[cj]

> I really loathe their location dependend compensation

Quick thought experiment: would you still disagree location-dependent compensation if they opened a physical office in your region, and priced their offers according to the local market?

Companies that have physical offices in multiple regions naturally adjust compensation levels depending on the local talent market. Why should it be any different for remote companies where the only difference is no physical office?

[awesomepeter]

They don't compete in the local talent market, they compete in the global talent market while offering local compensation. If they have a physical office, then they actually compete in the local market.

edit: I mean have an office and require to work from there. Companies which have an office and offer remote are naturally at a disadvantage here in the same way, though having an office may help offset the disadvantage (some people don't want to work remotely, having an office to go to from time to time and talk to people, meetings, integration parties, other benefits)

edit2: I've also just checked their rates, and for my region they are at best average even accounting for local market prices. So I don't see how they have an attractive offer in any way.

[boring_twenties]

> opened a physical office in your region, and priced their offers according to the local market?

Can't speak for the parent but I live in a city where plenty of tech companies have physical offices, and all of them pay jack-shit relative to the national market.

I don't know if I agree or disagree with it, but I certainly won't be applying with any of them. The same thing goes for GitLab.

[0xffff2]

I would absolutely still disagree. I recognize that most companies do it, but it makes absolutely no sense to me. If I'm doing the exact same work for the company, surely my compensation should be based on the value of that work, not the physical location of any combination of the company's offices or my residence.