4 ms·
If the scaling is proportional to cost of living I don’t think much would change. Why would an employee move away from a large city with amenities, culture, and
by vegetablepotpie 6y ago
If the scaling is proportional to cost of living I don’t think much would change. Why would an employee move away from a large city with amenities, culture, and the career advancement opportunities that come from being in an office for a drop in salary? The only advantage I can see to moving is if you’re starting a family and you don’t want to live in the city.
Facebook is basically telling its employees that they want them to come into the office.
- Udik 6y agoExactly. A more serious move would be "I'll cut everyone's pay by 20%, now go to live where you want instead of spending insane amounts in rent here".
- falcolas 6y agoGiven that the difference between cost of living between the most and least expensive places in the US is in the $40,000 range, and salary drops are occasionally upwards of double that, no, the scaling is not proportional. For example, I live in Montana. Most COL adjustments say that I'd need about $40,000 more a year to maintain my current standard of living, yet equivalent positions get about $100k to $150k more a year. If one of those poor folks in SF making $250k a year now wants to move to Montana, they can easily expect to be making $150k or less after they move.