6 ms·

Be careful of the companies that advertise remote as a “benefit” of the job. They’re usually looking to discount your salary by 30-50% by some arbitrary cost o

by aantix 7y ago

Be careful of the companies that advertise remote as a “benefit” of the job. They’re usually looking to discount your salary by 30-50% by some arbitrary cost of living factor. You bring the same value - whether that’s delivered from New York City or Des Moines Iowa.

slackfan 7y ago
Let's not beat around the bush, specifically, Gitlab does this, IIRC.
- brantonb 7y ago
  Explained here: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/total-rewards/compensation/#paying-local-rates https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/total-rewards/compensation...
  - JoeCortopassi 7y ago
    Great explanation of a bad practice. A company should pay for the value they get, which is independent of the location. These calculations never seem to take into effect all the cost savings of having a remote person (office building/parking/food/working space/etc). Instead, they almost always mark the employee as a second tier of worker
    - slackfan 7y ago
      My company tends to do something similar for starting salaries, but that's because we're a consultancy, and our rates per-market are different. However: In the long term if employees stay with the company long term, salaries tend to get bumped up to approximately the same. So you might get started lower, but your yearly pay bump will be higher.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - bernawil 7y ago
    those arguments look just slightly in bad faith since they act like they're only competing for talent against local non-remote companies for every location when they're not. They're also competing against other remote companies, specially those that don't do location-based comp. Team members in low-wage regions being in golden handcuffs and sticking around because of the compensation even when they are unhappy. Those people will be still be in golden-handcuffs until they find another remote job. A concentration of team members in low-wage regions, since it is a better deal for them, while we want a geographically diverse team. Come on, you can still pay top dollar globally and hire evenly around the globe if that's what you want. It's just cheaper their way. Honestly, the whole thing is just a huge rationalization. They could just have said "we adjust for location because we can".
  - matthewbauer 7y ago
    > Team members in low-wage regions being in golden handcuffs and sticking around because of the compensation even when they are unhappy. We believe that it is healthy for the company when unhappy people leave. What??? Only in SV could a company get away with saying it’s “healthy” to not pay people their value. Usually, golden handcuffs refer to retirement and other benefits, not base compensation.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- gregkerzhner 7y ago
  GitHub does this as well. When I spoke to their recruiter they offered me 30 to 50% less than what I currently make because I live in a "tier 3" city.
  - slackfan 7y ago
    Honestly, if it was like a 5-10% difference it wouldn't be as nearly as insulting.
  - matthewbauer 7y ago
    Did you try a counter offer? I would think they would be flexible on this if they are in fact paying people in SF and NYC that much. I wonder if anyone has tried moving to NYC/SF for a year and then moving back to lower cost of living. Would these remote-only companies really give you a paycut?
wintermutestwin 7y ago
I worked remotely 17 years for a large SV tech corp doing work that was global in nature. 5 years in, they instituted a policy of having salary modifiers based on where you lived for both remote and onsite employees. Your salary wouldn't immediately change, but when it came time for increases, your compensation rate was considered. I had no problem with this policy because I lived on the side of a mountain and my house cost 1/5th a Bay Area home. Instead of a 1.5hour commute home, I would have a 1.5hr mountain bike ride out my back door. Now, the salary difference wasn't 50%, it was more like 25%, but I would have taken 50% to not have to live in the Bay Area. The real downside was that I had minimal mobility because most of the tech world is still in the dark ages of management by proximity. Doing a job search in the startup world in the age of Covid, I assumed that there would be an explosion of WFH jobs, but most are not.
- aantix 7y ago
  “But I would have taken 50% less to not have to live in the Bay Area” The even crazier notion is this - you shouldn’t have to concede anything. If they landed a dev in SF, they’d be willing to pay them the appropriate SF comp. It’s in their budget. Press harder. Money gives you options, even if you’re not a big spender, it’s security. Why not you? Demand more.
  - SamuelAdams 7y ago
    Right but it's also a race to the bottom. You don't know if the company has another candidate in their cards that will accept a 50% reduction to a SF engineer. With remote work you have a lot more competition.
    - aantix 7y ago
      "More competition" - but the company still has just a finite amount of time to evaluate candidates. I've been on the hiring side - if you want a very senior engineer and want to vet them properly, there's nothing fast about the process. You have access to a million senior engineers but who cares if you only have two engineers on your side that are qualified enough to interview them and those engineers are still expected to ship code, do code reviews, alongside doing interviews? If you can deliver a fantastic interview where you code on demand, talk architecture tradeoffs intelligently, the leverage still belongs to you as the engineer. Regardless of the number of candidates.
Kalium 7y ago
Let's examine this from the other side for a bit: why would a company want to pay for one developer's value in Des Moines an amount of money that could get them two or even three developers of value in Des Moines? What does the company gain by paying for one developer instead of multiple? The value you bring may be the same, but if you commoditize yourself it's possible your employer will agree. Then react accordingly. Remember, nobody wants a shovel. They want a hole.
- aantix 7y ago
  So don’t commoditize yourself. Sell your value, not your price.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
