4 ms·

> you're asking for SF salaries, and those in India are asking for NL salaries(or SF salaries) No. You got it all wrong. You're asking for equal pay for equal

by foofie 3y ago

> you're asking for SF salaries, and those in India are asking for NL salaries(or SF salaries) No. You got it all wrong. You're asking for equal pay for equal work. If all your team members are paid in full but you, in spite of doing the exact same work, are paid a fraction of what they are paid, then something is terribly off. Your contribution to your team does not depend on where you're currently located. How much time you waste on commute does not change the expectation placed on your output. If your office location is prohibitively expensive that means your company needs to sort their mess and work on a location that's more affordable. It makes no sense that you need to subsidize your employer's bad office location.

intothemild 3y ago
The problem with this line of thinking is that cost of living is the same everywhere. It is not.
- tock 3y ago
  Why does it matter? Salaries should depend on the value you deliver. I don't think companies limit their profits depending on the location. Apple devices are often more expensive outside the US.
  - mejutoco 3y ago
    While I can empathize with this, this is a moral judgement. Price is not determined by fairness, but by offer and demand (and other factors). Otherwise teachers might earn more than football players. I think one could argue they should.
    - tock 3y ago
      I agree. It's just supply and demand. I just disagree with people saying salaries are somehow pegged to living standards. No it isn't. Companies don't care about your living standards. They pay what the market commands thats all.
  - intothemild 3y ago
    Whilst we all want SF wages, those wages are because housing and cost of living in SF are exceptionally high compared to say Bali. So you want to earn 200,000 USD. Whilst living in a part of the world where that effectively places you in the top 1% of earners. You're only looking at this from that angle. What about the person who's living in SF, and scrapes by paycheck to paycheck. Whilst you live in a much cheaper area to live in, and you have a very different financial situation. Your both paid the same wage.. because "fairness". You might say, "JUST MOVE". But do you think that's a fair thing to tell someone? Sure people move to places like SF, but people do that for more than money, they do it for a variety of reasons. And one of them is that there's a lot of demand in that area for your talents. So if you wanted to change jobs, grow your career, etc.. you can. But that area has a higher cost of living. You sacrifice some of those things when you move to the small country town, there's no tech hub. No meetups, nothing. So do you think it's still fair to say to that person "Hey I know you're living hard... But at least you can spend that little money you have left on public transport getting to a meetup!". Whilst the person living in the middle of nowhere can afford first class.
    - tock 3y ago
      I get what you are trying to say. I'm one of those people who makes that kind of money in a cheap country. I'm just saying its fair from a value delivered perspective. Paying you less doesn't mean the company donates the money saved to a charity. It just goes to the companies balance sheet. I've had plenty of arguments with company exec's about this: 1. its not fair you get to live like a king! -> would you move here to live like "a king"? Oh you don't want to deal with the pollution and the bureaucracy and lack of safety. Ok. Ah so there is a cost I am paying by living in a bad country. 2. paying you SF salaries would be unfair to people living around you -> ok so you would be ok paying that extra amount directly to a charity right? Oh ok you aren't. I'm saying it's only fair for a employee to think they should be paid proportional to the value delivered. Companies exist to make more money. This causes a clash. In my last company the CEO specifically wouldn't hire staff engineers from cheap countries because he didn't want to give the other engineers the idea that they too can command higher wages. Just pay people the same amount and let them decide how to live their lives. They are adults.
- foofie 3y ago
  > The problem with this line of thinking is that cost of living is the same everywhere. It is not. I don't understand what point you think you're making. My disposable income is not my employer's business, and I definitely do not live below my means to subsidize my employer's business. You wanted me to do my work in exchange for my salary. Pay me. Don't think for a minute you are entitled to go through my grocery bill to see if you impose pay cuts.
DeathArrow 3y ago
>You're asking for equal pay for equal work. Equal pay for equal work doesn't mean the same pay. It means that an employee from Bay Area, one from Netherlands and one from India are able to buy the same amount of goods on their local markets from their wage.
- foofie 3y ago
  > Equal pay for equal work doesn't mean the same pay. Yes it does. You want me to deliver an output, not to slack off if I live X or Z. If you value my work, you pay me. You don't get to claim a benefit just because I chose to live somewhere cheap. Otherwise it would make sense to pay me millions if I chose to move to a penthouse in Manhattan.
- lazyasciiart 3y ago
  Remember that all of those local markets sell iPhones at a higher cost in USD than the Bay Area. Exactly which goods should they be able to buy the same amount of?
  - marcinzm 3y ago
    A roof over their heads for one.
  - Biganon 3y ago
    Rent, obviously Of course a Bay Area employee needs to be paid more, their rent is insanely higher than the rent of employees in the NL
    - lazyasciiart 3y ago
      Ok. So the salary difference should be the difference between the monthly median rent: for a 1 bed apartment that’s $1500/month cost difference, double it for taxes and fuzzy math, salary increase of $36k/year. Maybe it should cover “the median rent”, whatever size unit that is, so $1500 in Amsterdam vs $4k in SF: +$60k. Or should it cover buying a 3 bedroom house, though? That’s more like an extra $8k/month for SF, so salary difference is +$190k. This kind of detail is where it falls down. Should people be able to purchase the same goods, or the same relative local position in society? https://www.ktvu.com/news/in-bay-area-0-of-homes-were-cheaper-to-buy-than-rent-study-says https://www.ktvu.com/news/in-bay-area-0-of-homes-were-cheape...

