Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The quitting economy

aeon.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 196 posts

Re: The quitting economy

#111

Post by spinlock »

mcguire wrote: post #102
tmat wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This happened to me as well, the only way I was able to get above that plateau was to go freelance and start my own thing. Charging a fair market value for my time. Best decision I ever made.

That's about what I've decided, but all the freelance work I've seen available has been web development---the kind of thing I'm trying to escape. Freelancing for a systems programmer has a "I can't get there from here" problem, particularly since I'm crap-tastic at networking.

I feel like there's a market for independent contract sales. I would love to pay 15% of a contract to someone who could source and close contracts for me.

Unfortunately, I think there's no way to escape the need to network. But, it's a learnable skill so you just have to put in the time and effort.

Re: The quitting economy

#112

Post by spinlock »

s73ver wrote: post #86
0x4f3759df wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One idea I've heard is that Wall Street has solved this problem in the form of bonuses. If companies want their talent to stick around, a bonus structure would go along way, especially since a quick job move can get a person $10k bump.

Don't many of the big tech companies have this with their stock options? And I've heard that, with the Wall Street approach, your bonus is the lion's share of your income for the year. If true, I don't know if I'd like to go to that, given the propensity for letting people go in this field.

A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Wall Street bonuses are cash. Your options are restricted and the value is very unknowable.

Re: The quitting economy

#113

Post by jacobush »

joshuahutt wrote: post #101
xxSparkleSxx wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First job out of college Inhad something to prove and worked my ass off. What I did was extremely measurable and I was easily doing 2x the work compared to the department average. Every single day. 1.5% raise the first year, made a huge fuss the second year and asked for a large raise (because my numbers of were insane) and only managed a 4% raise (promotion included). I've been at a new job for about a year and have…

I discovered early on that, at least in larger companies, advancement in a role is based on your strategic value to the company, and not even remotely related to your work ethic. If your manager is willing to go to bat for you, you stand a chance of getting a meaningful raise. And that depends on whether you can demonstrably make their job easier. Working "hard" only serves to let you feel good about yourself.

Yes. Except, "strategic value to the manager"

Re: The quitting economy

#114

Post by _delirium »

CalRobert wrote: post #81
currymj wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do devs get paid in London on average? I always had the impression, perhaps wrong, that software engineers seem underpaid in England relative to the US, even accounting for currency and cost of living and such (which, probably London is as bad as SF on that front). (i've also gotten the impression that there's not the same level of cultural esteem for engineers and scientists and such in England, and that this m…

No personal experience, but salaries in Europe seem, on the whole, utterly pathetic compared to the US, at least looking at listings. I don't get the impression London bucks this trend. That being said, I moved to Europe and am pretty happy with where I'm at. It helped that my first job was with a company that had SF and Dublin offices, and I knew what the rate in SF was. It's public sector and Ireland, but here's an…

Salaries overall in the UK are comparable to the US (similar median), but programming falls at a different place on the salary curve. In the US, programmer is among the highest-paid professions, often earning 2-3x what would be a typical salary in other white-collar, professional jobs. In the UK that's not the case, and programmers earn just a typical white-collar salary that you'd earn in any job that requires university-level qualifications (or equivalent experience).

Unlike the US, I don't believe there is much of a perception of a "STEM shortage", which may be a contributing factor. Programmers are just not seen as particularly hard to find, at least no more than any other skilled profession. Especially after the fall of the Iron Curtain, which brought in a lot of highly skilled STEM folks into the common market.

Re: The quitting economy

#115

Post by TomSawyer »

sidlls wrote: post #107
TomSawyer wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and being passionate about your work — such as wanting to work with new developments in your chosen field or changing jobs for an opportunity where you'll be better able to apply your talents to your field of interest — is just a capitalist ploy.

It's not a capitalist ploy. Capitalists do exploit the passionate (to the detriment of us all) by giving them what they ask for: lower compensation in return for providing a job they're "passionate" about. It's not really any different from them exploiting youth.

The exploited are being tricked into believing that there's intangible value in spending their life's work on something that they believe in and are passionate about, right? It's only virtuous to do that if someone doesn't profit from it, correct?

