Apple delays bonuses for some divisions as it scrutinizes costs
bloomberg.com
bloomberg.com
FWIW my understanding was that it was already once-per-year 99% of the time, with the off-cycle bonus being intended for weird circumstances (starting at an unusual time that left a big gap in between bonuses, retention for employees likely to leave). Someone correct me if I'm wrong though!
EDIT: Clicking through to the Bloomberg article actually provides the context I was lacking:
> The majority of Apple’s divisions had already moved to a once-a-year schedule for bonuses and promotions, including software engineering and services, but staff in operations, corporate retail and other groups had still been on the outgoing biannual plan.
I wasn't aware that non-engineers were on a different schedule, but I wouldn't regard this change as "cost cutting", just consolidating some differences across orgs.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-03-14/apple-del...
What is more interesting is if there is a way to align promotions with stuff that's good for the company. The issue isn't that people want to get promoted, it's that they get promoted to do things that are negative for the company!
That seems to have been the standard for every job I've ever had, across disciplines and sectors. I assume this is not the norm in silicon valley?
Also, I swear, if 10 years from now Apple goes through rough times, they'll ask for a government bailout.
Morality only works when you're small and weak.
It is also worth noting that bonuses are customarily paid when the business is doing better than projected, but Apple's revenues were down 5% in 2022.
Meaningful and impactful in what way? They make phones, that’s it. They are not solving some big world issues. World won’t end if we don’t get phones with bigger screens and better cameras every year.
> Some would even argue that Apple (and other big tech companies are OVERpaying...)
No. None of the tech companies are overpaying, they are in fact underpaying. Employees get a tiny fraction of the profit they generate. They are not even paying the taxes they’re supposed to.
> It is also worth noting that bonuses are customarily paid when the business is doing better than projected, but Apple's revenues were down 5% in 2022.
Apple made $117.2 billion in profits in 2022. Surely they can pay their employees bonuses and better wages in general if they want to.
Oh come on, you’re not even trying to have a fruitful discussion. You don’t have to love Apple, but at least put a sliver of effort into the discussion.
Meaningful to me is something that improves quality of life for majority of people like vaccines, cure for terminal decease, better public transport etc. Making a $1000 phone sadly does not fall into same category.
Apple did push the industry with personal computers in 80s and better smartphones in 2007 but since then it’s been very incremental improvements.
NFC payments don't consume much energy on a phone either; you can generally set them to work even if the battery is dead.
Apple does provide all those as first party services though, so you might think of buying new phones as subscribing to that if you like it.
This is a race to the bottom. "It's okay if Apple makes things worse for their employees as long as they are still not as bad as X".
I'm sure there are people who considered their bonuses when deciding to work for Apple in the first place, and I think it's telling that Apple has decided to do this at a time when companies are laying off workers and the labor market makes "leaving in droves" unlikely.
> Apple's revenues were down 5% in 2022.
Frankly, it wouldn't matter since Apple is still be making obscene profits and more than enough to treat their employees far better than they were before this change, but however bad the end of 2022 was for apple they were doing better than ever just before that.
> Cupertino, California October 27, 2022 Apple today announced financial results for its fiscal 2022 fourth quarter ended September 24, 2022. The Company posted a September quarter record revenue of $90.1 billion, up 8 percent year over year, and quarterly earnings per diluted share of $1.29, up 4 percent year over year. Annual revenue was $394.3 billion, up 8 percent year over year, and annual earnings per diluted share were $6.11, up 9 percent year over year. https://www.apple.com/newsroom/2022/10/apple-reports-fourth-...
And as far as "really meaningful and impactful work" - well, Apple is a very large organization, with all that entails.
We're not comparing Apple engineers to some guy flipping burgers, but to engineers at other comparable companies. So "$X should be enough" is not the metric. There's no cutoff for "well compensated". It depends on how much profit the company makes and how much you bring in.
Apple is notorious for not compensating its people well, given that it doesn't have the most generous of salaries compared to other FAANGs and has more strict working conditions - while having the biggest profit margins.
>If people thought the deal they have is unfair and they can get a better deal elsewhere, they'd leave in droves, but that's not the case.
Many top devs have left Apple over the years exactly for such reasons. And people factor in other stuff too, for many years for many employees Apple was more based on instilling a cult-like, reality-distortion-based hold to be "glad to be working at Apple" than actual conpensation.
You know, of the "Apple employees get to do some really meaningful and impactful work" variety...
>Apple's revenues were down 5% in 2022.
