Tech workers demand high salaries despite hiring slowdown(www2.staffingindustry.com)
www2.staffingindustry.com
Tech workers demand high salaries despite hiring slowdown
https://www2.staffingindustry.com/Editorial/Daily-News/Tech-workers-demand-high-salaries-despite-hiring-slowdown-Lorien-66817
104 comments
Any source for that claim?
There's plenty floating around. Thougn it's definitely debatable depending on how you define productivity.
1: https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/ 2: https://clockify.me/productivity-pay-gap
For me at least from family in construction work it's very clear. They made the same hourly wage in the 80's as many workers do now, despite how much more productive construction has gotten.
The second article has a good quote:
> Wages and productivity were not growing at a directly proportional pace, but for some industries, such as high-tech (especially nowadays), wages are proportional to productivity. It all depends on the choice of variables taken into account.
1: https://www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/ 2: https://clockify.me/productivity-pay-gap
For me at least from family in construction work it's very clear. They made the same hourly wage in the 80's as many workers do now, despite how much more productive construction has gotten.
The second article has a good quote:
> Wages and productivity were not growing at a directly proportional pace, but for some industries, such as high-tech (especially nowadays), wages are proportional to productivity. It all depends on the choice of variables taken into account.
By simple observation, average single-income households were able to own a home and raise a family back then.
But they couldn't have a top notch smartphone or a computer that is as fast as server the size of whole buildings.
Although most people want to buy a house, given a smartphone and a rent or a house but living with no smartphone or internet, I think most people would choose pay rent and have access to internet and a smartphone.
Although most people want to buy a house, given a smartphone and a rent or a house but living with no smartphone or internet, I think most people would choose pay rent and have access to internet and a smartphone.
They still can.
Just not in luxury areas.
Sooooo as the parent said, "no."
"Luxury areas" are not somehow "optional" for the people that have to live there to work there, as the term "luxury area" implies.
"Luxury areas" are not somehow "optional" for the people that have to live there to work there, as the term "luxury area" implies.
They don’t have to work there. Plenty of jobs in non-luxurious areas.
That was the urbanization movement. Average families were no longer able to afford to stay in the rural areas they grew up in, but were quite well off compared to the poor who historically occupied the urban areas. As such, they were able to swoop in and buy up everything for a song in those urban areas. That is less about their income and more about taking advantage of a market disparity.
Prior to COVID many similar disparities were able to be found. In fact, there was a growing counter-urbanization movement taking advantage of it. It does seem opportunists sitting at home not allowed to do anything else during COVID squeezed a lot of them dry along with everything else, granted.
Prior to COVID many similar disparities were able to be found. In fact, there was a growing counter-urbanization movement taking advantage of it. It does seem opportunists sitting at home not allowed to do anything else during COVID squeezed a lot of them dry along with everything else, granted.
At least in Europe the companies have huge issues finding enough suitable junior engineers, because there are less and less young people. At some point more engineers will retire per year than young ones entering the job market. It looks like the traditionally low salaries for SW engineers in Europe are finally growing a bit.
I imagine there would be plenty of folks willing to come over if the wages at least got into the ballpark of the US. My impression is that the visa/residency process isn’t too onerous if you’re coming over with a job. Close the gap enough and it’s worth it for many, with quality of life stuff taking up the slack. But it can’t be too large, because tech workers can afford quality of life in the US too - it’s just purchased a la carte with the higher salary.
Not just tech workers. 24 year old non-technical product managers at FAANG companies are demanding $190,000 salaries.
As a European I wish more FAANG companies started hiring software engineers remotely. The only American companies that have offered me remote jobs with FAANG tier salaries were cryptobro startups.
As a European I wish more FAANG companies started hiring software engineers remotely. The only American companies that have offered me remote jobs with FAANG tier salaries were cryptobro startups.
[deleted]
Well, part of the deal for a lot of these salaries is that you work more hours than the EU allows.
And you can fire people more easily in usa
FAANG have many offices in Europe..
Do they pay European salaries in European offices? I imagine the answer to that question is, "yes." The appeal for a European to get an American FAANG position remotely is presumably to soak up some of that dramatically higher American tech salary. I'm not sure that's a reasonable expectation though, as most companies in my experience will adjust pay to scale to the employee's current location for remote roles.
Based on my personal experience, the answer is yes. Hired a lot of Europeans in London, Dublin, Munich, Zurich, Budapest and Lisbon over the last decade. Only Zurich came close to SV compensation levels.
