Why base salary rather than total comp?
Why base salary rather than total comp?
When I was new to the FAANG world I pretty much valued the stock at $0. I quickly learned that that was not correct; stock ended up being half my pay. (Probably more than half as you move further up the ladder!) The base salary is good, but another 100% on top of that was also pretty okay. I guess until you've seen it, it all seems mysterious. But I can assure it's almost as good as cash, minus whatever you pay someone to fill out all the tax forms.
As for why these companies give you stock instead of bumping up your base salary to be what you'd get by selling the stock right when it vests... apparently it's cheaper for them. It's not quite the same as printing money, but I guess it's close.
I find the NHS I have today is slighty worse than the Spanish equivalent I left a decade ago. Maybe because of the austerity policy of the Conservative government during the last decade, I don't know. In any case is not too bad.
Funny enough the private health insurances in Spain, which have to compete with a better public system, are WAAAAAAAAAAAAY better than ANY available in the UK.
At first I used the UK private insurance from my employer thinking "if they are being paid let's at least use them, saving resources to the NHS for people without an alternative". But not anymore...
- It's more complicated
- I have an uncomfortable relationship with my doctor when there are financial incentives involved (specially after one specific case)
I actually need to pay a 40% of the price of the insurance in income tax. The only reason I have not asked my employer to stop it is because the NHS cancer treatment times are getting longer than they should. That's the only benefit I see in them: a potentially shorter time to treatment in cases where time may make the difference between life and death.