Live data from Hacker News

If software engineering is in demand, why is it so hard to get a job?

betterprogramming.pub

41–50 of 586 posts

Re: If software engineering is in demand, why is it so hard to get a job?

#41
post #14

Very few firms want to hire juniors, while nearly all firms desire senior-level talent. This manifests inflated job vacancies because so many firms have an evergreen job posting for "Senior Full Stack". Because talent is scarce these roles rarely get filled (hiring managers expect million-dollar candidates to accept $100-200k compensation). Also, because lots of software requires specific expertise, there are vacanci…

seems like a chicken and egg problem

how are senior engineers supposed to be created if very few companies are willing to train junior engineers? Why aren't these companies offering paid apprenticeships if they are so desperate for workers?

Re: If software engineering is in demand, why is it so hard to get a job?

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To go in line with firms not wanting to hire juniors, I think generally firms do not want to invest heavily in employee training or education. I would, for example, happily make a shift from CRUD webdev and distributed networking to hardware and embedded and more lower level type work, but I doubt a firm would hire me near my current level and train me up.

I think you hit it on the nose. Companies don't want to invest in training their new hires. They just want someone to hit the ground running with as little hand holding as possible.

It doesn't help that, for a certain slice of the software industry, staying in a position for 18-24 months has almost been normed. If it's unlikely that your hire is going to be there for more than a couple of years, why on earth would you "invest" in them. It's not like you'll get a return on that investment.

Re: If software engineering is in demand, why is it so hard to get a job?

#43
post #8
post #3

It's hard to get a job because there are a lot of charlatans out there and it's often very hard to get rid of them once hired. Even worse is hiring someone merely mediocre and not actively harmful. That said of course the modern coding interview is I think only very loosely correlated with quality.

I get the feeling that mediocre business should be able to run just fine on mediocre people. So it can't be that bad. Of course, every business likes to pretend they're the top and can only hire top talent.

Top talent means different things to different businesses and many people forget or don't see that. Most companies don't need and are probably actively hurt by people that would be considered top talent at Facebook or something; they need people who can churn away on boring stuff (maintenance, crud, ...), reliably and in a predictable way from 9-5, 4-5 days / week. And like that kind of job and want to do it for decades and decades on end for you; people who don't reload LinkedIn looking for 'new challenges with the latest framework' 20x a day. I would like to hire almost only 'top talent' like that. I like to have 1-2 top performers that 'could've or did' work for Google etc but the rest, no; it's actually risky to have those people in that position because they get bored too quickly, job hop, like new things too much, want to redo stuff they think is badly done etc. Money is not really a thing that binds them either (maybe if you go crazy town, but who besides the FAANGs can pay that?): I had people walk off that were paid US wages in Spain by us (work from home, before covid) because they 'found a more interesting opportunity for their career'. That's not top talent to me.

Edit: and that similarly goes for how you define mediocre; I think my toptalents are your mediocre. I'll have your mediocre please!

Re: If software engineering is in demand, why is it so hard to get a job?

#44
I want to challenge the premise of this article.

Is there evidence that's it's hard for devs to get a job in general? E.g. The average hiring times for software devs (on popular platforms) in London was on the order of a couple of weeks.

I know from personal experience that junior devs from bootcamps were getting snapped up quickly - source, I worked for 3 years in the recruitment industry and also hired many devs in that time.

Doesn't seem to be a problem in general?

Re: If software engineering is in demand, why is it so hard to get a job?

#45
post #14

Very few firms want to hire juniors, while nearly all firms desire senior-level talent. This manifests inflated job vacancies because so many firms have an evergreen job posting for "Senior Full Stack". Because talent is scarce these roles rarely get filled (hiring managers expect million-dollar candidates to accept $100-200k compensation). Also, because lots of software requires specific expertise, there are vacanci…

To go in line with firms not wanting to hire juniors, I think generally firms do not want to invest heavily in employee training or education. I would, for example, happily make a shift from CRUD webdev and distributed networking to hardware and embedded and more lower level type work, but I doubt a firm would hire me near my current level and train me up.

The problem is likely that most people are willing to learn on the job, but then take that learning and go get a better job. A large portion of this problem is companies not being willing to increase pay to match the value you add by learning that skill, but it does lead to the doubt about bothering to train.

Re: If software engineering is in demand, why is it so hard to get a job?

