>>colone+(OP)
Is it wrong to be glad FB's reputation has tarnished (and stock price sideways) over the past year or so? For so long they've monopolized the talent pool in the Bay Area. If more people decide 1) they don't want to work at FB and 2) FB employees are itching to leave then I see any stain on FB's employment brand as a net positive to the greater tech + startup ecosystem.
>>dawhiz+N1
they havent monopolized talent, they pay for talent. Facebook paying high salaries has increased all of our pay, equity etc, whether you work there or not. The only thing this may be bad for is founders who are in a zero sum competition with FB for talent and now need to spend more money and equity to get it.
>>tmh79+r4
Wasn't Facebook part of the class action lawsuit that sought to supress wages and colluded in anti-poaching between Intel, Apple, Microsoft, and Adobe?
They may pay more, but they collude to make sure people couldn't leave without going far outside the bay. That's a monopolistic trait.
I agree they weren't putting a gun to people's heads but they were making the environment less available.
>>pq0ak2+cD
I don’t think Facebook was part of that group. More importantly though, it was in the aftermath of that, where large companies started more aggressively poaching employees, that large company compensation ballooned and startups started to complain about the top large companies hogging talent.