[thetopher]

As a non-remote employee, I had to find housing near my office. Now, as a remote employee, my only real requirements are a power source and internet connection. Sure, I have to live somewhere, but that need isn’t a result of my employment. It seems that non-remote employees have more specific and expensive housing requirements and costs.

[skohan]

Since I've been working at home, and so has my partner, we have had a lot more issues in the apartment. We're both on the phone all day, so there's very little chance of having a quiet space in the apartment during the week. We're also forced to split the work-related resources, like we have to organize an equitable time-share on the desk which is better for working, vs the kitchen table which is not as comfortable.

If work from home becomes the norm long term, I can imagine we would need to think about a larger apartment for this reason.

[leetcrew]

aren't you saving a good amount of money too though. I don't know if you and your partner drive to work, but I'm saving about $120/month just on gas, and I'd probably end up saving another $100-200/month on vehicle depreciation and insurance if this went on indefinitely. an extra $300/month makes a big difference in the rental market where I live.

[skohan]

I normally commute by bike so this isn't a factor for me. I'm also using more electricity, and I'm drinking the coffee I bought rather than the office coffee.

[leetcrew]

ah okay, so you don't save anything on the commute. I'm happy to pay for my own coffee (I get much nicer beans than we have at the office), but I have noticed that my utilities bill is no lower than it was mid-winter.

[fma]

I chose my employer based on where I want to live. The commute is stil about 40 minutes of driving each way buts its manageable. If I chose my employer to be in downtown Atlanta, or thereabouts, I would need to live in an area with more expensive house, less space, and crappy schools... Or drive 1.5 hours. Unless they'd double my salary, the 1.5 hour commute is a deal breaker.

Microsoft just announced 1500 jobs in downtown Atlanta, to be near Georgia tech and the tech hub. Not sure if they realize that developers who have working experience, likely now have kids now and arent going to settle for C level schools. Their location isn't even supported by mass transit that well (bus, but no train. They likely payed a premium for the space since it's "hip".

I've found it ironic that there's even such thing a tech hub, since we are the ones who create and push for remote work.

[philipov]

If you use that new-found freedom to pick an area with a lower cost of living though, you're going to get your salary cut.

[qppo]

Idk about you but I know which lower cost of living I'd prefer to move to, and my break-even salary cut is 25%. I think I can negotiate it to 15-20% which would effectively be a raise.

My salary is how much money I'm willing to take to work for the company. If I can live somewhere cheaper, that number is lower.

[bla3]

Another perspective is that if you live somewhere remotely, employers will pay for your increase in cost of living if you move to a more expensive place.

[technicaldonut]

Or just hire people from low cost of living areas.

Depending on the location, they could just let you go. Imagine moving from Idaho to NYC. Drastic increase in cost. If an employer needs to compensate for that, I'm pretty sure theyll think long and hard whether its worth it.

[hahajk]

How does that work?

[philipov]

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/facebook-employees-may-fac...

[mattrp]

I agree that it delves into the realm of triviality that’s not worth the costs of developing the policy and enforcing it.