Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 19 submissions in the queue.
posted by Fnord666 on Monday July 27 2020, @04:19AM   Printer-friendly
from the working-my-way-back-to-you dept.

There's been some recent speculation about the effects working from home will have on various parts of the economy, particularly the commercial real estate market. If companies can figure out how to keep employees productive, coupled with the desire for some to relocate to more rural areas (and consequently, farther away from the office), it's possible some companies may reconsider continuing to carry all the overhead associated with having an office.

Which leads to the question: should remote workers accept a pay cut for working remotely?

A recent survey of 600 U.S. adults found 66 percent willing to take a pay cut for the flexibility of working remotely.

To what degree varied, however.

  • Fourteen percent would take a one to four percent cut;
  • Twenty-nine percent would take a five-to-14 percent cut;
  • Seventeen percent would take a 15-to-24 percent cut;
  • Seven percent would take a 25 percent or more cut;
  • Thirty-four percent would not take a lower salary for flexible remote work.

The survey, taken from July 5 through 7 from Fast, a start-up specializing in online checkout, found COVID-19 safety concerns part of the current appeal of remote working. Thirty-nine percent were less comfortable returning to their physical office compared to 30 days before. However, 65 percent preferred a workplace that gives employees the flexibility to choose where and when they work remotely.

[...] The concept of "localized compensation" or paying someone less for the same work because of where they live is being hotly debated in human resources circles. In May, Facebook drew some backlash after announcing that employees choosing to permanently work remotely will receive salary cuts if they move to less expensive areas.

Originally spotted on The Eponymous Pickle.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by c0lo on Monday July 27 2020, @07:16AM (16 children)

    by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 27 2020, @07:16AM (#1027003) Journal

    Because outsourcing to India has worked so great before, let's do it again!

    The executives has a memory spanning one quarter, by evolutionary pressure. The moment they develop a longer memory, competition guarantee that hungry beta managers will contest and eat the alpha one in the next financial year.

    If India doesn't work, the flyover country will. Be it only because the ones that have difficulties finding a job will find attractive the idea of downscaling their life-style and relocating into cheaper towns/states. Not only they have a lower cost of life, but they can get employed faster for cheaper wages.

    Now, that will be the death of red states voting base. And TMB will start noticing hordes of pink/green haired SJW, together with their progressive kid (to remind him he's living with a roomie) invading his fishing spots - large grin

    --
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Interesting=2, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 1, Offtopic) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday July 27 2020, @01:00PM (12 children)

    by Azuma Hazuki (5086) on Monday July 27 2020, @01:00PM (#1027044) Journal

    That would be poetic justice: the greedy fucking GOP and their policies forcing mass interstate immigration of, y'know, THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY PRODUCE REAL VALUE AND PRODUCTIVE WORK into their territories and staining the map deep blue.

    --
    I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by c0lo on Monday July 27 2020, @01:54PM (11 children)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 27 2020, @01:54PM (#1027082) Journal

      THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY PRODUCE REAL VALUE AND PRODUCTIVE WORK

      I'm sorry to sorta disagree with you, but the way I see the things, roughly "THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY PRODUCE REAL VALUE" are those:
      1. who put food on your table
      2. who make sure your power grid delivers energy
      3. some of those who help you keeping healthy (gyms, supplements and life-style gurus excluded)
      4. (in the near future) who make sure you can telecommute
      All the others mostly are delivering a mixture between various levels of potential values (researchers) and making money (finance, entertainment, etc) with various levels of makework.

      A pity most in the first 2 categories are in the red states and the divisive politicking in US drove a thick separation wedge between the two.

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2020, @02:08PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2020, @02:08PM (#1027093)

        Your 1-4 are all micro optimizations.

        Only the last unnumbered item will meaningfully improve quality of life. See, for example, clean tap water. You may be able to find other examples.

      • (Score: 2) by Opportunist on Monday July 27 2020, @03:27PM (3 children)

        by Opportunist (5545) on Monday July 27 2020, @03:27PM (#1027132)

        The first 2 categories are in the red states only because tariffs keep cheap grub from abroad off our tables. If you think you can produce any kind of farm product in the US at competitive rates you're delusional.

      • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday July 27 2020, @04:55PM (5 children)

        by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 27 2020, @04:55PM (#1027172) Journal

        Boring Business software has real value.

