>It feels you are seeking validation on a compensation scheme that's at least equal that most corporations and bring nothing new to plate, nor is any more fair than what everyone else is doing.
I think this is a great point, because exec's are not included in this pricing calculator. I think they totally should be.
From the article and some other links I think the company is doing a great marketing campaign during a time where salaries and pay is a hot topic.
I do not think salaries should be paid based on location, especially if the team is remote. Everyone is in the room (zoom room) and they should be paid on their skillset and value they bring to the team. Using location allows the company to focus on cost. This points to the fact they will be located in LOW cost of living locations, using fair calculator is the justification for lower salaries. Which links back to
> If we start giving crazy high US salaries by default in remote, I'm personally afraid we're going to replicate the San Francisco phenomenon over and over, to cities elsewhere in the world.
We should be giving employees higher salary based on the value they bring to the company. If the engineer from Argentina is more productive and bringing more value to the team but they are paid much lower than a team member in the US, this will cause internal conflict but the only person gaining is the company from the margin they will make from that employees contribution to their overall cost.
Yeah, OP seems to not understand why San Fransisco(and tech hubs in general) real state is hot. I'm line with you, this is just a marketing piece, with low effort, made up excuses for why not paying people in 3rd world countries fairly.
I think this is a great point, because exec's are not included in this pricing calculator. I think they totally should be.
From the article and some other links I think the company is doing a great marketing campaign during a time where salaries and pay is a hot topic.
I do not think salaries should be paid based on location, especially if the team is remote. Everyone is in the room (zoom room) and they should be paid on their skillset and value they bring to the team. Using location allows the company to focus on cost. This points to the fact they will be located in LOW cost of living locations, using fair calculator is the justification for lower salaries. Which links back to
> If we start giving crazy high US salaries by default in remote, I'm personally afraid we're going to replicate the San Francisco phenomenon over and over, to cities elsewhere in the world.
We should be giving employees higher salary based on the value they bring to the company. If the engineer from Argentina is more productive and bringing more value to the team but they are paid much lower than a team member in the US, this will cause internal conflict but the only person gaining is the company from the margin they will make from that employees contribution to their overall cost.