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

I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

cushychicken.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

911–920 of 927 posts

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#911

Post by dhjhdskjsdjkds »

hguant wrote: post #8

There comes a point where the money just isn't a motivating factor anymore, and companies are struggling to figure out how to work in that environment. This bit from the author hits the nail on the head: >Is an extra $10k per year worth learning a new org, a new skillset, a new set of expectations, a new set of coworkers, and a new boss? For many engineers, the answer is: “No.” Yes I could quit and get a ~20k raise b…

So this. I guess I have had around 17 bosses (direct and dotted line) in around 26 years of I.T., and yeah, there is a point where you hit a kind of pay "glass ceiling" in your region if you are a decent but non-stellar engineer (70-95%ile) such that an extra 10-20k teaser is just not worth leaving a cool/familiar boss/situation for an unfamiliar one.

I'd move jobs if someone I knew and liked through my network wanted to hire me for the right job for a nice increase, but the idea of taking a +20k job with some random boss I have never seen under pressure or on a bad day--no way.

Taking a job when you are older is like buying a house without an inspection--you better really know and like the bones. Who you work for is the #1 factor for me. Nothing worse than hitting 50 and having some hateful blowhard breathing down your neck. Stress just sucks in your 20s and 30s, it can kill in your 40s and 50s.

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#912

Post by comp_throw7 »

exdsq wrote: post #893
comp_throw7 wrote: post #886

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Entry-level SWE comp for top-end finance shops in Chicago & NY is 400k+, so, ah, no. See levels.fyi.

We're going from "It's easy to earn $500k" to "Top-end financial shops in Chicago and New York". And if someone gets a good offer they'll be more likely to put it up on Levels. SBF earned what... $22B in the last three years in crypto by the age of 29? If he posted his earnings on Levels.fyi at Alameda Research can I start suggesting people can earn $1B by 30 by moving to Hong Kong and working for top crypto trading…

The original claim you were attempting to rebut:

> If you are in your 20's, it is totally worth moving to the US where you can get paid 500K+ per year if you navigate your career efficiently.

I don't want to say that it's "easy" to hit numbers in this ballpark as a senior engineer in the US, but the way to do it is relatively straightforward and doesn't require any particularly unusual skills, connections, knowledge, etc.

1) There is a set of companies which pay that kind of money

2) Those companies employ a non-trivial percentage of the software engineers in the country

3) Those companies are _always hiring_ more software engineers at those levels

4) The interview processes for those companies are public and quite similar

Obviously nobody is guaranteed to get a job paying that well at one of those companies. Some people simply won't be able to clear the bar (either technically or socially). But the bar is not "one in a thousand". These companies already employ something like 8-10% of the software engineers in the country, so "one in ten" is a hard _upper bound" on how strict they are (and obviously, since their selection process isn't perfect and they don't in fact have every single 10%ile engineer or better locked up, the bar is lower, probably much lower).

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#913

Post by jsiaajdsdaa »

Aeolun wrote: post #898
jsiaajdsdaa wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe you didnt STAR hard enough to be considered a dedicated, fanatic cog :)

When I saw they had like 14 principles I was like ‘yeah, peace out’. I can deal with 3-5, but 14? You can’t see the forest for the trees.

The scary thing is that I actually agree with almost all of their principles, I've memorized my answers for each one (with overlap), I can do quite a few BFS graph problems and implement an LRU cache accurately... I can do data modeling and talk about all of the non functional requirements of distributed systems.... and still I get denied :D

Oh well! Guess it will be remote work at a normal company for me then.

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#914

Post by tharkun__ »

lmm wrote: post #877
tharkun__ wrote: post #836

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You make statements about all people. You are the one that has to prove that this is true. My counter example works perfectly because I only need one. Specifically we still buy used skates for the kids, even though I would definitely have the money to buy new ones. Same for the vacations. They can tell me about Disney Land all they want and even though I could buy that cash right now, I will not.

So you did increase your savings rate after all?

