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

Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

hackernoon.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 198 posts

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#61

Post by dv_dt »

wolfspider wrote: post #45
vinceguidry wrote: post #17

The author of the article is misinformed about the true landscape of wealth and income inequality. The middle class is ultimately defined by the ability and need to build your own safety net. The upper middle class is able to do this with plenty of wealth to spare for luxuries like private schooling for their kids, income security is provided by their network. Just tap your network and find another job. The upper mid…

This is so horribly wrong- I've known upper middle class that get there by not spending hardly anything and owning their own business and operating it (e.g. Gas Station + Auto Repair). No leeching there. No accounting for "Luck" here or proximity to resources and opportunity. Do they actually teach this in schools or what nowadays? starting to seem prevalent. Life is what you make it, tomorrow holds no promises, oppo…

Of upper middle class folks who own their own businesses that I have met, more of them own their parents business or a spinoff of their parents business. Those that do not, often have come from an upper or upper middle class background where it was a very low risk situation for them to spend a year trying to get an odd business off the ground - they could always fall back to their parents, or their personal network. There are a few who built their own businesses from the ground up, but many of them will tell you that it was luck at multiple points that they were able to latch onto a workable cashflow (not to discount the hard work to explore that cashflow, and smarts to recognize and expand it...).

Edit: Addendum, access to capital is key to reducing risk on the path to success, and it can be formally there or informally there. If you listen to podcasts, try "How I built this", interviewing a range of business founders. You have to listen for it, but a huge number start as, oh I worked in the financial industry and then had this idea..., or oh my parents were a lawyer and a physician... etc... The founder of Starbucks, Howard Schultz was saved from being ripped off from his business by a Seattle mogul by Bill Gates, Sr (yes father of that Bill Gates...).

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#62

Post by brighteyes »

> Technology is the one career that has an optimistic future, isn’t beholden by regulation and credential inflation, and actually attempts to create some sort of meritocracy

One the one hand, tech might have less regulation than others - you can call yourself a "software engineer" and work as one without any formal credentials.

But on the other hand, plenty of other fields have optimistic futures and good guarantees of employment, the exact things the author is worried about (and the regulation in those fields often helps achieve those goals).

For example, nurses need to be certified but then they work in a field with good salaries and plenty of jobs in a rapidly growing market:

https://www.bls.gov/ooh/healthcare/registered-nurses.htm

Tech is an ok industry to work in, but there are others. Anyone that says "tech is the only good career" is either uninformed, living in a bubble, or a snob.

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#63

Post by outworlder »

twodave wrote: post #37

I don't get why people ever thought a job was anything other than a strictly professional relationship. Your employer is not your family, and if they say you are then that's a red flag because it means your employer will want you to give them more than they deserve. If you are relying on a business to pay your living expenses indefinitely because you've been loyal or whatever other nonsense, that is lunacy. If you're…

> If you're not producing some kind of value then you are dragging your company down, and you should be let go.

Have you worked at big companies? This has nothing to do with producing value. It has to do with whatever "strategic direction" the company wants to take. You can be profitable, but your whole division will be cut off if there is a conflict with whatever a more powerful exec is doing.

Layoffs are different from firing "low performers".

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#64

Post by rubicon33 »

Spooky23 wrote: post #33
rubicon33 wrote: post #10

> Fewer and fewer careers offer a stable path to the financial and personal security that underwrote the Baby Boomers’ “American Dream.” Technology is the one career that has an optimistic future, isn’t beholden by regulation and credential inflation, and actually attempts to create some sort of meritocracy, and so, those that are fortunate enough to be in it want to preserve the one island of paradise left. This rea…

Tech is not a meritocracy. Many of us like to think of it that way, but the reality is that most of the jobs associated with tech are bullshit, and much of tech headcount is IT. The last big place that I worked could easily cut tech headcount in half and hardly notice. A decade from now they can probably reduce headcount 80% in IT and 75% in the business. The impact of global growth won’t impact jobs directly for awh…

> The impact of global growth won’t impact jobs directly for awhile.

That's a definitive statement that is more nuanced than that. There are definitely people (myself included) who have been directly impacted by global tech outsourcing.

I won't get into the specifics but I can tell you that there are an increasing number of dev shops outside of the US that are specializing in solid communication. That's been one of the biggest problems and hesitations from US businesses. You need a manager in the other country, who is good. These companies are specializing in providing a excellent teams that at a fraction of the cost of a US team.

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#65

Post by ef4 »

logicx24 wrote: post #13
zeveb wrote: post #3

I'm not certain what he expects: lifetime risk-free employment? Yeah, there's stress involved with risk. But the risk one has as an upper-middle-class American is tech is nothing compared to the risks that others alive today face, and less than nothing compared to the risks that others in the past have faced. Nothing last forever. Not a job — not even one's life. Make the most of it while you can.

Author here. Not sure why you're being downvoted, I completely I agree with this. The fact that even upper middle class doesn't guarantee any real security was a huge wake-up call for me, and I can't imagine what it's like for everyone else.

