Wouldn't any company hiring workers in Europe need to provide the same benefits as any European company, roughly the ones listed above? Or can an American company just hire remotely and offer American benefits directly to employees (not talking about independent contractors of course)? It would seem like the former no? Or is there a possibility of the latter? Say I'm remote and would like to work in Europe. I think this is the big problem with trying to keep a remote American job there without becoming a consultant and getting paid Corp to Corp. Is remote work for an American company even possible if that company doesn't have a European presence in the country the work would be conducted in or would they need to get such presence first before it was legal? If it's the latter (seems like it would be) it could really limit the companies willing to hire in Europe.

I suspect that since the act of working happens physically in an European country, both the employee and the employer need to obey the labor law of that country.

Practically, the American companies usually employ Europeans through their European subsidiaries/branches (which to local government look exactly like local companies).

Or they ask you to setup a single person company

At a minimum a company hiring in Europe (or anywhere else) needs to offer at least the legal minimum of benefits. And they may offer additional benefits to be locally competitive. Of course, salaries may be lower than in many US locations as well. And, yes, companies usually have to establish some sort of legal presence in a country. This is an obstacle for smaller firms, less so for larger ones.

Are you saying these are standard benefits in Europe?

You didn't make it clear in your post, though I think that must be the angle you're coming from.

Except for the 13th month bonus, I’d say it’s pretty basic. You’d get those benefits working at a supermarket.

Five weeks vacation is a legal minimum. Most companies I worked for here in Denmark will give you six. It’s technically not five weeks, but 25 days.

I worked in Switzerland, the 13th month wasn't a bonus, they simply took your salary, divided that by 13, that was your monthly payment and you got 2 of them in December.

Also many bills are due on the first of January for the whole next year e.g. insurance. So it was kinda like a holiday and large bill windfall, but it wasn't additional to salary.

That was just one company, maybe other countries or employers are different.

This. You know your yearly salary (gross and net). Then you get it in different schemes depending on country and company. Some I now are:

- 14 payments (extras in June and December)

- 12+1 in December

- 12 + 2 x 0.5 (one extra in June and the other In December)

I believe dates were pick to match Xmas and Summer Holidays, two big spending anomalies

Anyhow you always negotiate yearly gross.

Not in the Netherlands. I always negotiated monthly gross. Then your 13th month and summer bonus suddenly actually feel like bonuses, even if the company includes it in the full yearly amount.

Even the '13th month' is standard, too, in Denmark, it is called 'vacation pay' and is accrued as a 12% added pay on top of your salary, but paid into a separate account, to be paid out when you go on vacation.

> Five weeks vacation is a legal minimum

No, it's not. It might be in some European countries, though.

I'm not European, but to a degree it seems so, yes. For example, minimum paid vacation by law is 21 days in almost all of Europe: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minimum_annual_leave_b... And judging by common statements and anecdotes here on HN, I think the number of paid vacation days tend to exceed the legal minimum, especially in Western Europe, just as they do in the U.S.--typically 2 weeks for salaried employees even though Federal law mandates 0.

Likewise, mandatory pension contributions (employee and employer) in most of Western Europe exceed 20% of income (upwards of 30% in some cases), as contrasted to 12% in the U.S.: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/pension_glance-2017-... Who in the U.S. contributes 10-20% to their IRA or 401(k) on top of FICA payments? It's not even legal to make such large contributions pre-tax. (Some of us are privileged enough to make up the difference with higher salaries; a smaller fraction of a higher salary let's us contribute more to retirement.) Note that employer contributions aren't generally reflected in salary figures, and in some European countries employer contributions exceed 20%.

Benefits and regulations vary from country to country. I don't know details about eastern Europe, but all those are fairly common to different degrees in large parts of the continent.

It's mostly the same in Eastern Europe (Romania at least), with the exception of paid overtime (though technically legally required, it is often not enforced), and the 13th monthly salary only being common in some industries.

Not everything standard, but quite common. Varies per country I guess. I'm thinking Netherlands.

Sure, but what about 300k, or 500k?

Also, not all of those apply to Norway at least and some are provided by the government.

Sure, maybe. My point is that US companies have to pay more because more things need to be taken care of by the individual instead of it being socialized to different degrees. Also there is very little in terms or labor rights in the US. So it is a bit more complicated, than just taking some amount you think any European would just line up for work, without considering the conditions they are used to.

It is not like the possibility to work remotely for US companies that in absolute numbers pay more than the local ones is completely novel. But at least in my circles pretty much no one is interested in doing so.

You have to update your knowledge about working for the software companies in US. You get $150-$300K plus almost all the benefits you mentioned on top of that.

You might have missed my point in the original post, that I care about everyone getting these or similar benefits, not just me in a higher salaried positions or after years of staying in a company. It indirectly improves my own quality of life and affects cost of things.

Me making 150, 200 or 300k actually has fairly limited impact on my life. Everyone else getting the same benefits or not has, in a way not easily compensated by salary.

I answered this line: >>> My point is that US companies have to pay more because more things need to be taken care of by the individual instead of it being socialized to different degrees.

the point is you get all these benefits and on top of this you get several times higher salary (I'm from Europe myself originally for what it worth).

Because that is what pretty every US American independently from political affiliation i talked with about this told me. They need to spent their own money on things that is covered via taxation in many parts of Europe. Whether this is good or bad, is a bit a matter of opinion.

I have absolutely no doubt that if you want to maximize personal compensation and benefits, the US is the place to be. Nothing else comes close

But originally this threat was about "Why compete with FAANG trying to pay new grads $300k when you can pay an experienced developer from Europe $100k? I honestly never understood it."

I doubt that a statistically significant amount of new grads get 300k in compensation plus those kind of benefits. I haven't spent a whole time researching but I couldn't find anything backing this up. E.g. it seems that you need to stay at Google 5 years to get 25 days vacation and entery level total compensation at FAANG being more in the 150k - 200k range.

On the other hand as an experienced developer making more than a 100k in just salary plus at least these benefits is not that hard in Europe if you are willing to move or find a remote job.

From all I heard or read, outside FAANG, the financial industry, and certain hotspot, the compensation and benefits within the US go down quite considerably and the difference to Europe is still big, but less exorbitant.

So sure, if you come in with full FAANG (many / all? of which have had engineering teams in Europe for a long time) style compensation packages plus benefits you will be able to attract many Europeans, especially if they don't have to move. But then we are quickly back to square one: Why compete with FAANG?

And again, I'd argue a big part of the reason why US companies can offer these much higher compensation package to positions like software engineers is because they save it on lower end jobs and there are fewer regulations for the common good in place that would cost them money. For some, this makes US companies a non-starter independent from the individual offer.

Contract? What contract?