You can try to do research for your location: https://www.levels.fyi/companies/google/salaries/software-en...
It is mostly driven by housing costs. A lot (read most) of the tech companies are located in the most expensive housing real estate markets. If I’m looking for a job, I most definitely will try to make sure I don’t end up having to spend more than half of my “in hand, guaranteed income” is not spent on housing.
The companies are pushing RTO in a bone headed way, will then have to pay the premium of having to hire talent in those expensive markets. It’s a fixable problem that companies don’t seem to want to fix.
The companies are pushing RTO in a bone headed way, will then have to pay the premium of having to hire talent in those expensive markets. It’s a fixable problem that companies don’t seem to want to fix.
> A lot (read most) of the tech companies are located in the most expensive housing real estate markets.
The most expensive real estate markets are expensive because of tech
The most expensive real estate markets are expensive because of tech
Why accept something low now when it will obviously revert back soon
It is not at all obvious it will "revert" back... we had HUGE amounts of people working on bullshit projects that never generated any revenue. Maybe in the previous climate of cheap capital we could afford to do that, but in 2023 capital ain't so cheap anymore. There's very little indication that's going to change.
amount/quantity doesn't mean quality.
top tier still can see lots of salary increase in growing hot areas, like OpenAI pays 1M to ICs, bottom tiers yes, may be overcrowded.
top tier still can see lots of salary increase in growing hot areas, like OpenAI pays 1M to ICs, bottom tiers yes, may be overcrowded.
Supply and demand, a boat load of extremely talented FAANG engineers were dumped on a smaller market. You might not be willing to compromise on the price of your eggs, but your peer might and he might be almost as good as you, and probably 10x as good as what the company previously had access to.
many of them are not that talented, but just got hired during hiring boom.
For example it is likely very different type of people were building Google originally when company had 25k headcount in 2010, and now with 200k headcount and abusing monopoly.
For example it is likely very different type of people were building Google originally when company had 25k headcount in 2010, and now with 200k headcount and abusing monopoly.
What’s the evidence saying pay will revert back? I doubt it personally.
I've lived through 3 of these times so far. The early 2000's when the stock market tanked. 2008, and now the last year.
The demand for people who can write software slows down, but we aren't anywhere near a peak plateau where software engineering jobs aren't needed. Silicon Valley isn't going to turn into the rust belt anytime soon.
What's changing are the types of skills needed, and engineers are imminently poised to do that. Unlike factory workers our skills are malleable and constantly changing.
The demand for people who can write software slows down, but we aren't anywhere near a peak plateau where software engineering jobs aren't needed. Silicon Valley isn't going to turn into the rust belt anytime soon.
What's changing are the types of skills needed, and engineers are imminently poised to do that. Unlike factory workers our skills are malleable and constantly changing.
Cost of living (and retirement) is very high. While assets like housing stay inflated, it's hard to take less, it's not greed.
The article summarizes this report: https://www.lorienglobal.com/-/media/lorien/lorien-salary-su...
Tech hiring has been broken for a long time and they keep looking to the government to somehow save them from their own incompetence in labor development. The "hiring" pipeline has been highly optimized for finding reasons not to hire a worker instead of finding suitable workers to develop. Each year this optimization gets closer and closer to its final goal of never being able to hire anyone. Meanwhile most companies would prefer to not give raises that keep up with inflation over having talent walk out the doo. They'll happily put themselves at the end of the "hiring" pipeline again where they will once again complain there are no workers despite having let many leave over small amounts of money that inflation adjusted is near zero.
> The "hiring" pipeline has been highly optimized for finding reasons not to hire a worker instead of finding suitable workers to develop.
The hiring pipeline has always been and continues to be hiring the least risky developer instead of trying to hire the "best" developer.
When the applicants far out number the time it would take to give a more in-depth hiring review for each candidate the approach to hiring the least risky candidate is one of "remove everyone who is risky and then see what you've got left."
This can look like "find reasons not to hire" ... but also consider that sometimes when you've got 300 applicants and even a simple test of programing capability rules out 270 of them (not exaggerating here) and the 30 that remain have unrealistic explications of compensation (not every company can match the pay of big tech) or have other red flags that make them a risky hire, well, that's a labor shortage.