Re: The quitting economy

#116

Post by nfriedly »

pm90 wrote: post #54
usgroup wrote: post #2

This is very noticeable in London. It's a relative rarity to find a dev that's worked anywhere longer than a couple years. The simple economics of it is that until a certain salary, there is no easier way to ratchet up the pay scale then to use the negotiating leverage of having a job to get the next one on better terms. Meanwhile, the supply situation for devs is such that employers have to accept the situation. I'm…

London seems like a place that could easily attract amazing developers simply by raising salaries. The money is there...it is the fucking financial capital of the world (well maybe 2nd after NYC). If the executives at UK financial companies wouldn't artificially hold down salaries, there could probably be a lot more innovation and a much better marketplace for tech workers.

Yea, seriously. I've gotten multiple recruiter spam emails that offer the equivalent less than half of my current salary for an engineering job in London. No, thanks.

Re: The quitting economy

#117

Post by [deleted] »

tradesmanhelix wrote: post #38
haburka wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue with abandoning the maximizing the shareholders profit mentality is that it has to be replaced with something else, and unless we change the way investment works, then it will still be serving the shareholders. The shareholders should be the one with power to make decisions, as they own the company. Additionally, not all companies serve greedy shareholders. Believe it or not, shareholders are people too who…

The problem with the "shareholder value only" model is its focus on generating short-term returns vs. creating long-term value. How is this sustainable? I don't think we should abandon shareholder profit completely (after all, companies do need to make money in order to stay in business). However, I do think the philosophy needs to be balanced with other aims like investment in employees, giving back to the community…

[deleted]

Re: The quitting economy

#118

Post by dnh44 »

spinlock wrote: post #111
mcguire wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's about what I've decided, but all the freelance work I've seen available has been web development---the kind of thing I'm trying to escape. Freelancing for a systems programmer has a "I can't get there from here" problem, particularly since I'm crap-tastic at networking.

I feel like there's a market for independent contract sales. I would love to pay 15% of a contract to someone who could source and close contracts for me. Unfortunately, I think there's no way to escape the need to network. But, it's a learnable skill so you just have to put in the time and effort.

The people who can close sales end up starting companies and they hire programmers. They end up taking a lot more than 15%.

Re: The quitting economy

#119

Post by georgeecollins »

wyc wrote: post #18

The most recent resource I've read on this was The Alliance by Reid Hoffman. In it, he postulates that both employees and employers are lying through their teeth: employers tell employees about the benefits, investment in its people, and family-feel. Employees say they want to be lifers. This never happens. Instead, 2 years is a pretty common stretch before turnover in white collar jobs, especially for younger folk.…

There are two problems to this in my mind: people are always scrambling for the rare "experienced" people because too little training happens. The other problem is that the best project work I have seen have come from experienced, cohesive teams. It's true that many experienced teams are not cohesive or even sometimes skilled. But I think continuity helps.

A company wonders why their development team is performing and they decide they don't have hotshots, or need more "hotshots" they can recruit from whatever company they think is a good place they can poach from. Communicating to the team that if you want to grow or be promoted, switch jobs. So a lot of money is spent and chaos created to get the results that a solid, if not brilliant or terribly experienced team, could accomplish.

Re: The quitting economy

#120

Post by georgeecollins »

wyc wrote: post #18

The most recent resource I've read on this was The Alliance by Reid Hoffman. In it, he postulates that both employees and employers are lying through their teeth: employers tell employees about the benefits, investment in its people, and family-feel. Employees say they want to be lifers. This never happens. Instead, 2 years is a pretty common stretch before turnover in white collar jobs, especially for younger folk.…

There are two problems to this in my mind: people are always scrambling for the rare "experienced" people because too little training happens. The other problem is that the best project work I have seen have come from experienced, cohesive teams. It's true that many experienced teams are not cohesive or even sometimes skilled. But I think continuity helps.

A company wonders why their development team is performing and they decide they don't have hotshots, or need more "hotshots" they can recruit from whatever company they think is a good place they can poach from. Communicating to the team that if you want to grow or be promoted, switch jobs. So a lot of money is spent and chaos created to get the results that a solid, if not brilliant or terribly experienced team, could accomplish.

Post reply on HN