3 ms·

It's a long term social class game to drive salaries back to the pre crypto/pandemic era. RTO is coupled with big layoffs, hiring freezes, etc. It may not impa

by artyom 2y ago

It's a long term social class game to drive salaries back to the pre crypto/pandemic era. RTO is coupled with big layoffs, hiring freezes, etc. It may not impact highest performers that much but makes it worse for everyone. Big players play the game, the rest just imitates.

HPsquared 2y ago
That doesn't make much sense though, I'm sure a lot of people would happily WFH for less pay than if they have to commute, spend all day in a noisy open office, etc.
- artyom 2y ago
  Less pay for doing exactly what you're already doing? How would that work?
  - HPsquared 2y ago
    WFH involves doing less. You don't have to spend 1-2 hours a day, plus expenses, commuting - and having to have an expensive house near the office.
    - tmottabr 2y ago
      except we are not getting paid to commute, we are expected to commute to do the work we are getting paid for. If we were paid to commute to the office then our commute time would be part of the work day. But I am paid for the work i do during work hours and if i have to commute that is expected to happen out of work hours. So actually the Company is already saving money by having me remote, so now i am also expected to get paid less for doing the same work while also saving the company money?
      - HPsquared 2y ago
        Pay is compensation for the inconvenience of having to work. An easier day needs less compensation to feel okay with. Just from the subjective view of the employee.
        tmottabr 2y ago
        What? Since when?? Pay is compensation for work done. Not having to commute does not affect the company at all, they still get the same amount of work done and it is still have the same value to then so i can assure you that the work i do did not became less valuable to the company just because i did not spend hours of my personal time moving to the office and back. Pay should either stay the same or, ideally, it should go up because while they are saving money by me not going to the office, i on the other hand have extra costs because i have to get good internet, will use my electricity for doing the work. Where i work not only pay did not get lowered when the team moved to fully remote, they actually pay us extra to cover costs of working from home. They also offer a one-time pay to cover the costs or assembling your home office so you can buy stuff you need like desk, chair, printer, etc when you change to remote or when you are hired as remote.
        HPsquared 2y ago
        I'm just giving my personal opinion, I'm sure shared by some people, that I'd actually accept less pay for a WFH job. Or, in other words, if they want me to work in an office they'd have to pay more.
        tmottabr 2y ago
        If i am looking for a job and had to choose between a remote work paying less over a in-office job paying more.. I would also get the remote job even if it paid less.. But in my opinion this mindset is the wrong one when you already have a job and is changing to remote. If you already have a job that the company already evaluated the value of and agree on a fair pay.. Then moving to work remote does not change the value of your work to the company while changing the costs the company have.. Where i live they cannot legally lower an employee pay, but if they could and had done when i changed to work remotely i would surely have accepted, but i would also start looking for work elsewhere. But i know they have not done it in countries they could have and like i said, they pay us extra to cover internet and utilities.

by artyom 2y ago

HPsquared 2y ago

That doesn't make much sense though, I'm sure a lot of people would happily WFH for less pay than if they have to commute, spend all day in a noisy open office, etc.

artyom 2y ago
Less pay for doing exactly what you're already doing? How would that work?
- HPsquared 2y ago
  WFH involves doing less. You don't have to spend 1-2 hours a day, plus expenses, commuting - and having to have an expensive house near the office.
  - tmottabr 2y ago
    except we are not getting paid to commute, we are expected to commute to do the work we are getting paid for. If we were paid to commute to the office then our commute time would be part of the work day. But I am paid for the work i do during work hours and if i have to commute that is expected to happen out of work hours. So actually the Company is already saving money by having me remote, so now i am also expected to get paid less for doing the same work while also saving the company money?
    - HPsquared 2y ago
      Pay is compensation for the inconvenience of having to work. An easier day needs less compensation to feel okay with. Just from the subjective view of the employee.
      - tmottabr 2y ago
        What? Since when?? Pay is compensation for work done. Not having to commute does not affect the company at all, they still get the same amount of work done and it is still have the same value to then so i can assure you that the work i do did not became less valuable to the company just because i did not spend hours of my personal time moving to the office and back. Pay should either stay the same or, ideally, it should go up because while they are saving money by me not going to the office, i on the other hand have extra costs because i have to get good internet, will use my electricity for doing the work. Where i work not only pay did not get lowered when the team moved to fully remote, they actually pay us extra to cover costs of working from home. They also offer a one-time pay to cover the costs or assembling your home office so you can buy stuff you need like desk, chair, printer, etc when you change to remote or when you are hired as remote.
        HPsquared 2y ago
        I'm just giving my personal opinion, I'm sure shared by some people, that I'd actually accept less pay for a WFH job. Or, in other words, if they want me to work in an office they'd have to pay more.
        tmottabr 2y ago
        If i am looking for a job and had to choose between a remote work paying less over a in-office job paying more.. I would also get the remote job even if it paid less.. But in my opinion this mindset is the wrong one when you already have a job and is changing to remote. If you already have a job that the company already evaluated the value of and agree on a fair pay.. Then moving to work remote does not change the value of your work to the company while changing the costs the company have.. Where i live they cannot legally lower an employee pay, but if they could and had done when i changed to work remotely i would surely have accepted, but i would also start looking for work elsewhere. But i know they have not done it in countries they could have and like i said, they pay us extra to cover internet and utilities.