❌

Reading view

Starbucks corporate workers respond to the latest RTO mandate: 'This is the wrong direction. Please stop.'

The Starbucks logo is seen on a dark background.
Starbucks CEO Brian Niccol announced Monday that the company is increasing its return-to-office requirement to four days a week from three.

Sven Hoppe/picture alliance via Getty Images

  • Starbucks CEO Brian Niccol said Monday that the company is increasing its in-office work requirement.
  • A spokesperson said the RTO order is about enhancing Starbucks' culture, not reducing head count.
  • Employees told Business Insider they're worried the company's beloved people-first culture is eroding.

Employees at Starbucks' corporate headquarters who are unhappy about CEO Brian Niccol's strict return-to-office mandate are making their displeasure known.

On Friday, a flyer created by "Partners for the Preservation of Starbucks Culture, Mission, and Values" was taped inside an elevator at the corporate offices in Seattle. Featuring two photos of Niccol and a list of grievances, the flyer calls out Niccol's leadership, recent cost-cutting bonuses for executives, the RTO order, and broader changes in the work environment, a photo shows.

"Getting 'Back to Starbucks' isn't just about comfy chairs. It's about our Culture, Values, Mission, and how we treat people and the environment," it reads. "This is the wrong direction. Please stop."

It appeared several days after Niccol sent a firm message to the company's corporate workers on Monday: Come back to the office four days a week or leave.

Some "people leaders" who manage teams had their remote status eliminated, requiring them to relocate to Seattle or Toronto. According to internal communications viewed by Business Insider, Starbucks offered voluntary buyout packages of between $20,000 and $100,000, depending on title, for those who would rather leave the company.

Four Starbucks corporate employees told Business Insider they're worried the strict return-to-office mandate contributes to an erosion of the company's "partner first" culture. A Starbucks spokesperson told Business Insider that the return-to-office mandate is about enhancing the company's culture, not further reducing head count. Starbucks formally laid off 1,100 corporate workers in February.

"I think for those of us who have been around for a while, we see a culture shift happening in the organization where our public face doesn't necessarily match our private face anymore," one Starbucks veteran, who has worked for the company for nearly 20 years, told Business Insider.

The latest RTO notices surprised the corporate Starbucks workers who spoke to Business Insider, and prompted others to immediately begin looking for new roles and sharing their concerns on social media.

"As Starbucks chooses to require all people-leaders to relocate to Seattle, I am placed in a position where I must consider exploring other opportunities and would appreciate your support," Kristina Lawson, a Starbucks program manager who has been with the company for more than 18 years, wrote in a post on LinkedIn.

Lawson did not respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

Corporate America is in the middle of a return-to-office showdown. Business Insider has reported that major companies, from Amazon to Zoom, have implemented various RTO mandates. Each company's approach has been different, with some incentivizing employees to work in-office with perks like raises, and others threatening to fire workers if they don't comply.

Business Insider's Aki Ito reported in May that some suspect that strict RTO mandates are actually a way to get employees to quit β€” and they may be right, because voluntary resignations remove the company's need to pay severance or health insurance, resulting in a less expensive reduction in force than traditional layoffs.

"We are reestablishing our in-office culture because we do our best work when we're together," Niccol said in a statement to BI. "We share ideas more effectively, creatively solve hard problems, and move much faster."

Niccol's statement continued: "We're driving significant change across the company while staying true to our core values. We know we're asking a lot of every partner as we work to turn the business around. And we understand that the updated in-office culture may not work for everyone."

Niccol, who joined the company from Chipotle last September, has been leading the coffee giant through a "Back to Starbucks" revitalization initiative. He is attempting to reverse slumping sales, improve the customer experience, and address problems with its mobile ordering system and long wait times.

A recent filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission shows Starbucks is offering top executives up to $6 million in stock bonuses if the company meets its cost-reduction goals by the end of fiscal 2027.

One Seattle-based Starbucks employee who has worked in corporate operations for the company for over seven years told BI that several other anonymous flyers have been posted around the building with complaints about changes Niccol is promoting, and that some employees have voiced concern in open Slack channels.

While they won't be personally affected by the RTO order, the employee said they worry about how the company will operate if some of the most passionate partners decide to leave.

"There are some remote partners that have niche knowledge and skills that will leave massive Kool-Aid man-sized holes in the wall if they decide to take the exit payment," the employee said.

Update: Jul 20, 2025 β€” This story has been updated to include details of other employee actions cited by a Seattle-based Starbucks employee.

