101–110 of 451 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“every laid off individual” should be “every laid off individual with a LinkedIn account”.
I wouldn't be surprised if most FAANG and similar tier companies require a linkedin account; mine did. HR sent policies, and would help you with a headshot, with the idea you'd use that w/ your email, Teams, etc. as well.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The last thing this nation needs is to depopulate further.
What makes you think US Population is receding? By all census counts, we're still growing, a lot. Numbers for 2022 are something like 900K immigrants living in the U.S. became U.S. citizens. 2 Million more migrants came with about @ 150K documented boarder crossings per month for 18 months straight. The only time there was a huge drop-off was during Covid, for obvious reasons. "The Build Back Better Act included a a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could also be why you can't find a job. You may be too expensive, and they're looking for engineers in the sweet spot of cheap/can keep the machine running.
FANG like companies also do a lot of things different then most other, especially smaller companies, so it's not that uncommon for small companies to hesitate to hire someone directly coming from FANG. Then for lower paying jobs a lot of people are hesitant to hire "overqualified" people as they expect them to jump ship the moment they find something better, i.e. no FANG people. Then team leads no matter which job/in…
As a hiring manager, this is a factor that weighs heavily in my mental math. My experience with ex-BigTech engineers has been that they tend towards wanting to make everything to match their BigTech experience. But they often don't have the pragmatism to understand that X is a good pattern at BigTech because *of the size of BigTech*. Have had way too many conversations of the form, "Yes, that is objectively better. But at our scale, the value add does not warrant the effort involved". Or "there's no need for these 15 layers of indirection because there's 5 of us, not 5000".
Obviously this is a stereotype and doesn't apply to everyone. But that's no different than how people have a positive stereotype of ex-BigTech employees being sharp.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“Moving down” can be more difficult than it looks. Anecdotally, employers can be reluctant to hire “overqualified” people (indicated by a high previous salary), because they believe these people will jump ship at the earliest higher paying opportunity elsewhere.
Wouldn't anybody jump ship for a better job, though?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't be surprised if most FAANG and similar tier companies require a linkedin account; mine did. HR sent policies, and would help you with a headshot, with the idea you'd use that w/ your email, Teams, etc. as well.
That sounds spicily illegal to my (admittedly EU-based) eyes, unless it’s literally written into the contract.
We actually tracked every laid off individual from Google to understand the story behind the layoffs. Here's the summary: - 747 out of the 2,762 laid-off Googlers have since updated their profiles to indicate a change of employment status in the last 4 months since November 2022. - Only 56.7% of these people joined a tech company. - 1/3 of these ex-Googlers joined startups. See the full blog post here: https://nubela…
> Only 56.7% of these people joined a tech company. There’s a very good chance that their new jobs are similar to their former jobs. Unfortunately, the term “tech” has become diluted to the point of worthlessness. Every company of any size needs programming, statistics, and such. Conversely many companies swept under the “tech” term don’t develop any technology at all. It’s so bad that actual technology development i…
The linked blog post reads like the other 43.3% don't seem to have found any new jobs at all (if I'm reading it right). ("There could of course still be many that have found new jobs, which they might not yet update their profiles - a common practice on LinkedIn").
Earlier quoted context omitted.
“every laid off individual” should be “every laid off individual with a LinkedIn account”.
Actually even this is wrong. Every laid off employee with a LinkedIn account that changed their employer on LinkedIn. I typically am not in a hurry to change mine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And probably leading to the next wave of innovation and/or unicorns. https://www.wired.com/story/tech-layoffs-are-feeding-a-new-s...
I seriously doubt that. Might be true for younger people who were laid off by the "LIFO rule" (i.e., cheaper severance), but anyone with a 10y+ career would at least think twice before joining a startup... Especially in Europe, but these kinds of stories are never about Europe.