Does Working From Home Have to Mean a Lower Salary?
The flexibility of remote work doesn’t have to come at your expense
The flexibility of remote work doesn’t have to come at your expense
As return-to-the-office dates come into focus, more people are looking for new remote jobs, but many worry such a move could result in a pay cut.
Experts say a pay cut isn’t a given—but individuals must be savvy about how they negotiate.
Workers looking to take the remote leap should do research about pay scales in the market where they want to live and be prepared to make a compelling case for how they should be compensated.
“Remote jobs tend to pay about the same as their in-office counterparts,” said Brie Reynolds, career development manager and coach at remote job listings site FlexJobs, speaking at The Wall Street Journal Jobs Summit in early October.
Companies typically set salaries based on the market value of the jobs and the cost of living in the employee’s city. Remote work complicates this equation: Some companies are agreeing to let employees work from anywhere for the same pay, but other companies, particularly those that have adopted a hybrid model, are setting remote salaries based on pay in the locations where employees actually live.
In the case of a fully remote company, salaries could be pegged to the region the organization calls its headquarters or where the remote worker is based, or some combination of the two.
“When you’re doing your salary research, you want to look at both your location and the company’s location and see if you can get a decent range out of that,” said Ms. Reynolds, who recommends workers research salaries on Payscale.com and Glassdoor.com.
A lot of companies are still hoping for a return to normal, which means people in offices. Permitting flexibility has become crucial to hiring the best, said Lauren Gardner, a talent executive at Microsoft Corp.
Getting hires “where they want to live and where they can do their best work,” is key to staying competitive, Ms. Gardner said.
New data from LinkedIn show that since early September 70% of people have filtered their searches for jobs on the platform to show exclusively remote-only job postings. But some jobs can’t be done from home and many managers will prefer to see their teams in person, at least some of the time.
People who want to work remotely or have a certain hybrid schedule need to be upfront about what makes them attractive as a remote employee and the exact type of work arrangement and pay they are looking for, said Michael D’Ausilio, global head of talent acquisition at JPMorgan Chase & Co.
“Have the honest conversation with the recruiter or with the hiring manager, because you don’t know if you don’t ask,” Mr. D’Ausilio said. “It is our job to make sure we’re giving you a realistic job preview of what life here would be like.”
Sara Sutton, founder and CEO of FlexJobs, said people in good standing at a company can make their case for maintaining their current pay when they move to a new, cheaper location.
“If you’re a high performer, they are not going to want to replace you,” she said. “They have to make an investment in hiring and bringing somebody up to speed, so there is a cost to the company.”
Job hunters should also review the expenses associated with going into an office. Working from home could save them so much that a pay cut could pay off, Ms. Sutton said. Around 40% of remote workers report personal savings of $5000 annually on expenses related to working at the office, such as commuting, dry cleaning and buying lunch, she said. Another 20% said they save up to $10,000 a year—a big consideration when negotiating.
Reprinted by permission of The Wall Street Journal, Copyright 2021 Dow Jones & Company. Inc. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. Original date of publication: October 31, 2021
With the debut of DeepSeek’s buzzy chatbot and updates to others, we tried applying the technology—and a little human common sense—to the most mind-melting aspect of home cooking: weekly meal planning.
An intriguing new holiday home concept is emerging for high net worth Australians.
With the debut of DeepSeek’s buzzy chatbot and updates to others, we tried applying the technology—and a little human common sense—to the most mind-melting aspect of home cooking: weekly meal planning.
Read the news, and it won’t take long to find a story about the latest feat of artificial intelligence. AI passed the bar exam! It can help diagnose cancer! It “painted” a portrait that sold at Sotheby’s for $1 million!
My own great hope for AI: that it might simplify the everyday problem of meal planning.
Seem a bit unambitious? Think again. For more than two decades as a food writer, I’ve watched families struggle to get weeknight meals on the table. One big obstacle is putting in the upfront time to devise a variety of easy meals that fit both budget and lifestyle.
Meal planning poses surprisingly complex challenges. Stop for a minute and consider what you’re actually doing when you compile a weekly grocery list. Your brain is simultaneously calculating how many people are eating, the types of foods they enjoy, ingredient preferences (and intolerances), your budget, the time available to cook and so on. No wonder so many weeknights end with mediocre takeout.
Countless approaches have tried to “disrupt” the meal-plan slog: books, magazines, apps, the once-vaunted meal kits, which even delivered the ingredients right to your door. But none could offer truly personalized plans. Could AI succeed where others failed?