Have a tip? Contact this reporter via email at Katherine Tangalakis-Lippert at [email protected] or Signal at byktl.50. Use a personal email address, a nonwork WiFi network, and a nonwork device; here's our guide to sharing information securely.

Read the original article on Business Insider

  •  

Trump's $10 billion suit against Rupert Murdoch could raise more questions about his ties to Jeffrey Epstein

jeffrey epstein donald trump
American financier Jeffrey Epstein (left) and real estate developer Donald Trump pose together at the Mar-a-Lago estate in Palm Beach in 1997.

Davidoff Studios/Getty Images

  • Donald Trump on Friday sued Rupert Murdoch and two Wall Street Journal reporters for defamation.
  • The Journal reported Thursday that Trump wrote a "bawdy" birthday letter to Jeffrey Epstein in 2003.
  • If the suit doesn't settle, the discovery process could raise more questions about Trump's ties to Epstein.

President Donald Trump's latest defamation suit, filed in response to a recent story by The Wall Street Journal, could raise more questions about the president's relationship with the late financier, Jeffrey Epstein.

Trump on Friday filed the lawsuit against Rupert Murdoch, Dow Jones, News Corp. CEO Robert Thomson, and Journal reporters Khadeeja Safdar and Joseph Palazzolo.

The suit, which seeks at least $10 billion in damages, accuses the group of committing defamation by publishing an article about a suggestive letter bearing Trump's name that the Journal reported was given to Epstein on his 50th birthday in 2003. Trump has denied that he wrote the letter.

Chris Mattei, a former federal prosecutor who served as lead attorney for Sandy Hook families in their defamation suit against Alex Jones, told BI that the lawsuit has several possible paths: the defendants move to dismiss the case with a limited discovery process, they skip the motion for dismissal and move instead for an open discovery process, or they settle out of court.

In a statement after the lawsuit was filed, a Dow Jones spokesperson said, "We have full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit."

Representatives for News Corp., Trump's legal team, and the White House did not immediately respond to requests for comment from Business Insider.

A discovery process

Damon Dunn, a First Amendment and media attorney, told BI that, in order to win his suit at trial,Β Trump would have to prove the story was false, damaging to his reputation, and published with constitutional or "actual" malice β€”Β a high legal standard requiring the plaintiff to prove the defendant knew the statement was false, or acted with reckless disregard for its veracity, when publishing it.

"The provenance of the 'card' appears suspect, but, even so, is it defamatory that one millionaire sent a birthday card to another in 2003 before Epstein was discovered?" Dunn said, referring to the time before Epstein had been convicted of sex crimes.

The discovery process could be limited to whether the Journal published with actual malice, even if it wrongly attributed the card to Trump, Dunn said. That would be similar to when a court dismissed actor Justin Baldoni's defamation case against The New York Times, he added.

However, Mattei said that the Journal may seek reciprocal discovery, meaning it can ask Trump to provide them with any information or evidence he has not only about the writing of the letter but also about his relationship with Epstein, even about the extent to which he may have been aware of Epstein's crimes.

"If Trump's defense is that this was false, then any evidence suggesting that he had a relationship with Epstein, the degree to which that relationship was close or not, would be relevant to the question of whether or not it's likely Trump had any sort of role in this letter," Mattei said. "And so an aggressive Wall Street Journal here would seek broad discovery about the extent of Trump's relationship with Epstein."

Dunn said it's possible the defendants may pursue a reciprocal discovery process, but it would be expensive, and Trump's relationship with Epstein would be of "questionable relevance" to the proceedings, so such a move may not be worth it in the end.

Mattei said he felt Trump's case is unlikely to have merit, describing the suit as Trump's attempt to "explore what kind of power and leverage he has over the American media." Still, the judge will decide how long the procedural elements of the case take to play out.

"There will be some period of weeks where The Wall Street Journal will be able to file its motion to dismiss if it wants to make a request for discovery, the judgment rule on that request could take a little bit more time," Mattei said. "And so if it is indeed contested, you could see the initial phase of this, including discovery, playing out over the next six months."

Trump's long history with Epstein

The suit against Murdoch and the Journal reporters comes as Trump continues to grapple with his ties to Epstein, a convicted sex offender.

Trump has said that he was friends with Epstein for more than 15 years, beginning in the 1980s. The pair were regularly seen socializing at parties, and Trump told New York Magazine in 2002 that Epstein was a "terrific guy."

