HOW TO PAY
REMOTE WORKERS

HOW TO PAY REMOTE
WORKERS

The future of work is shifting to include more remote work opportunities, but do you know how to
pay remote workers? PayScale has the data and compensation management software you need to align your compensation strategy in support of an increasingly distributed workforce.

The future of work is shifting to include more remote work opportunities, but do you know how to pay remote workers? PayScale has the data and compensation management software you need to align your compensation strategy in support of an increasingly distributed workforce.

DOWNLOAD THE WHITEPAPER

The Future of Work is
Remote…What does
That Mean for Pay?

The Future of Work is Remote…
What does That
Mean for Pay?

In the future, more employees will work from home. That was a certainty before 2020, as the data has been trending in the direction of increased remote work opportunities for years. However, following the coronavirus pandemic, remote work opportunities are set to explode. Where businesses were once reluctant to offer remote work, many are now scrambling to make remote work opportunities permanent.

But do you know how to pay remote workers? The answer to this question is complicated, in part because remote work is being adopted for a variety of strategic reasons. Some organizations hope to attract top talent with flexible work opportunities. Others hope to tap into a workforce they were previously not considering. Still others are viewing remote work as a potential cost savings mechanism.

Although all of these reasons are valid, getting pay right for remote workers is trickier than it might appear at first glance. There are several strategies. Should you compensate workers according to where the business is located, where employees are located, or against the national median for a specific position? Is it unfair if team members contributing the same value on the same project are paid differently based on where they live? Does cost of living matter and can you use a cost of living adjustment to calculate pay for a remote position in an area where you don’t have market data?

In the future, more employees will work from home. That was a certainty before 2020, as the data has been trending in the direction of increased remote work opportunities for years. However, following the coronavirus pandemic, remote work opportunities are set to explode. Where businesses were once reluctant to offer remote work, many are now scrambling to make remote work opportunities permanent.

But do you know how to pay remote workers? The answer to this question is complicated, in part because remote work is being adopted for a variety of strategic reasons. Some organizations hope to attract top talent with flexible work opportunities. Others hope to tap into a workforce they were previously not considering. Still others are viewing remote work as a potential cost savings mechanism.

Although all of these reasons are valid, getting pay right for remote workers is trickier than it might appear at first glance. There are several strategies. Should you compensate workers according to where the business is located, where employees are located, or against the national median for a specific position? Is it unfair if team members contributing the same value on the same project are paid differently based on where they live? Does cost of living matter and can you use a cost of living adjustment to calculate pay for a remote position in an area where you don’t have market data?

The answers aren’t necessarily simple. Getting pay right for remote workers requires a thoughtful and well-articulated approach to compensation — not just for remote workers, but in general. Indeed, without a compensation strategy articulating the purpose and process for setting pay for workers, remote or otherwise, an organization is at risk for paying workers unequally, unfairly, or noncompetitively.

To get at the right compensation strategy for how to pay remote workers, you’ll need salary data, and specifically salary data for geographical areas beyond your current headquarters or office locations. Minimally, this will allow you to model different scenarios with your finance team and align on desired business outcomes.

PayScale’s compensation management software provides this data as well as a wealth of insight and reporting tools. PayScale has dedicated customer support and professional services to provide guidance and insight into what other companies in your industry are doing to help you form a compensation strategy for the future of work and get pay right.

DOWNLOAD THE WHITEPAPER

The answers aren’t necessarily simple. Getting pay right for remote workers requires a thoughtful and well-articulated approach to compensation — not just for remote workers, but in general. Indeed, without a compensation strategy articulating the purpose and process for setting pay for workers, remote or otherwise, an organization is at risk for paying workers unequally, unfairly, or noncompetitively.

To get at the right compensation strategy for how to pay remote workers, you’ll need salary data, and specifically salary data for geographical areas beyond your current headquarters or office locations. Minimally, this will allow you to model different scenarios with your finance team and align on desired business outcomes.

PayScale’s compensation management software provides this data as well as a wealth of insight and reporting tools. PayScale has dedicated customer support and professional services to provide guidance and insight into what other companies in your industry are doing to help you form a compensation strategy for the future of work and get pay right.

DOWNLOAD THE WHITEPAPER

Remote Work Has
Been Trending Up
for Years

The outbreak of Covid-19 didn’t start the trend toward remote work, but it has accelerated it. According to PayScale’s Compensation Best Practices Report, remote work has been growing in popularity as part of an organization’s benefits and total rewards package year over year.