When the hiring pool is smaller and the stickiness of hiring a candidate is greater (a new hire jumping to big tech after getting 6-12 months of of experience is a common thing), then you can hire for the potential to develop a worker. Developing an employee for half a year and then having them leave means that you now need to switch (again) to a very risk adverse hiring approach.
The hiring pipeline has always been and continues to be hiring the least risky developer instead of trying to hire the "best" developer.
When the applicants far out number the time it would take to give a more in-depth hiring review for each candidate the approach to hiring the least risky candidate is one of "remove everyone who is risky and then see what you've got left."
This can look like "find reasons not to hire" ... but also consider that sometimes when you've got 300 applicants and even a simple test of programing capability rules out 270 of them (not exaggerating here) and the 30 that remain have unrealistic explications of compensation (not every company can match the pay of big tech) or have other red flags that make them a risky hire, well, that's a labor shortage.
When the hiring pool is smaller and the stickiness of hiring a candidate is greater (a new hire jumping to big tech after getting 6-12 months of of experience is a common thing), then you can hire for the potential to develop a worker. Developing an employee for half a year and then having them leave means that you now need to switch (again) to a very risk adverse hiring approach.
The inane questions asked during an interview don’t signal to me “risk mitigation”, they say “this what everybody else does and nobody got fired for doing the status quo”. Having done close to a hundred interviews as an IC it definitely seems like we, as an industry, are looking for why not to hire a given person.
If you have one open position and 500 applicants, you're going to have to figure out a "why not to hire" the vast majority of the applicants. If that is done in a way that isn't quantifiable you're going to get a hiring discrimination lawsuit some of the time.
Spending 30 minutes per applicant gives way too much time commitment for the people doing the interview and way too long "candidate applied" and "narrowed down to less than five people" such that the best candidates have found a new job weeks before you're at that point.
This isn't the best way to hire people - its the least worst when factors of hiring bias, timeliness of process, and risk reduction enter into how hiring is to be done.
Spending 30 minutes per applicant gives way too much time commitment for the people doing the interview and way too long "candidate applied" and "narrowed down to less than five people" such that the best candidates have found a new job weeks before you're at that point.
This isn't the best way to hire people - its the least worst when factors of hiring bias, timeliness of process, and risk reduction enter into how hiring is to be done.
Because most of us are working at companies that are absolutely drowning in backlogs and there's a ton of work to do. Tech workers can add value to any company. My company had a hiring freeze for most of the year and layoffs. Yet we have critical roles with no-one doing them (instead I'm doing 4 jobs poorly). Thankfully there are plans to hire in our new fiscal year (which starts in October).
Devs are also the sort who can and will work for themselves or small companies. There's no leverage by employers - we can leave and work anywhere, or for ourselves, even in the current climate.
Another reality workers in all industries are starting to believe: all of us, especially the working class, deserve the fruits of our labor.
Devs are also the sort who can and will work for themselves or small companies. There's no leverage by employers - we can leave and work anywhere, or for ourselves, even in the current climate.
Another reality workers in all industries are starting to believe: all of us, especially the working class, deserve the fruits of our labor.
Site is unusable from EU. The cookie consent popup has a freaking progress loading bar that reaches 100% after a few minutes only to say it failed to save your cookie preferences.
You’d think by now we’d have our browsers handle some kind of default cookie setting so we don’t have to deal with these annoying pop ups.
Highly recommend Adblock Browser, a fork of Firefox. I haven't seen a damn cookie popup in a long time.
Ad blockers can - some do by default - take care of this.
I've been casually looking for opportunities on linkedin, and for many of the roles I consider applying to there's >100 applicants according to the linkedin listing.
That strikes me as exceptionally high vs. past years when I was shopping around.
That strikes me as exceptionally high vs. past years when I was shopping around.
Thats still low for say Switzerland, anytime, if offer is actually meaningful. Not saying 100 or 500 top notch experts are applying for every single one (but generally those are the numbers), but the competition has always been crazy and you had/have to deliver, have often solid local language skills, relevant schools, solid resume etc to be even considered by agencies. I talk about normal job offers, not top 1-2% of the market
Very much an employer's market since half of the world wants to move here.
Till I landed my first contract (which included additional work for employer on residence permit as new entrant) I applied cca 75x, had few interviews (and landed 2 offers at the same time). This was with 6 years of diverse experience in exactly what I was looking for there, studied on uni exactly this, knew languages.
