3 ms·
Please. Not every remote hiring company works this way. There's great examples like Basecamp where they have a fully remote staff paying 90th percentile of SF
by busterarm 5y ago
Please. Not every remote hiring company works this way.
There's great examples like Basecamp where they have a fully remote staff paying 90th percentile of SF wages.
Some companies cast a wide net to get the best talent.
There is nothing wrong with voicing displeasure against companies who cast a wide net because they're cheap. Moreover, if companies are trying to skirt around putting money back into the local economy and employment taxes, let's not do business with them anyway.
- PragmaticPulp 5y agoCompanies like Basecamp are the exception that proves the rule. Why do you know of Basecamp’s practices? It’s because they specifically do something different than the norm (and they make a lot of noise about being different). It’s true that the top performers can get remote jobs just about anywhere. If someone is a top performer with extreme talent, they should absolutely apply to companies like Basecamp. However, Basecamp is a tiny company that receives huge numbers of applications, so its extremely competitive. I’ve done a lot of remote hiring, and we paid well above local wages for people. What you don’t see if you haven’t done remote hiring before is the absolute flood of applications you get from around the world. A local in-office posting may get in the 100s of applications for a reasonably well known company. Our remote job postings would receive in the 1000s or tens of thousands of applicants. It was unreal to see how competitive it was. Giving people the idea that any remote worker can walk out and collect US level wages is not realistic. Aspiring to be one of the top performers who can do just that is a good goal for those who are sufficiently motivated, but the reality is that it’s an extremely competitive space and the majority of companies prefer to hire locally once the wages get higher.
- busterarm 5y agoHave worked remote fulltime for many years, have hired locally and remotely and am fully aware of how competitive it is. All the justifications in the world about how everyone is doing it does not justify paying people what you can get away with vs the value that they provide when asked to. Generally most people fail the ethics questions. It's like if you picked up a wallet full of cash and kept the cash if nobody's looking. Sure, it's what most people would do. Sure, it's justifiable. Sure, you're still in the wrong to do so. So yeah, it's the reality that most companies pay this way. It will also continue to be so if we act like that's okay when it isn't. Engineers need to start asking for what they're worth just like folks in sales and marketing do. Instead we compete with each other and companies divide us and conquer. The truth is that most engineers who are great at what they do are far underpaid, even at standard US wages. --- And just to let people know that it's possible, I have throughout my career been able to ask for more than the average engineer in my position because I have a track record that can justify it and I deliver on my promises. I know exactly how much value I provide and that leaves me okay with asking for more money. I built an entire new platform and resulting new capabilities for my company that enabled us to land 8-figures worth of new ARR last year and a significant multiple of that in pipeline. I have knowledge that most of the rest of my engineering org does not have and is extremely difficult to hire for. There's no way my company just pays me the going salary for my position in my location.