10 ms·

The Joel test for remote work

67 points by fidrelity 4y ago

fidrelity 4y ago
I'd like to compile a list of all the remote companies that pass the joel-remote test. Has anyone got any examples?
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
k__ 4y ago
"Are benefits and vacations independent of your location?" Just because it's equal doesn't mean it's good.
- chrisseaton 4y ago
  Different locations don't need the same benefits, also. I don't need the same healthcare insurance in the UK as in the US. And I don't need or can't use the same public transport benefits living in Cheshire as I would in London.
t571882899 4y ago
> Offering equal pay for equal work [...] Pay people for their contribution and treat all humans with equal respect. That demand reads like a double-standard to me: people from the western world are happy to buy clothes, hardware, or food from foreign countries with low labour cost. They do that to cut down their own expenses, because the same goods would be much more expensive when produced domestically. This is the exact same mechanism at play, just with reversed roles. In one case it’s considered okay, in the other unfair. It only depends on which side of the table you sit at.
- davidmurdoch 4y ago
  What do you think when someone with 3 years experience gets paid more than someone with 12 years experience simply because they live in California, when the 12 year lives in Alabama?
  - esteth 4y ago
    Not OP, but isn’t that the reality of labour markets? The alternative is that everyone in non-SF areas of the world is competing for SF salary remote positions. It’s even worse at established tech giants like FAANG, where everyone working at anywhere other than SF would optimally declare fully remote for the free salary increase
    - ghaff 4y ago
      >everyone in non-SF areas of the world is competing for SF salary remote positions They're mostly not. It's really not a race to the top. If you can get a job with FB and get a Bay Area salary from them, most companies will effectively tell you to go for it. (So they are competing in a sense. But many are opting out.)
  - TameAntelope 4y ago
    I think about how strange it is we measure level of ability by years on the job, rather than level of achievement during those years.
    - badpun 4y ago
      I believe it’s because the latter is simply too easy to lie about and too hard to verify.
      - alecbz 4y ago
        It’s not even about lying, you can think you’ve done amazing things and just not be in sync with what the interviewer’s expectations. “Led a project” can mean anything from actually being critical to the project’s success to pushing some papers around so other people could do the work.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- nathanlied 4y ago
  That's because it is a double standard. However, people in low labour cost countries have usually preferred to get something rather than nothing, and they held virtually no power. People in low labour cost countries would need to collectively unionise/strike/fight for their rights, in countries that don't always have the best human rights laws, much less political will to defend their citizens. And if they win? Well, they might get those big companies to leave, because some other country makes it cheaper, or if they have to pay the same as back home, why not move the business back home? People who are capable of working remotely from low CoL areas/countries are, in contrast, more empowered. Generally better educated, often English-speaking, sometimes fairly well-connected. And it's just as easy to work for <CoL-Adjusting company #1> as it is to work for <CoL-uncaring company #1>. We're seeing a lot of people who thoroughly enjoyed full-remote work during COVID make it a dealbreaker to work remotely now. Those people often don't even consider on-site positions. This whole CoL-adjusted thing will depend on whether a good % of those people will consider CoL-adjustments a dealbreaker or not. I suspect some might, but not enough that it'll change the balance sheet, and so we'll see larger companies who can "afford" the bureaucracy of CoL-adjustment do it, whereas other companies will use CoL-neutrality as (one of the) carrots to attract talent from CoL-adjusters.
- zeckalpha 4y ago
  Some people are unhappy buying clothing, hardware, or food made by exploited labor that could never afford the things that they are making.
- shafyy 4y ago
  I'm really torn on this issue. On the hand, it seems to make sense to pay people based on the value they deliver for the company, not where they live while delivering it. On the other hand, the reality is that some regions have higher costs of living than others. Somehow, the salary needs to take that into account. Imagine if all tech companies went fully remote and kept paying about the same salary level as they do now. Employees moving to lower income regions would no doubt upheaval the local economy (e.g., housing). But then again, this would probably regulate itself in the longer run. Finally, why would only remote companies be upheld to this standard?
  - Sebb767 4y ago
    > On the other hand, the reality is that some regions have higher costs of living than others. Somehow, the salary needs to take that into account. Why? If I want an expensive car or a large house, should my salary also include that? It's also a lifestyle choice. IMO, paying people differently (especially in the same country) just creates an incentive for people to spend more money.
    - alecbz 4y ago
      As someone that lives in a HCOL area (and generally likes it) I think I agree. If I reduced my “quality of life” by eating out less and saving money, my company’s not going to pay me any less. Why should they start paying me less if I reduce my QoL by moving to somewhere I’d enjoy living in less that’s cheaper.
    - shafyy 4y ago
      Sure. But if you're working for a non-remote company, you need to live in the area where the company offices are. In that case, your expenses naturally go up.
  - jameshart 4y ago
    There is potentially also some premium companies should be willing to pay to employ people who live in locations that have reliable infrastructure, strong legal institutions, and stable government.
