> The key is to only have pay depend on location to the extent that the company constrains the worker's location When the worker has agency to chose remote vs

> The key is to only have pay depend on location to the extent that the company constrains the worker's location When the worker has agency to chose remote vs in office, tying pay to physical location seems like coercion though. Doesn't that constrain the worker? "Live in this specific area and come to the office and we will maintain your current pay. Else, you have to take a pay cut for the same role and work output" Maybe this is a reason why some companies are hesitant to have it both ways and are inclined to force people back to the office. Could they be reducing legal exposure to equal pay lawsuits?