If this turns out to be true, I hope it's a watershed moment in the tech industry. Lots of middle management in other companies will be sweating since they'll need to do something better than just asking "hey, when do you think this can be done?".
I had a manager who had a manager who had an director who had a director who had a VP who had a VP who had an SVP who reported to the CEO. I may have left out a few layers.
People don't want to accept it on this forum, but with VC money drying up, lessened risk taking, widespread layoffs, plus large influx of workers via career changes, remote work leading to CoL arbitrage, wages are likely to decline pretty broadly across the industry.
Especially so at the upper end FAANG comp bands. Likely most of these previously 500k+ comp packages will compress closer to 300k. Issuing RSUs at lowered valuation multiples is much less viable for a public company. Some public companies have ~50% or more of their revenue consumed by stock based comp, which is clearly not sustainable.
It will impact me too, but I accept it as the most likely outcome
I think the larger income hump will diminish greatly but other industries are probably just waking up to the fact that they were thrown into an accelerated automation and digital transformation competition. I really don't understand how that can't be bad for the rest of the labor market though.. I don't really see consumers as infinitely hungry for goods in the long term.
The good thing about automation/productivity gains is that it leads to increases in real wages. Cheaper means to produce goods and services means cheaper goods and services.
And so far throughout history, displaced workers have found new avenues to be productive in the face of technological disruption. It is true that the progression of technology has hastened over time, so perhaps it could create a bigger labor force disruption than in the past.
As some jobs disappear, other jobs become more cost viable through the deflationary structure. e.g. food delivery wasn't likely a viable business before automobiles/e-bikes. Once real cost of delivering a good passes into an economical threshold, new jobs become viable where previously they weren't
The Ides of March portend the end of one arisen world & the thrashing necessity of finding a new world to take it's place. (It famously did not go well for the assassin's & their desires.)
It would truly be a new world if Meta cut a bunch of management-class people, and the rest of the world actually followed suit. It seems unimaginable.
I feel like this is the one step that has been unimaginable anywhere in the world. There definitely have been whole teams let go, and a lot of other non-industrial/support departments seeing cuts, but just saying, the managerial class isn't really that valuable, we want to keep our good workers though: it'd be a wildly different world.
Weirdly I find myself far less eager for such a wide shift than I would have been, even a couple years ago.
The hierarchy was very sparse in many orgs. As an M1 (first tier manager), I managed a team of 13 people. My manager only had 3-4 people, and same for their manager. There definitely was a lot of room to flatten the hierarchy.
25 comments
[ 3.6 ms ] story [ 72.0 ms ] threadit's basically smooth talking.
M: Manager D: Director
The rough matching of levels is: M0, E5 or senior engineer, M1 to E6 or staff engineer, M2 for manager of managers, etc.
Director is the level above M2.
https://www.levels.fyi/?compare=Facebook,Microsoft,Google,Am...
And as another point of reference, mapping of Engineer levels to these same companies:
https://www.levels.fyi/?compare=Facebook,Microsoft,Google,Am...
M0 -> M1 -> M1 -> M2 -> M2 -> D1 -> D1 -> D2 -> D2 -> VP -> VP -> VP -> CxO -> CEO
Mx = manager Dx = director
Especially so at the upper end FAANG comp bands. Likely most of these previously 500k+ comp packages will compress closer to 300k. Issuing RSUs at lowered valuation multiples is much less viable for a public company. Some public companies have ~50% or more of their revenue consumed by stock based comp, which is clearly not sustainable.
It will impact me too, but I accept it as the most likely outcome
And so far throughout history, displaced workers have found new avenues to be productive in the face of technological disruption. It is true that the progression of technology has hastened over time, so perhaps it could create a bigger labor force disruption than in the past.
As some jobs disappear, other jobs become more cost viable through the deflationary structure. e.g. food delivery wasn't likely a viable business before automobiles/e-bikes. Once real cost of delivering a good passes into an economical threshold, new jobs become viable where previously they weren't
It would truly be a new world if Meta cut a bunch of management-class people, and the rest of the world actually followed suit. It seems unimaginable.
I feel like this is the one step that has been unimaginable anywhere in the world. There definitely have been whole teams let go, and a lot of other non-industrial/support departments seeing cuts, but just saying, the managerial class isn't really that valuable, we want to keep our good workers though: it'd be a wildly different world.
Weirdly I find myself far less eager for such a wide shift than I would have been, even a couple years ago.
*. Post itself is a screenshot of a notes app
This is as reliable as an anonymous egg-profile tweet
The whole idea with Blind is to read from people inside the company, where Blind verified they are indeed inside
- Part about Boz (very unlikely & a Meta blind meme)
- Reference to Bain (there was a false rumor they were involved in the November layoffs.)