Are salaries higher in the suburbs as opposed to the city? (Chicago: apartments, rent) - Illinois (IL) - City-Data Forum

tb4000 · 05-31-2010, 08:38 AM

I've been job hunting for a minute, and have a couple interviews this week for two similar roles, and the place in the Loop is basically offering an hourly rate barely above minimum wage, yet another place that's in Northbrook that pretty much has the exact same job description has a starting base of 40K. I'm chalking it up to it just being a lot of competition in the city as opposed to a smaller city, but anyone else that's headhunting, you noticed that?

chitown85 · 05-31-2010, 04:29 PM

There might be fewer people applying for suburban positions because the positions are in the suburbs. Most native Chicagoans don't have a problem commuting to the suburbs from the city, but I have noticed a lot of recent arrivals to Chicago from other cities despise the thought of the suburbs.

emathias · 05-31-2010, 04:34 PM

I can cost more to live in the suburbs or to commute to the suburbs from the city, so for any job that can't be done by high school or college students, there's kind of a minimum amount it has to pay for employees to be able to take the job. It wouldn't surprise me if that amount was nearly $40k/yr.

chitown85 · 05-31-2010, 04:42 PM

I have noticed suburban apartment costs are sometimes higher than in the city. I think it has to do with families who cannot afford down payments on homes, but can afford higher rent so their children can go to a good school. Plus, a lot of older couples live in suburban apartments and can pay the cost.

Lookout Kid · 05-31-2010, 07:13 PM

In my industry, salaries are much higher in Chicago than the suburbs. But a large majority of the prestigious firms are in the city.

chet everett · 06-01-2010, 05:54 AM

I really wonder if the jobs are as similar as they sound. I know that even fairly low level employment at a global firm's worldwide HQ tend to have more barriers to entry than a job that on paper entails the same duties at some branch office or a very small firm.

The opportunity for advancement at a HQ location generally is much better for entry level folks, although if the small firm does particularly well or even a branch office has higher than expected growth they might do more 'promoting from within'...

I agree that in some field the odds of a firm even having the same kind staff in Chicago and the 'burbs is pretty small. The trend for certain kinds of businesses to locate in the vibrant areas of the Loop and nearby section to the north has generally made Chicago a very different kind of labor market than most suburban areas.

I really doubt that the costs of living could be offset if one offers wages of nearly half the salary of another position. Take what pays more today!

urza216 · 06-01-2010, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chitown85

I have noticed suburban apartment costs are sometimes higher than in the city.

???

Down here, I can get an apartment for $400/month.. This is unheard of in the city!

linicx · 06-01-2010, 04:41 PM

Location is everything. Cost is relevent to the location.

Swandaddy · 06-01-2010, 09:05 PM

An interesting kind of sub-question to this would be if/how much a "car premium" per se would be?

For example if a job pays 40K in the loop how much (if any) extra would the company have to pay to fill that same job in a car-only area of the suburbs?

A related question would be (probably more for city dwellers) how much extra would a company have to pay you to take a job in the suburbs, assuming all other conditions were equal?

For me personally I'd probably say at least $15K/yr b/c they would have to pay for a nice car, as I would NOT want to drive a clunker. And they'd have to pay for both the extra time and hassle of battling rush hour traffic. And for the extra income taxes as it would probably bump me into a higher tax bracket.

emathias · 06-02-2010, 12:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swandaddy

An interesting kind of sub-question to this would be if/how much a "car premium" per se would be?

For example if a job pays 40K in the loop how much (if any) extra would the company have to pay to fill that same job in a car-only area of the suburbs?

A related question would be (probably more for city dwellers) how much extra would a company have to pay you to take a job in the suburbs, assuming all other conditions were equal?

For me personally I'd probably say at least $15K/yr b/c they would have to pay for a nice car, as I would NOT want to drive a clunker. And they'd have to pay for both the extra time and hassle of battling rush hour traffic. And for the extra income taxes as it would probably bump me into a higher tax bracket.

Six years ago when I got "downsized" as part of a merger, I put a $15,000 premium on jobs in the suburbs. In my industry (at least then) there wasn't that much of a difference in salary, so I stayed downtown (which was what I wanted anyway).

If you already have a car suitable for commuting, it may not require such a big premium, but I know a lot of city-dwellers would put about that much of a premium on suburban jobs.