Earlier quoted context omitted.
Better yet, come to Switzerland and earn > 10K usd/ month; and on top of that, you pay only a fraction of the Swedish taxes.
I thought it was pretty tough on immigration side of things?
Not for most EU citizens.
Employers will do almost anything to find workers except pay them more
241–250 of 451 posts
Re: Employers will do almost anything to find workers except pay them more
#242Earlier quoted context omitted.
They can terminate your freelance contract with a one week notice, but on the other hand, we can't terminate the contract on our side under any circumstances. All we can do is wait for the contract to finish and then not renew it. Its perfectly legal, a lawyer told me.
Well that should be easy to fix. Just keep showing up at the office but don't do any work. It shouldn't take too long before your employer gets sick of it.
They can fire you on disciplinary grounds (you ruining labor discipline or they can even try and prove you are actively sabotaging them). And then you can be liable for damages in court.
Believe me, they know how to cover their backs.
Re: Employers will do almost anything to find workers except pay them more
#243So then, the basic premise here is: Employers: "We can't find good devs/workers!" Devs/Workers: "Well, you don't pay enough!" My advice to employers is what a lot of companies started doing when there was a gold rush of developers and people were scarce. Find a few average devs or newbies with little or no coding experience, train them into your "system" and then work to promote them up into senior positions and give…
> then jump ship
But be careful... I did this back in the late 90's; I changed jobs four times in four years, getting a 25-30% pay increase each time. Then one day I tried to do it again, and they told me up front, "we're not interested in hiring you because you change jobs too often". Although I eventually did find something and have kept each job I've had since for at least 3 years, I'm pretty sure my "shady job hopping past" cost me a job opportunity just a few years ago.
Re: Employers will do almost anything to find workers except pay them more
#244Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're a senior software engineer, come to Sweden. You'll at least get 6000 usd/month as an employee. Management usually has a background in tech, you get lots of vacation, parental leave, etc. You're not expected to stay longer than 5 pm and working from home is common. There are many interesting jobs in finance, telecom, automotive, entertainment, medicine, defence, and there are plenty of startups. I work as a…
Does $72K go far in Sweden? I would assume not due to taxes...? I'm in a position of ignorance so I'm just looking to get a better idea of what it's like there :)
$72K is about $50K post tax (including one month of paid vacation). $72K is also a lower bound: I often see positions for ~95K-100K. And if you work as a contractor, ~$160K.
The national median wage is ~$35K ($27K post tax) afaik, and people live good lives on that, albeit in smaller towns.
And if you have a mortgage, you can deduct 30% of interest payments.
Re: Employers will do almost anything to find workers except pay them more
#245Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
We've already asked you to please not post generic inflammatory comments here. If you keep going we'll ban the account, so please stop? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Why is the OP submission not removed then? Do you only allow one side of the argument?
Re: Employers will do almost anything to find workers except pay them more
#246And if you think it's bad, it's even worse in Europe. Taking the French example: I'm an freelancer, but I used to have a contract with an American company. They gave me 3x the salary most of my French colleagues would get, while keeping the exact same social advantages (they paid me through a French branch). However, to them, the salary was twice lower than what they would have paid for the same guy in the Valley. No…
That's so true. Employers in general complain that they can't buy filet mignon for the price of hot dogs, and that's suppose to be the employee's problem. To make matters far worse, the industry in general pays lip service to on-the-job training and some employers also avoid junior/inexperienced developers, because they don't want to train anyone. And don't get me started on the absolute cancer that are HR/outsourcin…
>> Employers in general complain that they can't buy filet mignon for the price of hot dogs, and that's suppose to be the employee's problem.
The real underlying problem is that most employers I've encountered think that they're doing their employees a favor by "giving" them a job. They don't truly perceive it as a value-for-value economic transaction.
This becomes quite evident when they give you a pile of legal papers to sign where the balance of the benefits slant heavily to the employer.
Re: Employers will do almost anything to find workers except pay them more
#247And if you think it's bad, it's even worse in Europe. Taking the French example: I'm an freelancer, but I used to have a contract with an American company. They gave me 3x the salary most of my French colleagues would get, while keeping the exact same social advantages (they paid me through a French branch). However, to them, the salary was twice lower than what they would have paid for the same guy in the Valley. No…
How many people are experts in a non-JS server language and CSS at the same time? Assuming anyone even falls into that category, how many of them want to work for someone else as opposed to just doing their own thing?
>How many people are experts in a non-JS server language and CSS at the same time?
I've always assumed the term "full-stack" essentially implied that as part of the front-end emphasis.
Re: Employers will do almost anything to find workers except pay them more
#248Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exactly this. All tech companies in Finland are like "We can't find enough competent coders!" and newspapers are publishing that as is. Well, no shit, because your pay is shit.
> All tech companies in Finland are like "We can't find enough competent coders!" and newspapers are publishing that as is. To me, if a tech company claims in a newspaper that it cannot find competent coders, to me it says that they are uncapable of detecting talent. Which means "we have a really incompetent human ressource team". This is clearly not something that I would like journalists to print if I were a compan…
A certain huge multinational once tried to hire me, and disappeared when they were supposed to send me a test.
Cue some months later I see in a magazine a interview with them, and complaining they can't find someone for that job.
So I applied again, they apologized profusely, blamed old HR company. Sent me to talk to new one.
New HR company approves me, then multinational refuse me explicitly because corporate policy is that this particular job must be done by someone experienced.
Thing is: they wanted a local, and they were the first company here offering that job... So good luck finding a experienced person when you are the first one offering that job in first place.
No wonder they complain on media...
Re: Employers will do almost anything to find workers except pay them more
#249Is it argued that the trade-off between getting good people and keeping costs down is poorly made? (Due to GDPR compliance, I can't read the article.)
Re: Employers will do almost anything to find workers except pay them more
#250Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I definitely think that the rich (broadly defined -- both via high income or high wealth) need to be contributing more back to society than we are. If the goal is to spread wealth more evenly, wouldn't it make sense to tax wealth rather than income? As a general principle of incentives, you want to tax the thing you want less of.
> If the goal is to spread wealth more evenly . . . If the only goal was to spread wealth more evenly, then what we should do is simple appropriate all wealth beyond (num_wealth / num_people), and give it to all the people who don't have that much wealth. Then it would all be even stevens. :) But there is not just one goal. Another important goal is to still have a functioning economy after applying your policy choic…
Yes you should. Bob supported a host of vacation-related workers and kept the economy moving. You sucked money out of the economy and sat on it.
Saving capital so as to be wholly self-sufficient outside the functioning of a society is not in any sense a societal benefit. It's sort of the 'eat your own dogfood' issue: let's say you don't think retirement on Social Security is bearable, and you're alarmed by public healthcare and the state of roads. So, you do everything possible to suck all the capital you can out of that whole system, in order to privately retire off your own capital, going to better doctors and flying between them in a helicopter.
You're hardly going to be working to better the state of the public sphere, as you're constructing a walled garden for just you: is this the moral purpose of your saving money for years? You end up in direct competition with the public sphere, and we've seen this dynamic play out for decades, pretty much my entire lifetime and I'm 50.
You're basically ruining money velocity, and should indeed be punished for that choice. There is nothing moral about hoarding, especially when your argument (maybe not specifically yours…) is 'the public sphere is horrible and ruined, therefore abandon it and ruin it more'. That's the argument of an economic saboteur.