- gombosg 4y ago
  Absolutely agree! What I've seen as a good compromise for startups is to pay generously (~30-40%) above the best local rates but of course below US/SV rates. You can be confident that you're earning more than you could in basically any local job around you, and the company is still better off than hiring only SV (or US) folks. What I see in my experience is that most fully remote companies only want to pay you the local rate - which doesn't make a lot of sense. Some are willing to pay more, and only a few advertise paying equally regardless of location. It's understandable because it just doesn't make much economical sense. Obviously, I'd switch jobs any day for another 30-40% pay increase, and I'm curious how the last approach is going to get adopted by fully remote companies. As (fully) remote jobs become more prevalent, that also pushes up local rates, though, and local jobs usually offer some better benefits because you're not a contractor. It's an interesting market!
mariscada 4y ago
> Let’s say you can both afford to save 30% of your salary and you go on to invest it in, say, the S&P500. Then after your career you’ll go and retire in Spain. Guess who’ll afford a better lifestyle? That’s right, the US citizen. Location based pay simply exploits employees of weaker economic regions. It’s common in our world but that doesn’t make it right. I’m working at Google and moving back to Spain where I’m from where I will see my salary reduced by 50%. I love my team and my work but this is precisely the reason that will make me quit in favor of an American company that doesn’t adjust salary to region. Plenty of non-FAANG American companies that would pay what I was being paid while based in Germany. I strongly suspect I am not the only one.
- esteth 4y ago
  In that case though, why wouldn’t all Googlers working at offices in Spain already just declare fully remote for the 100% salary increase?
  - nathanlied 4y ago
    They could; and Google could then close down their offices in Spain and save that money. Maybe it'd be worth it, maybe it wouldn't; I don't know Google's financials to make the decision.
  - mariscada 4y ago
    There isn’t an engineering office in Spain. Just a small one for a very specific product acquired by Google. Truth be told if Google started a proper office in Spain they’d be able to find plenty of good candidates at the reduced 50% salary. Google is still paying way above local market rate. In my case the reason why I wouldn’t stay is the psychological factor of seeing my salary cut in half and feeling the need to optimize what I earn. I already have a friend here working remotely for what I saw described here on HN once as a second tier American tech company and with less experience he’s making more than I will make once I move. I have researched what other companies pay and I could definitely get my German salary back. I’m not saying I deserve those salaries or that Google is not being fair. But just as a multi-billion dollar company is optimizing their bottom line with the salaries they pay, I’m also obliged to do the same.
mc4ndr3 4y ago
> Is the company communication designed to be asynchronous? No. There will always be some boomer who refuses to use Slack messages and needs handholding on Zoom video for the most minor discussions. Character traits include emotional manipulation, not invented here syndrome, poor time management. They've been struggling to deploy a simple microservice for multiple financial quarters but will snap and call you slow when their code review process stalls. It's not easy to teach the concept of decoupling as a problem solving strategy. They've suffered the yoke of enterprise programming for so long, that they feel naked without iron chafing at the neck.
- zeckalpha 4y ago
  If you read further, they talk about the value of synchronous communication, too. The key to both is being intentional.
- hu3 4y ago
  From my experience, the word boomer is unwarranted here. I've see 18y olds calling their colleagues on Zoom multiple times per day without the slightest attempt to send a slack message. And I've seen 60y olds that defaulted to asynchronous written communication.
  - nathanlied 4y ago
    I'll agree with you here; I've got plenty of anecdata of the "younger" people choosing synchronous methods (calls, meetings, one-on-ones, etc.) vs "older" people (perhaps with families or other time-taking things) prefer asynchronicity. I don't think it's necessarily an age thing, more of a work methodology thing. Same as how some people cannot work remotely at all and will be miserable and unproductive doing so, where others thrive on remote and can't see themselves at the office. We should control for all of that in companies, and try to match people of the same persuasion. It may lead to far less attrition.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
NDizzle 4y ago
In regards to the first point, equal pay for equal work, last week I had a place drop the base salary from 260 to 135 because I'm in Arkansas. The whole state apparently has the same cost of living, and it's a fraction of the stated range for NY/CA. Ridiculous.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
celeritascelery 4y ago
> Offering equal pay for equal work [...] Pay people for their contribution and treat all humans with equal respect. Does any company actually do this? I don’t feel like this is economically feasible. What rate do you pay? The California rate or the Romania rate? If pay the Romania rate then no one from California will work for you. If you pay the California rate then you will be putting way more money into salaries then needed, which could drown your company in hard times. Splitting the difference doesn’t actually solve anything. I can see in the long run equal pay becoming a reality, especially within a country (same pay for California or Nebraska) because movement is so easy. But it will be long time before cost of living between the poorest matches that of the richest.
- chrisseaton 4y ago
