Read on Twitter
one of my early #WorkFromHome fears was that companies would start adjusting salaries for locality and like clockwork, it happened.
i think the practice is trash. compensation should be tied to performance + skill sets, not zip codes.
@reddit agrees
https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Reddit-permanent-work-from-home-15679060.php
i think the practice is trash. compensation should be tied to performance + skill sets, not zip codes.
@reddit agrees
https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Reddit-permanent-work-from-home-15679060.php
why do i think the practice is trash? well pull up a chair and let me share a few reasons.
1) it creates unfair compensation and consequently resentment when people know they’re being paid less money to do the same work.
2) it threatens organizational stability.
how? well, let’s play a make believe game, shall we?
how? well, let’s play a make believe game, shall we?
imagine that you’re a director in a company. you live in a small town somewhere in the southeast, but your company is based in the bay area.
in your role you manage a team, budgets, and planning processes. you work long days and sometimes weekends.
in your role you manage a team, budgets, and planning processes. you work long days and sometimes weekends.
how are you going to feel when you learn that one of your direct reports who DOES NOT have those same high-level responsibilities, earns close, the same, or more than you simply because they live in the bay?
are you going to feel committed to those long days or will you slowly begin feeling undervalued? will that feeling cause you to seek other opportunities? will it make you question your pace of work?
these are threats to the organization and its work.
these are threats to the organization and its work.
3) companies have budget and need to frankly stop playing b/c it starts a working relationship devaluing someone.
if a role is advertised to have a salary range of $100-$115K, the money is there (and then some) - why “save” $10K by adjusting salaries.
if a role is advertised to have a salary range of $100-$115K, the money is there (and then some) - why “save” $10K by adjusting salaries.
it’s not a company’s job to determine how much money someone and their family needs to live based on their location.
it’s a company’s job to attract and compensate talent based on their experience, skills, and performance.
it’s a company’s job to attract and compensate talent based on their experience, skills, and performance.
Many people pursue these high-paying roles because they have responsibilities ranging from children to aging parents to helping extended family members.
They invest in all it takes to get their only to reach the finish line and be told that their pay will be adjusted.
They invest in all it takes to get their only to reach the finish line and be told that their pay will be adjusted.
in conclusion, it’s peak capitalism for companies to adjust salaries simply to save money that they aren’t even hurting for. additionally it breeds resentment that has the potential to hurt the company in the longterm.
pay people for their talent and performance.
pay people for their talent and performance.
