Published On: Wed, May 27th, 2020

Why localized remuneration in a work-anywhere universe isn’t so simple

Last Thursday, Mark Zuckerberg told Facebook’s 48,000 employees that he expects upwards of 50% of a association will be operative remotely within 10 years. After surveying many of a advantages that remote work confers — including to “potentially widespread some-more mercantile event around a nation and potentially around a world” — he combined that those who select to pierce to other places in a U.S. or elsewhere will be paid formed on where they live.

“We’ll focus everybody’s comp on Jan 1,” Zuckerberg said. “They can do whatever they wish by a rest of a year, though by a finish of a year they should possibly come behind to a Bay Area or they need to tell us where they are.”

Facebook isn’t pioneering something wholly new. The judgment of localized remuneration has been around for some time, and it’s used by tech companies like GitHub that have essentially distributed workforces. Still, questions about either it’s satisfactory to compensate employees formed on their plcae are certain to grow as some-more outfits adopt remote-work policies.

Despite Facebook’s uncharacteristic clarity about a thinking, not everybody thinks a tactic creates sense.

One longtime Bay Area recruiter who typically focuses on executive searches calls “disparate compensate for a same work” a “dangerous place to be.” Explains a recruiter, Jon Holman, “Even if we plead a geographic inconsistency arithmetic formed roughly wholly on housing costs, what if a new honesty to telecommuting means that some-more women or people of tone can aspire to some of these jobs? Are we going to compensate them reduction than a mostly white and Asian-American engineers in a Bay Area? we doubt it.”

About the Author