3 ms·
No, they don't. This is what happens when you put data from completely different markets together, and you take an aggregate statistic. If all of your full-off
by jstx1 4y ago
No, they don't.
This is what happens when you put data from completely different markets together, and you take an aggregate statistic. If all of your full-office jobs are in India and Africa and most of the flexible ones are in the US, of course you'll end up with a huge difference if you don't adjust for the market.
The whole analysis is done poorly. You could at least share the actual data.
- mwint 4y agoWhile we’re at it, it’s not clear what “1.9x” means. Does it mean I pay the employer?!?
- bee_rider 4y agoI think it means 1/1.9 times as much. Although it is definitely an easy to misinterpret phrase, which shouldn't be used in general. In this case, "roughly half" is probably good enough.
- upupandup 4y agoCite your source and data please > you could at least share the actual data. you can be the first here to demonstrate
- bee_rider 4y agoThey aren't making a specific data-based claim. It is well known that different markets exist, the onus is on the article to explain how they handle that obvious confounding factor.
- some_random 4y agoReminds me of the stackoverflow dev survey, while they do break down some of the categories by location (the locations being USA and Other of course), others don't.
- bee_rider 4y agoErr, I agree that I'm not super impressed with the blog post in general, but it is an announcement of their report. I don't really feel like digging through the PDF, but is the actual data really in that document?