Ask HN: Are there any remote companies that pays SF rates worldwide remote?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23244229

by revertcommit • 6 years ago

33 46 6 years ago

news.ycombinator.com

Whenever I search for opportunities online, only companies that hire in SF pays well. Are there any remote companies other than Basecamp (since they rarely hire) that pays SF rates for anyone anywhere?

stephenr9• 6 years ago

What is the logic that says over inflated salaries that are required to make hiring possible in a ridiculously expensive place to live are the only measure of “pays well”?

You could have a salary substantially less in equivalent dollars and still end up better off if a huge chunk of that income isn’t being spent on putting a roof over your head.

Or do you just want the bragging rights “I make 300k” but are sick of spending half of it on rent?

byoung24• 6 years ago

I don't know about the OP, but I live in Los Angeles so when looking for remote opportunities I need a salary comparable to local onsite jobs. I've got a daughter in school here and my wife has a job with 10 years seniority and a pension at 20 years so it isn't realistic to move to Idaho for the cost of living savings. I've been working remote for 5 years and it has limited my choices to companies that pay LA wages. I've talked to coworkers who live on 5 acres in Texas, a mansion in Iowa, or 20 acres in Arkansas and they think I'm crazy but I can be at the beach or Hollywood in 15 minutes and I don't have to deal with snow or rain.

detaro• 6 years ago

But that's different from what OP asks, since not all remote companies pay the same rate globally.

stephenr9• 6 years ago

I guess maybe it's a factor of the US employment/benefits situation but I don't quite understand this scenario.

In Australia (where I grew up) if you leave a company, you don't lose your retirement savings from that time, because they're not controlled by the company.

Is that what you're suggesting: that if your wife changes her job, she'll lose the money that's been paid into a retirement fund for her?

As for kids: changing schools can be a hassle but I'd hardly consider it a reason not to move to a much more liveable location.

AnimalMuppet• 6 years ago

... and I don't have to deal with snow or rain.

But the smog, the wildfires, and the traffic are, um, not ideal.

I admit that the beach in Iowa is somewhat lacking...

revertcommit2• 6 years ago

You're totally right but I was asking this question because I wanted to know if there are any other companies similar to Basecamp that pays you SF rates no matter where ever you're in the world.

stephenr9• 6 years ago

Looking for a remote salaried position in another country seems like a weird situation to me. The headaches of setting up legal entities, complying with tax laws, benefits etc for whatever location the person is in, is not worth it IMO.

If you're a freelancer, it's up to you to decide what rate you want, and if you're willing to negotiate on that rate.

For reference, I charge clients about 3x more now, living in a relatively small city in Thailand than I did when I left Melbourne (Australia) several years ago, which is ridiculously more expensive.

allendoerfer• 6 years ago

In case you can manage to keep the same savings-rate, living in an expensive place, you can move to an inexpensive place for retirement and retire earlier. The absolute values count. It is not only about cost of living/salary.

jamil7• 6 years ago

I doubt there are many, why would they pay the SF rates if they don't have to?

mech422• 6 years ago

Actually - many do... A lot of small companies/startups aren't setup deal with varying costs of living and what a 'comparable' salary would be, so they just pay what they would pay in the local market (SF).

edit: my bad, I missed the 'worldwide' part...I only have experience with remote work in the U.S.

mfalcon• 6 years ago

Basecamp does.

revertcommit2• 6 years ago

Any companies other than Basecamp? Since Basecamp rarely hires.

peruvian• 6 years ago

Basecamp hires once every other year and they get thousands of applications for one position, so it's not really a good suggestion.

raztogt21• 6 years ago

In my experience is hard. All the remote offers I had always take into consideration that I live in México.

While the salary is like 5x what the average SE in México is paid, it is never close to what my peers in California are earning.

biermic• 6 years ago

I'd focus more on providing enough value to justify a SF like salary. Just trying to find a company that will throw money at you while you sit in a LOC area will be tough. Companies are not stupid, and you are competing with the whole world. There will always be someone who can do the job for a cheaper price. So figure out what value you provide, that justifies inflated rates. Another approach is not to be an employee, but a business. But that's not as comfortable.

JoeCortopassi• 6 years ago

If you want a well paying remote job, you need to avoid companies that advertise remote work. 99% of the time they are trying to capture great talent for less money. Instead just apply to well paying places, and prove you are a worthwhile asset. Even companies that swear they are non-remote will usually make an exception

Caveats: This usually only works if you're in the same country as the company (legal/tax complications). Also, while you might get SF salary you will almost never get SF stock comp, which is almost always worth as much as the salary

codegeek3• 6 years ago

I may have a very controversial take on this but I would share it regardless. The moment you compete with remote developers all around the world, you have to be really really good to command great salaries. The reason is that the employers have a very wide pool to select from instead of location specific. So as an employer, I don't have an incentive to just pay "SF Salary" unless I find that really exceptional candidate.

