Ask HN: Why do so many companies hire only local? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Why do so many companies hire only local?

6 pointsbendauphinee10 comments

I've noticed that most tech companies, when they do post for new hires, are looking for someone in X area.

I've been a contractor for several companies, and I can say that my performance has always been praised. In all cases, I have not worked on site, or even locally for some. This does not impact my ability to perform, and in fact may sometimes enhance it, since I don't have people wandering by to disturb me.

For those of you who deal with hiring, what influences you to only look locally, and not for remote workers?

View on HN

I've managed workers in different countries. I can confirm that it takes much, much more communication to keep remote workers "in the loop" and energized. It wouldn't appear that way at first glance (the distraction and needless meetings skipped).

Tech companies are run by people. They want to be understood and have an ongoing dialogue, as things develop very rapidly. Many decisions are reached at lunch/bathroom breaks/bar which is naturally inclusive of local talent (meaning you don't have to really explain much, as others will carry the message for you vs remote)

One missed point, cities have personalities or rather a group of people predisposed to certain ideas. You have just a little more certainty understanding who you are hiring when you have a vague sense of which (cities/communities) they are chosen. It's small, but makes a huge difference when trying to create momentum in a company.

Tasks will be outsourced...team members won't. As the tech scene continues and the high transitional cost of tech talent continues...i think more employers will want a little more 'buy in".....we know can do the job as well....that's not really the question.

In addition to the general workday communication issues, there are individual income tax issues, as well as benefits issues. The company now has to do payroll tax in another state, and find a health care plan in the employee's state. This is often not worth the expense for a small company.

Furthermore, location of an employee in another state may establish a tax nexus in that state (depends on the state), causing the company to have to pay income taxes in that state. This is generally not worth it for a company of any size.

If you're a telecommuter, you are generally best off by trying to work for an enlightened huge company that already has offices everywhere, or doing corp-to-corp consulting.

As an employee yes, but as a contractor no. I'm Canadian, and working for an American corp. It was actually easier for them to get me working, rather than an employee.

I think it's actually easier to hire someone overseas because there are no interstate tax or benefits issues.

There are a few reasons as to why most companies are only looking to hire local candidates. The first one is that companies are familiar with the area they're in, they know which colleges have better cs programs, they know which smaller companies had an impact in the area, and which ones they should avoid on resumes.

Another is simply that when you extend an offer to a candidate the company has already invested massive amounts of time and money in the interview process. Candidates are more likely to balk at accepting an offer out of state once they really start thinking about leaving whatever area they've called home for the last 3+ years.

Also in regards to telecommuting, you may be able to do that well but I can assure you that there are more remote workers who do it poorly.

All of that being said, some folks are able to make a good living moving around and doing contracts and remote work. You should be aware though, that if you hope to one day land a permanent position at a reputable company after years and years of contracting you're going to have a much harder time than someone who has worked multiple permanent roles.

I find it really dumb, considering these are tech companies. Yes the bandwidth is higher in person but it's a professional arrangement, not a marriage. It's just 19th century thinking honestly.

I think sooner than later companies who learn to accept distributed teams will have an edge over those which don't.

You just need to trust your employees more and have an internet connection.

I've never hired an employee, but I'd imagine that they're looking for someone to be a member of the team so to speak.

Contract work is when you need a certain task or objective done. But being a team member may involve driving new ideas, working with others, etc. That sort of stuff requires a lot of communication that can't be done by Skype or email.

Being on contract doesn't prevent any of that. I've pushed a few new ideas, and built out an entire new system. In fact, my current contract has considered having me on board such a success that they've hired two new contractors (I was their first experience with this).

I feel like a lot of the time a remote worker may come on strong at the beginning of an assignment and slowly drift away, as the lack of constant direction and team involvement causes them to become bored and distracted. This is something I'm actively trying to fix because finding good local workers can be very hard if you aren't in SF or NYC.

I think it's a matter of personality and also the ability of the company to identify which team members can work remotely. While it feels "safe" to keep somebody under constant supervision, it doesn't necessarily make them more productive. Less experienced people tend to need more hand-holding, which can be a factor in adopting a remote employee model.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com