A company based in Atlanta has a CTO located in Colombia and a mid-level dev located in SF. Is it OK for the mid-level dev have higher comp. than the CTO?
Comp should be based on both skill and location. It doesn't make sense otherwise, else lower skilled people can't live in higher COL locations.
Compensation is always based off of location. It’s not like an employee working at the same company as you will be paid equally for the same exact position, despite living in a lower cost of living area.
It's not location, it's market rate. Why companies don't pay bay area rates in Romania if work is the same? Because they can get a line of suckers willing to do the job for less. At executive level salaries become location independent since the talent pool is much smaller.
If this dev were easily replaceable for someone cheaper, the company would have done that. It is not purely location based. Location is just a factor of market value. If you are unable to find what you need locally and have to go further at a higher rate, it is because they find value in doing so.
I never understand that question - obviously the market rate is all that matters. This is the only reason that you get paid this much in tech. It is not because someone thought that it is fair for people in tech to make more money than people in McDonalds and that working in tech in sf is worth more than doing the job in india. If you can and want to move to the better paying market do it
India
Yesterday
641
Duniya me Vishwaguru ka Danka
Tech Industry
5h
344
The new Tesla Model 3 P goes from 0-60 in 2.9 seconds
Ask Blinders
Yesterday
1427
Top red flags in guy to see before saying yes to marriage (arranged)
India
Yesterday
208
Who is more intelligent Rahul Gandhi or Donald Trump?
Tech Industry
13h
3294
11 offers to laid off[UPDATE]: 5 offers
Your compensation should be for your skill not your location like how Basecamp does it