4 ms·
If a company hires someone in Tulsa and then they move to San Francisco will the company pay more? The end goal of location based compensation seems to be enco
by true_religion 6y ago
If a company hires someone in Tulsa and then they move to San Francisco will the company pay more?
The end goal of location based compensation seems to be encouraging everyone to live in a low cost area, and take a lower wage thereby saving the company money.
I can see why it makes sense to the company, but as an employee I wouldn't support the idea.
We may not have a software union, but the least we can do is be critical of ideas that will directly lead to paycuts.
- xyzelement 6y agoOh I totally get that "it would be very nice" to get paid a lot and spend a little. I am not debating that part, just the reality part.
- ghaff 6y agoIn reality though, for a given company, cost of living adjustments don't really compensate for the difference in actual cost for most people. If you're earning market rate in Tulsa and get a 20% bump in your base pay for moving to the Bay Area, you're almost certainly not coming out ahead.
- AlchemistCamp 6y agoIt depends if you're spending it on iMacs or on rent.
- iamhamm 6y ago(n=1) When I moved from MA to CA, my then employer increased my salary by 18% to ensure market competitiveness. My boss said HR told him it was needed otherwise I’d just leave when I saw other options.