  > Does any company actually do this? I think for example Igalia pay literally every person the exact same figure, no matter their experience or location.
  - jfk13 4y ago
    But does everyone at Igalia do exactly equal work?
    - netizen-936824 4y ago
      Who decides what work is equal?
      - znpy 4y ago
        Same tasks, same responsibilities might be a start?
        chrisseaton 4y ago
        That’s expectations, not output.
- 4y ago
davnicwil 4y ago
I'm an Engineering Manager at Stacker (YC S20) and heavily involved in hiring (which, yes, we are by the way :-). We're fully remote and I think we do pretty well on this test as written, which is nice to see. I was just discussing with someone the other day how exciting it is to be involved in this (historically) brand new model of organising around work, discovering and navigating all the advantages and challenges it presents. Like perhaps the actual Joel test I think this list is broadly directionally right, if I would say a little naive (or more generously, low in nuance) in the extremes where the interesting details and subtleties always are - but I love that the author has had a good run at making this, a decent list, and the first person I've seen attempt to do so. I look forward to us as an industry iterating forwards from here on what the best practices are and seeing how the fully remote model evolves over the next decade or so. Exciting times!
compiler-guy 4y ago
The original Joel Test is here: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/08/09/the-joel-test-12-steps-to-better-code/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/08/09/the-joel-test-12-s...
endisneigh 4y ago
Given that most businesses survive on the margin between business value vs employee pay, the notion of equal pay for equal work certainly sounds good, but will inevitably result either in more selectivity or a race to the bottom.
rco8786 4y ago
Reasonable list but I do take issue with #5. Synchronous communication is incredibly important in any working environment. Else you end up waiting an inordinate amount of time getting simple answers to simple questions. Not to mention the social aspect of simply having a conversation with a co worker. we have tools that easily enable this in a remote work environment. I’d suggest that this be re-tooled to be something more like “does the company optimize for focus time/flow time during the workday”
- ehnto 4y ago
  That's not universally true, and by subscribing to it you limit the flexibility possible for remote work to similar 9-5 constraints regular work has. In many businesses, remote work doesn't have to be regular work but at home, and for many of us who have been doing it since before the pandemic that is actually the big draw. Asynchronous by default means everyone is free to work when they are most productive and capable, and it really doesn't matter so long as the work gets done on time. Funnily enough, remote work for everyone has meant some remote positions have actually gotten worse, as the line between remote lifestyle worker and regulr employee working from home has been blurred.
  - rco8786 4y ago
    Fair enough. But on a list that is meant to be full of “universal truths” perhaps the better approach is to leave this out altogether then
    - ehnto 4y ago
      You're probably right, at this point the Joel Test should really be the bare minimum if a company is serious about a good software development experience, whereas being asynchronous is a bit extra, and a huge shift for most businesses.
- macksd 4y ago
  I think #8 (weekly syncs) illustrates that even the author doesn't believe in a 100% asynchronous world either. I value a good synchronous discussion when its possible. But between time zone differences and being flexible with people's varying home situations during a pandemic it's an exception rather than the rule.
analog31 4y ago
>>> Are your direct colleagues all working remotely as well? Yes, we do hardware work in our basements. </s> Ironically, I actually did hardware work in my basement during the lockdown.
topkai22 4y ago
The benefits/vacation point is a poor one. So much of that aspect of compensation is driven by local laws so as to be pointless. In fact, it’s a major reason why even remote friendly companies won’t hire internationally. Heck imagine a company founded in the UK committing to this. How would they deal with providing health insurance to their first employee in the US? Not offer it to US based employees?
alecbz 4y ago
Isn’t it kinda weird to attribute Joel’s name to this even though he has nothing to do with it? I mean sure, they are both lists of ten questions for assessing a job’s suitability, but is “Joel test” common enough (first I’ve heard of it but :shrug:) that’s it’s more a noun for the list than being seen as having to do with Joel?
- TAsoftdev 4y ago
  The Joel test is the Dark Souls of software development guidelines
cosmiccatnap 4y ago
This is what a union is for. People who think companies can't afford this are 1. Unaware of how much they skim at the top 2. Unaware of how many companies exist that don't deserve to.
BlargMcLarg 4y ago
>Does it encourage physical get togethers? I generally agree with all the points (minus the obvious caveats), but I'd prefer if we'd push back against the whole "happy work family" mantra. Some of us don't mind being seen as "just that guy doing the job from a distance", but do mind other people trying to make us more than that. For me, part of remote work is to get away from continuous pushing towards more socialization. Whenever someone says 'encourage', it often seems to loop around to a negative if you don't want to participate.
- axg11 4y ago
  I'm the complete opposite to you. I respect your opinion, so I think the question is even more important to ask. I'm not interested in working for a company where everyone is antisocial and the only interaction is through code reviews.
  - ghaff 4y ago
    Exactly. No one is "wrong." But if your position is that you never want to travel period, that's something you should discuss in the first phone screen if it's a hard condition. (And of course the converse is true as well. If the company is remote-first and doesn't believe in employees getting together physically that will be a showstopper for some.)
