Ask HN: Do You Consider Remote a Working Perk?

93 points by dizzystar ↗ HN
I was contacted about a remote position today. They asked for my expected rate and I told them. They replied, "Can you consider coming down since this is a remote position?"

I really struggled to come up with a response to this. Yes, I'm willing to negotiate on principal, but it has nothing to do with being remote. In fact, I consider remote a reason to pay more money.

My thinking is that it's difficult to find the type of people who has the focus and skills (focus overrides skill, I think) to really do remote work well. The employer is not paying for the office, not giving me free coffee, not paying for the computer I'm using, and (if it's important) no ping pong, and no social interaction with coworkers. In return, I give full-on focused work with no cruft.

I understand that it is a trade off, but I'm never sold on the thought that remote is some exclusive benefit.

86 comments

[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 142 ms ] thread
No. These days I consider it a requirement. Doesn't have to be full remote, but I want at minimum 2 days to be able to be out of the office and enjoying from the house I'm paying for using the salary you're (employer, not you, OP) are paying for. Have spent the last couple of weeks embroiled with an engineer who has made my Ops team almost 4 months behind on a specific deliverable.

Meanwhile, the rest of our deliverables that didn't involve this engineer and his team have shipped 90% ahead of time. That 10% was one deliverable that wasn't shipped ahead of time, it was shipped on time.

And my dept. is 100% remote.

I like your arguments though, working remotely sacrifices a lot that you would otherwise get by being chained to a desk, and the idea that you should take LESS money because of it is offensive.

Maybe they feel like you will be saving money and time not having to commute? I don't know. You make valid points and I agree, they shouldn't use remote as leverage when they are already saving a lot on the position being remote.
The gas is valid if they only want to negotiate $3/hr or something like that. It's always more, of course.
Commuting cost time also. If your rate is $80/hour, that really adds up if you have a one hour commute each way with traffic.
I live in Los Angeles. If the company is in New York, does that mean I should take out the price of plane tickets for each way?
The comparison doesn't make sense in a vacuum.

If you live in Hollywood and the job you want is in Santa Monica, then you would add some time for that. If the remote ob is just as good, you could save some time and not go to Santa Monica.

If your ideal job is already down the street from where you live, then remote doesn't offer much commute advantage.

Yes, if the fuckers insist you be there for 8:00 AM EST meetings on a regular basis.
I've worked entirely from home before and I didn't really like it after a while. It was too hard to get motivated every day and keep to the schedule I'd set and I missed having coworkers even just being around even if we don't talk all the time. But I would enjoy being able to work from home while still having a workplace I needed to go to at leaat a few days a week.
Where I work, "working from home" is code for "checking email a few times during the day so it appears I'm at least somewhat engaged, while really doing very little at all yet not using a PTO day."

Too hard to get anything done when others you need to collaborate with are not there.

Yes, it only works (from the employers point of view) if the following are true:

1. the employee either genuinely enjoys the work or genuinely cares about the company

2. the employee has not become cynical about the company, even if (1) was originally true.

In most lines of work these are unlikely to be true for most people. However, software engineering can, if you're lucky, have an addictive quality and be intellectually enjoyable and intellectually meaningful. If that coincides with a decent company with decent people, then weirdly, remote working can result in people working hard away from the office. In my case, getting much more done away from the office because personally I can get nothing done in an open plan office with frequent meetings.

You left out the critical ingredient: the company has to have remote-first DNA. If they aren't set up to handle that style of employee, its going to result in a hire that feels isolated and who will very probably experience being passed over for anything interesting. Remote-first implies all kinds of things, up to and including having slack convos with someone sitting one desk over, and most companies just don't care enough to put the effort in to make a truly remote friendly workplace.
While I will agree that "working from home" can often be codewords for fucking around and slacking off, one day I actually work at home I usually get more done than in a good week at the office.
Working remote is a perk. I don't see anything wrong with a negotiation based around perks vs income.

There are extremes and exceptions, of course, but the base assumption seems reasonable to me.

It’s possible they are considering cost of living (e.g. you can live “as well” nowhere near Silicon Valley on half the salary, depending). If that were true though, they should also be expecting to “up” their offer if you were remoting from downtown Manhattan or something.

Ultimately, you decide if the offer is what you wanted.