Although the option to work from home has been growing in popularity, only 3.6 percent of the total employee workforce currently works remotely half-time or more. However, 25-30 percent of the workforce is estimated to work from home multiple days a week by the end of 2021.

Fortunately, employees are largely in favor of remote work opportunities. 80 percent of employees want to be able to work from home. It is employers who have approached remote work skeptically — at least until recently when social distancing to flatten the curve from the Covid-19 pandemic forced the issue.

Employers are now realizing that remote work is not less productive than work in an office. Indeed, there is a positive correlation in increased productivity associated with working from home. According to a recent survey from Global Workplace Analytics, employees are productive 75 percent of the time they are working from home compared to 63 percent of the time in the office. Another way to look at it is that employees are distracted 78 minutes of the day in an office and only 43 minutes in the day when working from home.

Remote Work Popularity
Remote Work Popularity

Balcony-Girl

80-percent-of-the-US
3.6-percent-of-US
51-of-U.S.-workers
56-of-the-U.S.-work
43-of-the-U.S
86-of-people-feel
80-of-U.S.-workers
24-of-U.S.-employee
90-of-employees-fee
25-lower-turnover
80-of-the-U.S
3.6-of-the-U.S
51-of-U.S.-workers
56-of-the-U.S
43-of-the-U.S.-work
86-of-people-feel
80-of-U.S.
24-of-U.S.-employee
90-of-employees-fee
25-lower-turnover

Does a Remote Workforce Equate to Cost Savings?

According to a Gartner survey from March of 2020, 74 percent of CFOs want to transition at least 5 percent of the workforce to permanently remote positions. 25 percent of respondents want to shift 20 percent of the workforce to permanent remote positions. The objective of a distributed workforce is ostensibly to decrease payroll expenses. However, CFOs shouldn’t assume that a remote work strategy will save their organization money. This is why the question of how to pay remote workers is so important to get right.

Our research into salary data reveals that remote workers are actually paid more than people who work in an office. Currently, the national median pay for remote workers in the United States is $48,500 annually. Remote workers make 8.3 percent more than non-remote workers with the same experience doing the same job (controlled) and 7.5 percent more than non-remote workers generally (uncontrolled).

Remote Work Pay vs. Non-Remote Work Pay

Controlled-Remote-Work
Controlled-Remote-Work-Mobile

It is important to note that remote workers are not paid more because they work remotely. Rather, it is more likely that remote work opportunities currently tend to be reserved for high performers who have earned trust to work from home. Remote work opportunities are also more common in the information industry, which tends to be more highly paid than other industries.

However, this may change in the future. The coronavirus has demonstrated that more workers can be trusted to work effectively from home. As such, we may see compensation trends around remote work shift as remote work becomes ubiquitous.

Even so, CFOs shouldn’t assume that a remote workforce will necessarily result in cost savings. It certainly can, but it depends on the industry, the job position in question, and the organization’s compensation strategy and how they need to compete for talent. Of course, there are cost savings to be realized from a remote work strategy that have nothing to do with base pay, particularly as regards infrastructure. For example, businesses could save money by shrinking their office space, reducing or eliminating commuter benefits, and reducing expenses associated with workplace meals and other perks that are attractive benefits in an onsite work environment.

Controlled-Remote-Work
Controlled-Remote-Work-Mobile
Uncontrolled-Remote-Work-Mobile

It is important to note that remote workers are not paid more because they work remotely. Rather, it is more likely that remote work opportunities currently tend to be reserved for high performers who have earned trust to work from home. Remote work opportunities are also more common in the information industry, which tends to be more highly paid than other industries.

However, this may change in the future. The coronavirus has demonstrated that more workers can be trusted to work effectively from home. As such, we may see compensation trends around remote work shift as remote work becomes ubiquitous.

Even so, CFOs shouldn’t assume that a remote workforce will necessarily result in cost savings. It certainly can, but it depends on the industry, the job position in question, and the organization’s compensation strategy and how they need to compete for talent. Of course, there are cost savings to be realized from a remote work strategy that have nothing to do with base pay, particularly as regards infrastructure. For example, businesses could save money by shrinking their office space, reducing or eliminating commuter benefits, and reducing expenses associated with workplace meals and other perks that are attractive benefits in an onsite work environment.

