• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1076 months ago

    Apparently smaller tech firms are loving office mandates, because it allows them to hire talent that they normally would not have access to at their budget.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      636 months ago

      Yep. I’m willing to make 10% less to be fully remote. Given the alternative is fewer days of sleep each year, plus many more in time spent grooming and transiting, then the cost of transport and lunch, to ultimately get less done, both at home and at work (with the same deadlines) I might even take 15-20% less.

      Work/life balance is more important than money.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      236 months ago

      My company is based in CA, and employs me remotely from the Midwest. They pay me above average for my area, but less than they would have to if I lived in the Bay area where they are based. I feel like this works out for both of us! They even go so far as looking at the zip code of every employee when considering raises, and thus far (3 years) I have received an annual raise which is higher than the cost of living increase for my area.

      In my situation at least, me working remotely benefits both myself and my company. I just can’t understand why so many larger companies are so adamant about return to office, especially ones in larger coastal cities.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        46 months ago

        Same boat! My company is in Cali, I’m in midwest. I cost less than a Cali hire, but i make decent money for my area.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        76 months ago

        The only logical reason i’ve read for back-to-office policies is to justify office space rent.