It's entirely subjective. To some people it is a perk, to others it is a downside. If you don't consider it a perk, I would say so. Tell him that you appreciate the flexibility, but don't consider remote work to be an advantage.
> They replied, "Can you consider coming down since this is a remote position?"

It's a perk in the sense that you're not paying bay area rents. If you're in a high CoL area and want to say, applying to remote positions is an uphill battle, as the chief reason most companies want to look remote is to expand their recruiting reach without raising wages, and hoping to lower them.

In some situations it would be said you are being too literal?

Sometimes when people negotiate they say "can you do x because y" where y is just a plausible way to ask for x.

It is often more graceful than just saying "we don't want to pay that much."

im not following, can you explain what you mean a little more thoroughly?
I think whiddershins means the "since it's a remote position" part of the argument is just a smokescreen, and that they really just mean "can you come down on price". Perhaps the OP should call their bluff and offer to work on-site.
He's saying that saying "can you do X because Y" sometimes is just another way of asking "can you do X". So in this case, them asking for the OP to lower salary may have nothing to do with the position being remote, even though that's what they said.

This is a common negotiation tactic. If you give someone _any_ reason when making a request, they are more likely to comply, even if that reason doesn't make sense.

Small example, at a coffee shop: "Can I cut in line?" might get a negative response, but "can I cut in line, I am late to pick up my son from school" is much more likely to get a positive response. I don't have a link, but there have been studies to show that even nonsensical justifications are more likely to get positive responses. "Can I cut in line, my grandmother is watching TV" is more effective than no justification at all.

In this case, by connecting the salary reduction to a feature of the job (remote), it makes it more acceptable to comply with the request than if it didn't have a reason attached.

Work is something you do, not a place you're at.

The only good reason for an employer to require you to be at a specific place is if there are some levers or buttons there that needs to be pulled or pushed.

As computers start to code themselves, remote work will become essential as people (in theory) will have more time to live their day to day lives. But remote working is not that big a perk per se. What is modern work going to be about when it is just metrics and data? we need to rebuild a lot of communities and networks with our new (hopefully) time rich societies.
You got shadowbanned. I'm vouching for you because you seem to be an earnestly new account.
No, working remotely isn't a perk, it's simply: work.

[Use of the term "telecommuting" seems like another common giveaway, where and when it appears.]

The teams I've worked with have never had difficulty with communicating and collaborating, meeting deadlines and "innovating," and I highly doubt that we're all ninjas (because surely I am not).

Typical was my last position: I never clocked in from 9-5, usually from the early morning hours until late at night, to provide time zone coverage and purely out of interest and the desire to be a contributing member of the team, with several breaks included for meals, exercise, etc. Flexibility meant I was more likely to contribute, rather than less. (So many entities fail to understand this basic human dynamic. Instead create a prison, and watch how the inmates adapt and behave.)

I'm mostly able to control my environment, which means a quiet space in which to work, free from the distractions of my cube-dwelling days (though at least those had walls).

It's simply natural to work together remotely at this point, and I frequently notice how it provides companies with other tangible benefits, which I think some fail to consider.

I'd say some are trapped in a twentieth century mindset, but perhaps we're stuck here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Factory_system.

Yeah, I'm definitely like that at times too. Give 4 solid hours, take long break, then gun it when I'm at my most focused, which is often after 6pm.
My company recently went through a merger and did the typical rearranging of deck chairs, including renaming things arbitrarily. My department is commercial products (mobile apps). The new name for this department?

"Agile Build Factory"

They're literally telling us we're factory workers to them. My objections to this name were met with blinks and hand waves.

"Agile Build Factory"

Love it. Management probably thinks it is "cool, hip and edgy"

Maybe they could rename it to the Dynamic Agile Factory Team.
It’s not a perk at all in 2018, IMO, except perhaps for some logistical issues you might personally have (eg dealing with your kids, etc). I speak from experience. If you are maintaining full-on focus, as you said, you’re only saving the company money. Every point you’ve made here is valid.

Working “remotely” actually puts the entire burden of managing an office and managing deadlines squarely on your shoulders.

EDIT: I mean managing your own deadlines of course

Your intuition is right that you shouldn’t come down because it’s remote unless that is an optional accommodation for them. It’s not like they would offer you the same position without the remote option for a higher rate. Your rate is based on the sum total value they can offer, right? It sounds like a poor negotiation tactic on their part.
I've been remote for a few years. I've negotiated remote offers from many bay area a companies. This is a pretty standard piece of hr bullshit you should ignore. The correct answer is to hold your ground.

