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

The real reason you can't hire developers....

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 271 posts

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#221

Post by kakuri »

Pewpewarrows wrote: post #49

This post pretty much reflects my observations back when I was job hunting a year or so ago. I had a good amount of experience, was willing to relocate, wasn't looking for a telecommuting position, and was very flexible on salary. I advertised myself to several high-profile companies, many of which have affiliations with YC. None of them were through recruiters, and a few were even direct contacts with some core deve…

Similar experience here. Been watching HN's hiring posts for 6 months or so, replied to many, received about 3 responses. I know I'm no John Carmack, but I've had a $100K+ offer (for a telecommuting position), and have a $100K offer (again, telecommuting) on the table. All these poor companies so desperately trying to hire have never even bothered to investigate if I'm a good candidate.

I'm not too bitter as my opportunities are fine, but it really makes me wonder - are these companies insane? Do they actually want to hire? Do they really think they are amazing enough that nothing less than John Carmack himself is acceptable for them?

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#222

Post by mgkimsal »

bengl3rt wrote: post #91
nirvana wrote: post #76

I think the fundamental problem is that companies want a "Sr. Software Engineer" with >7 years of development and >4 years of development in their particular language, who also is young enough to think that "Nerf guns" and "xbox's" [sic] are an appealing "Benefit" and that aren't going to ask anywhere near $115k a year. (a totally reasonable salary, by the way, but I think you lose edge in negotiations by putting tha…

Also, $115k for a senior engineer? Really great "entry level" (i.e. recently graduated but mostly self taught with lots of internships under belt) is going for $110k... most of the "seniors" I know are running $200k plus.

Are you meaning they're getting that, or they're costing that?

For a $70/hour contract (~$140k/year), it actually costs the company north of $90-$100/hour (over $180k/year) when going through a recruiter.

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#223

Post by wglb »

up_and_up wrote: post #130
jemfinch wrote: post #126

I'm going to say it because it seems no one else is. I apologize ahead of time for my brutal honesty. You need to consider the possibility that you're not as competent as you believe yourself to be. Dunning-Kruger[0] is real, and your post doesn't demonstrate the self-awareness the best developers seem to possess. Your writing is sprinkled with emoticons and rife with reduplicated punctuation, both of which (especial…

So in general I totally agree with you. The issue is the communication style conveyed in the post above is no way similar to the communication style conveyed in to email and resume. My email was much more professional. I think your tome is somewhat off base.

So the "Full Version" is apparently not what your email said. That wasn't clear until the above comment.

In the "Full Version", if I was a hiring authority, which I am not (although I have been in past lives), there isn't enough there to warrant a second look. Did you have a cover letter? How many pages were in your resume? What projects have you done?

In what you have shared here, we see only keywords and some snark. Keywords don't cut it with real hiring managers.

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#225

Post by jarek »

chefsurfing wrote: post #160
jarek wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good post except I don't think the OP is complaining about having problems getting hired. The companies trying to hire are the ones having problems, and it seems they're doing little to fix them.

Do you think responding to email blasts would help them solve their hiring problem?

I think it's going to be slightly better than doing nothing.

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#226

Post by frou_dh »

omarchowdhury wrote: post #203
zasz wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought you'd made a typo. A "tome" is a heavy book, not a lengthy diatribe. The book could be a lengthy diatribe, but it could also be an annotated edition of The Odyssey. I suppose you could have called a long comment a "tome" out of playfulness, but it wasn't the clearest choice of words.

The tone in his usage of the word tome reminds me of tl;dr, or rather, tl; did read but will not argue your points. Although the original post does come off as ad hominem.

"ad hominem" is totally going on the HN bingo card :)

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#227

Post by waterlesscloud »

frou_dh wrote: post #226
omarchowdhury wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The tone in his usage of the word tome reminds me of tl;dr, or rather, tl; did read but will not argue your points. Although the original post does come off as ad hominem.

"ad hominem" is totally going on the HN bingo card :)

Right next to "Dunning-Kruger", I hope.

Actually, it's always "Dunning-Kruger" with a link to the wikipedia article to make it more authoritative.

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#228

Post by [deleted] »

bengl3rt wrote: post #212
dsolomon wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Credible citation needed.

A few data points: I was told by someone with lots of experience that I worked with for a few years that I should expect $110k when I graduate. Someone I know just left $200k at a multinational megacorp for the same at a 50-person company. A team of co-founders I know was acquhired by a different multinational megacorp, and they now make $350k-$500k before bonuses, although they've moved up from pure engineering to r…

[deleted]

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#229

Post by _delirium »

groby_b wrote: post #218
marshray wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hint: Look at places where 3br houses start at $750K.

I'm right in L.A. Nobody would give you the time of day for $750k, much less a 3 bedroom. :) I _am_ a sr. dev., and I'm fairly certain I'm not making $200k. But let's assume I'm not as senior as I like to think I am, and check glassdoor.com instead: http://www.glassdoor.com/Salaries/los-angeles-senior-softwar... The absolute top of the senior ladder lists $200k. At one single company, for one job. (And checking the s…

You can also look at aggregate U.S. household income statistics. Only 3% of households make $200k+ in total income, even after you count both incomes for married couples, and including investments/bonuses. And, most of those aren't in tech. So you'd have to have a very particular social circle for it to be anywhere near normal for even senior people to make $200k+. Just by aggregate numbers, low 6 figures is fairly common (16% above $100k), but things drop off rapidly above that (6% above $150k, 3% above $200k, 1% above $300k).

Re: The real reason you can't hire developers....

#230

Post by codeonfire »

thoughtsimple wrote: post #205
SeoxyS wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a lot for a remote employee. For a good senior on-site dev I'd gladly pay that, or more.

OK, then I don't get it. Why do you want to pay a remote employee less than on-site? This is assuming that your company was amenable to the idea in the first place. The employee off site is actually cheaper than on-site. Theoretically, you should be willing to pay more, not less. If the employee is not manageable off-site then you have a problem but an offer can be made conditionally that the first 3 months are a tri…

I don't think you understand what motivates management very well. An off site employee is almost worthless to a manager's prominence and career.
Post reply on HN