        Can you imagine converting a modern business accounting system back to manual? Do you have any idea how many people would need to be employed in order to do this work done by a computer?

        I won't get into how much human labor (that would be done by a fleet of workers) is saved by a modern payroll system -- especially across multiple states.

        Inventory control systems. Point of sail systems. City or Utility billing systems (water meters, natural gas, trash pickup). Think of how many legal secretaries are no longer needed due to modern legal office software for our valuable lawyers.

        This may not be among the items you mentioned, like food, power, transportation, health, but most of these, and other industries require software in the modern age. (Or require a whole log more workers.)

        I heard it estimated that in the mid to late 1960's the Bank of America, without computers, would have needed to employ more accounting clerks than the entire population of the US. (I have not looked for a source for that.)

        I do know that in the early 1980's, the type of offices that my company's product serves, were amazed at how much labor they could save for the one or two persons who did the specific type of accounting work that the product does. (Those people often have other tasks to do. They still have to run the computers, key in data, run reports, etc.)

        --
        To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2020, @06:21PM (4 children)

          by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 27 2020, @06:21PM (#1027227)

          Boring Business software has real value.

          For some values of real

          • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Monday July 27 2020, @07:13PM (3 children)

            by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 27 2020, @07:13PM (#1027251) Journal

            Since 64-bit float already can hold all possible values of real, there is no need for a 128 bit floating point format.

            But wait, now the new 128 bit floating point format can definitely hold all possible values of real. Really. For sure! This time!

            Next up, a 256 bit wide floating point format, so it can really, really, for real hold all possible values of real.

            Then next, 512 bit . . .

            --
            To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
            • (Score: 2) by Immerman on Monday July 27 2020, @11:45PM (2 children)

              by Immerman (3985) on Monday July 27 2020, @11:45PM (#1027399)

              Nonsense - any mathematician can tell you that The Real Numbers is an infinite set, and thus arbitrary specific values *cannot* be represented by any finite-length encoding.

              And any even middling decent computer scientist or programmer can tell you that floating point numbers categorically do NOT represent Reals, and exactly why you should never treat them as though they do.

              The more bits you add, the better the approximation you can achieve, but since an accurate representation would require infinite bits, no matter how many bits you add you'll always be infinitely far away from achieving true accuracy.

              • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday July 28 2020, @02:36PM

                by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday July 28 2020, @02:36PM (#1027624) Journal

                Since real numbers are an infinite set, that is why anyone arguing that a fixed size float (or even limited only by available memory size) float will have to keep moving to a higher and higher bit width.

                Moving from float 64, to float 128, to float 256, etc is the first of an infinite process.

                --
                To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
              • (Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday July 28 2020, @02:37PM

                by DannyB (5839) Subscriber Badge on Tuesday July 28 2020, @02:37PM (#1027625) Journal

                Or maybe you don't get the joke.

                --
                To transfer files: right-click on file, pick Copy. Unplug mouse, plug mouse into other computer. Right-click, paste.
  • (Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Monday July 27 2020, @01:19PM (2 children)

    by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday July 27 2020, @01:19PM (#1027062)

    relocating into cheaper towns/states

    When enough people earning triple or more of the previous local median wage move into a small town, the cost of living in the town starts to rise...

    --
    🌻🌻 [google.com]
    • (Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday July 27 2020, @01:22PM (1 child)

      by c0lo (156) Subscriber Badge on Monday July 27 2020, @01:22PM (#1027064) Journal

      Yes, I know what gentrification means.
      Whoever:
      1. take a while, somewhere around 10 years
      2. first movers have a big advantage

      --
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
      • (Score: 3, Insightful) by JoeMerchant on Monday July 27 2020, @01:35PM

        by JoeMerchant (3937) on Monday July 27 2020, @01:35PM (#1027073)

        I agree, it takes about 10 years, but part of the advantage that first movers enjoy is living in the town before it has decent shopping, higher level services supports, anything resembling culture, etc.

        The game in Florida used to be: move out in the country, outside a growing town, and then hope the town grows over you so you get a bump in property values. While you're living out there, you're commuting long distances on dangerous 2 lane highways to get to ANYTHING, from haircuts, to groceries, to work, etc. Relative lack of police, fire and ambulance service, etc. It's not too rough, as pioneer lifestyles go, but... do it for 10+ years and the costs add up, as do the risks.

        --
        🌻🌻 [google.com]