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

"Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

nityesh.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 624 posts

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#201

Post by jacknews »

balfirevic wrote: post #101
jacknews wrote: post #39

It seems to me companies can either pay for the work, and how valuable it is to them, or pay by need, ie 'cost of living'. But in the latter case, they should also be paying people with families more than singles, for example. Since that is not the case, I can't see how they can justify 'cost of living' adjustments. Quite apart from the fact that the cost-of-living indices are often wildly incomparable. For example,…

> It seems to me companies can either pay for the work, and how valuable it is to them, or pay by need, ie 'cost of living'. As many have pointed out, it's usually neither of those. The pay is determined by supply and demand.

The problem comes with the 'supply' side. It tends towards subsistence, because people need to eat. Subsistence is cheaper in 'poor' countries. Is that how we want society to operate?

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#202

Post by satyrnein »

lgleason wrote: post #89

If you live in the US and are advocating for this be careful what you wish for. It could lead to your 100-200K per year salary being cut to well below 100K to equalize across all engineers including those in low cost areas such as China and India.

Imagine how much more software would be written, how it might change the world.

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#203

Post by [deleted] »

Loughla wrote: post #100
lgleason wrote: post #89

If you live in the US and are advocating for this be careful what you wish for. It could lead to your 100-200K per year salary being cut to well below 100K to equalize across all engineers including those in low cost areas such as China and India.

Learn a lesson from the manufacturing fields. The jobs left because they could be cheaper somewhere else. It was a greater good for a much larger number of people, but for those at the top of the pay scale, it was a severe reduction in quality of life. Shooting for a higher average has the effect of bringing up a ton of folks' incomes, while negatively impacting a few. You, too, could be the few.

[deleted]

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#204

Post by ghaff »

NovemberWhiskey wrote: post #162
Dirlewanger wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can local wages (in a currency other than USD) be "pitiful", but food cost "the same" for the USD? These are incongruent. Locals wouldn't be able to subsist on those food prices. The USD has greater purchasing power, that's just a fact.

Anyone who's ever done an international relocation understands this. It works like this. Your company asks you, a SF-based tech executive, to relocate to India for a three-year assignment. Notional cost of living in India is absurdly low. But your company will actually estimate that you'll need ~$50-100,000 more per year from a COL perspective. This is because your existing lifestyle is now composed of what are all l…

Well, a lot of this isn't about CoL. Having to relocate internationally for a stint imposes all sorts of costs, especially for families. Plus, it's very possible that someone owns a house already which they can maybe rent out but there are still costs involved.

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#205

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

echelon wrote: post #164
jasonjayr wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then companies should have no problems whatsoever with Unions? I mean, if a group of employees want to get together to amplify their negotiating power, then they should not stop that?

I'm certainly not pro-union in tech, but this is something that could hasten its arrival. Just because I'm in Atlanta doesn't make me inherently worth less than my peers in SF.

> "Just because I'm in Atlanta doesn't make me inherently worth less than my peers in SF."

Should a person be charged SF prices for groceries when they're living in Atlanta because they're getting SF pay? Clearly not. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#206

Post by bluedino »

sremani wrote: post #125
lgleason wrote: post #89

If you live in the US and are advocating for this be careful what you wish for. It could lead to your 100-200K per year salary being cut to well below 100K to equalize across all engineers including those in low cost areas such as China and India.

The Software Developers will follow the path of the Autoworkers of the 60s, once a high paid and esteemed profession which becomes a menial job with average pay. It is not that far either, I bet Software Developers do not have beyond 7 years for this to take shape and of course, those massive layoffs are just around the corner when remote works becomes the standard.

The lower to mid-skill positions already have been.

The IT jobs that were like assembly line jobs (support, helpdesk, CRUD programming) has been outsourced like crazy to the rest of the world.

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#207

Post by blueyes »

The reason why many remote jobs exist is because companies can hire people remotely for less. I see no problem with that. This is a classic economic demand curve: at a lower price, there is demand for more workers. At a higher price, there is demand for fewer. If you want fewer jobs to exist, demand that everyone get paid SFBA salaries.

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#208

Post by cambalache »

username90 wrote: post #192
Dirlewanger wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can local wages (in a currency other than USD) be "pitiful", but food cost "the same" for the USD? These are incongruent. Locals wouldn't be able to subsist on those food prices. The USD has greater purchasing power, that's just a fact.

> Locals wouldn't be able to subsist on those food prices. You can live on 2-3$ a day with American food prices and eat well. You can live on 50 cents a day with American food prices if you eat badly. Most third world wages covers this. For people living on less than that they will be forced to eat food of so low standard that it would be illegal to sell in USA.

For poor people in third world countries(well everywhere actually) food represents a bigger % of your budget. So OK, they are not starving, they can eat OK, but even buying a new pair of jeans is an investment.

Re: "Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs

#209

Post by satyrnein »

bumby wrote: post #92
arc0 wrote: post #81

Facebook already pays people with the exact same credentials 1/3 in London what they would in California, despite London being similarly expensive. These companies do not pay anyone solely based on the work they produce, it has never and probably will never work that way.

There is a pervasive misconception that you are paid for how much value you bring. In a market economy, you are paid commensurate to how much you can negotiate. The value you bring (real or imagined) is part of that negotiation, but so are other factors. It pains me to see people get frustrated by this fact.

The value you bring is the ceiling on your compensation; employers are not going to pay more than that. Your cost of living is the floor; you're not going to take less than that. The spread between the two is what you're negotiating over.
Post reply on HN