Uncontrolled-Remote-Work

Then again, organizations may find that there are new expenses associated with supporting a remote workforce that were not expected when employees work in an office. This could include providing employees with:

  • Computers, monitors or other home office equipment
  • Stipends for internet connectivity
  • Upskilling or reskilling to help employees thrive in a remote work environment
  • Collaboration software and other cloud-based technology
  • Programs to create and maintain culture outside of an office
  • New or increased security measures and training
  • Technology for employees to “check in” work or to monitor employee productivity
  • Travel stipends to support in-person events or workshops

In other words, cost savings associated with a remote workforce needs to be budgeted for based on the organization’s compensation strategy, talent strategy, and the needs of the workforce. To do this, HR will need access to as much data as possible — including salary data — that allows them to model different scenarios for the CFO.

Uncontrolled-Remote-Work

Then again, organizations may find that there are new expenses associated with supporting a remote workforce that were not expected when employees work in an office. This could include providing employees with:

  • Computers, monitors or other home office equipment
  • Stipends for internet connectivity
  • Upskilling or reskilling to help employees thrive in a remote work environment
  • Collaboration software and other cloud-based technology
  • Programs to create and maintain culture outside of an office
  • New or increased security measures and training
  • Technology for employees to “check in” work or to monitor employee productivity
  • Travel stipends to support in-person events or workshops

In other words, cost savings associated with a remote workforce needs to be budgeted for based on the organization’s compensation strategy, talent strategy, and the needs of the workforce. To do this, HR will need access to as much data as possible — including salary data — that allows them to model different scenarios for the CFO.

Remote Worker Compensation by
Industry and Occupation

Although remote workers earn more than non-remote workers at the national median, the results are mixed when analyzing remote worker pay across industry and occupation. This data can be useful to organizations evaluating how to pay remote workers as it can indicate trends in workers who expect to earn the same or more when working from home and workers who might be willing to take a pay cut for the convenience of working from home based on their industry or occupation.

Generally speaking, we see that remote workers in highly professional, white collar industries receive higher pay relative to non-remote workers while other industries see modest decreases in pay for remote work. The more skilled and educated the profession, the more likely pay for remote workers will be higher compared to non-remote workers. For example, industries where remote workers receive higher pay include Agencies & Consultancies, Engineering & Science, Finance & Insurance, and Information Technology.

The exception is Healthcare, where remote workers are highly educated but earn nearly 19 percent less when working remote for the uncontrolled group and 0.4 percent less in the controlled group. Industries such as Construction, Energy and Utilities, Retail and Customer Service or Transportation and Warehousing also see lower pay associated with remote work positions, possibly because the core positions within these industries are required to interact with patients, customers, equipment, or teams onsite and where remote workers may be viewed as receiving special accommodation or benefit in exchange for reduced pay.

The same general trend is seen at the occupation level. Highly educated white-collar positions requiring unique professional skills see higher pay for remote workers versus non-remote workers, especially in the uncontrolled group. The highest paid remote work occupations are in Technology, Marketing & Advertising, Sales, Architecture & Engineering, Accounting & Finance and Human Resources. In the uncontrolled group, the highest paid remote workers in comparison to non-remote workers are in occupations related to Sales, Marketing & Advertising, Information Technology, Media & Publishing, and Human Resources. In the controlled group, the highest paid remote workers in comparison to non-remote workers are in Media & Publishing, Marketing & Advertising, Sales, Information Technology, and Human Resources.

Again, healthcare practitioners who work remote earn considerably less (12 percent) than non-remote healthcare practitioners in the uncontrolled group with no benefit to working remote in the controlled group. Occupations to experience a modest reduction in pay for working remote include Administrative & Clerical roles, Construction, Installation, Maintenance & Repair, Manufacturing & Production, Retail and Transportation. Generally, these are occupations where most positions must be onsite at least part of the time and where remote work may be a rare or special accommodation or more commonly seen with lesser valued positions.

Top Strategies for
How to Pay Remote
Workers

Knowing the national median by industry and occupation for remote workers compared to non-remote workers can help your organization form a general strategy around how to pay remote workers, but it can’t tell you what to pay workers in specific positions that may be remote or how transitioning certain positions to remote work will impact payroll. To do that, you first have to develop a compensation strategy for remote employees that aligns to your compensation strategy as an organization in general.