I conducted my first tests of AI in the summer of 2023, with mixed results. Early versions of Open AI’s ChatGPT produced some usable recipes. (I still occasionally make its gingery pork in lettuce wraps.) But the shopping lists it created were sometimes missing an ingredient or two. Bots! They’re just like us!
Eager to please, the chatbot also made some comical culinary suggestions. After I mentioned I had a blender, it determinedly steered me to use the blender…for everything, including fried rice, which it recommended I whiz into a kind of gruel. While it provided a competent recipe for pasta with zucchini, thyme and lemon, it thought it would be brilliant to add marshmallows, which I’d mentioned I had in my pantry, to the sauce. As a friend said: “If you’re having AI plan the recipes for you, it should definitely be doing something better than what your stoned friend would make you at two in the morning.”
Early AI could plan meals for the week, but required a lot of hand-holding. Like an overconfident intern.
Eighteen months after those first attempts—about 1,000 years in AI time—I was ready to try again. In January, DeepSeek AI, a Chinese chatbot, grabbed headlines around the world for its capabilities and speed (and potential security risks). There were also new and improved versions of the chatbots I’d found wanting.
This time, I decided to experiment with ChatGPT, Anthropic’s Claude and DeepSeek. (To see how they compared to one another, see “Bytes to Bites,” below.)
From my first AI rodeo, I knew to use short, direct sentences and get very specific about what I wanted. “Think like an experienced family recipe developer,” I told DeepSeek. “Create a week’s worth of dinners for a family of four. At least three meals should be vegetarian. One person doesn’t like fresh tomatoes. We like Italian, Japanese and Mexican cuisine. All meals should be cooked within 60 minutes.”
For the next 24 seconds, the chatbot “reasoned” through my request, spelling out concerns as I watched, rapt: Would the person who doesn’t like fresh tomatoes eat marinara sauce? Black bean and sweet potato tacos are a nice vegetarian entree, but opt for salsa verde to avoid tomatoes. Lemony chicken piccata is fast, but serve with broccolini. It was…amazing. The consolidated shopping list the chatbot provided was error free.
I tried the same prompt with Claude and ChatGPT, with curiously similar results. With all the options in the world, both bots suggested black bean and sweet potato tacos, and chicken piccata. The recipes’ instructions varied, as did suggested side dishes.
I decided to write a more detailed request. “Long prompts are good prompts,” said Dan Priest, chief AI officer for consulting firm PwC in the U.S. The more information you provide, the more the AI can “align with your expectations.” Don’t try to get everything right the first time, Priest said: “Have a conversation.”
Good advice. I admit, when I first began my tests, I was searching for weak spots. But I learned it’s crucial to refine requests. As Priest said, AI will consider your various demands and make trade-offs—though perhaps not the ones you’d make.
So I started talking to AI. I said I like to cook with seasonal ingredients—that my dream dinner is a night at Chez Panisse, the Berkeley restaurant where chef Alice Waters redefined rustic-French cooking as California cuisine. Within seconds I had gorgeous recipes for spring lamb chops with fresh herbs, and miso-glazed cod with spring onions and soba. When I asked to limit the budget to $200, the bot swapped in pork for pricey lamb and haddock for cod. I requested meals that adhered to guidelines from the American Heart Association, and recipes that used only what was in my fridge. No problem.
But would the recipes work? Chatbots don’t have experience cooking; they are Large Language Models trained to predict what word should follow the last. As any cook knows, a recipe that reads well can still end in disaster. To my surprise, the recipes I tested worked exactly as written by the chatbots—and took no longer than advertised. Even my luddite husband called Claude’s rigatoni with butternut squash, kale and brown butter “a keeper.”
As yet no chatbot can compete with Alice Waters—or my husband, for that matter—in the kitchen. (For more on that, see “How Do Real Cooks Rate AI?” below.) But I’ll keep asking AI to, say, create shopping lists for recipes I upload, or come up with a recipe for what I happen to have in the refrigerator—as long as I’m there to whisper in the chatbot’s ear.
Which chatbot is right for your kitchen?
Any of the three chatbots we tested can deliver a working meal plan—if you know how to talk to it. My personal pick was Anthropic’s Claude, for its intelligent tone and creativity, followed by DeepSeek AI for its “reasoning.” AI “agents” such as Open AI’s Operator, can, in theory, order the food needed to cook your recipes, but the consensus is they need a bit more time to develop.
Open AI’s ChatGPT • I had quibbles with ChatGPT’s first round of recipes. The seasoning skewed bland—only one tablespoon of soy sauce for a large veggie stir fry. It had me start by sautéing my chicken piccata, which then got cold while the pasta cooked. ChatGPT was also annoyingly chipper in its interactions. Still, with a few requested revisions, its lemon and pea risotto was perfection.