Why, does Apple share its profits with employees the years that they're up 5%?
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of how (labor) markets work. A company doesn't exist in order to funnel all its profit to its workers. Labor is a market just like other inputs, in the sense that there is supply and demand, so compensation is a function of that, not how much profit a company makes.
> You know, of the "Apple employees get to do some really meaningful and impactful work" variety...
To imply to someone who chooses to be at Apple over a place like Amazon or Meta (or non-tech company) that they are delusional and that their work is meaningless and has zero impact in this world is truly and utterly insulting.
No, it usually is a disagreement on how they should work (usually with the conventional way presented as some inviolatable physical law).
But that's irrelevant, as I wasn't aiming to critique labor markers and capitalism in the comment, or say that a "company exists in order to funnel all its profit to its workers".
That whatever they pay will be shaped by supply and demand and acceptable to people in the job market looking for a job is a given, a tautology actually.
Still, how well a company pays depends on how much of its profit it gives away. That whatever it does end paying will be ammenable to "supply and demand" doesn't mean there aren't companies paying well above market value for the same roles as others who pay less - even if the former don't need to do that to get employees.
Who are some of the companies that pay well above market value? I’m sure many engineers who have been laid off would appreciate the tip!
What is an example of such a company? I.e. one that pays well above market rate for a similar job at Apple? Bonus points if the culture, working conditions, etc. are on par or better.
Again, what do you know about Apple's internal culture? Have you actually worked there, or known anyone who has?
I've been chewing on this part. It's odd for a large profitable company to tighten the belt over a small miss that still left them large and profitable; they are not in trouble and their people aren't responsible for the macro. On the other hand, it's also no good to handsomely reward people when the business is not performing as it should; it misaligns key incentives.
Perhaps a good balance would be to retroactively adjust business targets for the purposes of the bonus; "One year ago, $X revenue looked feasible. Knowing what we know now, $Y would have been more in line with this year's market". Then you still measure collective success, but don't punish people for missing what turned out to be an impossible target.
Second, you spoke about revenues. What matters is profits. Walmart has insanely large revenues, but modest profits, due to very tight margins.
And, about Apple's profits in 2021 and 2022, I googled: "apple profits 2021 and 2022". Top hit says: "Apple annual gross profit for 2022 was $170.782B, a 11.74% increase from 2021." Ref: https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/AAPL/apple/gross-p...
Worth noting is that Apple missed investor expectations around profit for 2022, and more importantly, diluted EPS.
However, what really matters is the future outlook (expected profit, macro economic forecasts, etc.) not historical numbers. Why? Because you have to do things now to set you up for future success, not past glory.
1) Will FAANG+ companies hire college interns this summer?
2) Will FAANG+ companies hire new college graduates to start in the fall?
There's lots of companies out there that pay well, offer far better wlb, and aren't nearly as "picky" as FAANG.
It also has, historically, been very good on the resume. And they have tended to be on the whole respectful places to work with good perks / benefits.
Whether this all still holds in a year or two, we shall see.
I suspect the issue was that FAANG was massively overpaying junior talent fresh out of school (and hiring leetcoders without any engineering background) and now they're correcting.
I started in 2005 with no degree at $10/hr. Many years later, a handful of job changes, and I'm north of $200k total compensation when you include salary, insurance and ESOP. That's a huge leap from where I started, but when I see people nearly 1/2 my age hitting $200k on salary alone, it makes me wonder...
total comp for a senior engineer easily breaks $300k at any of the FAANGs. at the same time, downleveling is common for people who don't grind leetcode problems pretty intensely. I know more than one person with 10+ years at the "senior" level at other companies who only got a mid-level offer at FAANGs. and they still took it; it was more money even with the downlevel.
I am the highest level of Sr. SWE at my FANG w/ very little work to get there vs the folks I work with who are grinding themselves to death trying to get promoted from within.
Edit: I'll add that your first job or two is pretty important for setting the tone of your career. Going to a FANG and learning toxic habits, like putting yourself above your team and thinking only of compensation/promotions, can make you an asshole for life.
Also, that stuff was invented more than a decade ago in most cases. Very different companies back then
In particular -> "Going to a FANG and learning toxic habits, like putting yourself above your team and thinking only of compensation/promotions, can make you an asshole for life."
I think you'd be unwise to think that FANG will teach you toxic habits and putting yourself your team. Or if it happens, that other companies on average are better and FANG is the bottom of the barrel.
Whereas at larger companies you have more leeway in moving teams and finding an org with wonderful people.