Second job was much easier, agency and company wanted exactly me, but that was rather unique match.
Compared to Czech republic I moved there from, they were so desperate for seniors that even 10 years after resettling they kept bombarding me almost every day with offers to move back, immediate hires for senior positions and high (locally) salaries.
Very much an employer's market since half of the world wants to move here.
Till I landed my first contract (which included additional work for employer on residence permit as new entrant) I applied cca 75x, had few interviews (and landed 2 offers at the same time). This was with 6 years of diverse experience in exactly what I was looking for there, studied on uni exactly this, knew languages.
Second job was much easier, agency and company wanted exactly me, but that was rather unique match.
Compared to Czech republic I moved there from, they were so desperate for seniors that even 10 years after resettling they kept bombarding me almost every day with offers to move back, immediate hires for senior positions and high (locally) salaries.
On that metric, for postings where the apply link goes to an external page, any user that clicks apply (and is redirected) is counted, even if they don't actually follow through. For LinkedIn easy-apply, the metric is more accurate to actual submitted applications, but there seems to be a lot of users (scripts?) indiscriminately easy-applying to every possible job because it's, well, easy.
That doesn't have to mean anything though. I set up a couple of job posts some months ago, in that case we where trying to hire devs roughly in a specific time zone. As linkedin didn't support that we had to leave the location filtering completely off. We immediately got inundated with low quality applications from outside our target timezones. I know that others too have had this "issue"
From experience I can tell you that 99 of those are Indians without any sort of relevant resume for the job they're applying for.
Total anecdata, but a ton of those seem to be agencies and freelancers from the usual outsourcing hubs overseas.
[deleted]
Perhaps it's the same 100 people applying for every listing
Lol, look at this, this guy wants to be a principal and a Jr in out company. . .
I think it is people laid off still trickling back into jobs.
The covid money printing, followed by inflation-hedge dumping into stocks, followed by staggeringly high trillion-dollar valuations led to this. Realistic software dev salaries are not what the tech giants were paying.
> Their demands come even as wage inflation appears to have hit a peaked, the report said.
Does this reference a tech sector-specific wage inflation?
Does this reference a tech sector-specific wage inflation?
It’s literally propaganda.
You can tell it's propaganda because it's describing market forces as "demands." ;-) Technically workers are the supply, anyway.
It's also grammatically incorrect.. "appears to have hit a peaked"?
YoY price inflation (cpi) was 3.7% in August. The fed does not think price inflation is under control by any means.
Wage inflation will only peak if workers roll over and let employers take advantage of them.
Wage inflation will only peak if workers roll over and let employers take advantage of them.
Where are cybersecurity professionals commanding that salary?
Not too long ago that was lesser than SWE? I know plenty of certificate chasing cybersecurity professionals that can barely keep $100,000
Not too long ago that was lesser than SWE? I know plenty of certificate chasing cybersecurity professionals that can barely keep $100,000
>Not too long ago that was lesser than SWE? I know plenty of certificate chasing cybersecurity professionals that can barely keep $100,000
The high-end cybersecurity jobs require zero certificates. Qualifications > Certifications.
If you have actual expertise in red-teaming, proven track-record with discovering CVEs etc, the money is there.
The high-end cybersecurity jobs require zero certificates. Qualifications > Certifications.
If you have actual expertise in red-teaming, proven track-record with discovering CVEs etc, the money is there.
ahhh discovering CVEs, thats often a form of software engineering as opposed to making sure a system is PCI Compliant or whatever. I don't respect IT certificate chasers, because any dev could debilitate those organizations implementing “best practices” and just chooses not to
We used to have ML engineer and now it’s changed to AI engineer. I need to ask ChatGPT to generate more titles now.
The number of two-years-of-experience engineers with middling React skills who are demanding a six figure salary, plus additional comp, continues to astound me.
I stopped making reasonable offers to them. It was always a waste of time. We just move on now.
I stopped making reasonable offers to them. It was always a waste of time. We just move on now.
And you'll possibly even get talent that is willing to work for your intended price. Good luck.
We haven't had a problem hiring talented people yet.
If we had, that would indicate their price was reasonable and that we needed to change our salary ranges.
If we had, that would indicate their price was reasonable and that we needed to change our salary ranges.
Well if the market ever bounces back I think people will be a lot less loyal about leaving places with subpar salaries esp after all the layoffs
My experience has been that salary alone isn't much of a determinate for employee loyalty for the vast majority of people.
