Yep, my brother decided to join Facebook in a non-tech role (admittedly, right before the #deletefacebook movement began), and it was purely for the compensation. He even joked he had joined "the dark side". I've been off Facebook since 2011, so it was a bit disappointing. But, the compensation was the highest out of the companies he got offers from (Google, Stripe, etc.), so I don't blame him.
In this case I'm not getting that your brother wanted to be associated with them necessarily. If compensation was equal, which do you think he'd have picked?
Right but that's kind of irrelevant isn't it? Perhaps a semantic detail, but Donald Trump could hypothetically pay me as much as he wanted but it wouldn't change my desire to have his name next to mine.
Facebook is known for being a little more profligate with their spending, especially for senior and up. On the other hand, they will fire you faster. I have heard that Netflix is even more in that direction, if "excitement" is something you desire in the domain of "whether you will be employed tomorrow or not."
I think if the most important aspect is compensation, then the company is arbitrary. Not to suggest that compensation is an invalid priority, but I don't think it's the same as wanting to be associated with a company for an inherent quality.
j79|8 years ago
brailsafe|8 years ago
brailsafe|8 years ago
runevault|8 years ago
asfasgasg|8 years ago
brailsafe|8 years ago