Live data from Hacker News

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

cushychicken.github.io

551–560 of 927 posts

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

#551
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 onboarded the concept of 'risk to reward ratio'. If you're a gambling man, you might call this '+EV moves only'. +10/20k is nice (if you need it), but the risk is great in a new team, new environment etc.

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

#552
Aside from the technology, intellect & stability, I think a lot of people simply want to work less

I may be living in a bubble (I've been building https://4dayweek.io) but for me and those around me, the main attraction is a better work-life balance, then technology etc

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

#553

The whole "Quittening" is a little US-centric. The short answer is: "Too many jobs, too few qualified people" We're struggling to hire senior talent, well, senior, entry level, anything but apprentice. The thing is: So is everyone else. There are statistic on these things, there aren't anyone to hire, you have to get people to leave other jobs, but then those companies are just shorthanded and you solved nothing. So…

Can you tell more about this apprentice system? And what legal status does it have in your country?

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

#554

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How so? If you have more people competing for the same job, then the wages go down, and vice-versa, the less potential employees you have, the higher the wages have to go to fill the position. The supply/demands fraction is basic math. Are you saying math doesn't work?

No, I'm saying research has shown that wages are depressed for some workers, but not by the levels the anti-immigration brigade would have you believe.

>research has shown that wages are depressed for some workers, but not by the levels the anti-immigration brigade would have you believe.

That statement is pretty vague and pretty obvious on some levels but provides no concrete numbers and evidence that's generally applicable (basically it's easy to cherry pick some results and make generic claims afterwards that don't hold water).

I'm not pro-immigration and I'm not anti-immigration but I know math and personally experienced that whenever you have a lower supply of candidates then I have much more leverage for negotiations and better work conditions and have experienced the opposite, of employers being dicks due to over-supply of labor.

I therefore take those "research" findings with a generous train load of salt.

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

#555

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I'm saying research has shown that wages are depressed for some workers, but not by the levels the anti-immigration brigade would have you believe.

>research has shown that wages are depressed for some workers, but not by the levels the anti-immigration brigade would have you believe. That statement is pretty vague and pretty obvious on some levels but provides no concrete numbers and evidence that's generally applicable (basically it's easy to cherry pick some results and make generic claims afterwards that don't hold water). I'm not pro-immigration and I'm not…

At the risk of asking a stupid question, did you read the linked article? Are those 3 studies it links to invalid? (genuine question)

edit: sorry, just seen your edit. Care to elaborate why you think they are dismissible?

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

#556
post #433
post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

are you interested in the norm in terms of raw numbers, or where you would need to work to achieve this? and are you interested in people who have won the stock lottery, or just people who have their total comp pegged at 500k+? assuming the latter, you're looking at getting hired in at level as a senior engineer (maybe one level higher depending on the company) at most of your brand name tech companies that value eng…

Okay sure, but it’s hardly the case one can just join a FAANG company at a senior level to earn $500k easily as OP suggests. Want to retire early? Easy! Just become a managing partner at JP Morgan in your late 20s and you’ll be rich enough by 30.

Although I have yet to see a person with no lifestyle creep in these kinds of jobs. You start earning, you start spending. Yes, some people don't, but I keep hearing sad stories on that front too (guy did FIRE only for his wife to leave him after 6 months because they didn't keep up with the Kardashians. Some people feel mega-excluded if they can't partake in casual conversations like 'we are shopping for a new expensive carpet' or 'we just got a 8k lamp'.

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

#557

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The absolute value of your salary doesn't tell you anything about how long it takes to get to retirement (or more accurately, financial independence). That's exclusively a function of your spending and saving rates. https://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2012/01/13/the-shockingly-si...

Forecasting your spending rate far enough into the future, however, is a very tricky problem if you're trying to retire at 30, especially if you're living through turbulent times. I'd rather work 3 days a week until I'm dead then let my skills start deteriorating now and live the next 60 years in fear that my fixed income won't be able to sustain me.

As someone who's been working for +10 years now for 3 day's a week I can say: spot on!

I've got savings enough for fun projects or holiday's, and my 3 day job simply pays the rent/gas/electricity bills.

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

#558

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> getting married and having kids i have not met anyone yet who is married with kids but would have preferred an earlier retirement instead. kids are more expensive than all the other things combined that you listed - no amount of living in the basement or saving 30k on having no car is going to make up for that.

People regret having kids all the time. It's just not socially acceptable to talk about openly. https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/m9vh8a/serious_p... https://www.reddit.com/r/Parenting/comments/1wvx04/serious_d... https://www.reddit.com/r/regretfulparents/

Nothing worth doing is particularly easy, but let me give you a different way to think about it.

You're only on this planet for a few years. You can only taste so much of the human experience. A huge part of the human experience is raising a child. Not experiencing it means leaving a big part of what's possible to experience on the table.

If it's a choice, and you choose, and you're secure in your life, and financially / emotionally / mentally stable, I think regret isn't likely.

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

#559
I think there's something else that's necessary that doesn't align well with the things in the article, and which is currently lacking in my current work environment, but which is kind of hard to describe succinctly.

Basically, my job requires using a lot of tools and technology and processes created by other people, but none of those tools are easy to use or well documented. In order to get stuff done you have to have a social network of people who know how to do the things you need to do, and know all the secret tricks. The right environment variables to set. The right arguments to pass to simulators. How to find the important bit of data buried webapp developed by people who apparently like to invent new words for old concepts. I get a lot of terse autogenerated emails that probably mean something to somebody, but not to me, and don't have human return addresses or really any way to discern the context of where they came from or why. A lot of tools use domain-specific configuration languages that are usually just python scripts that call a bunch of functions that are defined elsewhere and have no documentation.

These things might be reasonable in a startup with a dozen people, but we have over a hundred thousand. My opinion is that once an organization is a certain size, everything really needs to be written down and easily accessible. I shouldn't have to regularly ask people how to do basic things, it should be on a wiki. If it's complicated, it should be in a training video, or a user manual.

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

#560

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The highest paying software companies employ LeetCode style interview Ugh yeah it’s ridiculous. We can’t hire anyone! Have you considered not putting candidates through months of studying to memorize a bunch of algorithm tricks and then grilling them for 5-10 hours total on those? No - that’s not what the cargo cult manual says.

I dunno if it's that ridiculous. Having to spend a couple of months studying to get a 100k raise, seems not a completely unfair trade.

That's the first interview. They usually test your ability to design systems and stuff in a second interview.
Post reply on HN