#46
The demand for programmers is largely becoming a myth in my experiences. I work in public sector digitalisation in Denmark and as such come into contact with a lot of private sector companies from whom we buy development, I also work as an external examiner for CS students to keep up with the field and spot potential candidates.

A decade ago my region of the country would produce maybe 50 fresh CS candidates a year, now it’s closer to 500 spread across multiple different educations. This may not sound like a lot, but in a region of 1 million people it’s actually quite a lot, and those are the technical CS/SE types not the myriad of soft IT/design/communication educations which produce a further couple of thousand each year. It’s like this because we (as in the employers) have been telling everyone we needed more and still need more for that same decade. But this is a half truth. We don’t actually need more people to become CS candidates, we need more trained plumbers who are proficient in X technology that we can use for 5-10 years until they leave us or we replace them with someone cheaper. And how do you get cheap labour? Well, one way is to make sure enough people are educated in what you need them to be, and while it may have been the case that the world needed more CS candidates a decade ago that is no longer the case, but it’ll take a while for young people to realise this.

Well that’s one part of it, the other part is how the educational organisations educate our young people by giving them the wrong kind of skills. I’m not exactly sure why they’ve abandoned teaching people actual computer science, but the part that the most students fail on and the part that shrinks year by year is now computers work. I can see how the fundamentals aren’t as necessary as they were in the 90ies when I got my degree, and I also remember how much some of us hated that stuff even back then. But it’s what’s required to fill the best paying jobs, like running the cobol systems for a bank. Cobol itself isn’t hard, a cobol system is hard because it came with nothing and was build in a time where everyone invented the wheel their own way. So what you need to become a good hire for such a system is all the basic CS knowledge that nobody no longer teaches so that you may understand and reverse engineer whatever all those cobol programmers did in the 50 years before you arrived.

It’ll be sort of interesting to see where it lands us though, but I’d frankly get into actual plumbing if I was young today because that’s bound to be a better career for most people who aren’t aces in either the technical or the financial/management side of CS.

Re: If software engineering is in demand, why is it so hard to get a job?

#48
post #14

Very few firms want to hire juniors, while nearly all firms desire senior-level talent. This manifests inflated job vacancies because so many firms have an evergreen job posting for "Senior Full Stack". Because talent is scarce these roles rarely get filled (hiring managers expect million-dollar candidates to accept $100-200k compensation). Also, because lots of software requires specific expertise, there are vacanci…

Most software positions at SpaceX, even those working on critical flight code, do not require aerospace knowledge. And SpaceX is not a great example as they hire a lot of interns and junior people willing to grind.

I find this insane and terrifying.

Re: If software engineering is in demand, why is it so hard to get a job?

#49
post #20
post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get the feeling that mediocre business should be able to run just fine on mediocre people. So it can't be that bad. Of course, every business likes to pretend they're the top and can only hire top talent.

A team of well managed mediocre members will be less of a headache and ultimately more value to a company than a team of rockstars. Besides all that, mediocre literally means average. You (collective) should be fine with average and stop overloading terms making general life more difficult than it needs to be.

Exactly this. Mismanaged rockstars going off in different directions is chaos.

I have no clue how the term 'mediocre' has come to mean essentially bottom of the barrel proficiency that is still the minimum hiring level quality. The top dog companies can be elitist, but when the company is "MegaCrudSoftware Inc.", it's just plain narcissism. Many Reddit/HN posters exude this in the individual sense and believe they're god's gift to the keyboard and it's just as narcissistic.

Re: If software engineering is in demand, why is it so hard to get a job?

#50
post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Even worse is hiring someone merely mediocre and not actively harmful. What's so bad about... mediocrity? For obvious statistical reasons, most companies, most jobs, and most people are mediocre (or worse).

Because a person's worth is directly tied to how much value they can produce for their company's shareholders. And if someone mediocre ends up being able to do the job, the company's management may face the fact that they're just a bunch of lame yuppies spending their life in the office to make someone else richer, not changing the world/making the world a better place/any other bullshit eaten from the trashcan of id…

> Because a person's worth is directly tied to how much value they can produce for their company's shareholders.

Well, perceived value rather than actual value. Which might be pretty much equivalent in a field like Sales where it's easy to track figures, but much harder in fields like software.

And in the end, most people are near the centre of the bell-curve of talent, and still manage to produce plenty of value for themselves and their employer. Not everybody has to be extraordinary to keep the society ticking, and the perception that we should always be excellent isn't just counter-productive, but actively harmful (see what magazines did to people's body image).

Post reply on HN