Saaster 7y ago
If the company is itself not based in NY or SF, it makes little sense and often isn't possible to offer NY and SF salaries. If remote work became the new standard, it doesn't mean that everyone is suddenly paid SF wages, instead wages will probably start to average out over a long period of time.
netjiro 7y ago
> They’re usually looking to discount your salary In my experience, less than 1/4 of the organisations and projects I help go remote / distributed do it for cost reasons. Most do it for brain power and efficiency. It's easier to recruit globally, especially when you're looking for very good people. We have strong data that asynchronous transparent communication increases efficiency, agency, autonomy, and decreases both the rate and cost of mistakes. It also drastically reduces the necessity of coordination management.
gregkerzhner 7y ago
For those working for a company that does cost of living adjustments, look into getting a virtual mailbox from https://www.anytimemailbox.com/ https://www.anytimemailbox.com/ and "move" to your new address in Seattle, Washington. Its a great tier-1 city which will raise your income by 30%. Washington also has no state income tax. The only downside is the weather, but since you don't actually live there you can avoid that and just get yourself a nice zoom backdrop of a rainy city. This could actually be a great startup idea - virtual "hacker houses" located in expensive cities that people can use as virtual home bases. We will take 5% of your tier-1 income to handle all your paperwork so you can be free to live where ever you want.
- ex_ex_nihilo 7y ago
  I would be fucked on my first expense report. "Why did you fly out of Charlotte, NC if you live in Seattle, WA?"
- opportune 7y ago
  I'm pretty sure this would be quite illegal to do to avoid state income taxes - usually you need to spend something like X% of your time in that state. Not sure about the legality of using it to get extra pay from your employer.
lbotos 7y ago
Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21127827 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21127827 > They’re usually looking to discount your salary by 30-50% by some arbitrary cost of living factor. Discount off of what? The local max in SF? Google Does this now. Are you angry that Google isn't paying employees the same in SF and India? Remote IS a benefit. Lack of commute. Full control over workspace. In true remote "full control" over your schedule (lunch with friends. Time shifting work at a whim. More integrated lifestyle.) Like I said 6 months ago, please attack "physical" company comp with the same vigor as remote company comp. (I work at GitLab, these views are my own, etc etc etc and I'm still tired of this naive hot take.)
- aantix 7y ago
  “ Google Does this now. Are you angry that Google isn't paying employees the same in SF and India?” Yes, yes I am. If Jeff Dean moves to India are his commits suddenly worth 10% of what they were when in the Bay Area? There are high performing employees - regardless of where they contribute from that bring a ton of value.
  - Kalium 7y ago
    > Yes, yes I am. If Jeff Dean moves to India are his commits suddenly worth 10% of what they were when in the Bay Area? No, but his options have probably changed and negotiating positions have probably shifted. Have you considered that others may view compensation as a negotiation? It sounds like you're operating from some variant of the labor theory of value and treating this approach as a moral imperative. If value is realized, compensation should be according to value, and nothing else should matter. Is that an accurate summary of your position? If that's accurate, might I suggest that this position is something an entrepreneur is ideally positioned to use to their advantage? Surely the world is full of excellent software engineers who would jump at the chance to be paid according to their value.
  - geodel 7y ago
    What is more likely: Jeff Dean negotiating his salary and perks with whichever company and living where ever he likes or whining about salary inequity across different regions in the world? A-level players will try and get compensation what they think they deserve by negotiating discreetly. However most of the CRUD peddlers who are not in tech hubs remain aware they are not going to get Silicon valley salaries while living in some remote Indian town.
freeopinion 7y ago
If equal-value employees are happy to work for 30% less in NYC than those in Des Moines, why wouldn't an employer prefer that? You go ahead and keep holding out for your extra 30-50%. I'm very happy to fill that spot. It's not like they pay Des Moines employees $3/hour. Six figures goes a long way out here on the lake.
- aantix 7y ago
  You want to live-it up reading /r/Frugal by the lake while leaving literally tens-of-thousands on the table, fine. Selling yourself short takes zero effort. There's always someone in line to undercut. But don't kid yourself - your ability to be thrifty isn't a virtue in this context. You steal experiences from yourself, your family, and you jeopardize your health and safety by not demanding appropriate compensation for the value you bring. I don't know you, but you're probably a great engineer. And if they can pay some guy on the coast a fantastic salary, then they can find a way to pay you the same fantastic salary.
  - freeopinion 7y ago
    When I got started with my first rental property, a friend gave me some advice. He said, figure out what the market rate is, then charge $50/month less. There will be high demand for your property. You'll never go a month without a renter and you will have the pick of the litter. Your renters will all be high quality because you can afford to be picky. And it will only "cost you" $50 month. It will save you $1000s because your tenants will value the great situation they have. They won't abuse your property. You won't have to advertise for new tenants. You won't have to litigate an eviction. There are people who can do what I can do who get paid $250,000/year. There are people who can do what I can do who can't find a job because they are holding out for $250,000/year. I'm ok making $50/month less and getting the pick of the litter. This is called capitalism. I'm a big fan.
    - cvlasdkv 7y ago
      There is some irony in being a big fan of capitalism and then advocating for your own exploitation.

