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

I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

cushychicken.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 927 posts

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#291

Post by taormina »

jlund-molfese wrote: post #185
matthewfcarlson wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a rule, I don’t trust any third party recruiters but that generally limits me to mid sized and up companies unless I actively seek them out. On the other hand, I get an email from Amazon recruitment nearly every day and I have zero desire to work the bozos.

I was also getting multiple Amazon recruiter emails per day until I actually called one recruiter who listed his phone number on the email up. He was willing to mark me as "Not Interested" or something like that in their candidate pool, and since then, I actually haven't had any more Amazon recruiter spam! Might be worth a try if you like having a clean inbox.

I tried that and immediately got 2 more emails from different teams. To this day, they continue. I swear that nobody at Amazon talks to each other.

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#293

Post by amitport »

reikonomusha wrote: post #287
amitport wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This just feel unjust for me. It bothers me to see a coworker getting underpaid just because they have certain personality traits (that are unrelated to their actual work). I will be less likely to stay at such a place, even if for me personally the pay is fine.

One thing to realize is that a manager has a lot of things to consider for their job in totality. Hiring, planning, documenting, budgeting, retention, lateral and upward management, team stability, etc. I'm not suggesting to be apologetic to them, but at most places, a manager has to put up a bit of a fight to get a significant raise for a subordinate. Even more so if it's out of salary band. Even more so if it's out…

I wouldn't blame anyone personally, but it is what it is. If eventually, this is what's happening often, then the workplace feels unjust to me. It doesn't matter if the cause is some manager, HR, CEO, etc.,. (Sometimes I imagine it can even be the cultural impact of somebody that already left the company...)

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#294

Post by BoorishBears »

optymizer wrote: post #228
reikonomusha wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can confirm, we do a low-pressure, non-timed, non-puzzle, somewhat realistic, short take-home exercise. But we don't (and can't) add 20+% to your salary in RSUs.

20% seems very low to me. In the 2 FAANG's I've worked at, the RSU's ended up being 100+% of my salary (which was average for my level).

Initial grant was 100% of one year's salary you mean right? So +25% of yearly salary before appreciation?

Otherwise you're saying something like a 250k base, 1MM RSUs before stock appreciation... which is a very lopsided looking offer

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#295

Post by richardfey »

lhorie wrote: post #64
pattusk wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do not disagree with your take, but I think you may only be speaking for a subset of engineers that are already fairly well compensated. The article likewise seems to discard the importance of money in favor of three other more immaterial factors, but I do not think this is representative of the situation of the global job market right now. I also think such a perspective can not fully explain the difficulties that…

I would posit that the OP underestimates the impact of his second point: remote-first in a covid world opened up a large swath of opportunities to get very large total compensation bumps everywhere. I'm part of a slack group comprised of ex-employees of a company I used to work at and some folks there expressed that it is entirely feasible to land jobs today that pay a full 100-200k over their current or previous com…

100k-200k on top of let's say 100k? So they would be making 250k per year? How common is this?

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#296

Post by reedjosh »

hguant wrote: post #8

There comes a point where the money just isn't a motivating factor anymore, and companies are struggling to figure out how to work in that environment. This bit from the author hits the nail on the head: >Is an extra $10k per year worth learning a new org, a new skillset, a new set of expectations, a new set of coworkers, and a new boss? For many engineers, the answer is: “No.” Yes I could quit and get a ~20k raise b…

I was quite satisfied with the position I was in at the last two companies I left.

All the things you mention matter to me, but I added 50% to my salary on my first jump, then another 110% on my second. All in just over a year.

Money is still my primary driver. It will be until I am fully financially independent. Not just able to live on a FIRE budget of $30k a year, but able to chase my own fairly expensive interests.

You're right, I'm not going to leave for another $10k, but another $100k, sure, and right now that's not that difficult to achieve.

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#297

Post by cmod »

Job "hygiene" and "motivation." The motivation just ain't there for lots of folks.

On "hygiene" — quoting from Clayton Chirstensen's "How Will You Measure Your Life?":

“Hygiene factors are things like status, compensation, job security, work conditions, company policies, and supervisory practices,” he writes. Critically, it turns out that compensation is also a hygiene factor (as opposed to a motivational factor): “You need to get it right. But all you can aspire to is that employees will not be mad at each other and the company because of compensation.”

“If you instantly improve the hygiene factors of your job, you’re not going to suddenly love it. At best, you just won’t hate it anymore. *The opposite of job dissatisfaction isn’t job satisfaction, but rather an absence of job dissatisfaction.*”

On motivation:

"Motivation factors include challenging work, recognition, responsibility, and personal growth … The theory of motivation suggests you need to ask yourself a different set of questions than most of us are used to asking. Is this work meaningful to me? Is this job going to give me a chance to develop? Am I going to learn new things? Will I have an opportunity for recognition and achievement? Am I going to be given responsibility? These are the things that will truly motivate you. Once you get this right, the more measurable aspects of your job will fade in importance."

Many are perhaps realizing they may have decent "hygiene" in their work life, but "motivation" adjacent factors have been dragging, and continue to drag.

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#298

Post by oleg_antonyan »

> Every engineer is at least a little bit techno-utopian.

Funny how my career started in electronics and embedded software and one of the cool things I saw back then was smart home. It was before "IoT hype" and I really thought that controlling your lights or curtains remotely via XMPP is cool. Now I'm building a house and hell no - I want to stay away of this crap, I want "dumb house" not smart. But still, technologically it's kind of cool

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#299

Post by ajsnigrutin »

pattusk wrote: post #40
hguant wrote: post #8

There comes a point where the money just isn't a motivating factor anymore, and companies are struggling to figure out how to work in that environment. This bit from the author hits the nail on the head: >Is an extra $10k per year worth learning a new org, a new skillset, a new set of expectations, a new set of coworkers, and a new boss? For many engineers, the answer is: “No.” Yes I could quit and get a ~20k raise b…

I do not disagree with your take, but I think you may only be speaking for a subset of engineers that are already fairly well compensated. The article likewise seems to discard the importance of money in favor of three other more immaterial factors, but I do not think this is representative of the situation of the global job market right now. I also think such a perspective can not fully explain the difficulties that…

> engineers doing soul-wrenching, boring jobs in toxic environment who still say because they are very generously compensated (hello FAANG).

This is also what a lot of europeans do with FAANG jobs.. get a FAANG job, move to america, live there for 3-5 years in a 4 bedroom apartment with 12 roommates, eat ramen, come back home, and buy a house.

There's also a question of how much more money do you get... 5% more to do something shitter than now... not worth it... but 50% more, is enough to think it through, if nothing else, how much sooner can you retire with that.

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#300

Post by reikonomusha »

pas wrote: post #283
reikonomusha wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could simply be extremely small sample size, but I know 5 (!!) people personally who fall into this intersection. All of them are quite talented. All jumped ship from meh-paying start-ups to a high-paying role at AMZN after railing on AMZN the years prior for being an awful company. One of them even took a department leadership role (or whatever the title equivalent is) and cited a 3x increase in TC. It could be t…

How long are they going to last? Also, are they working on Java 6? These are important questions because Amazon pays 300K for Rust. That seems like a combo that makes folks wonder maybe let's give them a shot, right?

This is true, these specific individuals not writing Java 6. Three of the five are doing something along similar lines of what you describe: a cool stack + a cool problem that indeed made them say, "let's give them a shot."
Post reply on HN