If the only reason someone worked for me was because I was willing to pay them the most, I think I'd re-think my entire company culture.
If the only reason someone worked for me was because I was willing to pay them the most, I think I'd re-think my entire company culture.
Being paid tip-dollar isn’t the biggest motivating factor for most people.
Feeling like you’re undervalued or being taken advantage of? That’s a huge factor in someone leaving.
Being paid substantially under market? I would feel both undervalued and taken advantage of.
Feeling like you’re undervalued or being taken advantage of? That’s a huge factor in someone leaving.
Being paid substantially under market? I would feel both undervalued and taken advantage of.
Thread is loaded with entitlement/privilege.
tech workers deserve higher salaries.
companies just don't want to pay it. they want you to make as little as possible
companies just don't want to pay it. they want you to make as little as possible
> tech workers deserve higher salaries.
That's a loaded statement. Salaries are set based on market conditions.
That's a loaded statement. Salaries are set based on market conditions.
> Salaries are set based on market conditions.
This is true, but the long-term market condition has been "There are not enough tech workers to meet the demand."
Honestly, I hate how extortionate the higher education system is in the US, but I benefit from it because it does an amazing job of choking off the supply of labor and keeping wages high. I'd still vote to provide free universal higher education, but the lack of it is what's keeping everyone in the tech sector afloat. Look at what the scourge of affordable tuition has done to European tech workers.
This is true, but the long-term market condition has been "There are not enough tech workers to meet the demand."
Honestly, I hate how extortionate the higher education system is in the US, but I benefit from it because it does an amazing job of choking off the supply of labor and keeping wages high. I'd still vote to provide free universal higher education, but the lack of it is what's keeping everyone in the tech sector afloat. Look at what the scourge of affordable tuition has done to European tech workers.
These statements are not mutually exclusive. Tech workers deserve higher salaries for the value they provide. And the market is to some extent manipulated, or we wouldn’t see massive layoffs and massive (and growing) profits. The difference is, tech workers don’t have an analog of layoffs at their disposal. Workers control labor supply of 1, when most companies individually control large multiples of the demand side. That doesn’t mean that workers deserve less.
And sometimes market conditions are "people refuse to work for us for less than 150k".
And sometimes you're in a time a place where laborers are expected to take a greater share of the benefits of their labor.
Actually, the word deserve is probably stronger. I think workers deserve to reap almost all of the benefits of their labor, as opposed to capital or leadership benefitting.
And sometimes you're in a time a place where laborers are expected to take a greater share of the benefits of their labor.
Actually, the word deserve is probably stronger. I think workers deserve to reap almost all of the benefits of their labor, as opposed to capital or leadership benefitting.
Tech companies are complaining, and have been since at least the dotcom era, that the market is incapable of providing the workers they desire. Two and a half decades later, they're still beating that same drum and demanding that the government dance to it by enacting policies that favor employers over workers and somehow it is still never enough.
They're set based on negotiations between employers and job seekers/their representatives. The market influences rates, but once negotiations start, every human foible, bias, and shortcoming has a role to play.
Your plumber deserves higher wages.
You just don't want to pay it. You want him to make as little as possible.
You just don't want to pay it. You want him to make as little as possible.
What slowdown is this? First I’m hearing of it. Author might need to separate imagination from reality.
It's not imagination, you're probably just insulated. Many people I know have been looking for entry-level positions for months (the city I/they live in is a tech hub) and are lucky to even hear a "no."
For entry-level? That’s been going on for a few years. No one wants to train up juniors anymore - they want to outsource offshore.
Then they wonder why they have to pay so much for mid level to seniors.
Then they wonder why they have to pay so much for mid level to seniors.
Skilled engineers are just in demand as ever, an engineer is different than a technician however. An engineer can take a problem and solve it using various tools, they can weigh the pros and cons of possible solutions and can determine what fits the situation. A skilled engineer understands the value of good coding practices, understands that even if an activity doesn't create value it is still important, such as documentation and testing.
