4 years experience probably makes you more of a mid to senior developer. Why even bother applying to positions below your level. That is probably why you cannot get one.
Ask HN: Why not more hiring of junior devs, then on-the-job-training?
261–270 of 495 posts
Re: Ask HN: Why not more hiring of junior devs, then on-the-job-training?
#262Earlier quoted context omitted.
A friend of mine runs a web dev shop and I have seen him train at least six people from zero-to-pro (very smart, fast learners with a math background) and what you described is exactly what happens. Once they become medium/advanced-level proficient they often quit and move on to other, bigger companies. If there was some formal, or informal understanding that candidates "trained on the job" would stay for a few years…
Pay them more. Isn't this why most junior devs leave? Because they are getting crap junior dev salaries? Once you've trained them they are no longer junior devs. The market certainly doesn't think so.
Pay or being capped as the junior in other peoples eyes.
In my first dev job, which was a fantastic job, some gatekeepers wouldn't give up access or tasks that I was better suited for.
I was always going to be a bit younger, always the junior guy on the team, despite the fact I had relevant education and, in my opinion, was probably better at the job.
Eventually I left and they were upset, but I didn't like being held back. Not everyone is like that though.
Nowadays I build and run teams. I don't do any real technical work unless I need to show a junior a working example on how to do it. I'd rather watch them learn and grow.
Re: Ask HN: Why not more hiring of junior devs, then on-the-job-training?
#263Earlier quoted context omitted.
Give proper annual raises to pay people what they’re worth instead of barely keeping up with inflation. After two years, you’re essentially a mid-level engineer and the money you can command is way more than what a junior developer with two annual “raises” is typically paid.
It's not just the salary. It's often about personal growth and wanderlust. Let me try an odd comparison: after graduating, would you choose to live with your parents if they fed you even more and offered you an even bigger room with more furniture ?
Careful about using that analogy. While the Western world would most likely choose to leave, the Eastern world would more likely do the opposite.
Re: Ask HN: Why not more hiring of junior devs, then on-the-job-training?
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
In Australia, you'd probably make more money in construction vs software engineering.
That doesn't necessarily mean you'll be happier, however. Most construction jobs are very hard on the body.
Maybe, maybe not. I was pretty happy when I was doing construction.
Re: Ask HN: Why not more hiring of junior devs, then on-the-job-training?
#265Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem from zero to hero is more than that. Entry-level college graduate non-developer positions might net 50-60k even in the Bay Area. So if you hire a 22 year old with a degree at that base and then teach them how to be a react pro over the course of two years they will then be eligible for 100k+ salaries. That's a 200%+ increase that is very difficult for even modern businesses to take sitting down. If Starbu…
>>That's a 200%+ increase that is very difficult for even modern businesses to take sitting down. Because businesses would rather have a person leave and then hire someone at 1.5x or 2x their salary than just pay the first person 2x what they were making the year before. This happens all the time . Employers want to have 2x people at 1x prices, and that doesn't work for long.
I am not business savvy so I am curious why businesses choose to do this.
Re: Ask HN: Why not more hiring of junior devs, then on-the-job-training?
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
A friend of mine runs a web dev shop and I have seen him train at least six people from zero-to-pro (very smart, fast learners with a math background) and what you described is exactly what happens. Once they become medium/advanced-level proficient they often quit and move on to other, bigger companies. If there was some formal, or informal understanding that candidates "trained on the job" would stay for a few years…
The other replies touch on this, but I'm gonna get straight to the point: Does your friend give them actual, meaningful raises as they grow? Is he actually paying competitively to begin with? Because I think if you have this pattern that consistently, it's really likely that either you're underpaying to begin with or your raises suck or are not even present. I love working at small companies. It's by far my preferenc…
Maybe they simply can't afford to pay more. Big companies tend to have a bigger budget.
Re: Ask HN: Why not more hiring of junior devs, then on-the-job-training?
