4 ms·
"Facebook will reduce the pay of workers who move to less expensive areas." That is ridiculous. A job is a job. Also what prevents anyone from keeping a Califo
by ulfw 6y ago
"Facebook will reduce the pay of workers who move to less expensive areas."
That is ridiculous. A job is a job. Also what prevents anyone from keeping a California phone number and a PO Box in Menlo Park or wherever? At what point have you 'moved'?
Note: I don't advocate doing this. I neither work in CA nor at Facebook. I just wonder if this doesn't open things up for being to game the system.
- mylons 6y agogreat way to game the system. probably even worth it to pay someone a few hundred a month to let you send mail to their house.
- cobookman 6y agoUS Tax code. For example: https://www.palmspringstaxandtrustlawyers.com/nonresidents-working-remotely-for-california-businesses/ https://www.palmspringstaxandtrustlawyers.com/nonresidents-w...
- jefftk 6y agoYou could still live in a much cheaper area of the same state. In the case of CA, drive 4hr out of SF and you can find houses for $100k that would be $1M in the city, with much more land. (Not something I would prefer, but many would.)
- econcon 6y agowhat's the area of that 100k house?
- GhettoChild 6y agoSalton City, CA
- jefftk 6y agoExample: https://www.redfin.com/CA/Ione/1400-W-Marlette-St-95640/unit-46/home/45617857 https://www.redfin.com/CA/Ione/1400-W-Marlette-St-95640/unit... in Ione CA. 3br, 1400sqft, under $100k, under 4hr from SF.
- dver 6y agoNot a 100k, 300k will get you something nice in the foothills.
- thirtyseven 6y ago"Hey ulfw, would you mind coming into the office tomorrow for X? Shouldn't be an issue since you're local..."
- ulfw 6y agoThe idea is to not come into work as you're WFH permanently in this setup. Listen I am not advocating doing this. I don't even live there nor do I work at Facebook. I just feel like this is easily gameable.
- city41 6y agoI doubt most people will take the risk of gaming their employer.
- kube-system 6y ago...Or the IRS, on your W4.
- delaynomore 6y agoWFH permanently does not mean you never visit the office. We have remote team members and they drop by the office once in a while.
- novok 6y agoMan, it will take about 6hrs of driving total with all the traffic from concord to menlo park, could we just do a zoom meeting instead?
- ideals 6y agoWhat's interesting is that if you stay in their Menlo Park office, you cost FB your salary + office sq/ft + office maintenance/security/cleaning/etc. But if you chose to work remotely you cost FB your salary - colo adjustment. The incentive is clearly to stay and cost FB more money per head.
- ivalm 6y agoThe hiring/retaining employee incentive for FB is opposite.
- mdoms 6y ago> That is ridiculous. A job is a job. And a market is a market. It doesn't matter what you do for a living, your salary/wage is, to some degree, determined by where you are, among many other variables.
- hackissimo123 6y agoThis point comes up again and again. On the one hand, I want to agree. Why should my moving to a lower COL area mean that my employer is entitled to capture a higher fraction of the value I produce? On the other hand, you are almost definitely reading this comment on a device that was manufactured in a "low cost of living area" (namely: China) by people who get paid far below Western wages. Likewise, most of the clothes you wear were manufactured in a "cheap" country by people who get paid next to nothing. If you had bought these goods from a US- or Europe-based manufacturer, you would have paid far more, and the people who produced the value would have received higher wages. So if Facebook shouldn't be allowed to reduce the pay of workers who move to less expensive areas, why don't we apply this logic across the board? Why is it okay for you (or me) to reduce the pay of our own workers (by which I mean the people who work who work for us indirectly, by creating the goods we consume) just because they live in less expensive areas? It seems to me that you can't have it both ways.