4 ms·

That's a very interesting point. I don't think we even need to get into the "legal" talks. I love how buffer is so transparent with everyone, but at the same t

by jypepin 10y ago

That's a very interesting point. I don't think we even need to get into the "legal" talks. I love how buffer is so transparent with everyone, but at the same time I'm not sure how I like (or dislike) how they discriminate with locations. I think both sides have very valid points right. If I'm a native from buenos aires for example, for me the ideal might to stay there, so ok, maybe it's fair that's my salary is adjusted with my cost of living. but at the same time, it's the same labor and same output for the company, just cheaper. So you can also see that as a way for the company to get cheaper labor... If you are so much into having a remote team, then why would you discriminate against location right? It can be seen as "we love remote, but actually just because it allows us to get the same labor for cheaper!".

csallen 10y ago
I think getting the same labor for cheaper is a totally valid goal for any business. It's similar to a developer shopping around at various companies to do (roughly) the same job but for better pay and benefits.
- nkantar 10y ago
  Or choosing to live in cheaper places to keep more of their pay.
gedrap 10y ago
>>> If you are so much into having a remote team, then why would you discriminate against location right? Well, minimizing the cost of running business is very reasonable, as long as it's fair to the employees which is subjective and complicated issue. I think that this is a fairly complicated issue. Some points: * if you pay the SF rate for developers in small towns in Easter Europe or Siberia or India or whatever, where the average salary is less than $750/mo and sometimes much lower, you might have some odd dynamics. Golden handcuffs and all that; * however, it is reasonably often an intentional decision to live in a cheaper place, with less opportunities, etc, so that you can save more money. So not really fair to heavily penalize for that and questionable how much should you penalize; * it's hard to adjust the numbers globally, really. There are some web sites about cost of living, but they ignore loads of details about the local dynamics. Often it's just a crowd sourced average. So paying the SF (or NYC or whatever) rate globally probably wouldn't work, you need some adjustments. The severity of such adjustments is hard to get right.
borplk 10y ago
But what's the alternative to pay everyone the SF rate?

by jypepin 10y ago

csallen 10y ago

I think getting the same labor for cheaper is a totally valid goal for any business. It's similar to a developer shopping around at various companies to do (roughly) the same job but for better pay and benefits.

nkantar 10y ago
Or choosing to live in cheaper places to keep more of their pay.

gedrap 10y ago

>>> If you are so much into having a remote team, then why would you discriminate against location right? Well, minimizing the cost of running business is very reasonable, as long as it's fair to the employees which is subjective and complicated issue. I think that this is a fairly complicated issue. Some points: * if you pay the SF rate for developers in small towns in Easter Europe or Siberia or India or whatever, where the average salary is less than $750/mo and sometimes much lower, you might have some odd dynamics. Golden handcuffs and all that; * however, it is reasonably often an intentional decision to live in a cheaper place, with less opportunities, etc, so that you can save more money. So not really fair to heavily penalize for that and questionable how much should you penalize; * it's hard to adjust the numbers globally, really. There are some web sites about cost of living, but they ignore loads of details about the local dynamics. Often it's just a crowd sourced average. So paying the SF (or NYC or whatever) rate globally probably wouldn't work, you need some adjustments. The severity of such adjustments is hard to get right.

borplk 10y ago

But what's the alternative to pay everyone the SF rate?