  - drewcoo 4y ago
    The problem is that so much of the work-sponsored open socialization feels fake. Fake smiles and say fake things. Everyone has to type the same "kudos" message for every accomplishment or they're not showing teamwork. The team I was on where everyone had to snap audibly in applause for anyone else "sharing." The pressure to drink together because that's what shows friendship in a frat. Etc. So much garbage!
    - moltar 4y ago
      Feels sickening to even read that. I’m sorry you had to go through that.
  - 4y ago
rhn_mk1 4y ago
> You have two people doing the same job but if you live in Romania and your colleague lives in the US at Gitlab you could earn a lot less. > But that’s treating you, a human being, like an asset. Funny how that objectifies people if you approach it from the market side, but if you start from the human being side, it turns out equal payment doesn't always make sense. How? Take a human being. One with abilities and needs - family, health, freedom, etc. They offer their abilities to you, the employer, because they need the ability to fulfill their needs. But the amount of resources to get there depend on their physical location: more expensive countries demand more money to fulfill the same needs. Therefore, paying the same would favor the needs of some over others. If you consider that most humans have some need for fairness and justice, you can't pay equal rates for the same effort. Best you can do is equitable. It's not the same as paying local market rates, but it precludes paying equally as a solution to objectification.
next_xibalba 4y ago
> Equal pay for equal work This seems like Pandora's box of compensation (at least for U.S. based tech workers). Is it not at least possible, that, if this were adopted by all tech cos, the average wage would pull wages downward?
kkfx 4y ago
Hum... Fully, total remote, hiring included is a bit utopia IMO, it can be done practically of course but demand a society that's not there and is in contrast with "being together"... IMVHO remote work, where possible (around 30% of jobs in the western world probably), should still be inside country borders in the same way multi-national company subdivide themselves by country because local laws can be too incompatible to manage a unique entity. Similarly for salary: in theory we must get paid for what we do so regardless of where we are in, but in practice cost of living must be taken into account because the same amount of money in math terms have not the same value everywhere and taking cost of living into account is simply too complex to be solved. The world is not a global world where anywhere we are things are equal, there are of course similarities, in the end humans are similar, but definitely not enough. "local" remote work is perfectly doable with little travel and common profit, world-scale remote work is potentially doable but not in the present world, also fully remote work is hardly possible IMO/IME... My honest opinion is that there is no "test" possible anyway, just negotiation not really different than any "non remote" job.
moneywoes 4y ago
Seems like all major companies are offering location adjusted pay. Is there anyway to find companies who don't? Also I'm in Canada yet getting like 50% after currency conversion edit I should say Vancouver Canada so property prices are higher than most of the US
ykevinator2 4y ago
sinuhe69 4y ago
These are good questions. But I would replace the 3 pillars with: Reciprocity/Fairness, Empathy and Communication, whereby the first two are known as the pillars of good moral. Effective communication enable and keep all the three coherent. I would like to add more criteria for the effective communication, though. Most of the time you can do with asynchronous communication but sometimes synchronous communication is the only effective way to solve a problem. The composition of the teams and their time zones should take that into account. I also don't mind an in-person interview if it's the final round for selected candidates.
NotTheDr01ds 4y ago
For point #1, perhaps neither scenario is "equitable". "Equal pay" may sound equitable given the horribly biased example given, but look at the converse case: > You have two people doing the same job but if you live in Romania and your colleague lives in the US at a company that pays both equally > Then after your career you’ll go and retire in Spain. Guess who’ll afford a better lifestyle? That's right - You, the Romanian citizen. Since your cost of living is 42.4% cheaper than your US colleague, you'll have much more disposable income to invest over the course of your career. Let's say you both make an after-tax income of $60,000 USD. If your colleague pays $40,000 a year for rent/food/transportation/clothing/staples and another $5,000 for (optional) non-essentials, then they'll have $15,000 to invest. You will spend roughly $23,000 on the same essentials and another $3,000 on non-essentials, leaving you $34,000 to invest annually. If you both invest in the S&P500, and it continues to return around 10% annually, then you both move to Spain to retire after 30 number of years, you'll have just over $5.5 million USD compared to your US colleague's ~ $2.5million. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/cost-of-living/united-states/romania https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/cost-of-living/united-states... - Although the basic principle holds as long as there's any cost of living difference. Also doesn't include tax or healthcare.
edanm 4y ago
> How do you balance the difference in national labour right laws and public holidays? The easiest is to simply give all employees enough vacation to decide themselves which holidays they want to celebrate and for how long. Everything else is an HR policy nightmare and an interference of the company in your personal life. This is probably illegal in many countries. I assume in many places you can't just give extra vacation and use that instead of giving holidays.

