California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses • Hacker News Board

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#221

Post by FireBeyond » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 4:17 PM UTC

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #202

FireBeyond wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For small businesses and startups, this can amount to millions of dollars of additional expenses. There's an adjustment needed. I have worked for and applied to healthcare startups that want you to BYO device. For working on PHI. In Production. We're not "all in this together". We all know that equity is worth nothing until proven otherwise. Stop cheaping out and expecting your employees to invest in your success w…

> If that means fewer/smaller startups, small businesses? Ultimately, so be it. This is really what it comes down to. If your business can't afford to employ people then people don't need to work for less, your business needs to cease operations. This bizarre entitlement entrepreneurs seem to experience baffles me. I don't care if the cost of labor makes your business inoperable. Tough shit. The last year or so I've…

Yup. And often those same people will say to others "you need to live within your means".

But when it comes to their business, all of a sudden they're entitled to a lot of things.

I'm all for small business, and vehemently support many.

But there's no constitutionally guaranteed right to a successful business.

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#222

Post by tinco » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 4:17 PM UTC

tristor wrote: post #210

I've worked remotely for about 10 years now. I actually don't want my employer covering these expenses. If the employer is covering these expenses it requires me to document the expenses and comply with employer policies related to these expenses. For instance, an employer may mandate what speed of Internet service I am required to have, where I always want the fastest option (gigabit generally) and redundant links.…

Is it typical that gas for commute is not covered? In The Netherlands that's a government regulation as well, never realised that might be uncommon.

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#223

Post by 535188B17C93743 » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 4:17 PM UTC

Guvante wrote: post #198

lopkeny12ko wrote: post #99

Many young people or those cheering for employee/consumer rights do not seem to understand that this does more net harm than good. For small businesses and startups, this can amount to millions of dollars of additional expenses. Like any economically rational entity, your employer is going to respond by reducing headcount, not hiring in CA anymore, cutting costs in your annual raises, or some combination of the above…

A computer uses 150kWh/year @ $0.42/kWh that is $75/year. Certainly internet is possible at $60/month so $720/year. Say you have a generous $500/5 years for equipment plan and you are still below $1,000/year/employee. Yes there are other expenses but you should already be providing a PC etc. How are you getting to millions at a small company? Certainly a shop with 3,000 people is out a few million but... You have 3,0…

$0.42/kWh!??! Jesus Christ. I think I'm paying around $0.0629/kWh. Where is this?

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#224

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 4:19 PM UTC

safety1st wrote: post #191

onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That would be true except the types of companies hiring a lot of remote workers already have a lot of remote workers in California. California has the luxury of being able to do whatever it wants and companies not really having much of a choice to say - we'll just skip the California market. It's a bigger market than Germany & Japan. This would go over less well if a state like Mississippi tried it.

This simply isn't true except when you're talking about the largest companies. The vast majority of American businesses don't have a place of business in all 50 states, or retail outlets, etc. etc. -- the majority of American businesses are small, operate in one or a handful of states, and as a result do in fact skip California. Sames goes I expect for "businesses hiring remote workers," only a Californian would have…

[deleted]

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#225

Post by ryandrake » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 4:19 PM UTC

ToucanLoucan wrote: post #202

FireBeyond wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For small businesses and startups, this can amount to millions of dollars of additional expenses. There's an adjustment needed. I have worked for and applied to healthcare startups that want you to BYO device. For working on PHI. In Production. We're not "all in this together". We all know that equity is worth nothing until proven otherwise. Stop cheaping out and expecting your employees to invest in your success w…

> If that means fewer/smaller startups, small businesses? Ultimately, so be it. This is really what it comes down to. If your business can't afford to employ people then people don't need to work for less, your business needs to cease operations. This bizarre entitlement entrepreneurs seem to experience baffles me. I don't care if the cost of labor makes your business inoperable. Tough shit. The last year or so I've…

Thank you. Businesses don't have some inherent, natural, god-given right to exist. We, the people, through the state, graciously allow them to exist and regulate them so that they operate in accordance with some public good. And even then, they have to earn their existence by being a financially viable business. It's a big hurdle, deliberately so.

