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

481–490 of 624 posts

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

#481

Post by oh_sigh »

darth_avocado wrote: post #444

No, equal pay for equal work, especially in remote jobs isn't going to work. Why is it that for almost the entire history of man, we've had wages decided based on COL, and suddenly when it comes to tech bros who are seeing a pay cut, we are all up in the arms? A Starbucks barista in SF gets paid one and half times that in Oklahoma. They do equal work, just different locations. A lady in the Zara sweatshops in Banglad…

All of your examples are geography dependent and is not actually equal work - the Oklahoma barista can't do the same job as the SF barista, because telecommuting baristas is not a thing.

But if the job role is to maintain a server fleet, and you can realistically do the job from anywhere, then you should get paid the same amount whether you happen to be in SF or Oklahoma, since you can complete the job in the same manner.

Equal pay for equal work makes sense - what doesn't make sense is to assume that the pay will normalize into bay-area level pay, versus bay-area level pay being lowered because companies realize they can pay everyone 70% as much and have the employees live in lower cost of living areas.

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

#482

Post by inglor_cz »

NationalPark wrote: post #366
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…

Speak for yourself, but you'd have to pay me even more to live in the middle of nowhere than in a city, and this doesn't seem to be an uncommon preference. Especially if you're young, single, have disposable income, and lean left politically, which is probably most of the remote tech workers who have these options.

Fun story.

A former chairman of the Czech Green Party, a young and progressive gay guy moved to a rural area, bought an older ruin of some former baron's chatelet and started putting it into order. With his husband.

In a year or so, his Tweets started shifting noticeably to the center and sometimes to the right, to a great consternation of his former Green co-partisans.

There is something about life out there that changes people's priorities.

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

#483

Post by renewiltord »

whimsicalism wrote: post #418
renewiltord wrote: post #342

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies can't stop you from unionizing. They can choose not to accept the collective agreement and they can hire permanent replacement for strikers. As for whether anyone should have a problem, you're welcome to have a problem. It's a free country. Whether that will lead to an outcome you desire is independent, though.

People love to paint this world of voluntary transactions and consensual agreements, but then corporations turn around and push for right-to-work laws which infringe freedom of association and contract by making it illegal for companies to sign security clause contracts with Unions. Why should a voluntary, consensual signing of a contract be made illegal?

It most certainly should not. In fact, I'd say we shouldn't weaken labour rights before we undo that.

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

#484

Post by jacobolus »

whimsicalism wrote: post #431
aeternum wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is excess milk production really a social need though? According to the market people would generally rather spend that money elsewhere. Via the subsidy the U.S. is forcing everyone to spend a small portion of their income on milk production.

> According to the market people would generally rather spend that money elsewhere Or some people don't have the money to spend on it at all. This is the fundamental issue with using "willingness to pay" as proxy for "utility consumer gains."

The appropriate way to fix that problem would be to directly give the money to the people who have trouble paying for food, instead of giving it to dairy farmers.

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

#485

Post by bee_rider »

Nasrudith wrote: post #400
Dirlewanger wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm in the same boat as you, but think about this: these cushy developer jobs in the Western world are on borrowed time. FAANG companies are investing billions to teach people how to code and brand it as if it's some noble humanitarian effort when it's really just to further lower wages. When the time of FAANG companies actually offshoring key development teams comes (and it is coming), I have 0 faith the federal gov…

Wait how could Unions help against outsourcing? What do Unions do? Use strikes (withholding labor) to get concessions. What does outsourcing involve? Finding cheaper labor out of the country and laying off or firing existing workforce. If outsourcing is the threat isn't the potentially outsourced threatening a strike kind of like responding to a mugger by putting a knife to your own throat? Except I think that might…

A union can't help workers whose company is currently in the process of outsourcing them. However, it is often the case that a company isn't ready to completely shut down local operations.

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

#486

Post by cratermoon »

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…

https://bitworking.org/news/2008/01/the-free-market-fairy/

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

#487

Post by Fargren »

NovemberWhiskey wrote: post #122
nemacol wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the "requirement" part is a sticking point. If I chose to move from my small house in WV to a condo in Pitt, i would not expect my employer to pay me more because of my choice. If they required me to move to Pitt or I lose my job, I would expect some compensation. Likewise, if I take a job and get X salary for that job, then move to a cheaper part of town I wouldn't expect to take a pay cut.

I'm not sure that's internally consistent from a logical perspective. Forget the require bit. Say it's an option. You're employed with a salary of $X at location Y. Your employer wants you to move to location Z with higher cost-of-living. You can either stay at location Y or move to location Z. You feel it's right that your employer increase your salary because of the higher cost of living if you move to Z. The compa…

The way I see it, if the company wants you to do something you would not do if not for their asking (i.e. moving) it makes sense to ask for compensation, and the compensation should be commensurate to how onerous what they want is. I would expect a relocation bonus even if moving from a high cost of living area to a low cost of living area, if moving was requested by the company.

On the other hand, if I want to do something because it is convenient for me but does not affect my work in any way (i.e. change where I work from) I would not expect my compensation to change.

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

#488

Post by kec »

inglor_cz wrote: post #479
lotsofpulp wrote: post #464

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand where people get the idea that prices are based on anything but supply and demand.

An interesting exception from intuitive understanding of supply and demand: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veblen_good

I'm not an economist but it has always seemed to me that Veblen goods are actually selling status and prestige. Flooding the market with product devalues the associated status which is what causes the price to drop.

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

#489

Post by golemotron »

gtsop wrote: post #339
golemotron wrote: post #335

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The lesson is: don't be a commodity.

Honestly interested in hearing your opinion on how to do that.

Find a niche or make one. There's no algorithm so it can be hard, but it is a strategy.

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

#490

Post by ubercow13 »

geodel wrote: post #478
ubercow13 wrote: post #463

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>there'll be plenty of people there who can do your job for less with the same set of skills Why weren't they already hired instead of the SF person, then?

Really? Is every person on earth with certain capability doing or getting opportunity to do exactly that work.

I don’t understand your point? The GP was implying that as soon as a SF engineer moves somewhere else, there are other engineers locally who could equally do their job.
Post reply on HN