The myth of America's missing software engineers • Hacker News Board

Re: The myth of America's missing software engineers

#141

Post by shreeshga » Tue, Aug 06, 2013, 1:29 PM UTC

DamnYuppie wrote: post #42

shreeshga wrote: post #14

Important factor is how many of the "qualified" candidates clear the interviews? The problem is not the lack of people to interview, it's the lack of people who clear interviews.

Can you elaborate on this further? Are you implying that it is the quality of the candidates and not the number? I can't say I disagree with that statement in and of itself. Yet I believe you are getting few qualified candidates because companies are asking for highly skilled people with a great deal of experience and then only, and my opinion is intentionally, offering well below market wages. This then allows them…

From my experience most of the H1B candidates who might join a company with lower wage at first, can and will negotiate for higher pay when they change company. I think the days of hiring H1B candidates at lower wages and thinking of _retaining_ them are gone and the companies do realize that.

Re: The myth of America's missing software engineers

#142

Post by BillyMaize » Tue, Aug 06, 2013, 4:52 PM UTC

fader wrote: post #93

BillyMaize wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Entry level with two years of experience?? I'd hope that isn't very strict or basically no one would be able to apply for the job meeting the requirements unless internships count, and even then you usually get like 1.5 years of experience that way.

"Entry level" in the US now means 3-5 years of experience. You're expected to work those years for free (as an "intern") to get the experience.

I made about 2/3 of the money in my Coop as I do now as a full time employee but then again my university required that we have a certain amount of paid internship time to get our degree so my experience may be atypical.

Re: The myth of America's missing software engineers

#143

Post by cantankerous » Fri, Aug 16, 2013, 3:45 AM UTC

bayesianhorse wrote: post #124

nobodysfool wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>You will be renting, not buying. Exactly why the OP won't choose to move there. Why should he have to pay someone the privilege of living, and get none of that money back when/if they decide to leave? At least when you buy you get some equity.

Because renting is more flexible and often less expensive... Imagine you loose your job in a crisis, you have to move/sell your house in a crashing market.

If you lose your job in a crisis, you also won't be able to pay your rent and you'll move/sublet your apartment. Losing your job pretty much screws you however you decide to live.