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.
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?".
yeah a lot of deadwood engineering managers. like you've a manager on top of a manager, then another manager, then finally director. then vp then CTO.
most of them are coasting, hosting "bonding" events, socializing, holding useless 1:1s where you're supposed to "take the lead", just utter bs.
You forgot meetings to plan for meetings
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.
That layer cake can go much deeper.
M0 -> M1 -> M1 -> M2 -> M2 -> D1 -> D1 -> D2 -> D2 -> VP -> VP -> VP -> CxO -> CEO
Mx = manager Dx = director
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
Happening over the Ides of March... a bit ironic
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.
* Blind post by non Meta employee
*. 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
Meta’s blind is full of troll posts like this right now. The most obvious tells that this is fake are:
- Part about Boz (very unlikely & a Meta blind meme)
- Reference to Bain (there was a false rumor they were involved in the November layoffs.)
Teamblind has successfully predicted 10 off the last 3 layoffs
No mention of impact to ICs. Seems strange to me.
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.
Can someone explain what D and M roles are for those unfamiliar? Thanks!
here's a listing for a D role https://www.themuse.com/jobs/meta/director-product-technical...
it's basically smooth talking.
They are levels in the management track.
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.
Here's a mapping of Manager levels to other companies such as Google, Amazon and Microsoft:
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...
It's their designator for management path employees. I'm assuming it's (D)irector and (M)anager.
(D)irector and (M)anager. Director are Manager who manage Manager.
What is this website?
Who cares about Meta?