Each of these strategies has strengths and weaknesses. Selecting the best strategy and getting pay right in alignment with that strategy will depend on your overall compensation strategy to attract and retain talent, the job title in question, location, industry, and the size of your organization — often in that order. For specific information about the pros and cons of each strategy as well as examples, download our whitepaper.

DOWNLOAD THE WHITEPAPER

There are a limited number of options to go about determining how to pay remote workers:

Employers-Location-Icon

Base Remote Worker Pay
on the Employer’s Location

Employers-Location-Icon

Base Remote Worker Pay
on the Employer’s Location

Employees-Location-Icon

Base Remote Worker Pay
on the Employee’s Location

Employees-Location-Icon

Base Remote Worker Pay
on the Employee’s Location

National-Medium-Icon

Base Remote Worker Pay
on a National Median

National-Medium-Icon

Base Remote Worker Pay
on a National Median

Don’t Use Cost of Living
Alone to Adjust
Compensation

One strategy for how to set pay for remote workers is to apply a cost-of-living adjustment, or COLA, to a position in a new location based on a benchmarked salary range for a location where you currently have market data. However, this is not a best practice.

Cost of living is calculated based on the Consumer Price Index, which measures the average change over time in prices for consumer goods in an urban market. You can use PayScale’s COLA calculator to see how moving a position to a new city will impact the purchasing power of that employee.

One strategy for how to set pay for remote workers is to apply a cost-of-living adjustment, or COLA, to a position in a new location based on a benchmarked salary range for a location where you currently have market data. However, this is not a best practice.

Cost of living is calculated based on the Consumer Price Index, which measures the average change over time in prices for consumer goods in an urban market. You can use PayScale’s COLA calculator to see how moving a position to a new city will impact the purchasing power of that employee.

Unfortunately, basing remote work compensation on cost of living will almost assuredly result in overpayment or underpayment for a position. For example, an organization based in San Francisco and considering a customer service center in Milwaukee may calculate the cost of living in Milwaukee as 46 percent less than San Francisco and conclude that salaries for employees living in Milwaukee should be 46 percent less than salaries in San Francisco. However, this conclusion would be erroneous.

Setting compensation based on COLA can seem logical and be tempting to organizations that do not have dedicated expertise in compensation management or lack the necessary data to effectively research salaries in new markets. The consumer price index or the cost of real estate in one area compared to another does not equate to what a specific job is worth in a specific market. Using COLA to calculate salary adjustments is therefore likely to be off the mark.

Let’s look at a few examples. We took some of the most common remote work positions and compared the national median for each position according to PayScale’s Crowdsourced data to the median of that job in a specific metro city using PayScale’s Crowdsourced data as well as the corresponding COLA adjustment. As you can see, the median pay for a position differs by metro area and does not correspond to COLA. Adjusting pay according to cost of living, especially in a major metro area compared to the national median (note: PayScale’s Crowdsourced data includes more rural markets and smaller company sizes than traditional surveys), tends to result in significantly higher pay.

Unfortunately, basing remote work compensation on cost of living will almost assuredly result in overpayment or underpayment for a position. For example, an organization based in San Francisco and considering a customer service center in Milwaukee may calculate the cost of living in Milwaukee as 46 percent less than San Francisco and conclude that salaries for employees living in Milwaukee should be 46 percent less than salaries in San Francisco. However, this conclusion would be erroneous.

Setting compensation based on COLA can seem logical and be tempting to organizations that do not have dedicated expertise in compensation management or lack the necessary data to effectively research salaries in new markets. The consumer price index or the cost of real estate in one area compared to another does not equate to what a specific job is worth in a specific market. Using COLA to calculate salary adjustments is therefore likely to be off the mark.

Let’s look at a few examples. We took some of the most common remote work positions and compared the national median for each position according to PayScale’s Crowdsourced data to the median of that job in a specific metro city using PayScale’s Crowdsourced data as well as the corresponding COLA adjustment. As you can see, the median pay for a position differs by metro area and does not correspond to COLA. Adjusting pay according to cost of living, especially in a major metro area compared to the national median (note: PayScale’s Crowdsourced data includes more rural markets and smaller company sizes than traditional surveys), tends to result in significantly higher pay.

*The data in this chart is based on PayScale Crowdsourced Data. PayScale also provides Company-Sourced Data and access to Third-Party Market Surveys for a full and validated view of pay ranges for any position in just about any market.