I think as you gain more experience and perspective you will look back and realize that you simply weren't upper middle class yet. It's not about income (which is just a point-in-time metric that can change in an instant), it's about assets.

Programmers have a much better shot at establishing this kind of security than most people, because you should be making 2x to 3x median income for your area, which means you can live on 1x median income and invest the rest.

A lot of the people I've worked with as a programmer over the past 14 years have done effectively that, so by now they have a lot of assets. That is what upper middle class security looks like.

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#66

Post by floodyberry- »

trhway wrote: post #5

this is why i don't move out of Bay Area - me and my acquaintances have been through lay offs here at various years, during the booms and busts, and nobody had any significant issues promptly finding a new job (with a salary increase usually :). Compare that to, for example, the next best thing in US tech - when AMZN says come to Seattle i always imagine being laid off from it few years down the road (with a non-comp…

> and nobody had any significant issues promptly finding a new job (with a salary increase usually :)

Way to disprove the myth of upper middle class security!

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#67

Post by desireco42 »

I am one of those weirdos, that change jobs so often, I do contracting often enough, that I get fired quite often, or quit.

I remember when one big corp I had long term contract decided to 'trim the fat' and laid us all. My neighbor felt bad and wanted to make lunch for me. I explained her that the same day, I went to another big corp (pretending to be startup) and got much higher rate I always wanted.

That lasted a year, then I was on my own again.

It really makes you stronger, your wife more stressed out, but my skills are way more awesome, I contribute way more and I don't care if you need to fire me. It will make me sad for sure, as I care about people I work with.

Anyhow, this is still true. I would love to have a place I can stay for 10-15 yrs like 'normal people'.

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#68

Post by taurath »

dugluak wrote: post #49
refurb wrote: post #2

Having been laid off due to downsizing, I think everyone should go through it at least once. Sure, the first time will leave you panic stricken, but you'll come out the other side with a lot more clarity about the employee-employer relationship. You are disposable. Even the CEO is disposable (as I've seen many times). Once you realize that, you'll stop the BS about loyalty to your company. It's a business arrangement…

CEO is disposable, but often gets a golden parachute.

In those terms, its usually a hit to reputation, though in general its RARE that a "reputation" hit will prevent an ex-CEO from getting another CEO job, but usually means they won't get a "better" CEO/Executive position.

Likewise, if you're working at a company (Facebook say) that has a scandal, get laid off, you're probably gonna be able to find another job.

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#69

Post by kjdndisneinj »

rubicon33 wrote: post #10

> Fewer and fewer careers offer a stable path to the financial and personal security that underwrote the Baby Boomers’ “American Dream.” Technology is the one career that has an optimistic future, isn’t beholden by regulation and credential inflation, and actually attempts to create some sort of meritocracy, and so, those that are fortunate enough to be in it want to preserve the one island of paradise left. This rea…

> quickly reducing the implicit bargaining power that we've enjoyed for the last 10 years.

Why not codify that bargaining power into a series of employee-owned organizations that are able to negotiate for salaries in line with that cost of living?

There might be some growing pains, but it would certainly be better than the current trend of a few CEOs, VCs, and upper managers hoarding capital for little more than artificially expensive Bay Area real estate.

Re: Getting Laid Off in Tech: The Myth of Upper Middle Class Security

#70

Post by justherefortart »

trentnix wrote: post #58
justherefortart wrote: post #50

Work for yourself. That's the answer. One job means you get fired and you're looking for a new boss. 10 clients means if one fires you, you still have 9 you're hopefully keeping happy. I try to follow what I read about Gates starting Microsoft in some Biography. He tried to keep 2x the salary of all the employees as cash on hand, so if something went bad, they could try to weather the storm as long as possible. So be…

I own my own business, which is kinda the same thing as working for yourself. Two bits of advice: 1. The first check you don't write is usually the one to yourself. You're the only worker that will show up for free. 2. The problem with being your own boss is that your boss is always around. I've never known stress and uncertainty like being a business owner. But I feel like I've learned a lot and am better for it. An…

Why wouldn't your first check be to yourself?

I guess I'm well rounded so that doesn't really apply to me. I hire for roles that consume my time but still provide value (the necessary busy work).

I'm a much worse employee as the proud failure of 7 startups (on #8 at the moment). So much bullshit, waste, politics, needless meetings, etc., that working for a company again is one of the most painful things I've ever had to do besides death of a family member or divorcing my first wife (that was #1 BTW).

I will agree with your #2, work life balance can be hard. But if you find yourself not wanting to work on a Wednesday, you can just not work that day. If you're particularly inspired on a Saturday, you can go all in.

My biggest issue was around this (startup #3, first fully self funded). I felt if I was not working every waking moment, I was failing. I learned my way out of that one eventually.

Discipline is the key in working for yourself. I'm lucky that my parents were both entrepreneurs. I saw them fail and succeed (and fail and succeed again...).

Post reply on HN