That doesn’t mean a startup is a bad choice for a new grad, it can be the best choice for many. But I would not count out larger companies so quickly.
So I agree that FAANG isn’t a great signal of brilliance but it is a good sign of “decently competent”.
Think what you want about the company itself, but they've done a shit ton of amazing engineering work.
Also Hasura is not Meta tech afaik.
Considering we pay about $350k for a fresh grad, I think I know why this is.
Assholes are everywhere, so learning to deal with them is essential, but, in my experience(which, arguably, mostly comes from another era), the valley has a lot more assholes per engineer than, say, a small to medium sized company. Not only that, but the valley has an overall social environment which is... unsupportive to many. It is, based on my experience and the general feeling I've encountered talking to coworkers and online folks, a very difficult place to find friends and support.
Depending on your role, there are a lot of places that look down on FANG experience. That is going to vary a lot with which part of the SW elephant you work on. My experiences as an embedded SWE who deals a lot with HW folks won't necessarily map to someone doing games or front end web work.
FAANG folks have high salary expectations, often do not know how to work in a less supportive environment, often possess big egos, and will leave as soon as they're offered another FAANG gig.
When I've hired for non-FAANG roles, I hire folks who are going to be a good fit for the team and the company, who demonstrate a good understanding of the work they've done, and whose experience aligns with what the role requires. Coming from a FAANG was neither a benefit nor an asset to me. Now that I've done time in the valley, I think I'd be extra careful to screen toxic folks.
...yet they look so similar when compared as a group to everywhere else.
What point of view?
- business model
- culture
- growth rate
- engineering problems
- ?
Netflix is totally different from Amazon is totally different from Apple, for instance, on almost each of these dimensions.
If you don't think this is true then I encourage you to look at the comments any time someone relatively senior coming from outside FAANG asks about being down-levelled when they start. There are always a few slightly too haughty people talking about how that outside experience doesn't translate and a different skill set is needed at high levels in a FAANG-style organisation. That's true - up to a point at least - but it goes both ways.
As a software developer, I'm 100% ideologically against working for a faang because it gives them even more power.
(TC is total compensation, it's a meme on Blind to mention what one's TC is when talking about working at a company. Those that don't are told to GTFO. Interestingly enough, the salary sharing is quite beneficial to employees on Blind, since it incentivizes salaries to go up.)
If you solely value TC then you may be a great fit for the valley. If you value other things, you probably won't like working and socializing with people who put TC above all else and you should avoid the valley. Leave it for the people who need it.
This is one of the big things you'll run into in the valley: folks who value that extra $150-250k of compensation every year vs proximity to friends+family, work/life balance, etc.
If the folks I work with are any indication, the extra money is what you'll tell yourself you'll spend one day while you blow the best years of your life grinding away at work. This is how you end up one of those weird, 60+, friendless engineers living in, I don't know, Las Vegas, driving a supercar and married to a foreign woman who only loves you for your money. But there are folks who will argue that that is a great life and if you want to work with them, the valley is there for you!
> If the folks I work with are any indication, the extra money is what you'll tell yourself you'll spend one day while you blow the best years of your life grinding away at work
I'm curious how old you are and how many YOE you had before you joined FAANG as a senior.
What did you spend "the best years of your life" doing instead of "grinding away at work"?
I want to add here that I'm not totally bagging on FAANG work. I'm glad I did it(and still am). I have an immensely impactful role that pays well even if I don't enjoy the team I'm on. But I work with people who have spent most of their careers in the valley and it shows. They're middle aged and frustrated that, despite their single, high paying FAANG job they can't buy a house or find a spouse("Man Jose" and all that). They're folks without hobbies who only seem to find worth in their work accomplishments. Maybe I'm just old and these are the kinds of people society cranks out now. I don't know.
FAANG folks I work with mostly worked hard but at a reasonable pace, not running themselves ragged like the startup folks I know.
I’m not sure what else would be included in total compensation.
The main benefits are a super relaxed work atmosphere. Absolutely no stress. I typically work from 10:30-3pm each day with time off for lunch. My work is mostly remote, though I only live a few miles from campus, so I could go in whenever I want. The projects are fun, I like all of my coworkers and have very laid back managers.
1. Raises at my current company weren't offered unless requested, or unless a promotion (change in title) occurred. Sometimes both. 2. Raises associated with normal growth in your role at my current company were pretty consistently 3-4%, raises associated with a promotion were 5-8%. 3. Switching companies would get me a 10-20% raise.
