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

Gitlab and remote work

about.gitlab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 214 posts

Re: Gitlab and remote work

#171

Post by silisili »

tomnipotent wrote: post #93
tristor wrote: post #89

I appreciate a lot of what Gitlab has done, but as someone who has been permanently remote for nearly a decade, I don't really consider them to be a leader in remote work. One of my biggest issues with Gitlab is that they pay based on locality, many other fully remote companies pay below Bay Area salaries, but they pay flat globally, meaning you can be location-independent without a pay-cut and it helps to bring in h…

Locally-adjusted pay is a fluke if revenues are not locally constrained (like a coffee shop). It's just another way employers try and nickle and dime workers, and it's sad that a large class of workers have been brainwashed to support it because somehow they're more upset at the other workers making more, than the company trying to pull a fast on on them. "But you would make so much more than your neighbors!". Fuck o…

It also only works if people stay put. I made less than my CA counterparts for nearly a decade, constantly reminding me just how expensive CA was.

Fast forward 10 years, a quarter of them sold their house and basically retired in my area. Yay.

Re: Gitlab and remote work

#172

Post by baby »

makeitdouble wrote: post #163
baby wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate that as well, but from the point of view of the employer it makes sense no? They are supposed to pay as little as they can afford, and location impacts that.

"as little as they can afford" is still completely subjective, as they will pay more for an employee that is better valued on the market for any specific reason, regardless of the actual results once they join Gitlab. If tomorrow they declared they "need" to pay their employees 2x more to hire "A players" and get an edge on their competitors, we probably would have to take their word for it.

I'm not sure I understand. The way it works is that you look at the market where you're hiring someone, and seeing how people pay in that market (using different apps you can pay for). Then you decide which percentile you want to be part of (average payer, top payer, etc.)

Of course I imagine that you can make up a number and say "I'll pay my employees X because I have money right now and this is what they deserve" but it doesn't sound like a good financial decision for a business.

Re: Gitlab and remote work

#173

Post by baby »

golergka wrote: post #117
baby wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hate that as well, but from the point of view of the employer it makes sense no? They are supposed to pay as little as they can afford, and location impacts that.

Location impacts that only if the hiring is constrained by location. If you hire remote worldwide, then by all means, go for the cheapest developers that you can find worldwide, or go for developers who have my skills. Either way, it doesn't matter where we live. Especially if (as myself and many others) we don't live in one place and travel between different countries with drastically different local income levels.

Not sure I understand. But remote companies are doing exactly that, they're hiring not based on location to get talent from the whole world, and then they pay accordingly to the market of the candidate.

Re: Gitlab and remote work

#174

Post by aahortwwy »

tristor wrote: post #95
tomnipotent wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Locally-adjusted pay is a fluke if revenues are not locally constrained (like a coffee shop). It's just another way employers try and nickle and dime workers, and it's sad that a large class of workers have been brainwashed to support it because somehow they're more upset at the other workers making more, than the company trying to pull a fast on on them. "But you would make so much more than your neighbors!". Fuck o…

> You also won't see this for senior management. As a VP/C-level, I've never had a potential employer put pressure on salary during a negotiation because of my location (though it's always been domestic). It's never even come up besides relocation discussions. This is absolutely true and it's because executives usually have spent at least some amount of time doing "sales" type roles where they learn what value sellin…

Value selling isn't an option for most employees. Try it in a typical salary negotiation and you'll get funny looks followed by a repeat of their standard offer.

Re: Gitlab and remote work

#175

Post by leaflets2 »

silisili wrote: post #171
tomnipotent wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Locally-adjusted pay is a fluke if revenues are not locally constrained (like a coffee shop). It's just another way employers try and nickle and dime workers, and it's sad that a large class of workers have been brainwashed to support it because somehow they're more upset at the other workers making more, than the company trying to pull a fast on on them. "But you would make so much more than your neighbors!". Fuck o…

It also only works if people stay put. I made less than my CA counterparts for nearly a decade, constantly reminding me just how expensive CA was. Fast forward 10 years, a quarter of them sold their house and basically retired in my area. Yay.