This idea that, ohhhhh we can't regulate business because it will make them sad and even make some of them go out of business! The horror! They are not entitled to exist in the first place.

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#226

Post by alwaysrunning » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 4:20 PM UTC

lm28469 wrote: post #74

alwaysrunning wrote: post #56

I work 100% remote, have for over a decade, if my employer/contractor won't cover my expenses it tells me exactly what type of employer/company it is. If you can't recognize the value in me working fm home you won't see the value in me as an employee. Hard pass.

Shouldn't it be covered by your salary ? Otherwise why don't companies pay for my gas/tire/shoe soles/&c ?

Absolutely. And it is or I expense it. I don't only use my shoes for work so I don't expect them to cover that but maybe next year.

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#227

Post by mountainofdeath » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 4:20 PM UTC

This is stupid.

In an ideal US world, where healthcare insurance premiums aren't insane and aren't skewed toward large corporations, then everyone should be a contractor.

The person hiring you sends you payment and you do the work in accordance with your contract. At the end of the quarter, you total up your expenses (as already allowed under existing law) and subtract them from your revenue. You owe taxes on what is left.

With remote work, its really hard to anticipate costs you do not control e.g electricity. Furthermore, even the IRS insists that only subtract expenses that are substantially used for work. Years ago, anyone with a home office would consider their entire mortgage a business expense. Now, its subject to a complex set of rules taking into account the time spent actually working and the relative square footage of your work area relative to your home.

Furthermore, isn't this creeping into the territory of company towns? At what point would it just be cheaper to throw people into barracks, deducting room, board and laundry and simply remit the rest to the worker?

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#228

Post by photonbucket » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 4:20 PM UTC

valianteffort wrote: post #203

civilitty wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Californian who has lived here for a quarter century and has never threatened to leave, I’m glad the state doesn’t cater to startups who can’t afford an extra 5% for home office expenses for their remote workers. They have zero loyalty to the state and if all employees are remote there’s little benefit keeping the corp in CA. Everyone has to register to do business here and the FTB will get the bulk of its cut a…

And destroy the property values of all the people that worked their whole lives to own a home there. You're being myopic or selfish, neither is fair to your neighbors.

Half of us want the property values lowered, so that it's even possible to buy something

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#229

Post by brightball » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 4:21 PM UTC

lopkeny12ko wrote: post #99

Many young people or those cheering for employee/consumer rights do not seem to understand that this does more net harm than good. For small businesses and startups, this can amount to millions of dollars of additional expenses. Like any economically rational entity, your employer is going to respond by reducing headcount, not hiring in CA anymore, cutting costs in your annual raises, or some combination of the above…

One of many reasons to have a personal LLC/S-Corp in my opinion.

Another comment in the thread really nailed this well. If employers didn't pay for commute costs separately, why does this become a line item?

The employer does pay for gas and commute costs, as well as cost of living expenses...in a paycheck.

I place a high value on my home office setup so I have things exactly as I want them. I also live in a low cost of living area thanks to my ability to work remote.

A law like this is essentially there just to further incentivize the return to office policies that we've all been reading about. Now there will be an additional cost associated with going remote.

Re: California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

#230

Post by alwaysrunning » Tue, Oct 31, 2023, 4:22 PM UTC

alwaysrunning wrote: post #56

I work 100% remote, have for over a decade, if my employer/contractor won't cover my expenses it tells me exactly what type of employer/company it is. If you can't recognize the value in me working fm home you won't see the value in me as an employee. Hard pass.

"Researchers studied knowledge workers in 2013 and again during the 2020 pandemic lockdown and found significant changes in how they are working. They learned that lockdown helps people focus on the tasks that really matter. They spent 12% less time drawn into large meetings and 9% more time interacting with customers and external partners."

https://hbr.org/2020/08/research-knowledge-workers-are-more-...