by aantix 7y ago

slackfan 7y ago

Let's not beat around the bush, specifically, Gitlab does this, IIRC.

brantonb 7y ago
Explained here: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/total-rewards/compensation/#paying-local-rates https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/total-rewards/compensation...
- JoeCortopassi 7y ago
  Great explanation of a bad practice. A company should pay for the value they get, which is independent of the location. These calculations never seem to take into effect all the cost savings of having a remote person (office building/parking/food/working space/etc). Instead, they almost always mark the employee as a second tier of worker
  - slackfan 7y ago
    My company tends to do something similar for starting salaries, but that's because we're a consultancy, and our rates per-market are different. However: In the long term if employees stay with the company long term, salaries tend to get bumped up to approximately the same. So you might get started lower, but your yearly pay bump will be higher.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- bernawil 7y ago
  those arguments look just slightly in bad faith since they act like they're only competing for talent against local non-remote companies for every location when they're not. They're also competing against other remote companies, specially those that don't do location-based comp. Team members in low-wage regions being in golden handcuffs and sticking around because of the compensation even when they are unhappy. Those people will be still be in golden-handcuffs until they find another remote job. A concentration of team members in low-wage regions, since it is a better deal for them, while we want a geographically diverse team. Come on, you can still pay top dollar globally and hire evenly around the globe if that's what you want. It's just cheaper their way. Honestly, the whole thing is just a huge rationalization. They could just have said "we adjust for location because we can".
- matthewbauer 7y ago
  > Team members in low-wage regions being in golden handcuffs and sticking around because of the compensation even when they are unhappy. We believe that it is healthy for the company when unhappy people leave. What??? Only in SV could a company get away with saying it’s “healthy” to not pay people their value. Usually, golden handcuffs refer to retirement and other benefits, not base compensation.
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
gregkerzhner 7y ago
GitHub does this as well. When I spoke to their recruiter they offered me 30 to 50% less than what I currently make because I live in a "tier 3" city.
- slackfan 7y ago
  Honestly, if it was like a 5-10% difference it wouldn't be as nearly as insulting.
- matthewbauer 7y ago
  Did you try a counter offer? I would think they would be flexible on this if they are in fact paying people in SF and NYC that much. I wonder if anyone has tried moving to NYC/SF for a year and then moving back to lower cost of living. Would these remote-only companies really give you a paycut?

