Compare Two China Job Offers

You have two China job offers and a deadline. The reflex is to put the two monthly salaries next to each other and pick the larger one. Whether that is the right comparison depends on what else is in each package. On a China package, the salary line may not be the most useful number for deciding which job is better for you, because part of the real value can sit in other rows — but whether each of those rows applies to your offer, and how much it matters, is something you must check rather than assume. Rows worth a look can include: how the cash is split; whether, and how much, the employer contributes to social insurance and the housing fund (a regulated matter you must verify against the offer and local rules, not assume); how long and how risky the probation is; what the hours and location will actually cost you; what kind of contract you are signing; and what it would take to leave.

This article gives you a comparison method you can run yourself, with a spreadsheet and the two documents in front of you. It is a way to make the decision repeatable so you stop flipping between the two in your head. It is educational only — not recruitment, not immigration advice, and not legal advice. For any China-specific rule you verify against official guidance and your signed contract, not against this page.

Why this is hard from outside China

If you were already in the city with a friend who had done this twice, you would not need a method — you would have a person. Most readers this is written for are outside China, read little or no Chinese, and have no one to ask whether an offer is normal. That gap is exactly what the table replaces. It turns "does this feel right" into a table listing the rows, the evidence for each, and a score. You do not need to read Chinese to fill it, because you fill it from the contract and from written answers you request. Where the Chinese-language labor contract guidance matters, the method tells you to verify there rather than guess.

Build the table once, for both offers

Open a spreadsheet. Put the two offers as columns. Make one row for each axis below, and fill every cell from the contract text or from written confirmation the employer has sent — not from a recruiter's summary email and not from what you remember being said on a call. If you cannot fill a cell from writing, mark it "unconfirmed" and treat it as a question, not a score.

Some of these rows describe terms that appear in nearly every offer and are worth recording as a matter of course — base cash, stated hours, location, and contract type. Others are things you must ask whether they apply to your specific offer and verify in writing, rather than assume: employer social-insurance and housing-fund contributions, probation terms, variable pay, and any exit penalties. Mark each row accordingly.

Base versus variable cash. Separate the fixed monthly base from any bonus, commission, or allowance. Two offers can show the same total while one pays most of it as variable you may not receive on the schedule described. The base is the part you can plan around; the variable is the part you should discount until it is in writing.
Social insurance and housing fund. Social insurance is a statutory obligation; housing-fund participation and treatment for a foreign employee require confirmation under the rules of the city and the individual offer. Ask each employer which contributions apply, at what rates and base, and verify the answer against the relevant official guidance and in writing. Record: the contribution rates and the base those rates apply to. This is deferred and housing-linked value rather than take-home pay. A common real-world issue is that the base is set lower than your full salary — verify the figure the employer will actually use, and treat any claimed contribution as a question until it is in writing. Note it as its own row so it is not hidden inside the headline number.
Probation terms. If the offer includes a probation period, write down its length, any reduced pay during it, and the stated conditions under which the contract can end in that period. Probation is bounded by law: the length must fall within the cap for your contract term (one month for a contract of at least three months but under one year; two months for one to three years; six months for a contract of three years or more or an open-ended one), and probation pay may not fall below 80% of the lowest wage for the same post or 80% of the contract wage, nor below the local minimum wage. Verify the terms against the official guidance and your signed documents. This row can carry significant money and risk, and it is a row that may be left vague in conversation.
Hours and leave. Put the stated working hours, any overtime expectation, and the annual leave side by side. The gap between two offers here is a real part of your weekly life, not a footnote.
Location. One city's rent, commute, and daily cost can erase a salary gap that looked decisive on paper. Compare the place you would actually live, not the city name. The work location is also a required contract clause, so it should be in writing.
Contract type. Note what kind of contract you are signing — standard employment, a dispatch or agency arrangement, fixed term, or open-ended — and which legal entity actually signs. The name on the door is not always the name on the contract.
Growth and exit cost. List the training described, the progression the role is said to offer, and every penalty, training-fee clawback, notice condition, or non-compete clause attached to leaving — if any of these appear in the offer. A non-compete for covered staff may last at most two years and requires monthly compensation during that period. The exit cost is part of the price of the job.

Score what is written, not what you hope

Once the table is filled, give each offer a score from one to five on every row, using only what is actually written. Do not score the row you wish were true, and do not give partial credit for a promise someone made verbally. An "unconfirmed" cell stays unconfirmed until you have it in writing; it does not become a four.

