21–30 of 87 posts
Working “remotely” actually puts the entire burden of managing an office and managing deadlines squarely on your shoulders.
EDIT: I mean managing your own deadlines of course
> They replied, "Can you consider coming down since this is a remote position?" It's a perk in the sense that you're not paying bay area rents. If you're in a high CoL area and want to say, applying to remote positions is an uphill battle, as the chief reason most companies want to look remote is to expand their recruiting reach without raising wages, and hoping to lower them.
https://m.signalvnoise.com/basecamp-doesnt-employ-anyone-in-...
If for some reason that doesn't work out, you've discovered that the company values you less based on your zip code which is something you definitely want to find out before you're relying on them for your livelyhood.
^ This is basically the rationale I imagine when people pay the same worker less money just because of where they live. They obviously could hire someone local and would pay them more money. But they want to hire you. But they also think they can get away with screwing you on compensation, because you're remote. They save money and they get an employee. It's a win-win for them.
Fuck. That. Especially because they said "Can you consider ...". Uh, no, Mr. I Just Lost All My Negotiating Power By Asking Someone To Think About My Request Rather Than Insisting On It.
Remote is not a benefit. If they had a million qualified local candidates banging down their door, they wouldn't be negotiating with you. Tell them to put up or shut up.
In some situations it would be said you are being too literal? Sometimes when people negotiate they say "can you do x because y" where y is just a plausible way to ask for x. It is often more graceful than just saying "we don't want to pay that much."
im not following, can you explain what you mean a little more thoroughly?
In some situations it would be said you are being too literal? Sometimes when people negotiate they say "can you do x because y" where y is just a plausible way to ask for x. It is often more graceful than just saying "we don't want to pay that much."
im not following, can you explain what you mean a little more thoroughly?
This is a common negotiation tactic. If you give someone _any_ reason when making a request, they are more likely to comply, even if that reason doesn't make sense.
Small example, at a coffee shop: "Can I cut in line?" might get a negative response, but "can I cut in line, I am late to pick up my son from school" is much more likely to get a positive response. I don't have a link, but there have been studies to show that even nonsensical justifications are more likely to get positive responses. "Can I cut in line, my grandmother is watching TV" is more effective than no justification at all.
In this case, by connecting the salary reduction to a feature of the job (remote), it makes it more acceptable to comply with the request than if it didn't have a reason attached.
Why do you even care then?
> My thinking is that it's difficult to find the type of people who has the focus and skills (focus overrides skill, I think) to really do remote work well.
Are you basing that on anything other than wild fantasy? Have you heard of eastern Europe, where tons of people will work remote for far less money?
> In return, I give full-on focused work with no cruft.
All employees are expected to give that, remote or not, whatever "with no cruft" really means.