wintermutestwin 7y ago

I worked remotely 17 years for a large SV tech corp doing work that was global in nature. 5 years in, they instituted a policy of having salary modifiers based on where you lived for both remote and onsite employees. Your salary wouldn't immediately change, but when it came time for increases, your compensation rate was considered. I had no problem with this policy because I lived on the side of a mountain and my house cost 1/5th a Bay Area home. Instead of a 1.5hour commute home, I would have a 1.5hr mountain bike ride out my back door. Now, the salary difference wasn't 50%, it was more like 25%, but I would have taken 50% to not have to live in the Bay Area. The real downside was that I had minimal mobility because most of the tech world is still in the dark ages of management by proximity. Doing a job search in the startup world in the age of Covid, I assumed that there would be an explosion of WFH jobs, but most are not.

aantix 7y ago
“But I would have taken 50% less to not have to live in the Bay Area” The even crazier notion is this - you shouldn’t have to concede anything. If they landed a dev in SF, they’d be willing to pay them the appropriate SF comp. It’s in their budget. Press harder. Money gives you options, even if you’re not a big spender, it’s security. Why not you? Demand more.
- SamuelAdams 7y ago
  Right but it's also a race to the bottom. You don't know if the company has another candidate in their cards that will accept a 50% reduction to a SF engineer. With remote work you have a lot more competition.
  - aantix 7y ago
    "More competition" - but the company still has just a finite amount of time to evaluate candidates. I've been on the hiring side - if you want a very senior engineer and want to vet them properly, there's nothing fast about the process. You have access to a million senior engineers but who cares if you only have two engineers on your side that are qualified enough to interview them and those engineers are still expected to ship code, do code reviews, alongside doing interviews? If you can deliver a fantastic interview where you code on demand, talk architecture tradeoffs intelligently, the leverage still belongs to you as the engineer. Regardless of the number of candidates.

Kalium 7y ago

Let's examine this from the other side for a bit: why would a company want to pay for one developer's value in Des Moines an amount of money that could get them two or even three developers of value in Des Moines? What does the company gain by paying for one developer instead of multiple? The value you bring may be the same, but if you commoditize yourself it's possible your employer will agree. Then react accordingly. Remember, nobody wants a shovel. They want a hole.

aantix 7y ago
So don’t commoditize yourself. Sell your value, not your price.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]

Saaster 7y ago

If the company is itself not based in NY or SF, it makes little sense and often isn't possible to offer NY and SF salaries. If remote work became the new standard, it doesn't mean that everyone is suddenly paid SF wages, instead wages will probably start to average out over a long period of time.

netjiro 7y ago

> They’re usually looking to discount your salary In my experience, less than 1/4 of the organisations and projects I help go remote / distributed do it for cost reasons. Most do it for brain power and efficiency. It's easier to recruit globally, especially when you're looking for very good people. We have strong data that asynchronous transparent communication increases efficiency, agency, autonomy, and decreases both the rate and cost of mistakes. It also drastically reduces the necessity of coordination management.

gregkerzhner 7y ago

For those working for a company that does cost of living adjustments, look into getting a virtual mailbox from https://www.anytimemailbox.com/ https://www.anytimemailbox.com/ and "move" to your new address in Seattle, Washington. Its a great tier-1 city which will raise your income by 30%. Washington also has no state income tax. The only downside is the weather, but since you don't actually live there you can avoid that and just get yourself a nice zoom backdrop of a rainy city. This could actually be a great startup idea - virtual "hacker houses" located in expensive cities that people can use as virtual home bases. We will take 5% of your tier-1 income to handle all your paperwork so you can be free to live where ever you want.