If for some reason that doesn't work out, you've discovered that the company values you less based on your zip code which is something you definitely want to find out before you're relying on them for your livelyhood.

Paying market prices for employees is a great way to cut costs and optimize profits by exploiting workers' living arrangements. If someone lives in a market where there is very little job competition, and their cost of living is low, pay them less money! Your business will save money, and it's more fair to your workers who live in more expensive neighborhoods.

^ This is basically the rationale I imagine when people pay the same worker less money just because of where they live. They obviously could hire someone local and would pay them more money. But they want to hire you. But they also think they can get away with screwing you on compensation, because you're remote. They save money and they get an employee. It's a win-win for them.

Fuck. That. Especially because they said "Can you consider ...". Uh, no, Mr. I Just Lost All My Negotiating Power By Asking Someone To Think About My Request Rather Than Insisting On It.

Remote is not a benefit. If they had a million qualified local candidates banging down their door, they wouldn't be negotiating with you. Tell them to put up or shut up.

> Yes, I'm willing to negotiate on principal, but it has nothing to do with being remote.

Why do you even care then?

> My thinking is that it's difficult to find the type of people who has the focus and skills (focus overrides skill, I think) to really do remote work well.

Are you basing that on anything other than wild fantasy? Have you heard of eastern Europe, where tons of people will work remote for far less money?

> In return, I give full-on focused work with no cruft.

All employees are expected to give that, remote or not, whatever "with no cruft" really means.

Not a perk but as This is a specific market it all comes to the balance between number of remote Job offers in your domain and number of people looking for a remote position in your domain. Anyway if you're experimented working remote you can explain that it makes you real productive and that you see no reason to lower your fees/salary
No, it's not a "perk". This industry has plenty of jobs that can be done (and done very well) by 100% remote teams. The location of a worker should have zero negative impact on the pay arrangement.
I value working remotely because it allows me to save time and live in an area that fits my lifestyle. And it costs my company money as they need to pay my travel expenses when I do visit the office, as well as some HR and legal overhead. Many managers also find an employee's presence in the office valuable in and of itself.

I work remote full-time because it's something that I negotiated up front my with employer, but most of my team members are required to come into the office every day (or at least most days). If they work from home too often their manager will notice and "have a chat" with them eventually.

So from that perspective it definitely feels like a perk, and something that I am fine negotiating over as part of a larger compensation package.

It depends on the type of work. Working remotely with fixed hours isn't a perk. However, usually working remotely gives you significantly more control over your own time and schedule, which IMO is a huge perk.
I don't think remote work is a perk, but I do find some employers either think or feel that they can pay employees less just because they are remote. I would never work at a place like that.
They are playing you because they know you want this. Hold your ground and walk away if necessary. Remember that you have the control. Not them.
I don't consider it a perk, but at this point you'd have to pay me a lot more to come to an office. I don't think that I would (have to?) take less just because they want to hire me.

I agree that "remote work" is a skill into itself, but no matter how much I value that, I don't see how it's costing my employer anything.

If anything they ought to pay me more because they don't ave to provide my office and coffee and whatnot.

"at this point you'd have to pay me a lot more to come to an office"

So then you're saying that you will work for less to work remote, because you value it as a perk.

I suppose that any point of negotiation is a perk?

I mean, I'd work with a live band playing in the room if you'd pay me enough and give me ear plugs, so I suppose "no live music at work" is a perk? I dunno?

I find a mix of working on premise and remote the best - on premise keeps you in touch with the company and your colleagues, remote is the best to get stuff done.

They introduced it a while back at my workplace, and tbh, I would not take a job these days where remote work isn't atleast partially on the table.

Saves me between 1 and 3 hours of commute (depending ont he location).

If you'd expect me to come to the office every day... either it has to be somewhere where commuting to is really easy, or pays significantly more. And I'm not even sure I'm willing to compromise on the remote work part.

No. I get more work done at the office, and since I am fortunate to work for a company that doesn't prescribe to an open office plan, it's actually fun being at work sometimes. It's no fun working at home when there's so many cats and dogs that need hugs, Netflix shows to watch, and everything else