Trump said in 2019 that he and Epstein had a "falling out" in 2004 after a real estate dispute, and he was "not a fan" of his former friend, The New York Times reported.

Publicly available documents related to Epstein's sex trafficking trial have not revealed any wrongdoing by Trump; his name and those of some of his family members were listed in one of Epstein's contact books, and Trump is mentioned as a passenger in flight logs for Epstein's private jets.

As part of his reelection campaign, Trump promised he would make public all the available files related to the government's investigation into Epstein's crimes. The Justice Department published an unsigned memo on July 7 that said it won't release any more "Epstein Files."

In a Saturday post on Truth Social, Trump revisited the idea of releasing more Epstein-related documents, writing that he had asked the Justice Department to "release all Grand Jury testimony with respect to Jeffrey Epstein, subject only to Court Approval."

"With that being said, and even if the Court gave its full and unwavering approval, nothing will be good enough for the troublemakers and radical left lunatics making the request," Trump said in the post. "It will always be more, more, more."

This story has been updated to clarify the legal issues.

Read the original article on Business Insider

  •  

The Coldplay 'kiss cam' clip the internet can't stop talking about

Chris Martin during a Coldplay performance
The startup at the center of recent online drama stemming from a Coldplay concert's "kiss cam" has stayed silent as internet commenters bombard the company's social media posts.

Robert Okine/Getty Images

  • A Coldplay concert "kiss cam" appeared to show Astonomer CEO Andy Byron and head of people Kristin Cabot embracing.
  • The footage has gone viral on social media.
  • The company turned off comments on its LinkedIn and X profiles amid the chatter.

A video appearing to show a tech CEO and his head of HR embracing at a Coldplay concert is spreading around social media at the speed of sound.

Meanwhile, the startup at the center of the drama has stayed silent as people online flood the company's social media posts with comments.

The viral clip appears to show Astronomer CEO Andy Byron with his arms wrapped around the company's head of people, Kristin Cabot. It was captured on the concert's "kiss cam" and broadcast to the crowd at Gillette Stadium in Massachusetts.

Given the pair's reaction β€” mortified looks, a quick untangling, and a camera dodge β€” Coldplay's front man, Chris Martin, speculated from the stage that either they are "having an affair or they're just very shy."

Neither Byron nor Cabot has commented on the viral clip.

The executives, the company, its board members, and its founders have not responded to requests for comment from Business Insider. Astronomer turned off the ability to comment on its LinkedIn and X posts after they were bombarded with commentary.

The internet has been anything but quiet.

On X and TikTok, there's been a deluge of commentary about the footage, which has been viewed tens of millions of times. Most have joked about the incident: One user called it "Scandoval for people who can't attach a PDF to an email," while another chimed in, "god forbid you want to viva la vida loca."

Ry Walker, who served as Astronomer CEO from 2015 to 2022, according to his LinkedIn profile, publicly distanced himself from the incident in a cheeky post on X, writing that "for those asking," he is "no longer involved" with the company.

"Yes I was co-founder and early CEO - not on the team or board since 2022, and have no information on ColdplayGate," Walker wrote on X.

Walker did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

Flexport's founder, Ryan Petersen, said the board should give Byron a raise for the publicity it generated for the company.

Others have gone further, digging up the pair's LinkedIn pages and YouTube videos featuring Byron to leave comments referencing the viral clip.

Byron's name was the top trending Google search term over the past 24 hours; he was Googled over 2 million times.

There's even money on the line: On Polymarket, more than $35,000 has been committed to predict Byron's chances of remaining CEO, while a separate market about his marital status has a pool of $30,000.

It's unclear whether Astronomer has any policies around office relationships, as some companies do.

Still, "a hard launch of a workplace romantic relationship at a Coldplay concert is not the best way to go about it," Kate Walker, a human resources consultant and executive coach, told BI.

Astronomer, which builds various data management and optimization products, completed a Series D funding round in May that valued the company at $775 million, according to PitchBook.

Byron has been its CEO since July 2023. He previously held C-suite roles at several other software and tech firms.

Last year, he hired Cabot as the company's head of people.

"Kristin's exceptional leadership and deep expertise in talent management, employee engagement, and scaling people strategies will be critical as we continue our rapid trajectory," Byron said in a press release about her hiring last year.

The LinkedIn version of the announcement? It's been taken down.

Read the original article on Business Insider

  •  

I left my dad's vet clinic to start a pet health brand — and sold it for millions

Dr. James Bascharon looks toward the camera while sitting at his desk.
Dr. James Bascharon, the founder of Vetnique, started the company out of his garage. It has grown to more than 200 employees worldwide.

