I know a guy that left one FAANG recently which was laying off people, interviewed at two other FAANGs, got offers for senior remote roles for over $600k, accepted both and is now working two jobs at the same time. Given he was doing the previous FAANG together with a tough grad school, I think he'll be fine.
Im guessing an IC position? Still, being that senior I'd expect he's in quite a few meetings. I would love to hear how he manages his schedule and comes up with novel excuses.
If he really is coding 90% of the time though, more power to him.
There are some strategies one can use, e.g. work for one company on the East coast and one on the West, then being an early starter at the first one and late starter at the second one. Perhaps have some known medical issue that occasionally requires skipping some meetings if there is a conflict. I am honestly monitoring him and I hope he'll share his stories, tips and close calls for some added amusement. He's definitely using two computers to keep any monitoring system at bay.
Is it highly unethical? You're hired to do a job, if you can successfully do that job and another one, I don't think there is anything unethical about doing that. It's very common in lower wage positions, not sure why it's suddenly unethical in higher wage positions. I would say it's unethical to force people to sign a contract saying you own all of their attention during the day, even if you don't use it.
I agree that would be ideal, but realistically there's usually a pretty big power imbalance between someone seeking a job and a potential employer. I'd say that how ethical it is varies depending on the company. For example, Jimmy Johns has non-compete agreements. Someone working at Jimmy Johns has 0 ability to negotiate that. Are they unethical if they quit after a year or so to go work at Subway? I would say obviously not, maybe you'd think they are.
I'm sure you're thinking "but we're talking about software jobs where people have a lot more choice and bargaining power", which is definitely the case, hence why I mentioned that it depends on the company. On the most unethical end of contract violation I'd put the small startup that treats its people right and on the other end I'd put Walmart.
No; this is simple, if difficult. If you want to be ethical, you cannot sign an agreement knowing what it says in full, and then violate that agreement when the counterparty has operated in good faith.
What the person in your Jimmy Johns example has is the ability to seek work elsewhere.
They are indeed acting unethically if they choose to work at Jimmy Johns, knowing what Jimmy Johns requires of its employees, then proceed to quit and then go work at Subway.
I'm concerned you're considering "acting unethically" as a kind of condemnation. It's not. Life happens, and nobody's being sent to the stockade for acting unethically, but that is what you're doing when you violate a contract.
I'm not worried about "acting unethically" being a condemnation, but IMO actions taken in a vacuum can't really be judged to be ethical or unethical, which is what it seems like you're trying to do when you state that violating any arbitrary agreement is unethical. In fact I'm not sure you really fully believe this, since you add the proviso "when the counterparty has operated in good faith".
I would add that ethics is an entire branch of philosophy, so you know, there's so ambiguity between different folks' definitions. IMO it is ethical to violate contracts that would cause undue harm to one of the parties without good cause and furthermore it is unethical for a party to ask another to sign such a contract. And working at another sandwich place is not good cause. Clearly in your opinion you think it is unethical to violate such a contract because you appear to believe that violating any agreement (almost irrespective of context) is unethical. I'd be curious if you think that Jimmy Johns is ethical, unethical, or neutral for inserting such language into a contract in the first place. I would strongly disagree with that being either neutral or ethical.
If you sign a contract, then it is breach of contract, which would be a kind of illegal.
I don't see the ethical quandaries though. So long as one is doing the work promised, and the company is satisfied with their output. It's not any more unethical than working on any other side project after hours.
I believe you. People that doubt these things are usually projecting some kind of insecurity. "It's impossible!"... no actually, not only is it possible but it happens all the time and yes it happens with FAANG workers too.
It's funny, when this topic comes up, the people that are juggling multiple jobs are usually stuck in this weird place where they want to convince people it's true but at the same time not draw too much attention to it (for obvious reasons).
> People that doubt these things are usually projecting some kind of insecurity. "It's impossible!"... no actually, not only is it possible but it happens all the time and yes it happens with FAANG workers too.