67 points by fidrelity 4y ago

fidrelity 4y ago

I'd like to compile a list of all the remote companies that pass the joel-remote test. Has anyone got any examples?

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

k__ 4y ago

"Are benefits and vacations independent of your location?" Just because it's equal doesn't mean it's good.

chrisseaton 4y ago
Different locations don't need the same benefits, also. I don't need the same healthcare insurance in the UK as in the US. And I don't need or can't use the same public transport benefits living in Cheshire as I would in London.

t571882899 4y ago

> Offering equal pay for equal work [...] Pay people for their contribution and treat all humans with equal respect. That demand reads like a double-standard to me: people from the western world are happy to buy clothes, hardware, or food from foreign countries with low labour cost. They do that to cut down their own expenses, because the same goods would be much more expensive when produced domestically. This is the exact same mechanism at play, just with reversed roles. In one case it’s considered okay, in the other unfair. It only depends on which side of the table you sit at.

davidmurdoch 4y ago
What do you think when someone with 3 years experience gets paid more than someone with 12 years experience simply because they live in California, when the 12 year lives in Alabama?
- esteth 4y ago
  Not OP, but isn’t that the reality of labour markets? The alternative is that everyone in non-SF areas of the world is competing for SF salary remote positions. It’s even worse at established tech giants like FAANG, where everyone working at anywhere other than SF would optimally declare fully remote for the free salary increase
  - ghaff 4y ago
    >everyone in non-SF areas of the world is competing for SF salary remote positions They're mostly not. It's really not a race to the top. If you can get a job with FB and get a Bay Area salary from them, most companies will effectively tell you to go for it. (So they are competing in a sense. But many are opting out.)
- TameAntelope 4y ago
  I think about how strange it is we measure level of ability by years on the job, rather than level of achievement during those years.
  - badpun 4y ago
    I believe it’s because the latter is simply too easy to lie about and too hard to verify.
    - alecbz 4y ago
      It’s not even about lying, you can think you’ve done amazing things and just not be in sync with what the interviewer’s expectations. “Led a project” can mean anything from actually being critical to the project’s success to pushing some papers around so other people could do the work.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
nathanlied 4y ago
That's because it is a double standard. However, people in low labour cost countries have usually preferred to get something rather than nothing, and they held virtually no power. People in low labour cost countries would need to collectively unionise/strike/fight for their rights, in countries that don't always have the best human rights laws, much less political will to defend their citizens. And if they win? Well, they might get those big companies to leave, because some other country makes it cheaper, or if they have to pay the same as back home, why not move the business back home? People who are capable of working remotely from low CoL areas/countries are, in contrast, more empowered. Generally better educated, often English-speaking, sometimes fairly well-connected. And it's just as easy to work for <CoL-Adjusting company #1> as it is to work for <CoL-uncaring company #1>. We're seeing a lot of people who thoroughly enjoyed full-remote work during COVID make it a dealbreaker to work remotely now. Those people often don't even consider on-site positions. This whole CoL-adjusted thing will depend on whether a good % of those people will consider CoL-adjustments a dealbreaker or not. I suspect some might, but not enough that it'll change the balance sheet, and so we'll see larger companies who can "afford" the bureaucracy of CoL-adjustment do it, whereas other companies will use CoL-neutrality as (one of the) carrots to attract talent from CoL-adjusters.
zeckalpha 4y ago
Some people are unhappy buying clothing, hardware, or food made by exploited labor that could never afford the things that they are making.
shafyy 4y ago
I'm really torn on this issue. On the hand, it seems to make sense to pay people based on the value they deliver for the company, not where they live while delivering it. On the other hand, the reality is that some regions have higher costs of living than others. Somehow, the salary needs to take that into account. Imagine if all tech companies went fully remote and kept paying about the same salary level as they do now. Employees moving to lower income regions would no doubt upheaval the local economy (e.g., housing). But then again, this would probably regulate itself in the longer run. Finally, why would only remote companies be upheld to this standard?
- Sebb767 4y ago
  > On the other hand, the reality is that some regions have higher costs of living than others. Somehow, the salary needs to take that into account. Why? If I want an expensive car or a large house, should my salary also include that? It's also a lifestyle choice. IMO, paying people differently (especially in the same country) just creates an incentive for people to spend more money.
  - alecbz 4y ago
    As someone that lives in a HCOL area (and generally likes it) I think I agree. If I reduced my “quality of life” by eating out less and saving money, my company’s not going to pay me any less. Why should they start paying me less if I reduce my QoL by moving to somewhere I’d enjoy living in less that’s cheaper.
  - shafyy 4y ago
    Sure. But if you're working for a non-remote company, you need to live in the area where the company offices are. In that case, your expenses naturally go up.
- jameshart 4y ago
  There is potentially also some premium companies should be willing to pay to employ people who live in locations that have reliable infrastructure, strong legal institutions, and stable government.
gombosg 4y ago
Absolutely agree! What I've seen as a good compromise for startups is to pay generously (~30-40%) above the best local rates but of course below US/SV rates. You can be confident that you're earning more than you could in basically any local job around you, and the company is still better off than hiring only SV (or US) folks. What I see in my experience is that most fully remote companies only want to pay you the local rate - which doesn't make a lot of sense. Some are willing to pay more, and only a few advertise paying equally regardless of location. It's understandable because it just doesn't make much economical sense. Obviously, I'd switch jobs any day for another 30-40% pay increase, and I'm curious how the last approach is going to get adopted by fully remote companies. As (fully) remote jobs become more prevalent, that also pushes up local rates, though, and local jobs usually offer some better benefits because you're not a contractor. It's an interesting market!

