Benefits parity for 260 remote staff spread across 19 countries: where do you draw the line?

We went the other way and pay a cash allowance of 8% of salary where we cannot provide a pension locally. It is simple and people like it at first. I would be honest that most of them spend it, so we have met the letter of parity and not the purpose. I am not sure I would recommend it.

For the medical line, an international group health policy covering everyone outside your entity countries can be easier than patching each employer-of-record package. We cover 85 people in 11 countries that way. Per-head cost is higher than local plans, around 30% more, but it is one policy, one renewal and one answer when someone asks what they have.

How are you handling people who move country? That was the hole in our minimum-standard approach. Three people relocated in a year, each one dropped out of a good local plan into a weaker one, and each felt they had been penalised. We now guarantee no reduction for 12 months after a move.