by foofie 3y ago

intothemild 3y ago

The problem with this line of thinking is that cost of living is the same everywhere. It is not.

tock 3y ago
Why does it matter? Salaries should depend on the value you deliver. I don't think companies limit their profits depending on the location. Apple devices are often more expensive outside the US.
- mejutoco 3y ago
  While I can empathize with this, this is a moral judgement. Price is not determined by fairness, but by offer and demand (and other factors). Otherwise teachers might earn more than football players. I think one could argue they should.
  - tock 3y ago
    I agree. It's just supply and demand. I just disagree with people saying salaries are somehow pegged to living standards. No it isn't. Companies don't care about your living standards. They pay what the market commands thats all.
- intothemild 3y ago
  Whilst we all want SF wages, those wages are because housing and cost of living in SF are exceptionally high compared to say Bali. So you want to earn 200,000 USD. Whilst living in a part of the world where that effectively places you in the top 1% of earners. You're only looking at this from that angle. What about the person who's living in SF, and scrapes by paycheck to paycheck. Whilst you live in a much cheaper area to live in, and you have a very different financial situation. Your both paid the same wage.. because "fairness". You might say, "JUST MOVE". But do you think that's a fair thing to tell someone? Sure people move to places like SF, but people do that for more than money, they do it for a variety of reasons. And one of them is that there's a lot of demand in that area for your talents. So if you wanted to change jobs, grow your career, etc.. you can. But that area has a higher cost of living. You sacrifice some of those things when you move to the small country town, there's no tech hub. No meetups, nothing. So do you think it's still fair to say to that person "Hey I know you're living hard... But at least you can spend that little money you have left on public transport getting to a meetup!". Whilst the person living in the middle of nowhere can afford first class.
  - tock 3y ago
    I get what you are trying to say. I'm one of those people who makes that kind of money in a cheap country. I'm just saying its fair from a value delivered perspective. Paying you less doesn't mean the company donates the money saved to a charity. It just goes to the companies balance sheet. I've had plenty of arguments with company exec's about this: 1. its not fair you get to live like a king! -> would you move here to live like "a king"? Oh you don't want to deal with the pollution and the bureaucracy and lack of safety. Ok. Ah so there is a cost I am paying by living in a bad country. 2. paying you SF salaries would be unfair to people living around you -> ok so you would be ok paying that extra amount directly to a charity right? Oh ok you aren't. I'm saying it's only fair for a employee to think they should be paid proportional to the value delivered. Companies exist to make more money. This causes a clash. In my last company the CEO specifically wouldn't hire staff engineers from cheap countries because he didn't want to give the other engineers the idea that they too can command higher wages. Just pay people the same amount and let them decide how to live their lives. They are adults.
foofie 3y ago
> The problem with this line of thinking is that cost of living is the same everywhere. It is not. I don't understand what point you think you're making. My disposable income is not my employer's business, and I definitely do not live below my means to subsidize my employer's business. You wanted me to do my work in exchange for my salary. Pay me. Don't think for a minute you are entitled to go through my grocery bill to see if you impose pay cuts.

DeathArrow 3y ago

>You're asking for equal pay for equal work. Equal pay for equal work doesn't mean the same pay. It means that an employee from Bay Area, one from Netherlands and one from India are able to buy the same amount of goods on their local markets from their wage.

foofie 3y ago
> Equal pay for equal work doesn't mean the same pay. Yes it does. You want me to deliver an output, not to slack off if I live X or Z. If you value my work, you pay me. You don't get to claim a benefit just because I chose to live somewhere cheap. Otherwise it would make sense to pay me millions if I chose to move to a penthouse in Manhattan.
lazyasciiart 3y ago
Remember that all of those local markets sell iPhones at a higher cost in USD than the Bay Area. Exactly which goods should they be able to buy the same amount of?
- marcinzm 3y ago
  A roof over their heads for one.
- Biganon 3y ago
  Rent, obviously Of course a Bay Area employee needs to be paid more, their rent is insanely higher than the rent of employees in the NL
  - lazyasciiart 3y ago
    Ok. So the salary difference should be the difference between the monthly median rent: for a 1 bed apartment that’s $1500/month cost difference, double it for taxes and fuzzy math, salary increase of $36k/year. Maybe it should cover “the median rent”, whatever size unit that is, so $1500 in Amsterdam vs $4k in SF: +$60k. Or should it cover buying a 3 bedroom house, though? That’s more like an extra $8k/month for SF, so salary difference is +$190k. This kind of detail is where it falls down. Should people be able to purchase the same goods, or the same relative local position in society? https://www.ktvu.com/news/in-bay-area-0-of-homes-were-cheaper-to-buy-than-rent-study-says https://www.ktvu.com/news/in-bay-area-0-of-homes-were-cheape...