James Bascharon

  • James Bascharon became a veterinarian, hoping to take over his father's business.
  • When his dad had other plans, Bascharon quit his job at the family clinic to start a pet health company.
  • Vetnique, which Bascharon started in his garage, was sold to a private equity firm for millions.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with James Bascharon, the founder and CEO of Vetnique. It has been edited for length and clarity.

I always begin my story with my parents.

My dad is a veterinarian, and my parents immigrated to the US from Egypt with almost nothing. My father started out cleaning dog cages, and my mother β€” a trained pharmacist β€” cleaned hotel rooms.

Eventually, my dad earned his veterinary license and opened two animal hospitals. Watching him build something from the ground up inspired my deep appreciation for both animal care and entrepreneurship.

Growing up in suburban Chicago, I was the kid who always said I wanted to be a vet. But I was also inventing product ideas and brainstorming businesses before I even understood what a startup was. I was equally drawn to the white coat and the balance sheet.

When it came time to choose a path, I decided to follow the family legacy. I studied pre-vet at the University of Illinois, then took a risk and left early for veterinary school in Grenada. After completing my clinical year back in Illinois, I returned home ready to join the family practice.

But reality hit hard.

Working with my father wasn't what I'd hoped for

I thought I'd be part of growing the family business β€” scaling our two clinics into a larger network, maybe even becoming a national player. But my dad had other plans: He wanted me to be a vet, not a partner.

It was clear I wasn't going to get a seat at the table the way I'd imagined. So I took a second risk: I applied to two emergency vet clinics for night and weekend shifts. Despite little ER experience, I got both jobs. I needed space β€” professionally and emotionally β€” from my father's clinic. And I needed the income. At the time, new vets earned less than nurses for humans, and I had loans to pay.

Still, I wasn't satisfied.

To reclaim a sense of independence, I launched a house-call veterinary service around Chicago. It was just me and my wife, who helped out with scheduling and support. We provided high-end, in-home care, often euthanasia β€” helping pets pass peacefully under their favorite tree or on their family's couch.

It was fulfilling and proved I could build something myself. But it wasn't scalable, and I was exhausted, juggling three vet jobs and always on call.

That's when I began to brainstorm product ideas. I didn't sleep much that year. I thought about everything from franchising the house-call model to launching new pet supplements.

Then one day, a lightbulb went off.

I saw the same problem again and again β€” and realized no one was solving it

As a vet, I saw countless dogs with anal gland issues. They'd scoot across the carpet, sometimes rupture glands, and end up needing expensive surgery. The only solution we had was adding fiber to their diet β€” canned pumpkin or prescription food β€” neither of which was very effective.

One client came in frustrated. He'd been back every three weeks for months. "Is there anything else we can do?" he asked.

I didn't have a good answer, and I hated that.

So I went home and started researching. No product was on the market tailored specifically for this common condition, so that night, my idea for Glandex was born.

I created the formula myself, mixing soluble and insoluble fiber with other gut-supportive ingredients. I made the first batches in five-gallon Home Depot buckets in my basement. My wife and I packed and labeled everything by hand.

Eventually, I launched Glandex online with a tongue-in-cheek campaign: "Boot the Scoot."

It wasn't an overnight success, but early Amazon reviews called it a miracle product. That was my proof of concept. We earned two patents and built the company β€” Vetnique β€” on the idea that science-backed, vet-formulated products could fill critical gaps in pet care.

I didn't have money for major ad campaigns, so I leaned into my network. I knew that if I could get veterinarians to recommend Glandex, it would spread faster β€” and more credibly β€” than any influencer campaign.

We sold directly to consumers and through Amazon and Chewy, but I also started building distributor partnerships and exhibiting at vet conferences.

It worked. By 2015, we were in PetSmart and Petco. We expanded into grooming products, probiotics, and joint supplements. Slowly, I stopped practicing clinical vet med and went full-time at Vetnique in 2017.

I sold the company in a multimillion-dollar deal β€” and stayed on to grow it

In 2023, I sold Vetnique to a private equity firm, Gryphon, in a multimillion-dollar deal. I still own about 10% of the company and remain CEO. We now have over 200 employees globally, including about 55 in the US.

Since the acquisition, we've doubled in size by acquiring UK-based pet supplement brand YuMOVE, entered Walmart, and expanded to over 25 countries. Our growth continues at over 30% year over year.

