3 ms·

Companies paying less “because they can” as opposed to “because they must” will always lose out to the companies that will pay more “because they can” in an emp

Companies paying less “because they can” as opposed to “because they must” will always lose out to the companies that will pay more “because they can” in an employee’s market. And if the both companies are in the same market, that means that both the work and the profits are of similar kind. So it’s not exactly wise to adjust your wages down just because it seems like there’s nothing stopping you. Pay your employees according to the value they produce, not where they produce it from.

madrox 6y ago
There's a Pareto optimal middle ground here, because companies that pay more don't want to pay a lot more. They want to pay enough to beat their competitor's offer. All companies involved aren't interested in that number going higher than it has to. This is why cost of living adjustments exist in the first place. The pandemic didn't invent remote work.
- ironmagma 6y ago
  The pandemic didn’t invent remote work, and that’s why even after the pandemic, some companies will pay the same regardless of where you live, just as they did before. It’s up to the employee to choose the place that they most prefer to live in that case, which maybe it’s a city that gives them high margins or maybe it’s one that gives them a nicer quality of life per some arbitrary metric.
- ironmagma 6y ago
  Keep in mind, as well, that employees are already not forced to live where their employer wants them to be. They can live far away from work, and then commute an absurd amount each day, then get their paycheck and keep their cheap cost of living too. We don't pay someone who comes into the office less just because they live far away. It's just that in that scenario, a lot of carbon is being emitted, and the employee's life is being wasted needlessly.

3 ms·

Companies paying less “because they can” as opposed to “because they must” will always lose out to the companies that will pay more “because they can” in an emp

by ironmagma 6y ago

madrox 6y ago
There's a Pareto optimal middle ground here, because companies that pay more don't want to pay a lot more. They want to pay enough to beat their competitor's offer. All companies involved aren't interested in that number going higher than it has to. This is why cost of living adjustments exist in the first place. The pandemic didn't invent remote work.
- ironmagma 6y ago
  The pandemic didn’t invent remote work, and that’s why even after the pandemic, some companies will pay the same regardless of where you live, just as they did before. It’s up to the employee to choose the place that they most prefer to live in that case, which maybe it’s a city that gives them high margins or maybe it’s one that gives them a nicer quality of life per some arbitrary metric.
- ironmagma 6y ago
  Keep in mind, as well, that employees are already not forced to live where their employer wants them to be. They can live far away from work, and then commute an absurd amount each day, then get their paycheck and keep their cheap cost of living too. We don't pay someone who comes into the office less just because they live far away. It's just that in that scenario, a lot of carbon is being emitted, and the employee's life is being wasted needlessly.