Log In

Your email is not your username

Register

If you were a member of the old Bodybuilding.com forums and would like to reuse your previous username, you can request it below. We use your email only for registration and do not store it. For more information, please see our Privacy Policy.

Confirm your email

A registration code was sent to your email. Enter it here.

Welcome

You have successfully setup your account.

Sign in

Quick Navigation Bottom Misc
Forum » Tech companies cut salaries for moving out of Bay Area
  1. Results 31 to 60 of 77
  2. Page 2 of 3
  3. First
  5. 1
  6. 2
  7. 3
  9. Last

Thread: Tech companies cut salaries for moving out of Bay Area

post 1619640611 10-17-2020, 02:36 PM
-
#31
  1. CreamSauce
  2. Reds gonna red
  1. CreamSauce
  2. Reds gonna red
  3. Join Date: Mar 2018
  4. Posts: 171
  5. Rep Power: 0
Just lol at anyone thinking companies pay people based on their worth.

They pay what they think it needs to keep you at the company and motivated. That equation changes when you move to a low COL area because you have fewer options and companies know they're competing against lower offers.
post 1619640631 10-17-2020, 02:36 PM
-
#32
  1. coast2coastam
  1. coast2coastam
  3. Join Date: Jun 2009
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 11,323
  6. Rep Power: 138587
Originally Posted By TugOfPeace⏩
I work for two fortune 100 companies.
I work for one, so I guess you win.
post 1619640761 10-17-2020, 02:37 PM
-
#33
  1. Antonio519
  2. The ment, enjoy it.
  1. Antonio519
  2. The ment, enjoy it.
  3. Join Date: Jul 2009
  4. Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
  5. Posts: 25,343
  6. Rep Power: 71998
Originally Posted By SoutheastBeast1⏩
This

Lol at people saying it makes sense

It actually makes no sense. Are you not performing the same job for them? Then how has your value decreased to them?
They're getting paid SF salary due to cost of living in SF

If they move to some poverty city, they still get paid their worth minus the cost of living
Blaugrana Crew
Chicago Crew
Misc Porsche crew
post 1619641031 10-17-2020, 02:42 PM
-
#34
  1. cncman
  2. Democrats are terrorists
  1. cncman
  2. Democrats are terrorists
  3. Join Date: Dec 2008
  4. Location: Texas, United States
  5. Posts: 25,914
  6. Rep Power: 84633
Originally Posted By Antonio519⏩
They're getting paid SF salary due to cost of living in SF

If they move to some poverty city, they still get paid their worth minus the cost of living
The argument is that this is corrupt, taking advantage of workers.
"If you don't vote for me you ain't black!" - Plantation Joe Biden

Wreck em
Hook em
Glory to Aubernia!
post 1619641211 10-17-2020, 02:44 PM
-
#35
  1. whitepaper
  2. Registered User
  1. whitepaper
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jun 2011
  4. Posts: 20,840
  5. Rep Power: 55720
Originally Posted By Chezdon⏩
How does where you live affect the companies bottom line? Surely they pay you based on what you're worth, and how much you bring to the company? Moving 100 miles away suddenly makes you worth $20k less? Does not compute.
Originally Posted By Chezdon⏩
Yes but it's more nuanced than that. Can't be bothered to go into it but basically having x as your salary and then moving away to have it decreased is not that same as living in a certain city and having x salary.
Originally Posted By SoutheastBeast1⏩
This

Lol at people saying it makes sense

It actually makes no sense. Are you not performing the same job for them? Then how has your value decreased to them?
Originally Posted By cncman⏩
Not arguing they should, just that its standard. Cost of living is lower and the value of the dollar relative to the worker has increased. Obviously its unchanged with the company.
That's just it, though, the general notion of salary isn't so straight forward, and is a combination of skill + location in almost all cases. It's archaic for sure, but the a separation of work and your location is relatively new. Work has almost always been location dependent. You go to the factory, to the office, to whatever location to actually do the work--working remotely is at most a very new thing. With tech/Bay area, the standing logic is that to get workers to come to you, you had to raise the salary to allow them to live in the city where you're company is based (I'm sure the formula takes more into account, but you get the idea). That's not the case for a variety of work today, but the system is still in place. It's not going to change over night, and unless you're in a relatively unique job position/niche, your ability alone won't be the only commanding aspect of your salary.
2014 Misc Resolution: Negging no pics (screen captures of text don't count as pics)

