3 ms·
It doesn’t make sense for a company to pay NYC/SF wages to someone living in Bangladesh. It doesn’t make sense for a worker living in NYC/SF to accept a job pa
by jmathai 4y ago
It doesn’t make sense for a company to pay NYC/SF wages to someone living in Bangladesh.
It doesn’t make sense for a worker living in NYC/SF to accept a job paying Bangladesh wages.
Not sure what the proposed alternative is besides only hiring people in the lowest cost of living areas - which also wouldn’t work in favor of the company.
- sschueller 4y agoYet it made sense to give people from Bangladesh visa to work in SF for SF wages before? It's an excuse for a company to save money on the back of workers. That's it.
- jmathai 4y ago> Yet it made sense to give people from Bangladesh visa to work in SF for SF wages before? If they weren't set up for remote work and the employee being in SF was worth that amount - then yes. What I think people miss about "equal wages" is that it means everyone gets the lowest wage. Because, in most cases, the company has the leverage and their goal is to increase profits. Do I agree with that? Not really. But it's also not a reality I'm capable of changing. What "equal wages" does not mean is "everyone gets SF wages".
- sschueller 4y agoI am not saying pay everyone SF wages but don't pay more or less. Pay every one the same if they have the same skill/output. If that means you can't hire people from SF then so be it. If you can only find people in SF to do the job you need then you are effectively paying everyone SF wages. I am specifically targeting Sass businesses that have global identical pricing for their products and don't incure any additional expenses if an employee remote works from SF vs Bangladesh.
- jmathai 4y agoWho does this benefit though? People in extremely low cost of living areas getting (relatively) very high wages?