NOTE: COLA tends to be used in the compensation industry to refer to pay adjustments (raises) that are not actually based on the consumer price index or salary market data. Many organizations will budget yearly salary increases of 2 or 3 percent and refer to it as a cost of living adjustment (COLA) without actually researching how cost of living has increased by geographical area or how the competitiveness of a specific job has changed in a specific area. Organizations with a more mature approach to compensation management will research salary data for each of their job families within a given market on a regular basis and recommend pay increases based on this data with the corresponding pay communications that explain why it is an appropriate adjustment based on market changes and their budget.

Taking A Holistic
Approach to
Setting Pay for
Remote Workers

At PayScale, we talk a lot about the importance of paying employees according to the market. Generally, this is a smart approach to compensation management that ensures employees are paid fairly according to all compensable factors, of which geographic differentials is a major one (and which our Differentials Engine would support in setting pay for remote workers).

However, there are some valid criticisms to paying to location when applied to remote work. For example, you may not want to invest in a compensation strategy where workers providing the same value in the same job are paid differenty than employees who work in more or less expensive locations. This is particularly concerning at the hyper local level where employees might be threatened with pay cuts for living in a suburb versus living in a city, but it can also impact teams that are distributed nationally or globally depending on how compensation is determined and how the strategy is communicated to employees.

Providing higher compensation to employees who live in more expensive areas could also widen the wealth gap and even come to be viewed as a type of discrimination. This is especially true for organizations looking to save on payroll expenses by issuing pay cuts to workers who live in less expensive zip codes.

At the same time, it is impossible to deny that some positions are more competitive in some areas of the country than others and that cost of living is a factor in making sure pay is competitive enough to attract top talent. After all, people work to live and living expenses vary depending on location. This is even more exacerbated at the global level. Therefore, using a national median for compensation regardless of employee location may not be an effective strategy for more competitive positions in competitive markets. Minimum wage laws will also force employers to pay employees more in some locations than others.

At PayScale, we talk a lot about the importance of paying employees according to the market. Generally, this is a smart approach to compensation management that ensures employees are paid fairly according to all compensable factors, of which geographic differentials is a major one (and which our Differentials Engine would support in setting pay for remote workers).

However, there are some valid criticisms to paying to location when applied to remote work. For example, you may not want to invest in a compensation strategy where workers providing the same value in the same job are paid differenty than employees who work in more or less expensive locations. This is particularly concerning at the hyper local level where employees might be threatened with pay cuts for living in a suburb versus living in a city, but it can also impact teams that are distributed nationally or globally depending on how compensation is determined and how the strategy is communicated to employees.

Providing higher compensation to employees who live in more expensive areas could also widen the wealth gap and even come to be viewed as a type of discrimination. This is especially true for organizations looking to save on payroll expenses by issuing pay cuts to workers who live in less expensive zip codes.

At the same time, it is impossible to deny that some positions are more competitive in some areas of the country than others and that cost of living is a factor in making sure pay is competitive enough to attract top talent. After all, people work to live and living expenses vary depending on location. This is even more exacerbated at the global level. Therefore, using a national median for compensation regardless of employee location may not be an effective strategy for more competitive positions in competitive markets. Minimum wage laws will also force employers to pay employees more in some locations than others.

When determining how to pay remote workers, it is therefore important to think about compensation holistically. You should consider the difference between equal pay, fair pay and competitive pay as these are not always the same and some strategies may not entice the talent you are looking to attract.

Equal Pay ≠ Fair Pay ≠ Competitive Pay

For example, paying the national median for a specific job regardless of location will allow you to pay workers equally, but that may not be enough to attract and retain competitive talent if you are wanting to hire highly educated and uniquely skilled candidates living in expensive cities. Even if your positions are less specialized, your pay philosophy and compensation strategy should align to the values of your business and talent acquistion and retention goals. For example, you may want to make sure you are paying a living wage rather than minimum wage if you want your compensation to be viewed as fair and not just equalized.

Many organizations are grappling with these questions for the first time as they try to navigate how to pay remote workers. Organizations with a mature approach to compensation will try to balance the going rate of human capital with a philosophy that constitutes fair and competitive pay for their business. But the opportunity is bigger than cost savings. The shift to remote work is also an opportunity to tap into a workforce that has been hitherto underutilized, to recruit from a larger pool of talent, to diversify the workforce, and to offer more flexibility and work/life balance to employees.

