Submitted by arrogant_ambassador t3_11ebroo in nyc
drpvn t1_jad2h94 wrote
My firm and every other firm I know of pays remote workers the same as in-person workers. The idea that remote workers should earn less is ridiculous. If anything it’s a benefit to the employer, which saves on their commercial real estate footprint.
virtual_adam t1_jae9bv2 wrote
The same people who are outraged Google will pay them less in Alabama have no problem paying Indians or Romanians a fraction
The more fully remote becomes palatable, the easier it becomes for companies to partially off shore work
And this isn’t even shitting on offshore workers, I’m sure there are plenty that are smarter than my coworkers
BoredGuy2007 t1_jadk6b9 wrote
The benefit is the psychopathic desire to control how other people live their lives
It is truly ridiculous. I have yet to see a tangible empirical case for demanding workers come to the office
Pherring83 t1_jaenmvr wrote
Same here. There is tons of data to support why remote/hybrid work schedule is better yet all these blowhards keep trumpeting "Corporate culture" and "Engagement". The reality is essentially "We signed a 30 year commercial real estate lease and we have to justify it to shareholders."
myassholealt t1_jaewdtc wrote
But isn't compensation supposed to factor in cost of living for employees to make the wage competitive? You're not gonna find an 85K/yr administrative office job working in Tuscaloosa. But you can find a company paying that kind of money in NYC.
I think you guys are really delusional if you expect companies to continue to pay NYC-COL wages to workers living small town USA. Those with niche skills thus they have the bargaining advantage, sure. But your average employee? Lol.
961402 t1_jaf25zg wrote
Reducing wages AND saving on commercial rents is a win-win situation for any employer.
Remember, you're nothing but red numbers in a spreadsheet to your average employer
arrogant_ambassador OP t1_jad4ucr wrote
The city doesn’t want those savings.
drpvn t1_jad5ccb wrote
It would nonetheless be a huge mistake for the city to accept this framing. It would be expensive (bad for NYC taxpayers), it would create two tiers of employees, and it would cause remote workers to demand pay parity with in-person workers, ultimately making it even more expensive (even worse for taxpayers). The city should reject the idea that remote work is an employee benefit.
hulks_brother t1_jadicxa wrote
Remote workers should not be paid less but that doesn't mean that there shouldn't be a monetary incentive for in-person work.
drpvn t1_jadigwn wrote
If there’s a monetary bonus for in-person work, then remote workers will be paid less.
hulks_brother t1_jadkgww wrote
Potato Potahto
drpvn t1_jadlbuc wrote
More like bonus potato. In person gets a bonus. Remote gets a potato.
BoredGuy2007 t1_jadka2g wrote
“There shouldn’t be a credit card fee but there should be a cash discount”
JaredSeth t1_jadpd7d wrote
Remote workers will naturally be paid less though because they're competing with every other remote worker. When an employer can hire a full time developer in India for ₹700,000 a year, why would they pay someone in the States in $USD? If on the other hand what they really want is someone who'll come in to the office, they'll have to pay in accordance with the local cost of living to retain talent.
throws_rocks_at_cars t1_jaesm98 wrote
Quality
Legality of work materials requiring citizenship
Time zone coordination
Industries not present in India (say, aeronautics? Chip manufacturing? Take your pick.)
Residency requirements
Classified/cleared materials
Other federally regulated materials
Is that enough? We can keep going.
eclectic5228 t1_jae0dw8 wrote
Except that most NYC agencies have any residency requirement
JaredSeth t1_jae3un3 wrote
Oh, I was responding more to the general idea that remote workers should be compensated the same as in-person, not so much for city agencies.
poralexc t1_jaebh0t wrote
In software, outsourcing usually means writing something twice and paying two sets of engineers.
”Near shoring“ is becoming a lot more common—using workers from CA/Latin America but keeping them more closely integrated with their US counterparts.
JaredSeth t1_jaeedjc wrote
Yeah, my company does a lot of both (not "outsourcing" per se because these are employees, but certainly offshoring\near-shoring).
[deleted] t1_jadpvht wrote
[deleted]
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments