undefined | Better HN

0 pointsrunako3y ago0 comments

Quick thoughts:

1) You are correct, but this does not speak to the need for Microsoft to have sub-optimal processes in any aspect of its business.

Separately, all of the big tech companies including Microsoft pay significantly more than typical employers in places where there are no big tech offices (this is most of the country).

2) This is just incorrect. Those firms cannot sweep the labor market because their US cultures have historically been so dependent on face-time. Microsoft is able to hire engineers in Atlanta in part because Facebook and Google have yet to put down significant engineering presences here, for example. Most medium-to-large US cities do not have significant FAANMG presence and so are also ripe for picking. This is why e.g. Target is able to get great talent in Minneapolis.

3) This is a claim that is difficult to evaluate given that engineering has had essentially full employment for going on 20 years.

0 comments

slt20213y ago

1. process is not suboptimal, market conditions are different. Why would any well qualified minority go to msf for 120k in Atlanta if they can get 240 in Mountain view + relocation bonus? Plus most of qualified minority candidates are hired from top tier engineering programs are across the country. Local market is irrelevant at this point

2. You are wrong again, facetime is irrelevant, because of relocation. Very few will stay at MSFT in Atlanta for 100k if they can double pay + relo to CA/Seattle. Google does have office in atlanta, btw.

Your concept of supposedly "untapped talent in Minneapolis" is wrong, because in Minneapolis metro is about 3.5M people and Target can tap from talent pool of 3.5M, while places like Bay Area can tap from global talent pool (7B people) who self-selects and specifically migrates to places like Bay Area/NY/Seattle. This is three orders of magnitude difference in talent quantity and quality.

There is a reason Walmart established office in Bay Area, and doesn't want to limit itself to the great talent pool of Fayetville AR

runakoOP3y ago

> Why would any well qualified minority go to msf for 120k in Atlanta if they can get 240 in Mountain view + relocation bonus?

Because their family is in the Southeast, and because that $120k leads to a better overall living standard than $240k in Mountain View. Especially if one is raising/planning on raising children, proximity to family is a really important variable.

A process that systematically skips people who won't relocate to the West Coast is suboptimal in a world where we know remote work works.

> facetime is irrelevant, because of relocation. Very few will stay at MSFT in Atlanta for 100k if they can double pay + relo to CA/Seattle. Google does have office in atlanta, btw.

Reed Hastings and Tim Cook, among others, disagree with you. Google does have an Atlanta office, but most of FAANG does not have significant engineering presence there (Microsoft does). Notable that Google expects engineers in Atlanta to come to their office, even though their teams will likely be in other cities. This is the canonical definition of face-time.

And again, $100k in Atlanta or Dallas is roughly equivalent to $200k in the Bay or Seattle. Add in externalities like family and climate (everybody does not like the Bay climate!) and it's not as straightforward as you make it.

> because in Minneapolis metro is about 3.5M people and Target can tap from talent pool of 3.5M, while places like Bay Area can tap from global talent pool (7B people)

If you think everyone wants to move to the Bay, I probably can't convince you otherwise. But please consider that some people a) don't like the climate b) are married to people whose jobs are elsewhere c) prefer a lifestyle that includes homeownership.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse