Living in the city and getting paid more or teleworking for less?


This is not a new debate, but Mark Zuckerberg’s post-pandemic strategy has put him back at the centre of the conversation: Facebook will allow its workers to telework permanently. But employees who leave San Francisco – one of the world’s most expensive cities – and move to cheaper locations will have their pay adjusted accordingly. In the face of a foreseeable increase in teleworking after the coronavirus, is it feasible for this wage logic to be imposed? According to the experts, at present it is not legally possible to establish different salaries for the same task, but when (if) teleworking is regulated, a certain wage flexibility could be included depending on the area of residence.


Only three months ago, very few would have considered this question. Surely by now more than one has thought about teleworking and going to population centres further away from cities where life is much cheaper (housing above all, but also transport, schools…) and maybe in many aspects the quality of life too, to start with the quality of the air or that you save many hours a week on transport to work and back home.

Many companies in big cities already have plans on the table to reduce square meters of office space and encourage teleworking with the savings it brings. However, there is one issue that could be changed and possibly tip the balance in favour of teleworking – why telework for less? The debate is open …


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here