The issue with number 3 is for the employer, not the employee. GitLab doesn't want demotivated/unhappy employees to stick around: they want them to actively look for other opportunities and leave. Sounds reasonable to me.

>The issue with number 3 is for the employer, not the employee. GitLab doesn't want demotivated/unhappy employees to stick around: they want them to actively look for other opportunities and leave. Sounds reasonable to me.

Ironically if you paid a high salary but allowed people to work in a low COL area, this wouldn't be an issue... because the workers could aggressively save for retirement and semi-retire fairly early in their career.

But you want unhappy employee to leave in 2-3 months or ASAP not sticking for couple of years to earn his FIRE. I would say after 6 months you get to know quirks of company up to that you might still be oblivious to bodies in wardrobe.

That is exactly the reason. I updated the site https://gitlab.com/gitlab-com/www-gitlab-com/commit/5833b6f0...

> Number 3 is pretty rediculous. I don't think I've ever seen another company try to claim that they are doing employees a favor by paying them less money than their peers.

I've heard it used in the context of US government work. (They simply don't want people who are "in it for the money"). I don't know if that's based on studies or just a feeling.

Huh? For government jobs, people are in it for the healthcare and the pension.

> Huh? For government jobs, people are in it for the healthcare and the pension.

Pensions don't exist anymore, you get a savings account (403b IIRC) w/ some % matching contrib

He did not claim that. It's bad for the company, much more than for the employees. Unhappy employees who stay for financial reasons tend to negatively impact culture, quality and speed.

As a company we don't want unhappy team members.

Thanks for explaining your reasons. I've been in a golden handcuffs situation (clawback clause on a meager signon/moving bonus that I wouldn't be able to pay back) and I thought the same thing: why would they insist I stay on when I'm most definitely moving on and won't give my best in the remaining time?

Thanks. Mind if I link to this comment from our handbook?

I don't think you understand the motivation it's not a favor for employee it's a benefit to the company they don't want people who don't want to stick around purely because they pay highest wage for a given market.

Number 3 is one of the most reasonable on the list...it's strange you think someone in SF or NYC would ever sign on if they would be paid the exact same as someone in podunk, MT despite the CoL differences.