Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home • Hacker News Board

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#161

Post by bpfrh » Mon, May 25, 2020, 3:11 PM UTC

codegeek wrote: post #141

sailingparrot wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I would gladly pay the same amount of money directly to the employee instead of dealing with insurance companies and their bullshit. Well in this case the swiss companies must pay the amount directly to the employee, so you should be happy?

In this case, it makes no sense for employer to pay. Everyone lives differently, have different homes, different cost of utilities etc. It makes more sense to provide a tax deduction or credit to employee directly. If using this theory that just because someone is working from home, we should pay a portion of rent etc, then where do we stop. Why not pay for their coffee/tea while they are working at home. How do we d…

I disagree, for me this is an extension of "the employer has to provide me with the tools to work".

If I need a desk and a room to work and they don't want to make space in their buildings, then they have to pay for me to set it up.

Nobody would bat an eye that a company has to pay for the laptops of their employer.

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#162

Post by seanmcdirmid » Mon, May 25, 2020, 3:14 PM UTC

hocuspocus wrote: post #106

ramblerman wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Compared to SF, Zurich is 50% cheaper in rent, but pretty much more expensive across the board for everything else. From Numbeo: https://www.numbeo.com/cost-of-living/compare_cities.jsp?cou...

After taxes and rent, "everything else" is fairly insignificant in practice, even though both cities are very expensive. Also I would be careful about numbers from Numbeo, I certainly don't pay $50/kg for beef.

Eating out is super expensive, even McDs is what...15 CHF for a meal these days? I actually managed to save a lot of my salary while living in Lausanne because everything was so expensive to buy.

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#163

Post by MiroF » Mon, May 25, 2020, 3:14 PM UTC

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #155

MiroF wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because SF & Seattle are some of the best labor markets for tech talent in the world? How is this a mystery?

The metro-areas, yes - but there are many neighbourhoods, suburbs, exurbs and submetropolitan areas with the same level of access to the talented locals but with approaching an order-of-magnitude less land-value.

> but there are many neighbourhoods, suburbs, exurbs and submetropolitan areas with the same level of access to the talented locals but with approaching an order-of-magnitude less land-value.

Which in the Bay is that true of?

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#164

Post by skohan » Mon, May 25, 2020, 3:16 PM UTC

thetopher wrote: post #111

sdfx wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A trend that started already in a lot of companies a couple of years ago and will only be accelerated by Covid. Many places do overbook desks in offices right now and have flex-tables without fixed assigned workers. Seems fair to think about compensating employees for the costs that are being pushed to their side.

As a non-remote employee, I had to find housing near my office. Now, as a remote employee, my only real requirements are a power source and internet connection. Sure, I have to live somewhere, but that need isn’t a result of my employment. It seems that non-remote employees have more specific and expensive housing requirements and costs.

Since I've been working at home, and so has my partner, we have had a lot more issues in the apartment. We're both on the phone all day, so there's very little chance of having a quiet space in the apartment during the week. We're also forced to split the work-related resources, like we have to organize an equitable time-share on the desk which is better for working, vs the kitchen table which is not as comfortable.

If work from home becomes the norm long term, I can imagine we would need to think about a larger apartment for this reason.

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#165

Post by qppo » Mon, May 25, 2020, 3:18 PM UTC

philipov wrote: post #122

thetopher wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a non-remote employee, I had to find housing near my office. Now, as a remote employee, my only real requirements are a power source and internet connection. Sure, I have to live somewhere, but that need isn’t a result of my employment. It seems that non-remote employees have more specific and expensive housing requirements and costs.

If you use that new-found freedom to pick an area with a lower cost of living though, you're going to get your salary cut.

Idk about you but I know which lower cost of living I'd prefer to move to, and my break-even salary cut is 25%. I think I can negotiate it to 15-20% which would effectively be a raise.

My salary is how much money I'm willing to take to work for the company. If I can live somewhere cheaper, that number is lower.

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#166

Post by seanmcdirmid » Mon, May 25, 2020, 3:19 PM UTC

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #71

codegeek wrote: post #26

Everytime I see "must pay", it scares me. Yes I know that employees get exploited etc but instead of making employers pay, why not let employees get a tax deduction or even a credit ? As an employer, I can tell you that the burden of employer paying for everything is not necessarily a good idea. It is not about the money only but also about the added overhead/red tape. In US, I am already sick of for example health i…

Health care really isn't the same thing. Employees don't need health insurance to work somewhere - and many pass, especially if they get insurance elsewhere (through a spouse, for example). I've passed on a low-wage job because I was poor and couldn't afford to buy clothes before starting work - when, realistically, they could have provided the shirts or, alternatively, vests. And so on. It shouldn't cost an employee…

Health insurance can’t be provided as a job benefit in Switzerland, and premiums are paid post tax, so they don’t have this kind of problem.

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#167

Post by jlj » Mon, May 25, 2020, 3:28 PM UTC

DaiPlusPlus wrote: post #155

MiroF wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because SF & Seattle are some of the best labor markets for tech talent in the world? How is this a mystery?

The metro-areas, yes - but there are many neighbourhoods, suburbs, exurbs and submetropolitan areas with the same level of access to the talented locals but with approaching an order-of-magnitude less land-value.

Amazon's Bellevue footprint across to the lake from Seattle is expanding. New development in Seattle mostly stopped since 2018, while some existing projects are still being built and coming online.

https://www.geekwire.com/2020/amazon-bring-15000-employees-b...

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#168

Post by RHSeeger » Mon, May 25, 2020, 3:31 PM UTC

mehrdadn wrote: post #149

RHSeeger wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the case of a homeowner that is still paying off their home, I would consider their mortgage payment as the monthly amount. For a homeowner that has finished paying off their house, it might be reasonable to use a value equal to what the payment would be if they took out a 30yr mortgage to pay an amount equal to 80% of the cost of the house (ie, if they had a "standard" mortgage). For the case of someone not payi…

But then why not just treat it as the company renting (say) a room in the employee's apartment (like a normal rent or sublet)? It seems to be what's actually going on fundamentally anyway, and it bypasses the need to think about any third parties that may be involved in the employee's living arrangement.

The general idea is that an employee working from home saves the company money and generally costs the employee money (or, more generally, the employee's household). The specifics of how it costs them money are just a thought exercise; I was merely presenting one way to look at it (the way I look at it).

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#169

Post by koheripbal » Mon, May 25, 2020, 3:34 PM UTC

MrGilbert wrote: post #60

Someone needs to take a closer look into this. It feels sketchy. This is an article (from yesterday) based on a pay-walled article (from yesterday, and in a different language), which itself is based on a court decision (from April 2019). This is not related to the current pandemic (which the article vaguely states, but not explicitly). Also, to give you a time-frame: The linked court decision is from April 2019, the…

Title should include the year (2019), to make it clear it's not related to current events.

Re: Swiss companies must pay share of rent for employees working from home

#170

Post by ashtonkem » Mon, May 25, 2020, 3:34 PM UTC

Makes some sense during the pandemic. Many workers pay a high cost per foot in order to live within reasonable commute time to the office. In a suddenly remote world these same workers are expected to set aside a large chunk of their home specifically for working, at a pretty high per foot cost due to geography.

As a permanent thing, I’m not so sure. If I can live anywhere and know that I’m going to have to have an at home office, why does my employer have to pay for that? And what are the unintended side effects?