When determining how to pay remote workers, it is therefore important to think about compensation holistically. You should consider the difference between equal pay, fair pay and competitive pay as these are not always the same and some strategies may not entice the talent you are looking to attract.

Equal Pay ≠ Fair Pay ≠ Competitive Pay

For example, paying the national median for a specific job regardless of location will allow you to pay workers equally, but that may not be enough to attract and retain competitive talent if you are wanting to hire highly educated and uniquely skilled candidates living in expensive cities. Even if your positions are less specialized, your pay philosophy and compensation strategy should align to the values of your business and talent acquistion and retention goals. For example, you may want to make sure you are paying a living wage rather than minimum wage if you want your compensation to be viewed as fair and not just equalized.

Many organizations are grappling with these questions for the first time as they try to navigate how to pay remote workers. Organizations with a mature approach to compensation will try to balance the going rate of human capital with a philosophy that constitutes fair and competitive pay for their business. But the opportunity is bigger than cost savings. The shift to remote work is also an opportunity to tap into a workforce that has been hitherto underutilized, to recruit from a larger pool of talent, to diversify the workforce, and to offer more flexibility and work/life balance to employees.

Product-Screenshot

Product-Screenshot

Get Pay Right for
Remote Workers
with PayScale’s
Compensation
Software

Compensation is a critical and strategic part of managing the workforce. The right compensation strategy can increase candidate acceptance offers, lower unproductive turnover, engage employees and motivate workers to perform at their best, especially when tied to merit raises, incentive pay and career pathing. However, many organizations do not have mature processes for managing compensation competitively or a philosophy for paying workers fairly and equitably.

The shift to remote work is causing many organizations to consider more deeply how they manage compensation and invest in market data to set compensation accurately using national medians or specific location differentials.

Compensation management software can save HR and compensation professionals considerable time and expense in getting pay right no matter where employees are located. PayScale’s suite of solutions includes three types of validated market data — Crowdsourced Data, Company Data, and traditional third party surveys — in addition to services, software and reporting tools to help customers build compensation structures and monitor compensation fairness and competitiveness over time. PayScale’s Differentials Engine gives organizations the ability to adjust pay according to both geography and hot skills with an easy-to-use interface.

CONTACT US FOR A DEMO

Interested in learning
more about how to pay
remote workers using
common compensation
strategies?

Download the Whitepaper: Formulating
a Remote Work Pay Strategy

By clicking Download Whitepaper, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

Want to know how much you should be paid? Take PayScale’s free salary survey.

Video-Call
Video-Call

Methodology

PayScale provides an analysis of median pay for remote and non-remote workers nationally and by industry and occupation, using a controlled and uncontrolled analysis to account for explained and unexplained pay differences between these groups. We also provide the cost of living adjustments for select metro areas and compare these adjustments to PayScale’s crowdsourced data to demonstrate the nuances of compensation differences by location.

Overall sample size is 473,116 profiles, looking at respondents who are specifically either remote workers (“Yes, I telecommute 100% of the time”) or non-remote workers (“No, I can’t telecommute”). Sample collected from 6/1/2018 to 05/31/2020.

DEFINITIONS

Total Cash Compensation: TCC combines base annual salary or hourly wage, bonuses, profit sharing, tips, commissions, and other forms of cash earnings, as applicable. It does not include equity (stock) compensation, cash value of retirement benefits, or value of other non-cash benefits (e.g., healthcare).

Median Pay: The median pay is the national median (50th Percentile) total cash compensation (TCC). Half the people doing the job earn more than the median, while half earn less.

Uncontrolled Median Pay: Median pay for remote and non-remote workers are examined separately. The uncontrolled median pay does not control for variables such as years of experience, education or other compensable factors. This provides a picture of the differences in wages earned by remote and non-remote workers in an absolute sense.

Controlled % Difference: This is the amount that a non-remote worker earns for every dollar that a comparable remote worker earns. That is, this is the pay difference that exists between remote and non-remote workers after we control for all measured compensable factors.

Controlled Median Pay: To illustrate the pay difference between remote and non-remote workers, we calculate this estimate of what the typical non-remote worker would earn they occupied the same position as the typical remote worker.

Industries: PayScale uses 15 industry categories that are custom aggregates of the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS).

Occupations: We report data for 22 occupations as defined by the Standard Occupational Classification System.

% COLA: This is the cost of living adjustment on median pay. A +43% COLA means a pay premium of 43% is used to demonstrate the pay difference for a location.