ex_ex_nihilo 7y ago
I would be fucked on my first expense report. "Why did you fly out of Charlotte, NC if you live in Seattle, WA?"
opportune 7y ago
I'm pretty sure this would be quite illegal to do to avoid state income taxes - usually you need to spend something like X% of your time in that state. Not sure about the legality of using it to get extra pay from your employer.

lbotos 7y ago

Please see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21127827 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21127827 > They’re usually looking to discount your salary by 30-50% by some arbitrary cost of living factor. Discount off of what? The local max in SF? Google Does this now. Are you angry that Google isn't paying employees the same in SF and India? Remote IS a benefit. Lack of commute. Full control over workspace. In true remote "full control" over your schedule (lunch with friends. Time shifting work at a whim. More integrated lifestyle.) Like I said 6 months ago, please attack "physical" company comp with the same vigor as remote company comp. (I work at GitLab, these views are my own, etc etc etc and I'm still tired of this naive hot take.)

aantix 7y ago
“ Google Does this now. Are you angry that Google isn't paying employees the same in SF and India?” Yes, yes I am. If Jeff Dean moves to India are his commits suddenly worth 10% of what they were when in the Bay Area? There are high performing employees - regardless of where they contribute from that bring a ton of value.
- Kalium 7y ago
  > Yes, yes I am. If Jeff Dean moves to India are his commits suddenly worth 10% of what they were when in the Bay Area? No, but his options have probably changed and negotiating positions have probably shifted. Have you considered that others may view compensation as a negotiation? It sounds like you're operating from some variant of the labor theory of value and treating this approach as a moral imperative. If value is realized, compensation should be according to value, and nothing else should matter. Is that an accurate summary of your position? If that's accurate, might I suggest that this position is something an entrepreneur is ideally positioned to use to their advantage? Surely the world is full of excellent software engineers who would jump at the chance to be paid according to their value.
- geodel 7y ago
  What is more likely: Jeff Dean negotiating his salary and perks with whichever company and living where ever he likes or whining about salary inequity across different regions in the world? A-level players will try and get compensation what they think they deserve by negotiating discreetly. However most of the CRUD peddlers who are not in tech hubs remain aware they are not going to get Silicon valley salaries while living in some remote Indian town.

freeopinion 7y ago

If equal-value employees are happy to work for 30% less in NYC than those in Des Moines, why wouldn't an employer prefer that? You go ahead and keep holding out for your extra 30-50%. I'm very happy to fill that spot. It's not like they pay Des Moines employees $3/hour. Six figures goes a long way out here on the lake.

aantix 7y ago
You want to live-it up reading /r/Frugal by the lake while leaving literally tens-of-thousands on the table, fine. Selling yourself short takes zero effort. There's always someone in line to undercut. But don't kid yourself - your ability to be thrifty isn't a virtue in this context. You steal experiences from yourself, your family, and you jeopardize your health and safety by not demanding appropriate compensation for the value you bring. I don't know you, but you're probably a great engineer. And if they can pay some guy on the coast a fantastic salary, then they can find a way to pay you the same fantastic salary.
- freeopinion 7y ago
  When I got started with my first rental property, a friend gave me some advice. He said, figure out what the market rate is, then charge $50/month less. There will be high demand for your property. You'll never go a month without a renter and you will have the pick of the litter. Your renters will all be high quality because you can afford to be picky. And it will only "cost you" $50 month. It will save you $1000s because your tenants will value the great situation they have. They won't abuse your property. You won't have to advertise for new tenants. You won't have to litigate an eviction. There are people who can do what I can do who get paid $250,000/year. There are people who can do what I can do who can't find a job because they are holding out for $250,000/year. I'm ok making $50/month less and getting the pick of the litter. This is called capitalism. I'm a big fan.
  - cvlasdkv 7y ago
    There is some irony in being a big fan of capitalism and then advocating for your own exploitation.