So focus on becoming that really really good candidate who can command SF level salary while living in say Thailand or whatever your choice of stay is. Otherwise, you are competing with hundreds and thousands of people and if you are just about as good as them, someone is willing to work for less than SF salary. Supply/demand ?

Also, a company may be ok with a good enough dev. who costs much less than a great dev. who costs a lot more.

one2know2• 6 years ago

Salary has very little with how "good" you are, and determining "good" is the essence of this scam industry. Hypothetically, lets say there are devs being paid $1MM per year who are kicking back $250-500k to their managers who got them the jobs. They do the same work as everyone else. Are they good?

stephenr9• 6 years ago

In most industries, more experience = more pay. Not all, not always fairly, but generally.

In tech, more experience in a niche field generally = even more money.

It’s not that different than paying for regular items.

There is supply and demand at play (hence niche roles will often pay higher) and the basic concept of “you get what you pay for”. Generally a more experienced developer will be more productive. Generally that means they’ll be compensated more.

SF salaries are pushing the supply and demand part heavily: without sufficient salary the candidates can’t afford to live where the job is because it’s so over populated.

asdkhadsj2• 6 years ago

Oh it entirely does. But I think you're confusing the source for "good".

As the GP said, supply and demand, you're competing with a lot more developers when you work remote. I think we'd all agree there, right?

So now the company hiring has a large pool they need to sort through. How do you choose? Well they _could_ just choose the "best", but they get to define best, or good, right? Some companies may literally want to choose the best client they can, but many will want to balance all variables. They want a skilled candidate, who fits their culture, for a price that leaves them with a good feeling.

A candidate willing to accept less pay is a value in itself. If the candidate meets or exceeds the minimum skill that the company is desiring, the cheap price tag is often great.

Now I know this is a complex topic, but as a remote worker and someone who has hired many remote workers for a company with real, limited non-VC income, salary matters. Even in just the candidates I've interviewed, if they were all the same price tag I would have different coworkers today. Which isn't to say that my coworkers are bad or that we hired poorly, we hired based on variables at the time, and we made the right decision.

Price has nothing to do with candidate skill, but is still often top tier variable in choosing a candidate. It is not a scam. It is reality.

neonate• 6 years ago

If you have to invoke a fabricated scenario to make your point, it suggests that your argument is weak.

maest• 6 years ago

I'm having a hard time understanding why this is controversial. Can someone with a dissenting opinion chime in? I'm curious what the other side of the argument sounds like.

lgl• 6 years ago

It's not really controversial, but just a kind of sad state-of-the-world type thing imho. While there are undoubtedly a lot of talented developers in SF, "SF salary" doesn't really equate with talent and it's mostly there due to the uber expensive nature of the place and US economy expectations afaik. For example, I'm pretty sure there are a ton of developers all around the world that are much more talented and hard working that a lot of people getting paid "SF salaries" in SF and that are paid but a small percentage of even an average "SF salary"

OP is right because the differences can be so abysmal that even just 1 month of "SF Salary" can be much greater that 1+ years of salary in other countries for basically the same job. So it would be an obvious choice that if companies can get a remote developer that's just as productive for 20k/year it would make no sense to pay >120k..150k/year (which seems to be the average for a software engineer according to payscale).

codegeek3• 6 years ago

The other side usually is "Why should we restrict salaries based on location. Where a developer lives should NOT matter for a job and why should they get paid less than someone in SF ?"

But my point is that it DOES matter as there are other factors involved and not just location. Lets say that I find a great developer who wants SF salary vs a good enough developer who wants 1/5th of the SF salary, I may not need that great dev. at that cost. The "good enough" developer will be, well good enough and worth it. A lot of developers (and don't get me wrong, I am one too) tend to overestimate their abilities and expect high salaries just because devs get paid high salaries in general.

jppope2• 6 years ago

Pretty sure Basecamp pegs their salaries on Chicago rates...

enonevets• 6 years ago

It’s top 10% standardized based on SF market rates

Source: https://basecamp.com/about/jobs

jppope2• 6 years ago

they updated to SF sometime in the last 3 years. My info was based on what they had previously said.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/employee-benefits-basecamp-co...

Ask HN: Are there any remote companies that pays SF rates worldwide remote?

Related Stories