How did this affect their salaries? (If at all)

Re: Gitlab and remote work

#176

Post by Traubenfuchs »

inyorgroove wrote: post #118
alexfromapex wrote: post #69

My favorite part of their story is how they changed the interview process to not be terrible and built a dashboard to quantify it: https://about.gitlab.com/blog/2020/03/19/the-trouble-with-te...

I've interviewed with them twice (2016 & 2022), didn't receive any feed back other than a generic decline e-mail. And this was despite promises to the contrary from recruiters, I was ghosted when I asked for it too. I even recall teaching the interviewer some javascript quirk during a coding challenge the first time and solved whatever silly brain teaser question that was asked, with test cases too! Yet zero feedback…

So your personal experience with the processes of $BIG_CORP don't live up to the fairy tails $BIG_CORP spins in their blogs, talks and other public relations material? I am shocked, shocked!

Re: Gitlab and remote work

#177

Post by leaflets2 »

leeoniya wrote: post #103
tristor wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You also won't see this for senior management. As a VP/C-level, I've never had a potential employer put pressure on salary during a negotiation because of my location (though it's always been domestic). It's never even come up besides relocation discussions. This is absolutely true and it's because executives usually have spent at least some amount of time doing "sales" type roles where they learn what value sellin…

> This is absolutely true and it's because executives usually have spent at least some amount of time doing "sales" type roles where they learn what value selling is. or because there are two orders of magnitude fewer VPs/C-levels than line workers. an extra +100k for a single unicorn employee is easier to justify than +20k comp x 100 replaceable employees

And, when execs give other execs high salaries, it's simpler for them themselves to keep their own high salaries?

Otherwise, after a while, maybe others in the company would say:

The other execs don't make more than this:... Why should we pay you so much?

Re: Gitlab and remote work

#178

Post by lucideer »

rschachte wrote: post #141
codegeek wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should the definition of "World Leader in Remote" be based on how they pay. Why can't it be based on the fact that they allow fully remote and pay reasonably well for your area. Who decides the definition ?

Well that would be fine and all but there are a zillion tech companies that allow remote work that pay reasonably well. It doesn’t mean they’re a world leader in remote work. I worked at a small company that paid me a lot, gave me free stuff, perks etc. It doesn’t mean they’re a world leader in remote work. It just means they offer those things. The point is — they are not a world leader in remote work. They are a te…

> to convince people like you otherwise

Nobody here is "convinced by their marketing" or has even mentioned they believe GLs claim. They're only asking for an explanation of your metric: that location based pay grades preclude leadership in remote working. I have yet to see any reasonable case for why this should be?

Re: Gitlab and remote work

#179

Post by JulesRosser »

codegeek wrote: post #54
rnk wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw a list of companies that paid the same regardless of location. There were even a few bay area companies that didn't cut your pay when you moved away, I wish I had that handy.

Can you name a few who will pay a Senior Software Engineer the same salary in Bay Area vs say Bangalore, India ? I am curious.

We do at Expensify. A good % of our team works fully remote: https://we.are.expensify.com/benefits-perks

Also, check out remotewide.co for a list of remote companies with location independent pay. I think this is exactly what you're looking for.

Re: Gitlab and remote work

#180

Post by leaflets2 »

vladvasiliu wrote: post #158
Barrin92 wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Locally-adjusted pay is a fluke if revenues are not locally constrained You don't get paid based on company revenue, you get paid based on the lowest amount you (or someone you're competing with) are willing to agree to sell your labour for. That amount is going to be lower if your cost of living is lower. People earning less if they work remotely in Podunk, Idaho compared to SF is no different from someone earning…

Fair enough. But it would seem that for a remote worker, the value for the company comes from what they produce, not from where they produce it from. To me, this would instead be an argument that "since engineers are equal, might as well get the cheapest one". Which is an argument I can understand, even if I don't agree. But this would mean that your compensation would be mostly fixed, and you'd mostly look for peopl…

If you change the argument to this:

"Among equal engineers, get the cheapest one"

Post reply on HN