A technician was a barista who went to a 3 month boot camp[1] that promised to turn him into a "Full Stack Developer" who got railroaded through the basics of the React-Express-Mongo stack (all of which is largely JS) and a certificate. A technician doesn't waste time understanding why the reports are coming out slightly wrong, they'll just go ahead and add some code that updates all the values that are off by 1. A technician is defined primarily by the tool they have and their ability to use it. A technician will do something like have an entire table returned to the client side and then filter through it in the frontend because it that's what they know how to do.[2]
For a while technician's could demand the salaries of skilled engineers by virtue of an enormous shortage, and the fact that VC capital meant there was always another unicorn to sling their code around at. The market is contracting now and the technicians are starting to be unable to demand six figure starting salaries, and get insulted that some of the offers are only 60-70k, which as an aside is still a decent salary for most people in the US, one of my good friends works in construction management and despite his years of experience he just transferred jobs, he was estatic at the prospect of possibly making 80k at his new job, but I digress. My point being I think that part of the problem is there was a bubble in tech salaries for a while that were unsustainable, and now we are seeing a mild corretion.
Notes:
1. I have nothing against boot camp grads who can be valuable engineers and contributors, if they either 1) Were already tinkering and interested in programming before and the boot camp was just their way of getting their foot in the door or 2) They understand the bootcamp is the beginning of their journey and not the end and are willing to put the effort into continuing education.
2. I know this comes off hard on technicians, but I have seen many even supposedly "senior" engineers who are overglorified technicians, the difference between a perpetual technician and an engineer is continually learning. Here's a tip, if you want to be a decent engineer you should probably have a decent grasp of at least 3 programming languages, be able to understand networking basics, and follow everything outlined in Norvig's "How to become a programmer in 10 years."
A technician was a barista who went to a 3 month boot camp[1] that promised to turn him into a "Full Stack Developer" who got railroaded through the basics of the React-Express-Mongo stack (all of which is largely JS) and a certificate. A technician doesn't waste time understanding why the reports are coming out slightly wrong, they'll just go ahead and add some code that updates all the values that are off by 1. A technician is defined primarily by the tool they have and their ability to use it. A technician will do something like have an entire table returned to the client side and then filter through it in the frontend because it that's what they know how to do.[2]
For a while technician's could demand the salaries of skilled engineers by virtue of an enormous shortage, and the fact that VC capital meant there was always another unicorn to sling their code around at. The market is contracting now and the technicians are starting to be unable to demand six figure starting salaries, and get insulted that some of the offers are only 60-70k, which as an aside is still a decent salary for most people in the US, one of my good friends works in construction management and despite his years of experience he just transferred jobs, he was estatic at the prospect of possibly making 80k at his new job, but I digress. My point being I think that part of the problem is there was a bubble in tech salaries for a while that were unsustainable, and now we are seeing a mild corretion.
Notes:
1. I have nothing against boot camp grads who can be valuable engineers and contributors, if they either 1) Were already tinkering and interested in programming before and the boot camp was just their way of getting their foot in the door or 2) They understand the bootcamp is the beginning of their journey and not the end and are willing to put the effort into continuing education.
2. I know this comes off hard on technicians, but I have seen many even supposedly "senior" engineers who are overglorified technicians, the difference between a perpetual technician and an engineer is continually learning. Here's a tip, if you want to be a decent engineer you should probably have a decent grasp of at least 3 programming languages, be able to understand networking basics, and follow everything outlined in Norvig's "How to become a programmer in 10 years."
> Skilled engineers are just in demand as ever
the problem is that many companies don't have good interviewing process to distinguish such engineers during hiring, so they are lost in crowd and salaries may receive hit.
the problem is that many companies don't have good interviewing process to distinguish such engineers during hiring, so they are lost in crowd and salaries may receive hit.
Meanwhile: "In November, Jay Powell, the chair of the Federal Reserve, said the labour force was 3.5mn workers shy of pre-pandemic forecasts. He said 2mn of the shortfall could be due to more people retiring early."
and
"Long-term demand for tech talent is not expected to abate. Based on its digital ambitions the EU alone wants 20mn technology specialists, which compares with the 9mn it had in 2021."[1]
Seems like the layoffs have been mostly a short-term reaction to the shock of the pandemic era coming to a close. Long-term, we'll soon be back to the steady drumbeat of tech worker shortages.
[1] https://www.ft.com/content/b1b710a1-6d12-43e5-8508-ae4584a72...
and
"Long-term demand for tech talent is not expected to abate. Based on its digital ambitions the EU alone wants 20mn technology specialists, which compares with the 9mn it had in 2021."[1]
Seems like the layoffs have been mostly a short-term reaction to the shock of the pandemic era coming to a close. Long-term, we'll soon be back to the steady drumbeat of tech worker shortages.