HairyWBush Reps for life - Hamster Compassion: https://forum.obnoxiousbrutes.com/showthread.php?t=181804893
post 1619641281 10-17-2020, 02:45 PM
-
#36
  1. coast2coastam
  1. coast2coastam
  3. Join Date: Jun 2009
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 11,323
  6. Rep Power: 138587
Originally Posted By cncman⏩
The argument is that this is corrupt, taking advantage of workers.
Bro, they wouldn't break even if they didn't cut those salaries. Think of the shareholders!
post 1619641351 10-17-2020, 02:46 PM
-
#37
  1. Sterilite
  2. Banned
  1. Sterilite
  2. Banned
  3. Join Date: Aug 2020
  4. Age: 56
  5. Posts: 5,060
  6. Rep Power: 0
Good, WFHcels can suck a dick after wanting a shutdown and wanting this virus to prolonged for so long

ELITES sticking it in their asses now

NOW YOU WILL FEEL IT
post 1619641371 10-17-2020, 02:46 PM
-
#38
  1. HMFIC_BROWSIN
  2. Buy high, sell higher.
  1. HMFIC_BROWSIN
  2. Buy high, sell higher.
  3. Join Date: Feb 2009
  4. Location: Arizona, United States
  5. Posts: 73,524
  6. Rep Power: 348838
Originally Posted By SoutheastBeast1⏩
This

Lol at people saying it makes sense

It actually makes no sense. Are you not performing the same job for them? Then how has your value decreased to them?
This.

Makes zero logical sense.
post 1619641801 10-17-2020, 02:50 PM
-
#39
  1. guest89
  2. Forever aBOARD
  1. guest89
  2. Forever aBOARD
  3. Join Date: Sep 2003
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 41,691
  6. Rep Power: 169649
Move to a state with lower income taxes (Or one without them) an that 18% is irrelevant. Especially due to the cost of living difference. You can live better on 100-125K per year in most states then you could on 200K per year in the bay area.


If you have the ability to work remote. The only reason to stay in the Bay area is if you love that area. If you have issues, it pays to leave.
post 1619641931 10-17-2020, 02:52 PM
-
#40
  1. FAPhaggot
  2. Hawaiian shirt hoarder
  1. FAPhaggot
  2. Hawaiian shirt hoarder
  3. Join Date: Nov 2015
  4. Posts: 24,226
  5. Rep Power: 185354
The "full salary working remotely" thing was fun for a while, but you didn't think they were going to cut labor expenses if they couldn't cut them? Fuk, they would automate every job in the building and fire the whole lot of workers if it would save them 10%.

I wonder how this will impact the tsunami of Californians moving to the Mountain West. So long as

A. CA remains a chit place to live, and
B. the Chinese will buy your house there for a million dollars anyway,

you're going to see an exodus. But making $80K to work remotely in Idaho is a lot different than making $160K to work remotely in Idaho.
FA Crew
Always Pick 1 Crew

"Experience is something you get right after you need it."
post 1619642031 10-17-2020, 02:53 PM
-
#41
  1. Antonio519
  2. The ment, enjoy it.
  1. Antonio519
  2. The ment, enjoy it.
  3. Join Date: Jul 2009
  4. Location: Chicago, Illinois, United States
  5. Posts: 25,343
  6. Rep Power: 71998
Originally Posted By TugOfPeace⏩
The problem is when you use the argument that salary should remain the same everywhere, why should a company in SF give a higher salary due to the cost of living in SF?
This...
Blaugrana Crew
Chicago Crew
Misc Porsche crew
post 1619642051 10-17-2020, 02:53 PM
-
#42
  1. skier!
  2. Rhodium Membership
  1. skier!
  2. Rhodium Membership
  3. Join Date: Apr 2007
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 4,699
  6. Rep Power: 55381
I don't understand how the company will know. I live in the Bay Area, but have a PO Box as a legal address. If I moved 100 miles SOuth, they aren't going to know unless 1) I tell them 2)they are monitoring IP address from VPN login.