#267Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That's the weird thing — they (because there are two cofounders) were actually paying very competitive salaries (for the local market). I was impressed to hear what some of them were making. So it's not the money. This is only half of what I asked. What about the raises? As someone in another thread chain pointed out, the expected raise from job leaping is maybe 15%. How did the raises your friend gave compare to t…
In fact in the good big companies, they crave for employee growth. Time and money for training, meaningful career growth, and pay growth, major tech switches without changing jobs. I find that small companies are often much worse in all these metrics. As a jr employee they’ll never rise to chief architect - your friend, the cofounder, has that job. And is never giving it up. Plus thanks to cash crunch, making shortcu…
Big companies will spend money on training but personally I have learned a lot more at smaller places because I was able to explore a lot more and my contributions had a lot more impact on the buisiness overall.
Re: Ask HN: Why not more hiring of junior devs, then on-the-job-training?
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
Look, if you want to talk economics and get taken seriously, you need to get your terminology straight. It's not an economic shortage when you're in a store full of goods that you can't afford. It's a shortage when the shelves are empty .
The shelves are empty because all of the goods are elsewhere. We've already established that. By your self-contradictory definition, the term "shortage" loses its meaning and ceases to exist. Because with enough money, you can always buy what you need. If you need a few tons of platinum to do something and discover that (hypothetically) there isn't actually that much here on Earth, you could build spaceships to go mi…
> The shelves are empty because all of the goods are elsewhere. We've already established that.
No we haven't. I can assure you, the "shelves" of developers that companies in Europe have access to are far from empty. It's a matter of price. Developers from all over the world would flock to Europe if the pay was outstanding.
Having said that, let's imagine the scenario where some country allows zero immigration, all its developers are employed and would not switch jobs at any price (which is the crucial part), then you'll have a shortage. I'm not aware that such a country exists.
> If you need a few tons of platinum to do something and discover that (hypothetically) there isn't actually that much here on Earth, you could build spaceships to go mine it from the asteroids with enough money. Bam! No shortage.
If there's nobody that can meet demand of the platinum at any price, then there indeed is a shortage. Platinum that is in the ground or in outer space is not part of the supply.
> It doesn't really matter if you take me seriously, though, so I'm not going to keep expending effort trying to convince you to change your mind when you're not willing to consider my ideas.
Nobody who has basic literacy in economics will take you seriously if you can't get your terminology straight. Seriously, just look it up. Your "ideas" are besides the point. Yes, I get it, there are companies that can't afford developers. That is not a shortage in the economic sense of the word.
Re: Ask HN: Why not more hiring of junior devs, then on-the-job-training?
#269Earlier quoted context omitted.
A friend of mine runs a web dev shop and I have seen him train at least six people from zero-to-pro (very smart, fast learners with a math background) and what you described is exactly what happens. Once they become medium/advanced-level proficient they often quit and move on to other, bigger companies. If there was some formal, or informal understanding that candidates "trained on the job" would stay for a few years…
I did this. I landed my first job out of school way below industry rates (like 2/3 typical junior in my area, mostly because I'm bad at negotiation), got a tiny (~2%) salary bump at 6mo and then nothing for a year. I never felt comfortable asking for a big raise, despite learning a lot and contributing a lot, and after a year the bump at 6mo felt more like a slap than anything. I jumped ship when another opportunity…
I have been working for a"consultancy" (just an outsourcing place in reality). They low balled me on my initial salary but I was desperate to leave the previous job so I took it. After a year I was told I did a good job, but I saw not getting any increase because of salary bands. Like you this is not something I am especially good at negotiating.
Took me less than a month to find someone who was offering significantly better salary, yet the consultancy seemed surprised when I told them. Suddenly the salary bands became a lot more flexible.
I shouldn't need to have another job offer to get offered pay rise in line with inflation.
Re: Ask HN: Why not more hiring of junior devs, then on-the-job-training?
#270Earlier quoted context omitted.
> very smart, fast learners Well that is your friends first problem! For a smart fast learner your friend isn’t providing a benefit worth the cost of a couple of years of low job growth. Your friend should look for candidates who are average learners, want a steady paycheck, and don’t want to do anything tech related outside of work hours.
Smart fast learner is not in opposition to want steady paycheck nor with "does non tech outside of work". The two don't imply average learner either.
Sure - I’m saying you want a combination of the three.