"Equal pay for equal work" in remote jobs • Hacker News Board

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

#231

Post by mac01021 » Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 4:16 PM UTC

mantap wrote: post #32

Cost of living is a swindle, at least when it applies internationally and cross culturally. If you want to live like a local in Jakarta (to use an extreme example), you can do so very cheaply, $180 a month for a room, eat rice for breakfast lunch and dinner. If you want to live like a San Franciscan in Jakarta, it will cost as much if not more as in San Francisco. An apartment will cost several thousand dollars a mon…

You've overlooked the case where I want to live like a Jakartan in San Francisco, eating rice for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, and renting 50 square meters of living space.

Take the minimum, over all cultures, of what would be taken as a comfortable lifestyle, and then assess the income required to maintain that lifestyle in various cities to see that, in a real sense, those cities do have different costs of living.

That said, I believe the most sensible companies will not allow their HR/payroll departments to apply a standard cost-of-living formula, simply because there are bound to be prospective employees in Jakarta whose market values are higher than those of other prospective employees who happen to live in SFO and, as an employer, I'll want to hire all those people at their respective market values.

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

#232

Post by claudeganon » Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 4:16 PM UTC

baron_harkonnen wrote: post #140

This will happen but people will should not be surprised that we all get paid Topeka KS salaries not San Francisco CA salaries. The long term strategy of location pay differentials may seem like punishing people for leaving SF, but it's the opposite. I've been paid 80% of SF rate to live in the middle of nowhere and anyone else who has done this will realize it's an amazing deal. When a 3000 sq ft house costs conside…

>When a 3000 sq ft house costs considerably less than your 1 bedroom apartment, you realize that your cost of living didn't just drop by more than 20%, but that standard of living went way up.

I moved from an apartment in LA to owning a home in Michigan. My standard of living had not gone up. Instead of being surrounded by an interesting, diverse set of generally sane people, and having many more job opportunities readily available in my field, I have COVID denying, borderline cultists who tried to assassinate the governor and generally make it unsafe for me to go anywhere without risking getting sick and stolid corporations that underpay and don’t take risks. Thankfully, I still work remotely for a company in California so I can go back when this all blows over.

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

#233

Post by diehunde » Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 4:16 PM UTC

People who complain about this don't understand how fiat money works. They are blinded by the numbers they see in other's people's checks.

Instead, if companies give coupons to pay for rent and food, nobody would complain because they wouldn't see the real value of different cities' coupons.

IMO, the effort should be focused on improving the conversion formulas. Although from what I've seen, people living in cheaper cities are getting a better deal than their colleagues living in SF or NY right now.

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

#234

Post by avernon » Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 4:17 PM UTC

Eventually it will equal pay for equal work. And that pay will be set by the marginal producers in places like India or the Philippines.

Differentiation is the key here, if you can do that then you have leverage no matter where you live.

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

#235

Post by ghaff » Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 4:17 PM UTC

NovemberWhiskey wrote: post #215

ghaff wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Sure, plus possibly even some element of tax normalization etc. But these are all cost-of-living items predicated on the assumption "I want to keep on living as I did and not be worse off for it". If that also means international schools for kids so they can stay on the same qualification track, then that's also a necessity, no? Assistance with costs of home rental are often a separate line item in a good relocation…

International schools. Probably a driver in a lot of low CoL areas. Maybe a cook. etc. And as you say, a lot may be handled outside of a "CoL adjustment." It just points out there's a huge gap between live like a local and live like a Westerner, especially a Westerner who is being relocated temporarily to a location that may not be especially desirable.

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

#236

Post by warkdarrior » Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 4:18 PM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #149

baron_harkonnen wrote: post #140

This will happen but people will should not be surprised that we all get paid Topeka KS salaries not San Francisco CA salaries. The long term strategy of location pay differentials may seem like punishing people for leaving SF, but it's the opposite. I've been paid 80% of SF rate to live in the middle of nowhere and anyone else who has done this will realize it's an amazing deal. When a 3000 sq ft house costs conside…

In a (still very hypothetical) world where some group/class of employees are overwhelmingly remote/distributed, it's reasonable to assume that salaries tend to equalize at least within the US. That's a lot of hypotheticals, of course. However, if it were to become the case, why would I have any reason to pay you a premium to live in Manhattan or SF any more than I would pay you a premium to live in Aspen. ADDED: Sala…

The discussion won't be about premium for Manhattan v. premium in Aspen. It'll be premium for Manhattan v. regular wage in Stockton.

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

#237

Post by nivenkos » Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 4:19 PM UTC

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.

Even low cost areas like Western Europe. Tech salaries in Europe are about 1/3 of the US salaries, even for exactly the same job (in enterprises).

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

#238

Post by [deleted] » Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 4:20 PM UTC

simonebrunozzi wrote: post #112

> You should expect "equal pay for equal work" at your new remote job So naive. In an ideal, utopian world? Maybe it would work this way. Maybe. In reality, your compensation is a function of your negotiating power. Some people, in fact, manage to get the same pay even when working remote, because they're "highly employable". Others don't. And let me add: I almost agree that remote work shouldn't necessarily command…

[deleted]

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

#239

Post by refurb » Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 4:20 PM UTC

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.

You’re not paid based on “worth”. You’re paid based on the intersection of how badly the company needs someone (demand) and how many people out there do what they need (supply).

If suddenly the supply expands from the Bay Area to all of the US, that changes the equation. Don’t forget that guy in Atlanta who is equally as talented as you, but willing to work for 20% less than you make.

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

#240

Post by coward8675309 » Wed, Nov 18, 2020, 4:20 PM UTC

eloisant wrote: post #88

The reality behind "cost of living" is actually "market price". Companies having this policy don't actually try to figure out how much it costs to live in a city in an other, they just look how much people are paid for a similar job in the area. In other words, companies with this policy pay you as low as the market allows them, without you being poached by a local competitor.

Yes, pretty spot on. Would these Facebook employees be happier if Fb decided the equilibrium point was way below SV/SF subsistence and reset everyone's salary accordingly? "We're being fair. Work from wherever you like. Happy now?" I don't see that scenario hurting Fb. In fact, if I were Zuck, I might do it to clean house. There are plenty of talented people outside SV/SF and I bet they might be less focused on work as a source of free snacks and as a vehicle for their pet political causes.