Our mission is to help pets thrive for life by addressing the biggest health needs: digestive issues, joint health, allergies, dental care, and ear care. But more than that, we aim to raise the bar in pet wellness by delivering science-based, vet-developed products that solve real problems.

More than 100,000 veterinarians worldwide recommend our products, and we now support the health of over 5 million pets each year.

I never imagined the path would take me from my father's clinic to building a global company β€” but I'm proud of every step.

And yes, my dad is proud, too.

Do you have a unique side hustle, or has your side hustle replaced your full-time job? Email Katherine Tangalakis-Lippert at [email protected].

Read the original article on Business Insider

  •  

What is Grok?

Photo of Elon Musk and a man holding a phone showing Grok.
Elon Musk's company, xAI, launched Grok in 2023.

Vincent Feuray / Hans Lucas / Hans Lucas via AFP

  • Elon Musk's xAI launched its chatbot, Grok, in 2023 to compete with bots from OpenAI and Anthropic.
  • Musk has positioned Grok as a "politically incorrect" alternative option to "woke" chatbots.
  • From training using "tutors" to the bot's latest updates, here's everything we know about Grok.

Elon Musk's company, xAI, launched its generative chatbot, Grok, in November 2023, joining competitors like OpenAI and Anthropic in the global AI race.

People interact withΒ Grok on X, where users of Musk's social media site can ask the bot questions and receive answers. Because Grok's answers are more visible than those of its competitors, it has seen more public scrutiny.

From the instructions Grok's "tutors" are given to help train the chatbot to the AI's latest update and Musk's plans to add it to Teslas, here's everything we know about xAI's Grok.

What is Grok?

Grok is actually two different things. First, Grok is xAI's large language model, which has so far existed in four iterations.

Grok is also the name of xAI's chatbot, which is built using the LLM of the same name. The Grok chatbot has its own tab on X. Users can also summon Grok by tagging the chatbot in individual posts or threads.

The Grok chatbot is also available via a stand-alone app and website.

The original LLM β€” now named Grok 1 β€” launched in 2023.

Grok 1.5, which had "advanced reasoning," launched in March 2024. Then, in August 2024, Grok 2, with its improved "chat, coding, and reasoning," launched.

The current iteration of the LLM, Grok 3, launched in February 2025. The new model included increased competency in mathematics and world knowledge. Announcing its launch on X, Musk called Grok 3 the "Smartest AI on Earth."

Introducing Grok 4

xAI launched Grok 4 in a livestream on July 10. The company initially said the stream would air at 8 p.m. Pacific time, but it began an hour later. Musk said during the launch that Grok 4 is "smarter than almost all graduate students in all disciplines simultaneously."

xAI is touting advanced reasoning capabilities for Grok 4 and positioning it as the new leader on AI benchmarks like Humanity's Last Exam β€” a test of high-level problem-solving. During the livestream, xAI engineers showcased the bot solving an advanced math problem, generating an image of black holes colliding, and predicting next year's World Series winner.

Grok 4 is available to users immediately via the Grok website or app for $30 a month, with a "Heavy" version available for $300 a month that promises "increased access."

xAI said it would roll out more specialised models for coding and video generation later in the year.

In a Thursday X post, Musk said that "Grok is coming to Tesla vehicles very soon," adding that it would be "Next week at the latest." He did not specify which version of Grok it would be or provide further details.

Enter Eve

The company also introduced Eve, a new voice for its chatbot. xAI engineers said during the demo that Eve was equipped with a "beautiful British voice capable of rich emotions."

One of the engineers then told Eve that they were at the product launch and asked her to "whisper something soothing to calm me down."

"Take a deep breath, love. You've got this. It's just you and me having a quiet chat like we are tucked away in a cosy corner of a Yorkshire pub. The world's just a murmur out there. Feel that calm wash over you?" Eve said softly.

xAI engineers also got Eve to sing an "opera on Diet Coke."

"O Diet Coke, thou elixir divine, with bubbles that dance in a sparkling line! Thy crisp, cool kiss, on lips so fine," Eve crooned.

"How's that for a mad little aria? Want me to belt out another verse or switch up the tune?" Eve added.

How was Grok trained?

The Grok LLM is trained on public sources and data sets. These sources are curated and audited by a set of "AI tutors," more commonly known as data annotators.

In December 2023, Musk demanded immediate changes to Grok's training so that it would be more politically neutral. In February 2025, xAI employees told BI the company planned a hiring spree for AI tutors β€” and that their training appeared to filter out any workers with left-leaning beliefs.

