> I worked at Facebook for 4 years and also don't understand that comment.
I have never worked for FB and I thought it was fine. None of that is FB-specific.
> I take it being an L5 is a good thing?
It's implied lower numbers are better.
>> it was me and 20 other L8s interviewing for the same L6 opening
> but just six months ago you were an L8, and competition to become an L6 was a coin toss?
Yes, due to the number of people competing for the same position.
> No idea what 'price discovery' could mean in this situation, other than a fairly weird way to say 'salary range'?
Salary range implies stability. eg What a company is willing to pay for what positions. There has been a lack of standardization in talent across tech and instability in compensation. Another way to think of it is an increased risk tolerance in wages. This has been fueled by leniency in promotion/raises/hiring when profits were higher.
> And any of this having to do with 'the bond market' is just baffling!
Monetary policy (around interest rates) is directly related to profit margins and hiring. Suffice to say, this is common knowledge for anyone who owns property (beyond a car, maybe) or tracks the job market.
Can you further elaborate on why monetary policy is directly related to profit margins?
My understanding is that monetary policy / interest rates is controlled by the FED. When they raise rates then money is more expensive, therefore profit margins shrink, and the hiring bar has to increase.
I was 35 years old before I had the faintest idea how money works, like even a little.
And the only way I learned even a little is because I lived in NYC for a bit and ended up hanging with a bunch of Street cats after work, who laugh their asses off about how clueless we all are (in that moment personified by yours truly).
But you get a few G&Ts into them and they’re pretty happy to teach you Econ 101.
https://www.levels.fyi/?compare=Facebook,Amazon,Google&track... says higher numbers are better (more senior, more highly paid) at Facebook, so maybe the GGP post is talking about working at Meta, leaving, and then coming back to apply for a less senior role than they'd had previously? It confused me.
Ah one minor critique, you didn’t tell them about the last time the same office that goes after terrorism and money laundering and stuff took time out of their day and busted all these same firms for wage fixing in the ancient days of just over ten years ago in federal court.
I have never worked for FB and I thought it was fine. None of that is FB-specific.
> I take it being an L5 is a good thing?
It's implied lower numbers are better.
>> it was me and 20 other L8s interviewing for the same L6 opening
> but just six months ago you were an L8, and competition to become an L6 was a coin toss?
Yes, due to the number of people competing for the same position.
> No idea what 'price discovery' could mean in this situation, other than a fairly weird way to say 'salary range'?
Salary range implies stability. eg What a company is willing to pay for what positions. There has been a lack of standardization in talent across tech and instability in compensation. Another way to think of it is an increased risk tolerance in wages. This has been fueled by leniency in promotion/raises/hiring when profits were higher.
> And any of this having to do with 'the bond market' is just baffling!
Monetary policy (around interest rates) is directly related to profit margins and hiring. Suffice to say, this is common knowledge for anyone who owns property (beyond a car, maybe) or tracks the job market.