[jbroman]

This is consistent with what major tech companies do today when an employee relocates (or are simply hired in a less pricey region).

Whether or not you agree that employees should be paid differently depending on cost of living where they reside, it isn't new.

[Traster]

What I'm interested in is that it's quite difficult today to find out how much you would be paid when you relocate. You need to jump through a lot of hoops to get the move approved in principle before you find out your new compensation. With this new system it should theoretically be fine to relocate anywhere, so if it is then you'd want to find out how much each area pays before you decide to move. Which means suddenly you know that guy who chose to go live in downtown SF is getting paid 1.4x more than you for the same job. The same is true today obviously, most big offices are in different areas and have different pay scales, but it's generally not as well known by the employees what those scales are.

[AmericanChopper]

This sort of scaling is simply a (rather flimsy) cover for the natural consequences of moving to remote work. If employees in the large metros have to start competing with workers from everywhere else, the salaries are going to start falling. A worker in rural Mississippi is going to expect a much lower salary than an equivalently skilled worker in Palo Alto, and a worker in Manila would expect even less again. Remote work puts significant downward pressure on salaries. This is simply an attempt to offset that. But if you think a hiring manager faced with having to choose between hiring somebody on a big metro salary vs a small rural one is going to be completely uninfluenced, then I’ve got news for you...

[meowtimemania]

honestly as a front end dev, I don’t think what I do is that difficult and I’m overpaid. I feel a little nervous that with remote work I won’t be overpaid in the future