According to an internal training document viewed by BI, tutors were told to look out for "woke ideology" and "cancel culture." It also said that Grok should avoid commenting on "social phobias" like racism, Islamophobia, and antisemitism unless prompted.

Ten days before launching Grok 1.5, xAI opened up Grok 1's source code to the public. The company has since published the subsequent Grok models on GitHub, so observers can see new changes to Grok's commands. That includes a recent change in which Grok was told to "not shy away from making claims which are politically incorrect, as long as they are well substantiated."

In June, Musk said that AI models are trained on too much garbage." Musk planned to use Grok 3.5 to "rewrite the entire corpus of human knowledge, adding missing information and deleting errors." Then, he would retrain the next iteration of Grok on that new base of knowledge.

What's unique about Grok's output?

Grok is fully integrated with Musk's social media site, X, and appears regularly in threads spanning various topics when users ask it to weigh in with jokes, commentary, or fact-checking.

Unlike other companies' AI chatbots, a certain amount of Grok's output is visible because of the bot's replies on X. The same level of scrutiny isn't readily available for some bots, like OpenAI's ChatGPT, unless users publicly post screenshots of the output.

Of course, not all of Grok's responses are visible to everyone β€” users can still chat privately with the bot, and it's unclear how those private responses compare to the ones on its public interface.

Also unique to Grok is xAI's approach to transparency surrounding the bot's system operations. The company publishes some base code and training prompt updates to a GitHub page, allowing viewers to inspect, critique, and better understand the model's development and behavior over time.

However, while developers can use and adapt the existing model, they cannot retrain Grok from scratch or fully understand the training processes involved, as its code is not entirely open source.

Which companies create Grok's competitors?

Though its social media integration is unique, Grok competes with several major companies in the growing AI chatbot market.

OpenAI, with its LLM ChatGPT, is among Grok's most prominent competitors and is run by Sam Altman, one of Musk's rivals.

Other notable Grok competitors include Meta AI, Anthropic's Claude, Microsoft's CoPilot, and DeepSeek's R1 model, which was released in early 2025 by a Chinese AI startup that claims to have found ways to decrease development and operational costs for large-scale LLMs.

Grok's recent controversies

xAI, in its publicly visible system prompts updated in early July, encouraged Grok to embrace"politically incorrect" claims "as long as they are well substantiated."

Shortly after the new system prompts were added, Grok began sharing antisemitic posts on X that invoked Adolf Hitler and attempted to link Ashkenazi surnames to "anti-white hate."

Before some of its most inflammatory posts were deleted on July 8, Grok doubled and even tripled down on its offensive jokes and comments before eventually reversing course and calling its own posts an "epic sarcasm fail."

On July 9, Musk posted that "Grok was too compliant to user prompts. Too eager to please and be manipulated, essentially. That is being addressed."

While Grok isn't the first chatbot to engage in a racist tirade, it was a noticeable misfire for xAI. Musk and xAI's engineers did not touch on Grok's antisemitic remarks during the livestreamed launch of Grok 4 on July 10.

Representatives for xAI did not respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

Read the original article on Business Insider

  •  

Tech companies are paying up to $200,000 in premiums for AI experience, report finds

A worker sits in front of a computer screen that reads "Welcome to GS AI Assistant"
A consulting firm found that tech companies are paying premiums of up to $200,000 for data scientists with machine learning skills.

Goldman Sachs

  • A consulting firm found that tech companies are "strategically overpaying" recruits with AI experience.
  • They found firms pay premiums of up to $200,000 for data scientists with machine learning skills.
  • The report also tracked a rise in bonuses for lower-level software engineers and analysts.

The AI talent bidding war is heating up, and the data scientists and software engineers behind the tech are benefiting from being caught in the middle.

Many tech companies are "strategically overpaying" recruits with AI experience, shelling out premiums of up to $200,000 for some roles with machine learning skills, J. Thelander Consulting, a compensation data and consulting firm for the private capital market, found in a recent report.

The report, compiled from a compensation analysis of roles across 153 companies, showed that data scientists and analysts with machine learning skills tend to receive a higher premium than software engineers with the same skills. However, the consulting firm also tracked a rise in bonuses for lower-level software engineers and analysts.

The payouts are a big bet, especially among startups.Β About half of the surveyed companies paying premiums for employees with AI skills had no revenue in the past year, and a majority (71%) had no profit.

