3 ms·

Right but it's sold to employees as based on cost of living, quite a few remote companies do this for example to have flat rate salary bands but still pay less

Right but it's sold to employees as based on cost of living, quite a few remote companies do this for example to have flat rate salary bands but still pay less based on location. For example: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/total-rewards/compensation/compensation-calculator/ https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/total-rewards/compensation... We could of course quibble about market rate and so on but that shouldn't be locally based in a global marketplace. The fact that a software shop down the road from me pays peanuts when I'm looking for work with companies in other countries that otherwise pay their staff very well isn't important IMO and IME.

robertlagrant 4y ago
> The fact that a software shop down the road from me pays peanuts when I'm looking for work with companies in other countries that otherwise pay their staff very well isn't important IMO and IME. Of course it's important. It means you will, all other things being equal, go for the employer that pays the best rate. And that will drag your local wage up, or it might cause the local shop to close down because they can't pay well enough. In general I keep seeing people very much like being paid a good salary, but not understanding the one thing that puts their salary high (or low): competition from other employers, and from other employees. Other employees lower it; other employers raise it. The fact that employers think they don't have to pay SF salaries globally is the same mechanism that created SF salaries in the first place.