5 ms·
Why not?
by Adraghast 4y ago
Why not?
- brk 4y agoCapitalism?
- xwdv 4y agoBecause developers in those regions can tolerate less salary due to their lower expenses, as a competitive advantage.
- Adraghast 4y agoWhat if the dev in Boise and the dev in Seattle and the dev in Butte got together and agreed none of them would work for less than a certain salary?
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- brk 4y agoIt's a version of the prisoner's dilemma. They could do that, and they arguably should do that. But it won't scale to everyone doing that, and so it breaks down to a remote person with lower cost of living volunteering work for a bit less, in order to secure a desired position for themselves.
- wilsynet 4y agoThose developers should definitely try it.
- aketchum 4y agowhat if you had wheels instead of feet? there is zero mechanism for this and tech workers have shown again and again that there is not interest in a professional union.
- bluGill 4y agoUnions in the US have policies that tech people do not want. Often they are backed up by law, so you cannot legally form a union that gives you the good without the bad.
- sundaeofshock 4y agoThat would require forming a union and tech workers tend to be somewhat hostile towards unions.
- anoonmoose 4y agoSure, I'll grab the catnip and you put the leashes on, I'm sure this will work out great.
- mguerville 4y agoDevs in Vancouver would benefit
- nus07 4y agoSo you are indirectly saying that they will form a union. Human greed will say that the developer in Seattle(or others) will not agree to it and look for a better deal for himself/herself.
- xwdv 4y agoOh yea sure, and the dev in Butte will get to decide the minimum salary, so the guy in Seattle can get fucked. Nice Union. A match made in hell.
- wilsynet 4y agoOstensibly because Amazon won’t allow you to because RTO policy. I guess if you don’t show up, they’ll eventually fire you.
- ilikecakeandpie 4y agoI'm with you. The quality and value of my work does not change with regards to my physical location