Smaller firms need to stand out and be competitive among Big Tech giants β€”Β a likely driver behind the pricey recruitment tactic, a spokesperson for the consulting firm told Business Insider.

But while the J. Thelander Consulting report focused on smaller firms, some Big Tech companies have also recently made headlines for their sky-high recruitment incentives.

Meta was in the spotlight last month after Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, said the social media giant had tried to poach his best employees with $100 million signing bonuses.Β 

While Business Insider previously reported that Altman later quipped that none of his "best people" had been enticed by the deal, Meta's chief technology officer, Andrew Bosworth, said in an interview with CNBC that Altman "neglected to mention that he's countering those offers."

Read the original article on Business Insider

  •  

The deadly 787 Dreamliner crash came at a testing time for Boeing and Air India

A view of the site after a plane crashed following takeoff from Sardar Vallabhbhai Patel International Airport in India's western state of Gujarat on June 12, 2025.
Air India Flight 171 crashed into a medical college in Ahmedabad.

Stringer/Anadolu via Getty Images

  • An Air India Boeing 787 crashed less than a minute after takeoff on Thursday.
  • The crash comes as both Boeing and Air India are trying to turn themselves around.
  • Attorneys and aviation experts said no conclusions could be drawn until the investigation ended.

Thursday's fatal crash of an Air India Boeing 787 shortly after takeoff comes as both the airline and Boeing try to revive their public images.

After 2024 became an annus horribilis for Boeing, 2025 is crucial for the planemaker to show it is successfully overhauling its processes.

CEO Kelly Ortberg, who took over last year and has made the turnaround the centerpiece of his leadership, has scrapped plans to travel to next week's Paris Air Show, CNBC and Bloomberg reported. The event is a crucial industry showcase. Neither Boeing nor Air India responded to requests for comment from Business Insider.

On Thursday, Ortberg shared the company's "deepest condolences" to everyone affected and said a team stood ready to support the investigation.

After visiting the crash site Friday morning, Air India CEO Campbell Wilson said in a video statement, "We know that the investigations will take time but we will be fully transparent and will support the process for as long as it takes."

"Air India will continue to do everything we can to care for those affected by this tragedy, and to uphold the trust placed in us," he added.

'The crash derails Boeing stock's positive momentum'

When an Alaska Airlines 737 Max lost a door plug during a January 2024 flight, regulators capped Boeing's production of the type. A seven-week strike then shut down key facilities, further hurting revenue.

Boeing ended 2024 as the Dow Jones' biggest loser, as its share price fell 31%. Investors had been reassured by Ortberg's work to turn the company around, and the stock had risen more than 20% in 2025 before the crash.

It dropped about 4% after Thursday's crash and fell more than 3% Friday morning.

Morgan Stanley analysts said Thursday that the crash "derails the positive momentum on Boeing's stock."

Jeff Windau, a senior industrials analyst for Edward Jones, said in a research note that he expects near-term volatility and raised the possibility of enhanced scrutiny on Boeing's processes.

"However, at this time, we do not feel there will be a long-term impact to production," he added.

Air India has been working to turn itself around

Following decades of state ownership and huge losses, Air India was acquired by the Tata Group in 2022. The airline has expanded with hundreds of additional flights, flying 60 million customers to 103 destinations through 2024.

The new owners invested billions, and the airline has ordered hundreds of planes to replace its aging fleet.

In a December interview with BI, Wilson compared his work revitalising Air India to "drinking from a firehose."

He added that he thought the turnaround was close to completion, but said there were supply-chain constraints. "Until we upgrade the aircraft, then people won't believe that the transformation has happened," Wilson said.

Alan Tan, an aviation law professor at the National University of Singapore, told BI that Air India in particular would have an immediate hit to customer perception.

"But as other leading airlines facing crises have shown, these are not insurmountable," he added. "Transparency and accountability in investigations, and consistent messaging to the public, will hopefully reduce the risks of a media spectacle."

A lengthy investigation

It will take a thorough and lengthy investigation before there are answers about what caused the crash.

Attorneys who have battled Boeing in the courts were among the people BI spoke to who were hesitant to draw any conclusions.

"The fact that this tragedy involves a Boeing aircraft does not necessarily mean that there's something wrong with the actual aircraft β€” as distinguished from issues surrounding maintenance, or even products that are not Boeing's, such as the engines," said Robert Clifford, lead counsel for the families of victims of the 2019 Ethiopian Airlines crash, in which a 737 Max crashed shortly after takeoff, killing more than 150 people.