[1] https://www.ft.com/content/b1b710a1-6d12-43e5-8508-ae4584a72...
We had more than 1 million, mostly older experienced workers die from covid. Why is anyone surprised we have a labor shortage?
Because pretending that happened and is still happening would be contrary to the narrative that labor (vs. Capital) needs to be reigned in to make the economy broadly functional again. Inflation is being driven by corporate price gouging and labor shortages (outside of those resulting from the pandemic) are being driven by the wildly unequal distribution of returns to owners vs workers.
COVID’s on track to kill another 200K people in the US this year, plus cause serious health problems for who knows how many more, so I don’t expect any of this to abate. They’ll just keep jacking up interest rates and screaming “NOBODY WANTS TO WORK ANYMORE” until the whole thing implodes.
COVID’s on track to kill another 200K people in the US this year, plus cause serious health problems for who knows how many more, so I don’t expect any of this to abate. They’ll just keep jacking up interest rates and screaming “NOBODY WANTS TO WORK ANYMORE” until the whole thing implodes.
This ^, exactly this ^
[deleted]
I've found the issue isnt high performing engineers, they're gonna get paid.
The issue is middling engineers and junior engineers where before they would expect a 130k-150k salary in a tier 1 city, those offers are gone.
The issue is middling engineers and junior engineers where before they would expect a 130k-150k salary in a tier 1 city, those offers are gone.
I don't know how the folks just starting out are finding jobs. Seems like no one wants to hire juniors anymore unless it's for pennies and they can work you to the bone.
I think you need to look outside traditional tech industry and instead look at industries where the code is a legacy behemoth or a cost center but still critical. A trucking company that uses code for planning and routing. The software that a federal agency uses to manage its workforce. A local or regional bank that has a lot of java written in the 90s that it needs bug fixing for.
Eh, I’m a mid level dev, and have worked for those sorts of companies in the past, but even they won’t hire me anymore. I’m not sure if they filled all their open roles off the layoff or what.
For example I used to work for a F500 retail company prior to and during the pandemic. They had a surprisingly large development department and has tons of jobs available prior to 2020. I was able to get in via a cold application and a seamless interview experience. More recently, I’ve tried going back and they barely have any non lead roles, and I tend to get screened out of the few roles they do post. I even got referrals from some senior people at companies like who think I’d get a good fit only to get screened out because the recruiter/hiring manager doesn’t like that I can’t check off their alphabet soup checklist. Should have spent my career doing resume driven development.
For example I used to work for a F500 retail company prior to and during the pandemic. They had a surprisingly large development department and has tons of jobs available prior to 2020. I was able to get in via a cold application and a seamless interview experience. More recently, I’ve tried going back and they barely have any non lead roles, and I tend to get screened out of the few roles they do post. I even got referrals from some senior people at companies like who think I’d get a good fit only to get screened out because the recruiter/hiring manager doesn’t like that I can’t check off their alphabet soup checklist. Should have spent my career doing resume driven development.
By never saying you are a junior.
Some people figure it out.
Contract, make an LLC for more contracting, call that LLC experience, interview as senior engineer.
Some people figure it out.
Contract, make an LLC for more contracting, call that LLC experience, interview as senior engineer.
It's easier to do this nowadays. If you are smart, hard working, after a year and with AI in your pocket it should be easier than ever to work like someone with 3 years in a given space.
Don’t identify as a junior. Just say you’re a “software engineer” and don’t put qualifiers that would turn off employers
I think that makes sense. so many experienced employees have been laid off that companies don't need to hire newbies any more. Six years I started working for a company that hired 3 senior devs and boatloads of bootcamp grads. for a new project. I doubt that would happen now.
and they are expecting RTO in high cost of living areas!
Everyone always says that tech doesn't need unions because of the ability to negotiate. Doesn't seem to be working out well for the industry as a whole.
We have basically the same problem as UPS/Auto industry -> no trickle down.
Top 3 auto companies set to make 32 Billion this year. -> 580,000 employees Apple profit is 250 bill -> 164,000 employees
We have basically the same problem as UPS/Auto industry -> no trickle down.
Top 3 auto companies set to make 32 Billion this year. -> 580,000 employees Apple profit is 250 bill -> 164,000 employees
As in the "high salaries" of tech workers is just what average folks used to make relatively speaking previous decades.