Early in your career, the value you're providing is improving fast, and your compensation should keep up, but for most, it doesn't, because management has an idea that some percentage is "standard".
Having talked to lots of people about their salaries (which all workers should do), it doesn't seem to matter much whether you're switching between startups, between FAANG (or similar) companies, or between the two. But if the person you're responding to took a trajectory that led through a few companies to FAANG, it might create the impression that it's good to go to other companies before FAANG.
I'm sure it depends on the company, but you can also switch teams and products inside a large company if you feel there's more opportunity elsewhere. (One thing people think is that boring-but-important work might pay better - this actually isn't true, the exciting meme work also pays the most but is less stable.)
I suppose it's possible none of the FAANG folks I have spoken to about this were getting good performance reviews, but I have never heard of someone getting a 20% raise in one year at a FAANG company unless there were some obvious extenuating circumstances. I'm sure HNers will rush in now to tell me they got X>20% raise at Y FAANG, but that definitely seems like outliers to me.
And the thing is, you don't even have to be great to get a 20% raise by switching jobs early in your career. Normal, even mediocre growth as an engineer puts you at that valuation easily.
But I'd say in a FAANG the target isn't salary growth, it's getting enough stock refreshers to avoid TC falloffs, which you should be able to do through good perf reviews and promos.
Could you explain this further? I'm not sure I understand.
Also, yes, easier to get raises that way.
If you want to be leveled up fast in a FAANG, you should start in one. I know of 4+ YOE people jumping one level per year, they are an exception but the argument is, it is faster if you are born into the culture, rather than if you adopt it.
Imo having a FAANG company on your resume provides flexibility. Also, FAANG jobs are just nice. You have a lot of creature comforts that will make your first few years out of college much easier (Good 401k matching, liquid stock, good benefits, plenty of locations to chose from, wide selection of teams, free food, etc). Ive been at "good" companies without many of these benefits, and while the work is interesting, your quality of life suffers greatly.
Also eng talent is generally pretty good at FAANG from what I can tell. You have a lot of really senior people showing you the ropes, vs a startup which may be led by younger people who may be smart, but lack experience.
If you are dead set on some career path that doesn't require you to be at a FAANG company (i.e you got a job somewhere and you are satisfied with being there for a while), then sure it may not matter, but for a general SWE, the flexibility, resume value, and scope going to a FAANG company gives you is very valuable.
Note: I am using "FAANG" here to mean FAANG + Similar adjacent companies. Think Uber, Microsoft, Airbnb, Datadog, etc.
The timeline for reaching senior+ in FAANG is also likely to be a lot longer if you start from outside vs working up from inside.
It sounds like you're agreeing with me as you're having a good experience at a non-FAANG company :D
E.g. Stripe, Uber, Square, Microsoft etc would count towards "FAANG".
Do you think the environment at FAANG specifically is that different from other large tech companies?
That said, there are certain companies that are held in higher esteem by many of the folks who care about such things, and those companies tend to attract people who value working for an esteemed company. I talked with another FAANG engineer one day who said they'd feel like a failure if they didn't move on to another FAANG, despite grinding away for years, being middle aged and unhappy, and burned out by the politics at work. Anyway, I think those 'esteemed' companies attract more aggressive and driven folks which changes the culture vs any other large tech co.
I sure hope so. I've signed an internship offer for this summer but I am very anxious about it being reneged on
What is under 3rd M?
MAMAA would also make sense.
2) Yes, I know people with start dates in the fall at F and A (the fruit, not the river), and it looks like they intend to honor those offers.
I swear to God.
2) Maybe. My guess is external new grad offers (i.e offers extended to people that were not previously interns at the company) will become much harder to get/if not impossible. There were already a few companies that almost exclusively hired out of their intern class even before tech was hit hard by the economy.
Intern return offer rates might be lower as well, but if the overall class size decreases, my guess is the % of offers extended won't go down as much.
I'd be curious to know what's not working out. My best speculation is that there were other new product lines being worked on that aren't taking shape.
I don't think the phone and Mac business warrant this kind of change. Does anyone have an insight?
Never been one for anarchy but this just feels so much like we have all be trained by the system to conform. Does Apple also have Hall monitors? Do Applers need to raise their hand to ask their managers if they can go to the bathroom?
Only after they pledge allegiance to the iPhone, and the recurring-revenue services for which it stands.
One company, under Jobs, indivisible, with liquidity and touchbars for all.
That's why you're not seeing the money.