DeepSeek AI • I was impressed with this chatbot’s “reasoning” and the way it balanced sometimes-conflicting requests. Its recipes were seasonal (without prompting) and easy to follow; its shopping list, error free. Its one unforgivable mistake: presuming a paltry number of stuffed pasta shells would feed my hungry family. Some have voiced security concerns over using a Chinese chatbot; I felt comfortable sharing my meal preferences with it.
Anthropic’s Claude • I felt like Claude “got” me. This encouraged me to chat with it, resulting in recipes I liked and that worked, like a Mexican pozole for winter nights. This bot does need prompting; its initial instructions for brown butter and crispy sage leaves would have flummoxed an inexperienced cook. But when I suggested it offer step-by-step instructions, it praised me, which made me think it was even smarter.
Have a conversation. Even a very specific meal-planning prompt requires AI to make assumptions and choices you might oppose. Ask it to revise. Add additional requirements. Follow up for more specific instructions. Time spent up front will deliver a more successful plan.
Role-play. Ask AI to think like a cook whose food you enjoy. (Told I like writer Tamar Adler’s recipes, Claude instantly offered one for wild mushroom bread pudding.) If you aren’t a skilled cook, it’s probably unwise to ask AI to mimic a three-star chef. Instead, ask it to simplify recipes inspired by your idol.
Read carefully and use common sense. It is always important to read through a recipe before you shop or set up in the kitchen, and this is especially true with AI. Recipes are invented on the fly and not tested. Ask for clarification if necessary, or a rewrite based on your skills, equipment or time.
Ask for a consolidated shopping list. In seconds, AI can aggregate the ingredients for your recipes into a single grocery list. Ask for total pounds or number of packages needed. (This saves you having to figure out, for example, how many red peppers to buy for 2 cups diced.)
Request cook times and visual cues. A good recipe writer lets you know how things will look or feel as they cook. Ask AI for the same. This will improve a vague “Bake for 20 minutes” to “bake for 20 minutes or until golden brown and the cake springs back to the touch.”
We asked AI to create dishes in the style of three favourite cooks, which it does base on text from the Internet and elsewhere it’s been trained on. And then we asked the cooks to judge the results. Verdict: The recipes didn’t reflect our panel’s expertise or attention to detail. Seems AI can’t replace them—yet.
Tamar Adler undefined Trained to cook at seminal restaurants including Prune and Chez Panisse; food writer, cookbook author, podcaster
AI dishes inspired by Tamar: Winter Squash and Wild Mushroom Bread Pudding; Braised Lamb Shoulder With White Beans and Winter Herbs; Pan-Roasted Cod With Leeks and Potatoes
Assessment: “Superficially, the recipes seem great and like recipes I would write.”
Critiques: “So much of everything I’ve written has been geared toward helping cooks build community and capability. Here, a cook is neither digging in and learning by trying and failing and repeating and growing; nor are they talking to another person, exchanging advice, smiles, jokes, ideas, updates.”
GRADE: C
Nik Sharma undefined Molecular biologist turned chef; editor in residence, America’s Test Kitchen; cookbook author
AI dishes inspired by Nik: Black Pepper and Lime Dal With Crispy Shallots; Roasted Spring Chicken With Black Cardamom and Orange; Roasted Winter Squash and Root Vegetables With Maple-Miso Glaze
Assessment: “A bit creepy. It’s trying too hard to imitate me but leaving out my intuition and propensity to experiment.”
Critiques: “Ingredients are not listed in order of use, and quantities and cook times are off. Black cardamom would kill that chicken. Also: I always list volumes for liquids and weights, whenever possible.” (AI did not—but you could ask it to!)
GRADE: C
Andrea Nguyen undefined Leading expert on the cuisine of Vietnam, cookbook author, cooking teacher, creator of Viet World Kitchen
AI dishes inspired by Andrea: Quick Lemongrass Chicken Bowl; Winter Vegetable Banh Mi With Spicy Mayo; Quick-Braised Ginger Pork with Winter Citrus
Assessment: “Machine learning is good for certain things, like getting factual questions answered. AI mined my content near and far, and got some things right but not others. Good recipes contain nuances in instructions that offer visual and taste cues.”
Critiques: “Quantities were off—often way off. The rice bowl is only good for a desperate moment. The ginger pork is an awful mash up of ideas. Yuck.”
GRADE: C/C+
With the debut of DeepSeek’s buzzy chatbot and updates to others, we tried applying the technology—and a little human common sense—to the most mind-melting aspect of home cooking: weekly meal planning.
New study finds that CEOs are more likely to be fired for company underperformance if a director has served in the military.