As long as you aren't moving out of state and establishing residency, getting a new driver's license, etc it should be easy to conceal.
post 1619642091 10-17-2020, 02:53 PM
-
#43
  1. Omnivium
  1. Omnivium
  3. Join Date: Feb 2013
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 19,694
  6. Rep Power: 80934
Originally Posted By Chezdon⏩
How does where you live affect the companies bottom line? Surely they pay you based on what you're worth, and how much you bring to the company? Moving 100 miles away suddenly makes you worth $20k less? Does not compute.
Strong this. You all lost your damn mind if you think that makes any sense whatsoever
post 1619642281 10-17-2020, 02:56 PM
-
#44
  1. HMFIC_BROWSIN
  2. Buy high, sell higher.
  1. HMFIC_BROWSIN
  2. Buy high, sell higher.
  3. Join Date: Feb 2009
  4. Location: Arizona, United States
  5. Posts: 73,524
  6. Rep Power: 348838
Originally Posted By Omnivium⏩
Strong this. You all lost your damn mind if you think that makes any sense whatsoever
Also, in this case, tech companies will be motivated to have their employees leave SF, and employees who want to stay in SF will be the first to be laid off.
post 1619642531 10-17-2020, 03:00 PM
-
#45
  1. coast2coastam
  1. coast2coastam
  3. Join Date: Jun 2009
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 11,323
  6. Rep Power: 138587
Originally Posted By TugOfPeace⏩
The problem is when you use the argument that salary should remain the same everywhere, why should a company in SF give a higher salary due to the cost of living in SF?
It's not, it's the salary that's agreed upon when you're hired. If that's higher to entice you into moving into the Bay area because it's expensive, so be it. Why should that be retroactively undone? Should a company raise your pay then if you move to Beverly Hills since cost of living is even higher than it was where you were working? Or do you only get punished if you try to save money by moving somewhere cheaper?
post 1619642541 10-17-2020, 03:00 PM
-
#46
  1. ScramFranklin
  2. Registered User
  1. ScramFranklin
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Jul 2017
  4. Age: 36
  5. Posts: 19,925
  6. Rep Power: 147928
Originally Posted By skier!⏩
I don't understand how the company will know. I live in the Bay Area, but have a PO Box as a legal address. If I moved 100 miles SOuth, they aren't going to know unless 1) I tell them 2)they are monitoring IP address from VPN login.

As long as you aren't moving out of state and establishing residency, getting a new driver's license, etc it should be easy to conceal.
oof you just made me consider that i may not be able to remote login when I go home for christmas. I was going to just take my computer so I wouldn't need to actually take any PTO.
-Engineering Crew
-Self Improvement Crew
-Third Position Crew
-Keith Woods Crew
-Consolecel Crew
-Dr. Edward Dutton Crew
post 1619643041 10-17-2020, 03:07 PM
-
#47
  1. mr.left hook
  2. PHF member
  1. mr.left hook
  2. PHF member
  3. Join Date: Jul 2007
  4. Posts: 20,191
  5. Rep Power: 126540
i knew this was coming for all you office bitches with soft hands
MR.PHF '09

“Do you see over yonder, friend Sancho, thirty or forty hulking giants? I intend to do battle with them and slay them.”- Don Quixote

''damn right I like the life I live

'Cause I went from negative to positive

And it's allGood..."


"friends come and go but enemies accumulate"


< H.T.C Till I D.I.E >
"Zero tolerance Crew" ZERO, NADA !!!!
post 1619643151 10-17-2020, 03:08 PM
-
#48
  1. Astyanax
  2. Registered User
  1. Astyanax
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: May 2013
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 6,163
  6. Rep Power: 6825
If you don't get why the company would reduce salary, think about it this way. In lower COL areas, people are willing to accept lower salaries because their cost of living is lower. Therefore, if you move there and refuse to take a pay cut, why wouldn't they just replace you with someone else in the same area who is willing to work for less? It's really not on the company, but on the work force who are willing to accept the lower rate.
"Lift heavy ass $hit until you die because nothing is worse than being weak." ~ Hamburger Train.
post 1619643401 10-17-2020, 03:12 PM
-
#49
  1. Chezdon
  2. Vagabond
  1. Chezdon
  2. Vagabond
  3. Join Date: Feb 2010
  4. Location: London, United Kingdom (Great Britain)
  5. Age: 40
  6. Posts: 13,184
  7. Rep Power: 13479
Originally Posted By Slayermanlet⏩
It's the same thing in the UK. Engineers in Manchester or Bristol aren't 20,30% less 'valuable' than they are in London. You're paid what you will accept more than what you're worth.
Yeah but the company in Manchester is selling to people who are, on average, worse off than Londoners. So their profit margins are smaller and so the salaries they can give are lower.

Unless companies in London suddenly start making less, then a Londoner who moves to Wales shouldn't suddenly receives 20% lower salary because he decided to move. Another £20k in the shareholders pocket? Lmao, like they don't have enough already. Spread of wealth within companies is already a fúcking joke, no need to increase that just because my rent went down £100 a week.

