|
|
|
|
|
by rahimnathwani
1572 days ago
|
|
"This indicates to me that location has nothing to do with salary, it's all market forces, and trying to insert COL adjustments into the mix is awkward and easily refuted." That's exactly what I said at the start of my comment: "Salaries don't differ because of cost of living. They differ because of supply and demand." Your proposed method of setting compensation ("get the cheapest ones first, then raise my offered salary until I couldn't find anyone") will end up paying people in Delhi less, because their BATNA will tend to be lower. So, even if that's not your intention, you will end up with location-based pay. And if there are significant differences between different same-level employees in Delhi? The lower-paid one will ask why. So you'll institute some sort of pay band that only applies to Delhi or India overall. So you'll end up with location-based pay bands. |
|
I disagree, the company will just avoid SF engineers. Then, because nobody artificially adjust your salary based on location, salaries will equalize, so someone in Delhi and someone in Madrid will make the same, regardless of their location.
We're talking remote, you can't mix remote and on-site in the same conversation. The BATNA of both is the same, because they're competing in the same global market.