Ensuring Fairness In Remote Work Opportunities

Where Should You Anchor Pay for Remote Workers? It’s Not One-Size-Fits-All. As remote and hybrid work evolves from temporary solutions into long-term strategies, a critical compensation question keeps rising to the surface: What market data should you use to anchor pay grade midpoints for remote roles? Let’s break down the most common approaches and the pros and cons of each: #1 - National Median Pros: Easy to manage, creates consistency across geographies, supports broad talent pools. Cons: May be misaligned with local labor markets. You risk overpaying or underpaying employees in some locations. #2 - Headquarters-Based Market Data Pros: Simple to integrate with existing structures, supports cross-team pay equity when most teams are HQ-based. Cons: Can create fairness issues when remote workers live in quite different cost-of-labor areas. #3 - Actual Work Location Pros: Most aligned with local market competitiveness. Cons: Adds complexity, can create wide pay disparities, and complicates mobility. #4 - Tiered or Geo-Zone Models (e.g., high/medium/low cost of labor zones) Pros: Balances market alignment with administrative simplicity; easier to communicate than fully localized pay. Cons: Needs clear governance and careful design to avoid confusion or resentment. #5 - Closest Company Office Pros: Provides a geographic anchor that aligns with internal structure and local norms. Cons: May not reflect actual labor market where the employee lives and works; potential mismatch for very remote areas. #6 - Same Range for Remote and In-Office Roles Pros: Promotes internal equity, simplifies administration, and aligns with values of flexibility and fairness. Cons: Can be costly in low-cost areas, and may not reflect local market rates which can in turn create recruiting challenges. Why it matters: Your midpoint strategy isn’t just a technical decision. It reflects your values, cost structure, and talent strategy. As remote work normalizes, your pay anchoring approach will shape perceptions of fairness, influence mobility, and impact long-term workforce planning. Document your anchoring logic, communicate it clearly to leaders and employees, and revisit it annually to ensure continued alignment. What approach is working best for your employer? #Compensation #RemoteWork #PayTransparency #TotalRewards #HR #HumanResources #PayEquity #FairPay #JobArchitecture #FutureOfWork #GeoPay #CompensationConsultant #SHRM #WorldatWork

The "If, Then" leadership style has come back in remote and hybrid work decisions. Here's why it doesn't work and what people leaders can do to get it right. It is that old formula: If you prove you’re more productive, then you get flexibility. The problem? This isn’t leadership. It’s a warranty policy, and it’s got cracks. If you treat people like adults, then they will treat your mission like theirs. If you lead with trust, then the future of work is yours to own. We’ve seen this play out before, even pre-pandemic. There were two flavors of this with different outcomes. The learnings give us insights for success. _______________ Flavor 1. Large established companies flavor. It wasn't clear who got approved for remote work and why. Those who were lucky to get it often became second-class citizens. They faced a persistent need to justify their worth. They had to step up more than their colleagues who were in the office. They were often passed over for promotions and key roles. This was a failure of leadership. It did not build high-performing teams with a strong culture. They lost top talent. _______________ Flavor 2. Startups that were nimble and forward-thinking. They asked, "What if we make remote work the foundation of our growth? We could fund ourselves for longer. If we set clear expectations, accountability, and support for distributed teams, we can make it work. We won't be tied to one location or locked in talent wars in overcrowded cities. And guess what? They thrived. _______________ Here’s the so what for people leaders today: The if-then warranty policy isn’t going to cut it. Three steps to get it right: 1️⃣ Set clear, shared goals with your team. These need to be outcomes for the team to achieve. 2️⃣ Empower your team to set flexible work norms. They should suit both individuals and the team. They should help deliver the desired outcomes. Good people make things work for their teammates. This helps build psychological safety as well. 3️⃣ Be transparent about accountability. Provide real-time feedback if things go off course. Adjust as needed. We can't take flexibility and results for granted. What you will achieve: Your team will not just meet expectations—they will out perform.

8 in 10 companies are losing talent to RTO mandates. Yet 41% of employees would actively job hunt if forced back five days a week. The numbers tell a story most leaders aren't ready to hear. Today we analyzed emerging patterns in the Future of Work landscape at PeopleAtom, and what we discovered challenges everything we thought we knew about office returns. (Also today we cover Stripe culture scale story as a swipe file on our LinkedIn page do check out)... Ok back to office tea... The Uncomfortable Truths: → Stealth Layoffs in Disguise Companies are weaponizing RTO policies as "attrition by policy" → forcing voluntary resignations without severance costs. The real agenda isn't collaboration; it's headcount reduction. → Proximity Bias is the New Inequality Physical presence = career advancement. Remote workers face systematic disadvantage in promotions, recognition, and opportunities ↳ creating a two-tier workforce that undermines diversity and inclusion efforts. → Location Isn't the Problem Dissatisfaction remains high across ALL work models → remote, hybrid, and in-person. The issue isn't WHERE people work, but HOW organizations support collaboration and recognition. → Structured Hybrid Wins Companies with role-based, intentional hybrid models are outperforming rigid mandates in both retention and productivity ↳ proving that nuanced strategy beats blanket policies. 🔮 The Strategic Shift Ahead Instead of fighting the where, smart leaders are reimagining the how: ↳ Anchor Days Strategy → Designate specific collaboration-intensive days when teams converge ↳ Office as Social Infrastructure → Transform office time into high-value experiences, not attendance theater ↳ Role-Based Flexibility → Customize expectations by function, not hierarchy ↳ Proximity Bias Training → Equip managers to recognize and counter favoritism toward in-office staff The future belongs to organizations that see flexibility as competitive advantage, not operational burden. Those still treating this as a binary choice will watch their best talent walk to competitors who've cracked the code. This complexity is exactly why we're building PeopleAtom → a network where CXOs share intelligence on challenges like this. If you're a CXO - CEO, CIO, CHRO.... navigating these strategic decisions, join our network → we're connecting leaders who are shaping the future of work, not just reacting to it. Love the strategic implications of this shift, Joe Have a fab week ahead!