And also, there is such a thing as "London Weighting", but no way does it actually make up for the 200% increase in property prices here.
post 1619643711 10-17-2020, 03:15 PM
-
#50
  1. cgh
  2. Registered User
  1. cgh
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Sep 2007
  4. Age: 42
  5. Posts: 2,344
  6. Rep Power: 4273
How is that even legal?
post 1619643771 10-17-2020, 03:16 PM
-
#51
  1. mr.left hook
  2. PHF member
  1. mr.left hook
  2. PHF member
  3. Join Date: Jul 2007
  4. Posts: 20,191
  5. Rep Power: 126540
Originally Posted By SoutheastBeast1⏩
This

Lol at people saying it makes sense

It actually makes no sense. Are you not performing the same job for them? Then how has your value decreased to them?
the ones who used to commute 1 hour or 2 to work and back should get paycut. they are saving over 100$ bucks a week in gas
MR.PHF '09

“Do you see over yonder, friend Sancho, thirty or forty hulking giants? I intend to do battle with them and slay them.”- Don Quixote

''damn right I like the life I live

'Cause I went from negative to positive

And it's allGood..."


"friends come and go but enemies accumulate"


< H.T.C Till I D.I.E >
"Zero tolerance Crew" ZERO, NADA !!!!
post 1619644161 10-17-2020, 03:21 PM
-
#52
  1. coast2coastam
  1. coast2coastam
  3. Join Date: Jun 2009
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 11,323
  6. Rep Power: 138587
Originally Posted By Astyanax⏩
If you don't get why the company would reduce salary, think about it this way. In lower COL areas, people are willing to accept lower salaries because their cost of living is lower. Therefore, if you move there and refuse to take a pay cut, why wouldn't they just replace you with someone else in the same area who is willing to work for less? It's really not on the company, but on the work force who are willing to accept the lower rate.
This is all fine and good, except it's always a one way street with this reasoning. My company eliminated around 30 building leases recently since it's moving most of its workforce to fully remote. Should we see a raise in salaries because of the huge amounts of money the company will save as a result of this? After all this is a result of all of us going remote.
Originally Posted By TugOfPeace⏩
People in this thread don't understand basic supply and demand.
Big tech has worked together in the past to drive tech salaries down, if we were in a vacuum and the rules of supply and demand were completely fair, programmer salaries would be much higher, and executive salaries would be much lower.
post 1619644791 10-17-2020, 03:29 PM
-
#53
  1. Omnivium
  1. Omnivium
  3. Join Date: Feb 2013
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 19,694
  6. Rep Power: 80934
Originally Posted By TugOfPeace⏩
People in this thread don't understand basic supply and demand.
You guys are the ones who don't understand. If your job switches to 100% remote, then location becomes irrelevant and they have no reason to pay extra for people who live in SF. So if they're lowering wages, they should lower them for EVERYBODY, INCLUDING THE PEOPLE WHO STAY IN SF.

For 100% remote jobs, it makes no sense to pay based on cost of living. The job is worth what it's worth, and where the employee lives is 100% irrelevant
post 1619645081 10-17-2020, 03:32 PM
-
#54
  1. Astyanax
  2. Registered User
  1. Astyanax
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: May 2013
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 6,163
  6. Rep Power: 6825
Originally Posted By coast2coastam⏩
This is all fine and good, except it's always a one way street with this reasoning. My company eliminated around 30 building leases recently since it's moving most of its workforce to fully remote. Should we see a raise in salaries because of the huge amounts of money the company will save as a result of this? After all this is a result of all of us going remote.

Big tech has worked together in the past to drive tech salaries down, if we were in a vacuum and the rules of supply and demand were completely fair, programmer salaries would be much higher, and executive salaries would be much lower.
As the employee, you sell your services to the company. They are your "client". The fee you are able to charge is dependent on the quality of the service you provide AND the abundance of other vendors like you who could offer the same service at possibly a lower price AND the abundance of clients who are seeking the same service, to whom you could offer your services instead, if your current company is not willing to pay what you want. Unfortunately, whether or not the company closes its offices does not affect the number of "customers" available to you.

If companies are colluding to drive wages down, that sucks, but that's why we used to have unions in this country.
"Lift heavy ass $hit until you die because nothing is worse than being weak." ~ Hamburger Train.
post 1619646301 10-17-2020, 03:44 PM
-
#55
  1. coast2coastam
  1. coast2coastam
  3. Join Date: Jun 2009
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 11,323
  6. Rep Power: 138587
Originally Posted By Astyanax⏩
As the employee, you sell your services to the company. They are your "client". The fee you are able to charge is dependent on the quality of the service you provide AND the abundance of other vendors like you who could offer the same service at possibly a lower price AND the abundance of clients who are seeking the same service, to whom you could offer your services instead, if your current company is not willing to pay what you want. Unfortunately, whether or not the company closes its offices does not affect the number of "customers" available to you.

