3 ms·
Sure, in those rare cases where you can find a company that really does interesting work (this is doubly difficult if you are limited to companies that allow re
by pault 7y ago
Sure, in those rare cases where you can find a company that really does interesting work (this is doubly difficult if you are limited to companies that allow remote work). For boring company A vs boring company B you are going to follow the money, I think (unless you actually work for The Boring Company).
- emilycook 7y agoDisclaimer, I am a GitLab employee. But IMO this isn't really comparing apples-to-apples, since we're specifically talking about remote companies. Sure, someone may have 2 job offers from 2 different remote companies, in which case the company offering SF rates has the advantage. But I'd argue that would be a fairly rare case overall given how globally competitive remote work is. What's probably more likely is that someone is comparing Local Company A vs Remote Company B (this was my case), with the compensation rates being fairly equal. Then, the decision is "am I willing to be paid less than a coworker in SF for the opportunity to work remotely?" I was fine with that trade-off personally, and I'm sure a lot of people who are attracted to remote work would be as well.
- mieseratte 7y agoThere are a non-trivial number of factors that go into picking a job such that I sincerely doubt I would ever find myself going "Well, that one is offering 10K more per year." Off-hand: - Size of company, size of department, size of team - Future prospects, both in terms of company's market and my own growth - Type of work, e.g. maintenance vs. active development, "rescue" mission vs. greenfield vs. boring brownfield. - Composition of team, leadership, etc. - Industry, e.g. do I find it reprehensible vs. tolerable vs. interesting Perhaps I'm the odd man out here, but I've never been in a position where salary was the material factor in picking one job over another.