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

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

#621

Post by darth_avocado » Tue, Nov 24, 2020, 9:38 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #464

MetalGuru wrote: post #452

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pay isn’t directly based on COL. It’s based on supply and demand. If there were thousands of baristas available to fill jobs at SF Starbucks, the pay would be lower. The reason pay is higher in SV is because all the same firms were competing against each other for the limited supply of talent. One could argue the supply is impacted by COL, but it’s still only an indirect cause of pay determination.

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

Because COL drives supply and demand. If you're only willing to pay $5/hr in SF, you'd have less supply because people won't be willing to work for that price.

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

#622

Post by darth_avocado » Tue, Nov 24, 2020, 9:42 PM UTC

ubercow13 wrote: post #463

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…

>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?

Because there's benefits to hiring people who would work in person.

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

#623

Post by darth_avocado » Tue, Nov 24, 2020, 9:48 PM UTC

oh_sigh wrote: post #481

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 ma…

How is a Barista's work different in SF vs Oklahoma? Making coffee is the same process (and I'm talking about regular baristas). It is unequal pay for the same work, in different locations.

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

#624

Post by kmonsen » Sat, Nov 28, 2020, 6:49 AM UTC

MetalGuru wrote: post #452

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…

Pay isn’t directly based on COL. It’s based on supply and demand. If there were thousands of baristas available to fill jobs at SF Starbucks, the pay would be lower. The reason pay is higher in SV is because all the same firms were competing against each other for the limited supply of talent. One could argue the supply is impacted by COL, but it’s still only an indirect cause of pay determination.

At least in google pay was more based on col than supply and demand. The reason was if not everyone would move to Mountain View and that was not good for the company. So in general offices in low col like India or Taiwan paid better than expected to try to have people stay.

There were exceptions like London for some reason.