The discipline matters because the salary row will otherwise dominate the whole sheet by sheer visibility. When every axis has a number, the salary row becomes one of seven instead of the only one you can see.

The tradeoff you cannot avoid

No offer will win every row, and pretending one might is how people talk themselves into the wrong choice. For example, a higher base can sit next to a thinner housing-fund base or a longer probation. A more prestigious employer can carry heavier hours. A cheaper city can give you a larger real home for the same money but fewer international communities nearby. The table is not there to produce a perfect offer. It is there to make the trade visible, so you choose which axes to sacrifice with your eyes open rather than discovering the sacrifice after you have signed.

A worked example

Consider a fictional comparison in which both offers are for fixed terms of at least three years, both employers confirm that a foreign employee can participate in the local housing fund, and the written rates comply with the local rules. Offer A: base 20,000 RMB a month, housing fund at 5%, one-month probation. Offer B: base 19,000 RMB, housing fund at 12%, three-month probation. If either contract is shorter than three years, recheck the probation cap before treating B as a valid option. On cash alone A is ahead by about 1,000 RMB a month before tax. But B would contribute 12% of the stated base to the housing fund against A's 5%; whether and when you can withdraw or use those funds for rent or a purchase depends on the local rules and your circumstances. A asks you to pass probation faster. Whether B is better depends on your weights: if you need cash now, A; if you value the fund and can accept a longer probation, B. The point of the table is that you can only run this comparison if you have the rate, the base and the probation length in writing — otherwise the two salaries look like the whole story.

Where the law actually enters

Most rows in this method are about what each employer puts on paper. Two rows are different, because they are also governed by law, and that is where a source — not your intuition — should settle the question.

Probation is bounded by Article 19 of the Labour Contract Law: its cap depends on the contract term, and Article 20 sets a pay floor. An English Shanghai portal guide incorrectly gives three months for the one-to-under-three-year band; the statute says two months, so use the law itself for this calculation. Social insurance registration is likewise a national rule: under the Social Insurance Law, Article 58 requires registration within thirty days of the start of employment.

What those sources do not prove is whether either of your two offers complies, what a particular probation length should be for your contract, anything about other cities' practice, or anything about the other rows. Use them as pointers to verify, never as facts about either employer.

Weight the rows by your own life

A raw total of the scores can mislead, because the rows are not equally important to you. Weight them before you add. If you intend to use the housing fund to rent or buy, that row should count more than the leave row. If you are in China for two years and then leaving, the exit-cost row may outweigh a small monthly gap. If your partner or children are moving with you, the location row may dominate everything else.

Write your weights next to the rows, multiply, and only then compare totals. Two readers with the same two offers can reasonably pick different winners, and the weights are where that decision lives.

Ask for the writing before you score

You cannot score a blank cell, so the first move is to get the missing items in writing from each employer. Send a short, plain list: the full cash breakdown, the social insurance and housing fund rates and base, the probation length and any pay difference, the stated hours and leave, the exact contract type and signing entity, and the exit clauses. Frame it as confirming details before you decide, which is reasonable on either side. Offers expire on different dates, so send the list as early as you can.

An employer that will not put a term in writing has told you something about that term. Note the refusal in the cell and score accordingly.

What this method cannot prove

The table ranks what is written. It cannot prove any of the following, and a clean score should not persuade you otherwise:

That variable pay will be paid as described. The formula and the timing need to be in writing.
That the contribution base is what you assume. Verify the figure the employer will actually use, not the one you expect.
That stated hours equal worked hours. Policy and practice are separate questions the table cannot settle.
That a described growth path exists in fact. A title is not a promotion, and a promise is not a track.
That you have found every exit clause. Penalties often sit in a separate appendix you have not been shown.

For any China-specific rule — probation limits, insurance categories, contract forms — check the current official guidance and your signed documents. This page is educational and does not replace reading the contract or consulting qualified legal or immigration advice.

The takeaway

Run the table before you tell either employer yes or no, and do it alone so the salary number does not pre-decide the outcome. When the two salaries are close, the offer with the weaker housing-fund base, the longer or riskier probation, or the vaguer exit clause may work out more expensive over a year — but whether it does depends on your weights, on what the contract actually says, and on whether those terms are confirmed in writing; a larger monthly figure is not automatically the worse deal, nor a smaller one automatically the better. Score the rows from the writing, weight them by your own life, accept one trade you can name, and sign the offer whose sacrifices you can state out loud.