US software engineer. I have 24 days of PTO, 15 company holidays, and 9 sick days. 10 weeks for parental leave (16 for moms). $240K salary, $400-600K in annual vesting equity. That’s private paper equity, but I’ve already been able to cash out $700K and buy a house with cash.
Fully remote. I can expense $120/month for phone and internet, and a few lunches each month, too. I can get a new laptop and/or monitor sent to me just by asking.
When I do visit the office, the trip is fully expensed. Free daily lunch. Coffee and drinks and snacks everywhere, free. Private desks in a semi-open office with couches scattered around. Lounges with hundreds of board games, nearly all of which have seen table time during work hours.
Primary projects are tracked in a knowledge-sharing system, but I can mostly work on what I want to. I’m encouraged to merge small fixes and refactors without any ticket-pushing at all. Yelling by managers or anyone would not be tolerated.
“At-will” is more FUD than reality in my experience. Most companies, when firing or laying someone off, give something like 2 weeks of severance for every year of service.
That compensation is better isn't in dispute. My question is about worker rights, how much of the stuff you posted is just your company vs US law? Are you protected better by law than someone here would be?
What is more important, the law, or the typical employee experience? If you're in a strong market where workers are in demand (evidenced somewhat by higher compensation), then workers will tend to be treated better for fear that they will leave for another opportunity (remember: "at will"). If workers have fewer opportunities, then how much can the law really help?
Are there specific protections that are lacking in the US that you would expect to result in worse employee outcomes?
I'm not sure what any of that has to do with my question. The person I replied to said that from what he knew worker rights were somewhat better in the US so I asked for examples. How an employer treats you is of course important, but can't really be considered worker rights if they can decide to change that depending on market conditions.
Again, I'm not arguing about who has it better. I am asking a very narrow question about worker rights differences between the two countries. If you want me to say that US software workers have it better, then sure. But that's not really what I'm asking.
I work at more typical software job for an AUS company operating in the US ... AUS workers make less money than the US office but they can rollover PTO indefinitely, right to log off, etc. I think the main reason people come to the US to work from aus is the cost of housing anywhere near the cities is exorbitant and the australian version of the american dream is unbelievably dead.
I wish I could suggest something for you. My path was moving to the Bay Area 13 years ago to work for a small startup, helping to grow it, then going remote after a few years. Startup is a B2B with an ethical technical founder, and it had a credible business model from day 1.
Fully remote. I can expense $120/month for phone and internet, and a few lunches each month, too. I can get a new laptop and/or monitor sent to me just by asking.
When I do visit the office, the trip is fully expensed. Free daily lunch. Coffee and drinks and snacks everywhere, free. Private desks in a semi-open office with couches scattered around. Lounges with hundreds of board games, nearly all of which have seen table time during work hours.
Primary projects are tracked in a knowledge-sharing system, but I can mostly work on what I want to. I’m encouraged to merge small fixes and refactors without any ticket-pushing at all. Yelling by managers or anyone would not be tolerated.
“At-will” is more FUD than reality in my experience. Most companies, when firing or laying someone off, give something like 2 weeks of severance for every year of service.