If companies are colluding to drive wages down, that sucks, but that's why we used to have unions in this country.
Thanks for the lesson in economics 101. I now see why I need to take a 20% pay cut overnight because I moved to save money. We can't have that, seeing how only the "customer" is allowed to save money, the "client" should go and kick rocks.
post 1619646621 10-17-2020, 03:48 PM
-
#56
  1. suave2000
  1. suave2000
  3. Join Date: Mar 2009
  4. Location: Peru
  5. Age: 37
  6. Posts: 29,108
  7. Subscribers: 2
  8. Rep Power: 12068
LOL @ all the CUCKS ITT siding with the megacorps, cutting salaries to workers just for leaving that chithole is a bitch ass move, talk about CUCKING your own workers aka slaves. The companies are saving millions by having their employees work remotely as they are cutting massive operative costs by basically transfering them to the workers and their homes, now the cuck employees have to pay for the electricity/internet/ and so on while the megacorps save that money. And now the have the PCHUKING AUDACITY to cut the paycheks of their employees just becuase "muh cost of living"

This is the ultimate cuckoldry and PHUCKING LOL @ all the cuck peasants defending the megacorps you phucking CUCKS
post 1619646861 10-17-2020, 03:52 PM
-
#57
  1. suave2000
  1. suave2000
  3. Join Date: Mar 2009
  4. Location: Peru
  5. Age: 37
  6. Posts: 29,108
  7. Subscribers: 2
  8. Rep Power: 12068
Originally Posted By coast2coastam⏩
Thanks for the lesson in economics 101. I now see why I need to take a 20% pay cut overnight because I moved to save money. We can't have that, seeing how only the "customer" is allowed to save money, the "client" should go and kick rocks.
Getting a reduced salary while the company saves millions in operative costs by having all of their workforce working from home is the ULTIMATE form of capitalist cuckoldry and part of the MASSIVE transfer of wealth we're going through.

The 0.001% gets all the benefits while the average joe gets phucked, lmao @ corporate crony capitalism. IF you cucks weren't so brainwashed against collectivism you could have unions to protect your ass in cases like these but ayyy lmao "muh capitalism"

post 1619647371 10-17-2020, 04:00 PM
-
#58
  1. RIKTER
  2. Registered User
  1. RIKTER
  2. Registered User
  3. Join Date: Dec 2006
  4. Age: 51
  5. Posts: 31,602
  6. Rep Power: 241807
Im assuming the same ones defending this would ridicule anyone claiming these same tech companies should pay them more because they moved to a city with a higher cost of living....
post 1619649001 10-17-2020, 04:21 PM
-
#59
  1. coast2coastam
  1. coast2coastam
  3. Join Date: Jun 2009
  4. Location: United States
  5. Posts: 11,323
  6. Rep Power: 138587
Originally Posted By RIKTER⏩
Im assuming the same ones defending this would ridicule anyone claiming these same tech companies should pay them more because they moved to a city with a higher cost of living....
There's no benefit for the company to do that, they only benefit if they cut your salary given the opportunity. By their own reasoning they should keep your salary high if you stay in SF even though you no longer provide any benefit to the company by doing so. It's only a valid argument if it's in favor of the company according to these people.
post 1619649491 10-17-2020, 04:26 PM
-
#60
  1. HMFIC_BROWSIN
  2. Buy high, sell higher.
  1. HMFIC_BROWSIN
  2. Buy high, sell higher.
  3. Join Date: Feb 2009
  4. Location: Arizona, United States
  5. Posts: 73,524
  6. Rep Power: 348838
[QUOTE=suave2000 post_id=1619646861]Getting a reduced salary while the company saves millions in operative costs by having all of their workforce working from home is the ULTIMATE form of capitalist cuckoldry and part of the MASSIVE transfer of wealth we're going through.

The 0.001% gets all the benefits while the average joe gets phucked, lmao @ corporate crony capitalism. IF you cucks weren't so brainwashed against collectivism you could have unions to protect your ass in cases like these but ayyy lmao "muh capitalism"

[Img]https://specials-images.forbesimg.com/imageserve/5ef06de165fa3d00067571f5/960x0.jpg?fit=scale[/Ig][/QUOTE]I'm a pleb and my net worth has also gone up more this year than ever b4... I must be a 1%er scumbag stock owner.... Right?
Quick Navigation Top Misc
Bookmarks
Digg.com
Digg
del.icio.us
del.icio.us
Stumbleupon.com
StumbleUpon
Google.com
Google
Facebook.com
Facebook
Posting Permissions
  1. You may not post new threads
  2. You may not post replies
  3. You may not post attachments
  4. You may not edit your posts