mariscada 4y ago

> Let’s say you can both afford to save 30% of your salary and you go on to invest it in, say, the S&P500. Then after your career you’ll go and retire in Spain. Guess who’ll afford a better lifestyle? That’s right, the US citizen. Location based pay simply exploits employees of weaker economic regions. It’s common in our world but that doesn’t make it right. I’m working at Google and moving back to Spain where I’m from where I will see my salary reduced by 50%. I love my team and my work but this is precisely the reason that will make me quit in favor of an American company that doesn’t adjust salary to region. Plenty of non-FAANG American companies that would pay what I was being paid while based in Germany. I strongly suspect I am not the only one.

esteth 4y ago
In that case though, why wouldn’t all Googlers working at offices in Spain already just declare fully remote for the 100% salary increase?
- nathanlied 4y ago
  They could; and Google could then close down their offices in Spain and save that money. Maybe it'd be worth it, maybe it wouldn't; I don't know Google's financials to make the decision.
- mariscada 4y ago
  There isn’t an engineering office in Spain. Just a small one for a very specific product acquired by Google. Truth be told if Google started a proper office in Spain they’d be able to find plenty of good candidates at the reduced 50% salary. Google is still paying way above local market rate. In my case the reason why I wouldn’t stay is the psychological factor of seeing my salary cut in half and feeling the need to optimize what I earn. I already have a friend here working remotely for what I saw described here on HN once as a second tier American tech company and with less experience he’s making more than I will make once I move. I have researched what other companies pay and I could definitely get my German salary back. I’m not saying I deserve those salaries or that Google is not being fair. But just as a multi-billion dollar company is optimizing their bottom line with the salaries they pay, I’m also obliged to do the same.

mc4ndr3 4y ago

> Is the company communication designed to be asynchronous? No. There will always be some boomer who refuses to use Slack messages and needs handholding on Zoom video for the most minor discussions. Character traits include emotional manipulation, not invented here syndrome, poor time management. They've been struggling to deploy a simple microservice for multiple financial quarters but will snap and call you slow when their code review process stalls. It's not easy to teach the concept of decoupling as a problem solving strategy. They've suffered the yoke of enterprise programming for so long, that they feel naked without iron chafing at the neck.

zeckalpha 4y ago
If you read further, they talk about the value of synchronous communication, too. The key to both is being intentional.
hu3 4y ago
From my experience, the word boomer is unwarranted here. I've see 18y olds calling their colleagues on Zoom multiple times per day without the slightest attempt to send a slack message. And I've seen 60y olds that defaulted to asynchronous written communication.
- nathanlied 4y ago
  I'll agree with you here; I've got plenty of anecdata of the "younger" people choosing synchronous methods (calls, meetings, one-on-ones, etc.) vs "older" people (perhaps with families or other time-taking things) prefer asynchronicity. I don't think it's necessarily an age thing, more of a work methodology thing. Same as how some people cannot work remotely at all and will be miserable and unproductive doing so, where others thrive on remote and can't see themselves at the office. We should control for all of that in companies, and try to match people of the same persuasion. It may lead to far less attrition.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

NDizzle 4y ago

In regards to the first point, equal pay for equal work, last week I had a place drop the base salary from 260 to 135 because I'm in Arkansas. The whole state apparently has the same cost of living, and it's a fraction of the stated range for NY/CA. Ridiculous.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

celeritascelery 4y ago

> Offering equal pay for equal work [...] Pay people for their contribution and treat all humans with equal respect. Does any company actually do this? I don’t feel like this is economically feasible. What rate do you pay? The California rate or the Romania rate? If pay the Romania rate then no one from California will work for you. If you pay the California rate then you will be putting way more money into salaries then needed, which could drown your company in hard times. Splitting the difference doesn’t actually solve anything. I can see in the long run equal pay becoming a reality, especially within a country (same pay for California or Nebraska) because movement is so easy. But it will be long time before cost of living between the poorest matches that of the richest.

