Hacker News Reader

> But I just can't get over the very basic logic of "same work, same pay." It seems deeply, critically unfair to me – and beyond unfair, it seems like a quick way to make anyone outside SF feel "lesser-than.

Would you pay a plumber more if you could get another plumber to do the same work for less?

Would you pay more for groceries if another grocery store is selling at 50% cheaper?

> On the other, it's hard for me not to agree with the employers' basic arguments. In a capitalist sense, they're gonna pay what they need to, nothing more: market-based pay is just that. PR aside, they're running a business.

Everyone pays what they (feel) they need to and nothing more, not just employers.

I can't decide either.

Arguments that you are paid the value you bring to the company. If that's true, then companies that profit are ripping off their employees to some extent.

Arguments for "same work same pay". How does that apply to manufacturing where clearly overseas workers making the exact same clothing are paid less than their American counterparts, the exact reason manufacturing moved overseas in the first place? If you think this is deeply, critically unfair, well there are generations of blue-collar workers that agree and probably don't feel a lot of sympathy for tech workers when nobody gave a crap when it happened to them.

Arguments you are paid your market-based replacement value. You get paid less in a cheaper COL area than an expensive COL area, if you actually live in said areas. This makes the most sense to me, just from a competing for talent perspective. Sadly all this does is enrich property owners in high COL areas.

As far as how it applies to remote work, well that falls into the market-based replacement value bucket. If the corp is willing to hire remote workers, then you as a remote worker are also competing against the entire world of remote workers, some of who live in even cheaper areas. This is one of those "be careful of what you wish for, you might get it" situations. I don't see how, long term and outside truly world-unique talent situations, corporations will agree to pay Bay Area wages to remote workers wherever they are. Especially when tech workers aren't unionized, indeed most vehemently oppose being unionized.

Pay is not determined by worth or value, exactly. It is chiefly driven by supply and demand. The supply of workers outside of the Bay willing to accept 25% less than a Bay area salary is more or less everyone while no one in the Bay would take that deal. Allowances should be made because some companies won’t adjust comp which skews the numbers a bit (supply and demand that is).

Trying to derive compensation from worth, value, or fairness is tantamount to a category error.

> But I just can't get over the very basic logic of "same work, same pay."

Well when same people are taking advantage of not only cheap goods (housing and all) but also cheap services, they may have some slick sounding arguments on their side but not some moral high ground for equal pay.

> I don't know. Does anyone have links to convincing arguments you've read one way or the other?

There can't be any. Unfairness against one's self feels visceral but against others it is mostly along "Well they don't work in IT industry so they are different" or even better "Well this schmuck could go ahead get ML PhD and earn million dollar/year. No one is stopping them."

What "cheap services" are you talking about? Moving around the world (including SV and several places in Europe), the cost of services and rent never seriously reflected the differences in pay. iPad costs iPad price everywhere, food is about the same in western world as well, plumbers aren't working for free either.

So what services are you talking about?

Heard of child daycare, house cleaning / maid, handyman, in-home therapy and so on.

> plumbers aren't working for free either.

Not working for free vs paid equal in NYC/SFO/Raleigh/Columbus makes a world of difference.

> food is about the same in western world as well

That's just categorically untrue. In a smallish city in Portugal the food is drastically cheaper than in Paris. For some concrete data, look at the Bic Mac index ( the eurozone kind of screws the comparison up, but it's still valid for Canada vs US vs UK vs EU )

Same goes for rent ( a studio in Paris is as much as a 2-3 room apartment in Montpelier, let alone a small city in Sicily), or associated services.

This is a great analysis.

I'd also add that the value of being able to work in-person is not zero - some roles can go fully remote, but things like user research are much more difficult to conduct remotely (particularly with hardware).

Finally, the reason the Bay Area / NYC cost the most are because they attract on the whole, highly qualified talent. It's not unexpected that the salary scales would be where the senior, high performing talent is implicitly located.