Hacker News Reader

Comment by fsniper | Hacker News Reader

It's strange to see US based workers to bash on Europe based workers who push back for their rights. Even if you don't see any "rights" to fight back, isn't it to your own benefit that someone else is fighting for more rights/better conditions? Why would you sit back and accept to be the scapegoat for conditions that you didn't cause or you didn't have any say over at the first place? The companies are laying of people, because? They are not earning as much as someone says so, while sitting on cash reserves?

View on HN

B/c the cold hard truth is that people would rather the 3-4x salaries.

https://jobs.theguardian.com/job/8512191/head-of-cyber-secur...

You have the head of cyber security making almost 1/2 as much as many CS grads right out of college.

People can and will say they want more rights... but if that were _really_ true you would see tons of tech workers breaking down the door to get into Europe. As it stands, the complete opposite is happening.

How is that at all related? US paying more is not mutually exclusive to people in Europe to fight for better conditions/their rights? Do you consider this to cause US to pay less and in turn lost income?

Sorry to break it to you, but it's already happening and not at all related to what happens in Europe, but to US's own incompetency on responsible economics.

>How is that at all related?

It is all related. It is so much harder to do business in Europe than in the US, especially in tech. Almost exclusively due to regulation.

Still? how is that at all applies to workers? Workers should be caring more of how the business is regulated instead of their own rights/conditions? That does not make sense to me at all.

Here Google is a behemoth having thousands of employees and most probably unlimited cash flow all across the world and you are suggesting a few hundred UK workers should be more concerned about this behemoth's responsibilities than their own benefits?

>Still? how is that at all applies to workers? Workers should be caring more of how the business is regulated instead of their own rights/conditions? That does not make sense to me at all.

You can care about whatever you want. Introducing regulation and hoops to jump through for businesses comes with a cost though.

>are suggesting a few hundred UK workers should be more concerned about this behemoth's responsibilities than their own benefits?

It goes beyond Google. I'm saying Europe should be concerned that a lot of their top talent leaves to start businesses or work in other countries.

Yes but that role you link to will open up a lot of doors, revolving doors as they say. Also does the UK have paid speaking engagements like the US does?

And that's a government role. I don't know what a US government head of security role pays, but I suppose it would not be on par with a FAANG role?

No, it wouldn't be on par with FAANG but it would still be 3-4x higher.

An "IT Specialist" at the US Treasury gets paid between $150-180k.

https://www.usajobs.gov/job/716266700

I am not against at all for more wages, and I don't think any UK worker is too. But if less regulation and lower cost of business comes with this kind of news, thank you but no thank you. https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/31/health/ohio-train-derailment-...

What news?

It says the workers studying fell ill but recovered within the same day.

>will open up a lot of doors

This could be said about any job

>Also does the UK have paid speaking engagements like the US does?

No idea

> The cold hard truth is that people would rather the 3-4x salaries.

This sounds like an assumption based firmly in the American value system. This part is often missed:

> 25 days annual leave (rising to 30 after 5 years), plus 8 public holidays and the King’s birthday

Anyway comparing a government job to big tech isn't fair. It is big tech salaries that are unusual, not the other way around.

>Anyway comparing a government job to big tech isn't fair. It is big tech salaries that are unusual, not the other way around.

A similar role in the US would still pay 3-4x that.

>This sounds like an assumption based firmly in the American value system. This part is often missed

This is based on people "voting with their talent" and showing that they will put up with _a lot_ in exchange for $150k+ salaries.

The 5 extra PTO days are not worth halving my salary and then almost halving it again. I may move (back) to Europe when I retire or come close to that age.

Are you paying taxes in your own EU country to pay for the pensions and healthcare? You do know that's how it works, right? The social contract is that in your high earning years you pay into the system then when you are young/old you get to use it.

>This sounds like an assumption based firmly in the American value system. This part is often missed:

>> 25 days annual leave (rising to 30 after 5 years), plus 8 public holidays and the King’s birthday

So best case scenario, you get 20 days more paid leave than in the US (which typically only has 2 weeks or 10 days). That works out to approximately 7.7% higher effective wage.

Even better, government workers in the US get pretty generous PTO too. It works on a bit of a "banking system" but 25 days + holidays isn't even particularly impressive for a Government position of that seniority.

https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/leave-ad...

You could pretty easily match that amount of PTO for a comparable position.

No, that is not to my benefit. As a US based employee I would generally rather have fewer employment rights. While this might increase my risk of getting laid off, this also makes it easier to find a new job. Employers are more likely to hire me if they know they're not being locked into a long term commitment. And greater labor flexibility increases the average economic growth rate; a rising tide lifts all boats.

The amount of cash reserves is entirely irrelevant. Why would shareholders want to waste that capital on unnecessary employees when it could be invested in growth projects or returned as a dividend?

I’ve heard it described as “Americans think of themselves as temporary poor future billionaires”. Not all Americans, but this is why you see so many simping for the rich even when its not in their own interests.

>even when its not in their own interests

It is not in our interest to emulate Europe when it comes to tech.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com