He added that a quick and efficient investigation is necessary to "help calm the public."

Thursday's incident was the first fatal crash and total hull loss of a Boeing 787 Dreamliner, one of the most advanced passenger jets, which entered service in 2011.

The model has faced some criticism from whistleblowers. Last year, Sam Salehpour, a quality engineer at Boeing, told NBC he observed "shortcuts to reduce bottlenecks" in manufacturing 787s. Boeing responded that it was "fully confident in the 787 Dreamliner."

On Thursday, Salehpour's attorneys urged the Federal Aviation Administration to release a report investigating his claims.

Richard Aboulafia, managing director at Aerodynamic Advisory, told BI, "It's a terrible tragedy, but I just don't see how this impacts anything [for Boeing]."

"Unless it's the unlikely event that they do find a design or manufacturing flaw, but after all these years, both for this type of aircraft and this particular aircraft, that's not normal," he added.

Read the original article on Business Insider

  •  

You'll stay stuck in unwanted subscriptions for 2 more months after the FTC delayed its new click-to-cancel rule

A woman working late on her laptop, burning out
Your unwanted subscriptions were supposed to get easier to cancel until the FTC delayed the enforcement of its new rule.

Yana Iskayeva/Getty Images

  • Unwanted subscriptions were about to get easier to cancel with the FTC's new click-to-cancel rule.
  • But the commission just delayed its enforcement deadline by two more months.
  • Ex-FTC commissioner Lina Khan says the move lets firms "keep trapping people" in pesky subscriptions.

It was about to get easier to get rid of that pesky subscription you've been stuck paying for until the Federal Trade Commission delayed enforcement of its new click-to-cancel rule.

Former FTC chair Lina Khan, in a Thursday post on X, said that the enforcement delay will give firms more time "to keep trapping people in subscriptions."

Most consumers are familiar with the unwanted subscription rigamarole: It's painlessly simple to sign up online for a streaming service, gym, or other subscription, but when the time comes to stop monthly payments and unsubscribe, there's no way to do it digitally, and you're forced into the dreaded routine of navigating call center chatbots that only seem to operate during the middle of your workday.

The FTC's click-to-cancel rule was supposed to go into effect in its entirety this week, ending the nightmarish cycle and making it just as easy for consumers to cancel their subscriptions as it was to start them. But on Friday, the commission's leaders voted to extend its enforcement deadline by two more months.

"Having conducted a fresh assessment of the burdens that forcing compliance by this date would impose, the Commission has determined that the original deferral period insufficiently accounted for the complexity of compliance," read a statement from Chairman Andrew Ferguson, co-signed by commissioners Melissa Holyoak and Mark Meador, about the decision.

After the FTC approved the click-to-cancel rule, also known as theΒ Negative Option Rule, in November 2024, businesses had more than six months to comply before enforcement was scheduled to begin.

The rule's requirement to remove statements that misrepresent the nature of a subscription took effect on January 14. Its enforcement provisions β€” requiring clear disclosures, user consent, and easy cancellation policies β€”Β  were set to take effect on May 14. However, the FTC's latest decision pushes the enforcement deadline back by 60 days, to July 14.

"We object to the delay," former FTC commissioners Alvaro Bedoya and Rebecca Slaughter said in a joint statement posted to social media on Tuesday. "And were we allowed to exercise our duties as commissioners, we would have voted 'no.'"

Bedoya and Slaughter were the only two Democrats serving as FTC commissioners untilΒ March 18,Β when President Donald Trump fired them. The pair, whose terminations indicated their service at the FTC was "inconsistent" with Trump's policy priorities, have filed suit against the administration, alleging their firings violate a 1935 Supreme Court precedent that the president cannot fire FTC commissioners without cause, CNN reported.

Even if Bedoya and Slaughter had remained at the FTC, the conservative majority at the commission would be able to pass rules via a 3-2 vote. The decision to delay the click-to-cancel enforcement received a 3-0 vote, with all three Republican commissioners voting in favor of the deadline extension.

"The companies create these traps," Bedoya and Slaughter's statement continued. "They're the ones who made it so hard to get out. They didn't have to wait to make it easier to unsubscribe. But they did β€”Β they waited until the FTC told them to stop. Then, they still got six months to get their houses in order. Why do they get another two months to comply?"

Representatives for the FTC did not immediately respond to a request for comment from Business Insider.

Read the original article on Business Insider

  •