Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Basecamp doesn’t employ anyone in SF, but now we pay everyone as though all did

m.signalvnoise.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 192 posts

Re: Basecamp doesn’t employ anyone in SF, but now we pay everyone as though all did

#41

Post by pc86 »

rplnt wrote: post #34
Fredej wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are willing to pay up to what the work is worth for them. The work is not worth more just because you happen to live in the bay area.

No, you actually pay as little as possible to keep the employee happy and working for you. The living expenses move with this lower bound. More here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16051409

In my experience employers often pay less than it takes to keep the employee happy and working. Most of the full-time jobs I've quit have been for pay and little else.

Re: Basecamp doesn’t employ anyone in SF, but now we pay everyone as though all did

#43

Post by Daishiman »

jasonlfunk wrote: post #37

This is really an interesting idea. Since the developers who live in cheaper parts of the country/world are now, effectively, paid more than those who live expensive parts of the world, are they not incentivizing employees to move out of the big cities? I'm also curious about traveling expenses. I don't know if they do or not, but if they had an "all hands" meeting in Chicago, would they fly their employees in from a…

> Since the developers who live in cheaper parts of the country/world are now, effectively, paid more than those who live expensive parts of the world, are they not incentivizing employees to move out of the big cities?

They do a lot of that by creating satellite offices. But there's always some level of advantage to being closer to customers.

Anecdotally, there's a non-trivial correlation level between people who like the breadth of activities available in the city and level of professional development.

Re: Basecamp doesn’t employ anyone in SF, but now we pay everyone as though all did

#44

Post by adventured »

jasonlfunk wrote: post #37

This is really an interesting idea. Since the developers who live in cheaper parts of the country/world are now, effectively, paid more than those who live expensive parts of the world, are they not incentivizing employees to move out of the big cities? I'm also curious about traveling expenses. I don't know if they do or not, but if they had an "all hands" meeting in Chicago, would they fly their employees in from a…

> are they not incentivizing employees to move out of the big cities?

Yes, that's broadly, rapidly occuring in the US (I can't speak to any other markets). It's a trend that will likely result in Silicon Valley getting partially distributed to two dozen cities in the US. Something changed in the last five or so years quite dramatically when it comes to telecommute work. It went from a concept that never seemed to quite live up to its potential, to now delivering. Credit probably goes to the dramatic cost of living increases since the great recession in major cities, ~5x increase in average broadband speeds in ten years + high quality mobile, and companies gradually dipping their toes into the telecommute world and finding value there (constantly reinforcing upward cycle, more companies try it + more people try it, volumes increase, repeat).

Re: Basecamp doesn’t employ anyone in SF, but now we pay everyone as though all did

#45

Post by throwaway2016a »

rplnt wrote: post #30
jasonkester wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just up the beach from my $6/night bungalow in Thailand there was a resort that costs $1,500/night. The work I'd do from there would be functionally equivalent from my employers' perspective. So as long as we're covering expenses, I'd prefer they cover mine at that second place. The fact that I might actually be living cheaper is none of their concern.

If there's an equally qualified dev willing to take $1494/day less, employer would take that one. But if the only available people live in resorts, then the employer has no choice.

As I hiring manager I can say that is a huge if. You get what you pay for. Eventually people who are really good wise up and up their rates (as they should) even though their cost of living is lower.

I have met Indian developers living in India making just about as much as they would in the US and they were always busy.

Re: Basecamp doesn’t employ anyone in SF, but now we pay everyone as though all did

#46

Post by flexie »

jasonkester wrote: post #2

Well done. Personally, as a remote developer, I always make a point of billing at my "Bay Area Rate", even though I've never lived there. There was a point, early in my guy-on-the-beach-with-a-laptop era where I would cut my bill rate in half while working from the beach with a laptop. Clients were happy about that, and it more than paid for beers and thatch huts. Then one time I tried not cutting my bill rate in hal…

Basecamp is selling all over the world. What should their salary level be like? Bay Area because that’s where a lot of the larger tech companies are situated? Washington State (Microsoft, Amazon)? Copenhagen (where one founder, DHH is from)? Sudney where one major competitor, Jira, is from? I’d say whatever the market is that they hire in. If you wanna pay above market rate, by all means do that. If you can attract employees in Chicago for less than Copenhagen or Bay Area salaries, then by all means, feel free to do that. Employees are free to leave.