chrisseaton 4y ago
> Does any company actually do this? I think for example Igalia pay literally every person the exact same figure, no matter their experience or location.
- jfk13 4y ago
  But does everyone at Igalia do exactly equal work?
  - netizen-936824 4y ago
    Who decides what work is equal?
    - znpy 4y ago
      Same tasks, same responsibilities might be a start?
      - chrisseaton 4y ago
        That’s expectations, not output.
4y ago

davnicwil 4y ago

I'm an Engineering Manager at Stacker (YC S20) and heavily involved in hiring (which, yes, we are by the way :-). We're fully remote and I think we do pretty well on this test as written, which is nice to see. I was just discussing with someone the other day how exciting it is to be involved in this (historically) brand new model of organising around work, discovering and navigating all the advantages and challenges it presents. Like perhaps the actual Joel test I think this list is broadly directionally right, if I would say a little naive (or more generously, low in nuance) in the extremes where the interesting details and subtleties always are - but I love that the author has had a good run at making this, a decent list, and the first person I've seen attempt to do so. I look forward to us as an industry iterating forwards from here on what the best practices are and seeing how the fully remote model evolves over the next decade or so. Exciting times!

compiler-guy 4y ago

The original Joel Test is here: https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/08/09/the-joel-test-12-steps-to-better-code/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/08/09/the-joel-test-12-s...

endisneigh 4y ago

Given that most businesses survive on the margin between business value vs employee pay, the notion of equal pay for equal work certainly sounds good, but will inevitably result either in more selectivity or a race to the bottom.

rco8786 4y ago

Reasonable list but I do take issue with #5. Synchronous communication is incredibly important in any working environment. Else you end up waiting an inordinate amount of time getting simple answers to simple questions. Not to mention the social aspect of simply having a conversation with a co worker. we have tools that easily enable this in a remote work environment. I’d suggest that this be re-tooled to be something more like “does the company optimize for focus time/flow time during the workday”

ehnto 4y ago
That's not universally true, and by subscribing to it you limit the flexibility possible for remote work to similar 9-5 constraints regular work has. In many businesses, remote work doesn't have to be regular work but at home, and for many of us who have been doing it since before the pandemic that is actually the big draw. Asynchronous by default means everyone is free to work when they are most productive and capable, and it really doesn't matter so long as the work gets done on time. Funnily enough, remote work for everyone has meant some remote positions have actually gotten worse, as the line between remote lifestyle worker and regulr employee working from home has been blurred.
- rco8786 4y ago
  Fair enough. But on a list that is meant to be full of “universal truths” perhaps the better approach is to leave this out altogether then
  - ehnto 4y ago
    You're probably right, at this point the Joel Test should really be the bare minimum if a company is serious about a good software development experience, whereas being asynchronous is a bit extra, and a huge shift for most businesses.
macksd 4y ago
I think #8 (weekly syncs) illustrates that even the author doesn't believe in a 100% asynchronous world either. I value a good synchronous discussion when its possible. But between time zone differences and being flexible with people's varying home situations during a pandemic it's an exception rather than the rule.

analog31 4y ago

>>> Are your direct colleagues all working remotely as well? Yes, we do hardware work in our basements. </s> Ironically, I actually did hardware work in my basement during the lockdown.

topkai22 4y ago

The benefits/vacation point is a poor one. So much of that aspect of compensation is driven by local laws so as to be pointless. In fact, it’s a major reason why even remote friendly companies won’t hire internationally. Heck imagine a company founded in the UK committing to this. How would they deal with providing health insurance to their first employee in the US? Not offer it to US based employees?

alecbz 4y ago

Isn’t it kinda weird to attribute Joel’s name to this even though he has nothing to do with it? I mean sure, they are both lists of ten questions for assessing a job’s suitability, but is “Joel test” common enough (first I’ve heard of it but :shrug:) that’s it’s more a noun for the list than being seen as having to do with Joel?

TAsoftdev 4y ago
The Joel test is the Dark Souls of software development guidelines

cosmiccatnap 4y ago

This is what a union is for. People who think companies can't afford this are 1. Unaware of how much they skim at the top 2. Unaware of how many companies exist that don't deserve to.

BlargMcLarg 4y ago

>Does it encourage physical get togethers? I generally agree with all the points (minus the obvious caveats), but I'd prefer if we'd push back against the whole "happy work family" mantra. Some of us don't mind being seen as "just that guy doing the job from a distance", but do mind other people trying to make us more than that. For me, part of remote work is to get away from continuous pushing towards more socialization. Whenever someone says 'encourage', it often seems to loop around to a negative if you don't want to participate.

