3 ms·

As I read this, Buffer doesn't pay remote employees less. Rather, you're payed more if you work from expensive cities (eg. Hong Kong), than if you work from che

by bfwi 12y ago

As I read this, Buffer doesn't pay remote employees less. Rather, you're payed more if you work from expensive cities (eg. Hong Kong), than if you work from cheaper cities (eg. Bucharest)

izolate 12y ago
I've never understood or agreed with this approach. Your lifestyle choices should have no bearing on your salary. If somebody reduces costs by choosing a cheaper city to live in, it should be regarded as any other frugal activity. That is, an independent and completely personal affair. I understand the cost saving benefit from an employer's perspective, but since that's not me, I've chosen my side.
- rudyfink 12y ago
  I've seen two general explanations. I'll present them without comment, though I recognize there is plenty of room for that on both: 1) it's considered easier to justify internally, since the worker in the more expensive area is being paid at a closer to market rate for their market (rather than above rates in their market); or 2) the management of the organization is usually located in the more expensive area and internally evaluates rates there as the baseline (and the remote rate(s) as the negotiated special cases).
- tinco 12y ago
  People don't (usually) pick a city to live in because of the cost of living, it is simply a good/bad side effect. Family/friends/job opportunities are what really affects the decision to go live somewhere. From that perspective it makes sense as an employer to try and give all your employees a chance of the same living standard, regardless of city choice. Also, from a employees perspective if you feel you're getting a lower wage than someone who is of less value to the company, you can always try and renegotiate your salary.
- bkjelden 12y ago
  I work at a satellite campus for a large tech firm, and I've come to the conclusion "cost of living adjustments" are just HR BS for the company's belief that talent markets are local, not national or global, and they are using that belief to exploit satellite/remote workers.

by bfwi 12y ago

As I read this, Buffer doesn't pay remote employees less. Rather, you're payed more if you work from expensive cities (eg. Hong Kong), than if you work from cheaper cities (eg. Bucharest)

izolate 12y ago

I've never understood or agreed with this approach. Your lifestyle choices should have no bearing on your salary. If somebody reduces costs by choosing a cheaper city to live in, it should be regarded as any other frugal activity. That is, an independent and completely personal affair. I understand the cost saving benefit from an employer's perspective, but since that's not me, I've chosen my side.

rudyfink 12y ago
I've seen two general explanations. I'll present them without comment, though I recognize there is plenty of room for that on both: 1) it's considered easier to justify internally, since the worker in the more expensive area is being paid at a closer to market rate for their market (rather than above rates in their market); or 2) the management of the organization is usually located in the more expensive area and internally evaluates rates there as the baseline (and the remote rate(s) as the negotiated special cases).
tinco 12y ago
People don't (usually) pick a city to live in because of the cost of living, it is simply a good/bad side effect. Family/friends/job opportunities are what really affects the decision to go live somewhere. From that perspective it makes sense as an employer to try and give all your employees a chance of the same living standard, regardless of city choice. Also, from a employees perspective if you feel you're getting a lower wage than someone who is of less value to the company, you can always try and renegotiate your salary.
bkjelden 12y ago
I work at a satellite campus for a large tech firm, and I've come to the conclusion "cost of living adjustments" are just HR BS for the company's belief that talent markets are local, not national or global, and they are using that belief to exploit satellite/remote workers.