• randomname01@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    55
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    …and you just wouldn’t get hired, because the guy who lives next to their office is a more attractive option, even if he’s only 80% as productive as you.

    And that’s arguably why it makes some sense; companies would be more likely to hire more locally and be more flexible about remote work - both of which save precious planetary resources ánd people’s time.

    • FLemmingO@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      1 year ago

      Companies would also then be incentivized to invest in and lobby for better affordable housing in the communities their offices are located in/around so that employees at all pay scales have affordable options within a few miles of the office.

    • severien@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      I would just move temporarily, and after probation period move far away. Surely they can’t fire me because my living situation changed and had to move…

      • randomname01@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        In this hypothetical scenario this gets implemented it would certainly be standard to have a clause to protect employers against exactly that.

        • severien@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Seems kinda shitty that you basically can’t move without employer’s approval.

          Also poorer people living farther away would get discriminated.

          • randomname01@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            It’d be fair to just keep paying the same compensation you received before moving; you could still move, but you’d have to pay the price.

            And yeah, there are still a lot of problems with this approach as long as housing is left to market forces. But those problems are inherent to free markets, not to this possible solution to another problem.

      • Lazz45@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        They very much can, will, and do for much less. Welcome to an “at-will” employer. The only thing that’s illegal is discrimination