What I don’t see is why all companies should follow Bay Area salaries.

Re: Basecamp doesn’t employ anyone in SF, but now we pay everyone as though all did

#47

Post by xiphias »

flexie wrote: post #46
jasonkester wrote: post #2

Well done. Personally, as a remote developer, I always make a point of billing at my "Bay Area Rate", even though I've never lived there. There was a point, early in my guy-on-the-beach-with-a-laptop era where I would cut my bill rate in half while working from the beach with a laptop. Clients were happy about that, and it more than paid for beers and thatch huts. Then one time I tried not cutting my bill rate in hal…

Basecamp is selling all over the world. What should their salary level be like? Bay Area because that’s where a lot of the larger tech companies are situated? Washington State (Microsoft, Amazon)? Copenhagen (where one founder, DHH is from)? Sudney where one major competitor, Jira, is from? I’d say whatever the market is that they hire in. If you wanna pay above market rate, by all means do that. If you can attract e…

DHH goes deeply into the discussion about why they do it. It's worth for them as this way they can be very selective and keep the employees happy, also they don't have to think about changing jobs, and the company doesn't have to worry about good employees leaving. They basically treat people as not interchangable.

Re: Basecamp doesn’t employ anyone in SF, but now we pay everyone as though all did

#48

Post by gambiting »

pjc50 wrote: post #23
rplnt wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the work you're doing is exactly the same regardless of where you do it from But the "bay pay" isn't for your work. It's so you can work - i.e. cover your expenses associated with working at that particular place.

No, it's a market-clearing rate like everything else. It is for the work and only for the work. Otherwise you get the bad old days where unmarried employees were paid less than married ones, and so on.

But a married programmer might only be willing to work for a higher salary, so you need to pay them more to hire them.

Re: Basecamp doesn’t employ anyone in SF, but now we pay everyone as though all did

#49

Post by athenot »

raverbashing wrote: post #27
jasonkester wrote: post #2

Well done. Personally, as a remote developer, I always make a point of billing at my "Bay Area Rate", even though I've never lived there. There was a point, early in my guy-on-the-beach-with-a-laptop era where I would cut my bill rate in half while working from the beach with a laptop. Clients were happy about that, and it more than paid for beers and thatch huts. Then one time I tried not cutting my bill rate in hal…

Is it just me that thinks working on the beach is awful? Too much light, sand, and heat to be able to concentrate Even if you're working in a coastal hut, nothing beats good ergonomics of a real office

Yes... mostly.

Jealousy factor can't be beat. But beyond making your friends/acquaintances drool on social media, yes the ergonomics stink for classic development.

However, I think variety is nice. Just like in an office situation, sometimes a breakthrough idea comes when sitting alone in an uncomfortable meeting room (and without secondary monitors). At home, I do some work on my back deck (partially remote worker here) but it's only when I'm in that mental place where I need to crawl out of a box and get a fresh look on things. It's also nice during meetings, so long as you prevent outdoor audio from distracting the conference call.

Re: Basecamp doesn’t employ anyone in SF, but now we pay everyone as though all did

#50

Post by philipps »

Another argument for globally similar rates could be that cost of living is also to some degree a reflection of additional value (high quality education and healthcare, safety, etc...) which individuals in low income locations may lack. Getting paid the higher rate is a form of compensation.

However, I haven’t seen the same argument for other salaries. What makes a developer different from a musician, a lawyer, an architect? Or, for that matter, from a teacher, a waiter, and a bus driver? Shouldn’t the same argument that the work is the same apply?

Post reply on HN