And a lot of this comes from people who are far less wordly than they think they are. Like there are people that genuinely believe that no one in security makes more than $200k except CISOs.
I doubt these claims because I know human nature pushes people to lie in order to contribute to conversations.
I understand it's entirely possible to juggle two remote jobs, I just don't think it's nearly as common as people claim or think, which is why it's an easy lie to make. It's got nothing to do with the total salaries involved, and everything to do with the exceedingly rare nature of the claim.
But that ignores my point; you said something, I said what you said isn't true, so when you restate what you already said without adding anything, you're not improving your position.
I personally know I person who works two remote PM jobs at the same time and in addition runs her own side gig. Sometimes she joins two meetings from the two laptops at the same time.
I know a guy who overlapped months of two different jobs.
So it exists and happens. And for IC-type positions should be even easier.
Well, you aren't supposed to destroy the fabric of society! /s
How do you think society would work if there was no restriction on the size of the group that is allowed to break the laws for their own benefit?! Imagine the horror if all plebs were allowed to do that! Could everyone live in Monaco or what?
If it's in your contract where you promise not to work for anyone else without telling your employer, yes, it's illegal because breach of contract is illegal. But it's not illegal in its own right. However I doubt that they didn't make him sign a contract to the contrary so he's probably double dipping.
Contracts don't determine what is legal and not legal. If the said person is found out then they would be in breach of contract and could be fired or sued. They would not earn themselves a criminal record.
They could earn themselves a criminal charge if the court decides what they're doing is fraud which it likely is if they have signed something saying they wouldn't work elsewhere simultaneously.
that's not enough to show injury. If an employee does all their assigned work, there is nothing of value lost by the employer. No injury means no standing means no fraud.
If we assume they started both on the same date, then they wouldn't have had to lie or mislead prior to that point.
Then the question is only whether it's legal (contractually) to be employed by more than one employer at a time. But to that... would it be legal for a company to own every waking hour rather than just your employed hours?
I've not seen anything that says someone has to be exclusively hired, but they would need to be able to fully do their job for their employed time and surely that's all that matters.
I'm in the top 25% compensation for senior SWEs in my area, according to levels.fyi, and I only have 5 YOE, so I guess so. I don't know that either me or them feel like that provision is the driver of this, but if it weren't a great offer I'd probably fight harder.
I'm not in the USA so I'm not sure how the W2s and SSNs are tied to job/healthcare/401k etc, but how does this double timing work? Won't the Tax office/Finanzamt (IRS) know about this?
The individual will end up overpaying on social security and underpaying on most other taxes. When they file their taxes for the year, they will most likely owe some additional money to the government. As long as they pay it promptly, I don't think the IRS will have any issues with the situation.
They can also request that the employer withhold additional taxes; this is fairly common because of situations where both spouses work.
They likely have two healthcare plans, but that's generally not an issue - again, it's fairly common if both spouses are employed.
For the 401K, the individual will just have to make sure that their total contributions between both companies are under the federal limit.
I am not in the US but where I am from the contract usually says you are not allowed to work for another employer unless approved by your current employee. All the stories of overemployed get me kinda envious because I would never dare to try it myself.
In your jurisdiction (Europe?) you are likely fine doing it legally if you are a consultant/contractor (i.e. responsible for all taxes/insurances yourself) but not as an employee. So if you find two remote jobs in the US, you are good.
It is likely a breach of contract at both jobs, though. All contracts I’ve signed in the past include a clause that say “this is your one and only primary job and you hold no others”.
It's a better path, for sure. But the true path to financial success is to own a large enough share of a large enough company that you can get paid a 100-1000x salary for one job, rather than a 2x salary for two.
In a risk adjusted basis, making a million a year even for three years can set you up for life. Starting a business has so much risk, and could be attempted after you have 1.5 million saved and sitting in some index fund.
