5 ms·

Doesn't make it better. Look at what gitlab and many others that already have transparent wages do. They justify paying you less for the same work because of y

Doesn't make it better. Look at what gitlab and many others that already have transparent wages do. They justify paying you less for the same work because of your location. So you are as qualified as someone else but make way less. On the other side their products cost the same globally.

kuu 5y ago
> They justify paying you less for the same work because of your location. So you are as qualified as someone else but make way less. But now you have that info when applying to the job and it's up to you if you consider that fair or not. So far until now it was a (probably known) secret. Information is power.
- zepto 5y ago
  Not if everyone has it.
  - phaemon 5y ago
    Everyone having information is called "universal education". It's not a bad thing.
    - JohnWhigham 5y ago
      Well, at least you now know why many developers oppose salary transparency: because they ultimately will get screwed as wages regress toward a mean.
      - phaemon 5y ago
        Yes, that's true. I guess I don't oppose it because I don't care. But I certainly know many developers whore highly concerned about their pay.
the_gipsy 5y ago
Well duh, transparency does not mean equality. But it's a huge step forward in information-equality.
- zepto 5y ago
  No it’s not. This entirely benefits employers in the end because information about the individual is discounted. This just further commodifies workers.
Joakal 5y ago
Was gitlab going to pay more if there wasn't any transparency?
rpmisms 5y ago
> They justify paying you less for the same work because of your location. Fine by me. I'm happier in the middle of nowhere, anyway.
Broken_Hippo 5y ago
I doubt they paid the same before transparent wages because transparent wages didn't cause this. McDonalds will pay more in one town than another and sometimes pay varies depending on the location in town. They've done this for decades, and it has traditionally caused folks to take on a slightly longer commute to bring home a bit more extra money, but most folks don't because it still isn't a lot of pay. The bigger point is that you know these things upfront. Want more money? Go ahead and live in the more expensive area. And honestly, equal pay doesn't necessarily mean equality. Will both rates of pay give you a similar quality of life? Is it more fair that the person in Kentucky has a much higher quality of life than the person in New York?
- dagw 5y ago
  Is it more fair that the person in Kentucky has a much higher quality of life than the person in New York Quality of Life isn't objective. People who choose to live in New York probably wouldn't have a better quality of life living in Kentucky and vice versa, even at the same pay, because so much of what defines quality of life for those people is tied up in the things that New York or Kentucky can uniquely offer.
  - Broken_Hippo 5y ago
    While we all know that folks have preferences, your salary determines whether or not you can live the life you want. A salary that grants you a comfortable life in Kentucky with a decent amount of spending money (especially if you buy a cheap house) won't give you the options in New York. In some salary ranges, housing costs alone are going to do it and will be the difference between a stressful, penny-pinching life and living with some cushion. This is the objective area of quality of life. Even between, say, Chicago and NYC is a huge difference if the salaries are equal (because housing prices are cheaper in Chicago, and the quality of cities isn't going to be so different).
    - danaris 5y ago
      If you mean "New York City", then please say that when comparing it with another state, because I can tell you from first-hand experience that large swathes of Upstate New York have a similar cost-of-living to much of Kentucky.
maeln 5y ago
> They justify paying you less for the same work because of your location. So you are as qualified as someone else but make way less. And you can know this thanks to the transparency and it help to make an informed choice. And if this policy prevent them from recruiting good worker, they will change it. In a non transparent setup, they could be doing it a none would be wiser.
WJW 5y ago
Why not move to the place with higher pay if that is important to you and so easy to figure out? At least with the formula publicly available it is simple to game; before there was also a formula but you had to guess at it.
jedberg 5y ago
The mistake you're making is assuming what someone gets paid is their value to the company. That's never been the case. What you get paid is the going rate for your area that meets local supply and demand. So it makes a lot of sense to pay someone less who lives in another area, because there is lower demand for their skills there. I think this will even out over time as more workers are remote only. Once someone in Tulsa can do the same job as someone in San Francisco, and also easily find another similar job, I think the pay in Tulsa will go up and the pay in SF will go down. Companies are already fighting this by saying, "you'll get paid $X if you live anywhere in the US, but you'll get an extra 20% if you come into the office in San Francisco every day". So now you have to choose how much that 20% is worth to you.

