a very passionate case that, yes, Facebook is the *whole* problem. Not the tool per se, but the power it wields and how it wields that power.
They’re referring to this thread, which has been going around in coding circles. It’s highly entertaining. These kinds of technology “war stories” usually are. But we do have to ask if it was at all necessary.
I hesitate to share these kinds of stories these days. Because I realized that while they are interesting to hear, they are not fun to live through. It’s actually a story of a bunch of people being damn near run into the ground for the benefit of their employer.
Having a place to post this is seriously the only reason I spun up a new blog. If I could have one single idea take hold in tech management it's to stop talking about project updates in 1:1s.
Let me be clear though. You need to talk about project updates. In fact, you probably need to talk about them more often. I see a lot of places where they are locked up in short 1:1 conversations. Change your process so you are hearing them all the time in other venues.
Get project updates out of 1:1s and you'll have room for much more important conversations with your individual direct reports. If your org is stuck in update mode, it will take some time to make this shift. But you will be glad you did.
I hear you Jon. But we're not gonna pretend like this is a Trump thing. This is white America and has always been. You're just taking this opportunity because it's particularly bad right now and you wanna use it to punish Trump. I get it. But you can do better.
Please do use whatever rhetorical tactics you can to blast Trump. But be careful that you're not just describing how America has always worked and only pretending it's bad today. And more importantly, make sure you're gonna still be mad about it after Trump is gone.
These things Jon describes, where powerful people profit off the harm of others while giving themselves advantages, is at the very core of how America works. We have accepted that way of life for centuries. Trump does it with glee and forgets to pretend at decorum. That's all.
You can learn a lot by really examining what is happening with Timnit Gebru. Both how she was used to bolster Google's brand and credibility and how she was ultimately sacrificed when she wouldn't fall in line.
I'm really interested in hearing from Jeff Dean. The Google exec who Gebru says is responsible for backstabbing her. Because here's the thing. He could be a villain. Or he could just be an example of spineless white men who follow orders to destroy PoC when we don't behave.
I'm only talking about this explicitly because Gebru has decided to share her story openly. Keep in mind that what she's doing can and probably will be incredibly damaging to her. But we have to start standing our ground against this kind of villainy. This is how things go bad.