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

California employers must reimburse remote workers for all necessary expenses

nolo.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 462 posts

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

#61

Post by TrackerFF »

Some quick napkin math:

Say you work 100% remote, 8 hours a day. That's 2080 work hours a year, out of 8760 hours.

That means you need to be connected to internet, have electricity, etc. 23.74% of the time - let's round that up to 24%

Say a worker pays $600 / year for internet, $2400 for electricity / year, and - dunno - $1500 for your cellphone / year.

So that's $4500 / year, and your employer must cover approximately $1080 of that. If the company has 1000 employees, that's a million in extra costs.

Doesn't really sound like it is going to break the bank, especially not if your employer is also able to cut previous office-related costs.

Also, employers would probably start to offer a bit lower salaries to the workers that don't live in very high cost of living areas...if you pay 1000 employers on average $100k / year, that's a minimum $100m in annual salary expenses. If employees are willing to take a $99k salary for guaranteed 100% remote work, with the above expenses covered, then those costs are offset for the employer...

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

#62

Post by ghaff »

frumper wrote: post #51
Loughla wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay? I still don't understand how that means the costs for a private company should shift to the public purse. Please explain.

Work expenses paid for by an employee are typically tax deductible. This wouldn't be anything new. The expenses paid for by an employer are also tax deductible. This would also not be anything new. The idea isn't that the "cost" is borne by the taxpayer, it is that the employee/employer shouldn't pay a tax on the money they used to produce the income.

Tax deductible (which for most people in the US means nothing today) is different from being reimbursed.

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

#63

Post by AlwaysRock »

_ea1k wrote: post #54
ghaff wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you're going to pay for an extra room--which seems very unlikely (or should be) to be reimbursable as opposed to working on the kitchen table--the actual incremental costs seem pretty trivial. Even if you reimburse some pro-rated amount of internet and/or mobile, that's maybe $100/month in the US. ADDED: If you don't have an option to go into an office, a stipend for a co-working space may be reasonable.

I'm sure the WFH needs have factored into many home purchases in the past few years. It is a real expense.

100% My wife and I both work from home. We are DINK but that still means we need to compete with families for homes with enough space for two offices. I'm not complaining, it's just absolutely a major expense.

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

#64

Post by NhanH »

laweijfmvo wrote: post #50
rubiquity wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s these things called home offices and many have converted a room to be one when working from home all the time.

How do you value the opportunity cost of an extra bedroom?

It's not just opportunity cost. I have known people buying condo with extra room to use as home office (they picked the one with extra room). It is a very real and significant cost, not merely opportunity cost

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

#65

Post by saagarjha »

kortilla wrote: post #52
ghaff wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you're going to pay for an extra room--which seems very unlikely (or should be) to be reimbursable as opposed to working on the kitchen table--the actual incremental costs seem pretty trivial. Even if you reimburse some pro-rated amount of internet and/or mobile, that's maybe $100/month in the US. ADDED: If you don't have an option to go into an office, a stipend for a co-working space may be reasonable.

Working from the kitchen table doesn’t work if you have a family or really anyone else in the house.

Or if you have like any ancillary hardware, or want a back that isn’t ruined

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

#66

Post by em-bee »

ghaff wrote: post #23
troebr wrote: post #16

My biggest expense being remote is that I need an extra room for my office. Besides that, that would probably be heating in winter and electricity, but these are small compared to the cost of an extra room.

Unless you're going to pay for an extra room--which seems very unlikely (or should be) to be reimbursable as opposed to working on the kitchen table--the actual incremental costs seem pretty trivial. Even if you reimburse some pro-rated amount of internet and/or mobile, that's maybe $100/month in the US. ADDED: If you don't have an option to go into an office, a stipend for a co-working space may be reasonable.

i am paying for an extra room, because i have to live in a place that has that extra room, which costs more money. if i didn't need the room, i could save a lot of money by getting a smaller apartment.

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

#67

Post by pfannkuchen »

ghaff wrote: post #23
troebr wrote: post #16

My biggest expense being remote is that I need an extra room for my office. Besides that, that would probably be heating in winter and electricity, but these are small compared to the cost of an extra room.

Unless you're going to pay for an extra room--which seems very unlikely (or should be) to be reimbursable as opposed to working on the kitchen table--the actual incremental costs seem pretty trivial. Even if you reimburse some pro-rated amount of internet and/or mobile, that's maybe $100/month in the US. ADDED: If you don't have an option to go into an office, a stipend for a co-working space may be reasonable.

> working [full time] on the kitchen table

Good luck with your debilitating back issues in 10 years.

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

#69

Post by sokoloff »

frumper wrote: post #51
Loughla wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay? I still don't understand how that means the costs for a private company should shift to the public purse. Please explain.

Work expenses paid for by an employee are typically tax deductible. This wouldn't be anything new. The expenses paid for by an employer are also tax deductible. This would also not be anything new. The idea isn't that the "cost" is borne by the taxpayer, it is that the employee/employer shouldn't pay a tax on the money they used to produce the income.

The upthread proposal was "I think it should be done as a tax credit for the employee or the company instead."

That's a proposal to have the cost be borne directly by the taxpayers (a tax credit), not a mere reduction of profit via a valid business expense (a tax deduction).

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

#70

Post by driverdan »

troebr wrote: post #16

My biggest expense being remote is that I need an extra room for my office. Besides that, that would probably be heating in winter and electricity, but these are small compared to the cost of an extra room.

Unless you have special equipment that requires the space you don't need an extra room, you want an extra room.
Post reply on HN