kuu 5y ago

> They justify paying you less for the same work because of your location. So you are as qualified as someone else but make way less. But now you have that info when applying to the job and it's up to you if you consider that fair or not. So far until now it was a (probably known) secret. Information is power.

zepto 5y ago
Not if everyone has it.
- phaemon 5y ago
  Everyone having information is called "universal education". It's not a bad thing.
  - JohnWhigham 5y ago
    Well, at least you now know why many developers oppose salary transparency: because they ultimately will get screwed as wages regress toward a mean.
    - phaemon 5y ago
      Yes, that's true. I guess I don't oppose it because I don't care. But I certainly know many developers whore highly concerned about their pay.

the_gipsy 5y ago

Well duh, transparency does not mean equality. But it's a huge step forward in information-equality.

zepto 5y ago
No it’s not. This entirely benefits employers in the end because information about the individual is discounted. This just further commodifies workers.

Joakal 5y ago

Was gitlab going to pay more if there wasn't any transparency?

rpmisms 5y ago

> They justify paying you less for the same work because of your location. Fine by me. I'm happier in the middle of nowhere, anyway.

Broken_Hippo 5y ago

I doubt they paid the same before transparent wages because transparent wages didn't cause this. McDonalds will pay more in one town than another and sometimes pay varies depending on the location in town. They've done this for decades, and it has traditionally caused folks to take on a slightly longer commute to bring home a bit more extra money, but most folks don't because it still isn't a lot of pay. The bigger point is that you know these things upfront. Want more money? Go ahead and live in the more expensive area. And honestly, equal pay doesn't necessarily mean equality. Will both rates of pay give you a similar quality of life? Is it more fair that the person in Kentucky has a much higher quality of life than the person in New York?

dagw 5y ago
Is it more fair that the person in Kentucky has a much higher quality of life than the person in New York Quality of Life isn't objective. People who choose to live in New York probably wouldn't have a better quality of life living in Kentucky and vice versa, even at the same pay, because so much of what defines quality of life for those people is tied up in the things that New York or Kentucky can uniquely offer.
- Broken_Hippo 5y ago
  While we all know that folks have preferences, your salary determines whether or not you can live the life you want. A salary that grants you a comfortable life in Kentucky with a decent amount of spending money (especially if you buy a cheap house) won't give you the options in New York. In some salary ranges, housing costs alone are going to do it and will be the difference between a stressful, penny-pinching life and living with some cushion. This is the objective area of quality of life. Even between, say, Chicago and NYC is a huge difference if the salaries are equal (because housing prices are cheaper in Chicago, and the quality of cities isn't going to be so different).
  - danaris 5y ago
    If you mean "New York City", then please say that when comparing it with another state, because I can tell you from first-hand experience that large swathes of Upstate New York have a similar cost-of-living to much of Kentucky.

maeln 5y ago

> They justify paying you less for the same work because of your location. So you are as qualified as someone else but make way less. And you can know this thanks to the transparency and it help to make an informed choice. And if this policy prevent them from recruiting good worker, they will change it. In a non transparent setup, they could be doing it a none would be wiser.

WJW 5y ago

Why not move to the place with higher pay if that is important to you and so easy to figure out? At least with the formula publicly available it is simple to game; before there was also a formula but you had to guess at it.

jedberg 5y ago

The mistake you're making is assuming what someone gets paid is their value to the company. That's never been the case. What you get paid is the going rate for your area that meets local supply and demand. So it makes a lot of sense to pay someone less who lives in another area, because there is lower demand for their skills there. I think this will even out over time as more workers are remote only. Once someone in Tulsa can do the same job as someone in San Francisco, and also easily find another similar job, I think the pay in Tulsa will go up and the pay in SF will go down. Companies are already fighting this by saying, "you'll get paid $X if you live anywhere in the US, but you'll get an extra 20% if you come into the office in San Francisco every day". So now you have to choose how much that 20% is worth to you.