axg11 4y ago
I'm the complete opposite to you. I respect your opinion, so I think the question is even more important to ask. I'm not interested in working for a company where everyone is antisocial and the only interaction is through code reviews.
- ghaff 4y ago
  Exactly. No one is "wrong." But if your position is that you never want to travel period, that's something you should discuss in the first phone screen if it's a hard condition. (And of course the converse is true as well. If the company is remote-first and doesn't believe in employees getting together physically that will be a showstopper for some.)
- drewcoo 4y ago
  The problem is that so much of the work-sponsored open socialization feels fake. Fake smiles and say fake things. Everyone has to type the same "kudos" message for every accomplishment or they're not showing teamwork. The team I was on where everyone had to snap audibly in applause for anyone else "sharing." The pressure to drink together because that's what shows friendship in a frat. Etc. So much garbage!
  - moltar 4y ago
    Feels sickening to even read that. I’m sorry you had to go through that.
- 4y ago

rhn_mk1 4y ago

> You have two people doing the same job but if you live in Romania and your colleague lives in the US at Gitlab you could earn a lot less. > But that’s treating you, a human being, like an asset. Funny how that objectifies people if you approach it from the market side, but if you start from the human being side, it turns out equal payment doesn't always make sense. How? Take a human being. One with abilities and needs - family, health, freedom, etc. They offer their abilities to you, the employer, because they need the ability to fulfill their needs. But the amount of resources to get there depend on their physical location: more expensive countries demand more money to fulfill the same needs. Therefore, paying the same would favor the needs of some over others. If you consider that most humans have some need for fairness and justice, you can't pay equal rates for the same effort. Best you can do is equitable. It's not the same as paying local market rates, but it precludes paying equally as a solution to objectification.

next_xibalba 4y ago

> Equal pay for equal work This seems like Pandora's box of compensation (at least for U.S. based tech workers). Is it not at least possible, that, if this were adopted by all tech cos, the average wage would pull wages downward?

kkfx 4y ago

Hum... Fully, total remote, hiring included is a bit utopia IMO, it can be done practically of course but demand a society that's not there and is in contrast with "being together"... IMVHO remote work, where possible (around 30% of jobs in the western world probably), should still be inside country borders in the same way multi-national company subdivide themselves by country because local laws can be too incompatible to manage a unique entity. Similarly for salary: in theory we must get paid for what we do so regardless of where we are in, but in practice cost of living must be taken into account because the same amount of money in math terms have not the same value everywhere and taking cost of living into account is simply too complex to be solved. The world is not a global world where anywhere we are things are equal, there are of course similarities, in the end humans are similar, but definitely not enough. "local" remote work is perfectly doable with little travel and common profit, world-scale remote work is potentially doable but not in the present world, also fully remote work is hardly possible IMO/IME... My honest opinion is that there is no "test" possible anyway, just negotiation not really different than any "non remote" job.

moneywoes 4y ago

Seems like all major companies are offering location adjusted pay. Is there anyway to find companies who don't? Also I'm in Canada yet getting like 50% after currency conversion edit I should say Vancouver Canada so property prices are higher than most of the US

ykevinator2 4y ago

sinuhe69 4y ago

These are good questions. But I would replace the 3 pillars with: Reciprocity/Fairness, Empathy and Communication, whereby the first two are known as the pillars of good moral. Effective communication enable and keep all the three coherent. I would like to add more criteria for the effective communication, though. Most of the time you can do with asynchronous communication but sometimes synchronous communication is the only effective way to solve a problem. The composition of the teams and their time zones should take that into account. I also don't mind an in-person interview if it's the final round for selected candidates.

NotTheDr01ds 4y ago

For point #1, perhaps neither scenario is "equitable". "Equal pay" may sound equitable given the horribly biased example given, but look at the converse case: > You have two people doing the same job but if you live in Romania and your colleague lives in the US at a company that pays both equally > Then after your career you’ll go and retire in Spain. Guess who’ll afford a better lifestyle? That's right - You, the Romanian citizen. Since your cost of living is 42.4% cheaper than your US colleague, you'll have much more disposable income to invest over the course of your career. Let's say you both make an after-tax income of $60,000 USD. If your colleague pays $40,000 a year for rent/food/transportation/clothing/staples and another $5,000 for (optional) non-essentials, then they'll have $15,000 to invest. You will spend roughly $23,000 on the same essentials and another $3,000 on non-essentials, leaving you $34,000 to invest annually. If you both invest in the S&P500, and it continues to return around 10% annually, then you both move to Spain to retire after 30 number of years, you'll have just over $5.5 million USD compared to your US colleague's ~ $2.5million. https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/cost-of-living/united-states/romania https://www.mylifeelsewhere.com/cost-of-living/united-states... - Although the basic principle holds as long as there's any cost of living difference. Also doesn't include tax or healthcare.

edanm 4y ago

> How do you balance the difference in national labour right laws and public holidays? The easiest is to simply give all employees enough vacation to decide themselves which holidays they want to celebrate and for how long. Everything else is an HR policy nightmare and an interference of the company in your personal life. This is probably illegal in many countries. I assume in many places you can't just give extra vacation and use that instead of giving holidays.