141–150 of 191 posts
I changed positions in April. I decided after 15 years at the same company that I wanted to work closer to home so I started looking and agreed to an offer about a week later. I gave a four week notice and the transition was smooth.
There are some fields and sets of skills where I think it might actually be impossible for someone to be unemployed except by choice.
Pretty bad. I’ve got a lot of experience as an IC, manager, and leader, and it doesn’t seem to matter; companies seem much more picky (“you were great but we want someone with more tenure in ”) or wedded to cargo cult methods (the leetcode places). I haven’t extensively tapped my network for referrals, but I get a bad vibe from those, too. I’ve hit up about six folks and they all came back empty - no opportunities, e…
I'm still early in my career despite rising rapidly, so I've never had a job search that wasn't "just" a numbers game. But it's given me reasonable success, and something I've always wondered is: instead of painstakingly cultivating your resume for each job posting you come across, why not just write 1 accurate one and put that effort into, say, finding and applying to 10 positions per day for a few months?
Maybe the only reason people don't do this is the obvious one: It's really hard to find 900 open positions to apply to without moving cities unless you live in like, Los Angeles or something.
Good. Snapped something up that met my salary expectations after 60 days of searching hard. By hard I mean I abused LinkedIn, I messaged everyone I knew in every company I saw that was actively hiring and asked if they’d refer. Then I messaged everyone else letting them know I was on the market. Then I attended meetups when I wasn’t applying. I worked harder getting a job than I am working this current job.
That's definitely an awesome mindset. What helped you land your current job more? The network you already had or the cold messages?
I do this once a year.
Can't help but feel this isn't just SWE. Feels like the world is wobbling for some reason I can't quite place
Pretty rough. I'm a senior manager/director (manage software dev managers), 20 years industry, the last 8 in big tech. I've been searching for 2 months, applied to 80 roles at 50 companies...only had three recruiter calls and trying to schedule my first phone screen. Surprised at how slow going it is. Feels like companies are being very selective about who they hire and or which roles they want to fill. I think I hav…
Noticably bleaker responses than the last time this was asked (maybe a month back?). Can't help but feel this isn't just SWE. Feels like the world is wobbling for some reason I can't quite place
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>>> without the staff level title or pay.
Right but senior at Netflix/G/Meta might pay a lot more than staff at IBM or Samsung or Ford. Just because they want the candidate to be a lead, but won’t give staff level pay, is not a reason to reject a job imo.
I was told, more or less: "We don't think you're qualified for level X, but we still want to hire you into this specific specialized role we advertised as level X, doing all the same specialized work, with all the same expectations and requirements, at level X-1. We pinky promise you we'll promote you quickly because we are confident you are already qualified to handle these level X responsibilities, even though you're not qualified to be level X yet".
That reads like something straight out of McSweeney's.
Regarding companies requiring very specific requirements: I wonder if those are real adverts, or just ones invented by HR for PR purposes?
> or just ones invented by HR for PR purposes? That seems like a massive waste of time for no benefit to anyone. My assumption has been that the company is required to post internal promotion opportunities because their legal team thinks it’s required.
Right, we're talking about HR, so ...
;-)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Right but senior at Netflix/G/Meta might pay a lot more than staff at IBM or Samsung or Ford. Just because they want the candidate to be a lead, but won’t give staff level pay, is not a reason to reject a job imo.
It was an absurd catch-22. I was told, more or less: "We don't think you're qualified for level X, but we still want to hire you into this specific specialized role we advertised as level X, doing all the same specialized work, with all the same expectations and requirements, at level X-1. We pinky promise you we'll promote you quickly because we are confident you are already qualified to handle these level X respons…
Usually reqs at Google are for two levels. So a manager can hire a lead, and it can either be senior or staff. G has strict perf requirements so people are much quicker to downlevel and then promote vs. hire at L6 and then fire.