I see what you're trying to do there. I need to quote better. Let's retry:

Quoting myself:

    an example to refute the absolute claim of the parent and the article that only the savings rate matters for when you will be able to retire. This one counter example disproved that.
Keyword: only. My claim is that it's a combination of both. Then you come along and posit that it's impossible not to have an inflation of lifestyle and you won't be able to live off of less than you had before once you retire:

    not unless you can show someone actually succeeding [...] Plenty of people think they'll be happy to live more cheaply when they've retired [...] Of course it does. You get in the habit of buying things for the kid. You get in the habit of going to these places.
As in you are saying that nobody can succeed in living off less money than they had before. This is what I am giving a counter example for in my last reply. I have increased my salary over the years and I have very carefully kept my spending in check and given this continued habit I think it is entirely possible to retire on less income than now (i.e. 'live more cheaply') as expenses we now have (even used skates do cost money) will no longer be present at that time. Of course the jury is still out and we can talk again in 30 years and see how it actually turned out in the end ;) FWIW, if I look at my parents, same thing happened. Living off way less now in retirement than what they had before but it's OK. Kids are out of the house and self-sufficient. We were always frugal.

I'm not claiming how many people do and can do this. Just that it's absolutely possible. It's probably in the ballpark of people that can take 10 years of the beginning of their career to live so frugally that they retire at 32 with millions in the bank :)

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#915

Post by faiD9Eet »

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #473
eyjafjallajokul wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Healthcare, 30 paid holidays, unions, paid overtime, weekends and calls off work come extra (it is 40h week period, want more pay for it), retirement, flex time, ... If you are in your 20's, it is totally worth moving to the US where you can get paid 500K+ per year if you navigate your career efficiently. I posit that making this much money more than covers any of these additional expenses that you call out.

Is it really? I mean, you more than likely aren't going to get paid 500k+ per year, even if you "navigate your career" efficiently. And in so many cases, you might be losing out. Did you want vacation time or do you simply want to work while you are young? Do you want to have children in your 20's? If so, maybe not move to the US. Your child probably will have citizenship of your home country - but maybe not, especia…

I would like to second that. I would even take education options into account, if I had kids.

I did the calculation for my current job (Germany, huge telekommunications company, city of 200.000 inhabitants). It goes like this

* 72'000€ a year * 38 hours of work per week, distributed to my choosing * 44 days of paid vacation per year * approximately 20 days of paid sick leave per year * 10 days of paid child sick leave per year * covered health insurance

To match those conditions, a job in the US must pay 180'000$ per year (in cash) plus health insurance for me, my family and their education.

Though I do not know what equity is worth. Can those 500k$/y earners get their compansation in cash?

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#916

Post by bdavis__ »

marcosdumay wrote: post #701
bdavis__ wrote: post #605

Earlier quoted context omitted.

it is probably because the new devs know so much more and are able to identify and communicate problems in code that others have written. write code for the center of the bell curve (at your organization). the bottom will never understand anything, the top understands it all. You need to make the majority in the middle be comfortable. that means slowly bringing in new language features, as they become widely known an…

That's an interesting point of view to explore. Is it worth more to attract a few highly capable developers or a lot of middle capable ones? Your code practices will probably resonate differently on each of those groups, so you will probably have to choose. And I don't think there's a generic correct choice like you imply. Also, by how much are people even capable of choosing the (required) expertise level of the cod…

yeah, absolutes never apply to every situation.

it is possible to go down in expertise, but not up. sometimes "fortran in any language" can be a viable approach depending...

note i didn't say a the best approach.

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#917

Post by freyr »

giantg2 wrote: post #910
freyr wrote: post #881

Earlier quoted context omitted.

None of that has any bearing on what I said. If anything, having an MS and mid-level experience only make it easier for you than most. But you’ve been complaining about your job for months and you’re still there. And you talk about all other jobs like they’re beneath you.

"And you talk about all other jobs like they’re beneath you." Source? I haven't said any jobs are beneath me. "only make it easier for you" Basically what I'm saying - I don't suck at interviewing etc. There aren't many high paying jobs in my area. I do just generally suck.

Alright, you convinced me.

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#918

Post by bluedays »

reikonomusha wrote: post #135
bluedays wrote: post #117

Okay, now do one for juniors. As a junior developer I would literally work for the worst company, but none of them are interested in me.

Contact me with your resume and I'll try to give you my best good-faith advice as a hiring manager. (And if I think you could have potential on my team, I'd even talk about hiring you myself.)

Sent you an email.

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#919

Post by bluedays »

brewdad wrote: post #209
bluedays wrote: post #117

Okay, now do one for juniors. As a junior developer I would literally work for the worst company, but none of them are interested in me.

Have you tried looking for jobs with the best companies? Some of the worst companies are the worst because they have unreasonable expectations for their hires relative to the value they can provide for putting up with working there.

No, I didn't think I was good enough to work there. Mostly because of all the DS&A stuff you read about here on HN.

Re: I think I know why you can't hire engineers right now

#920

Post by wreath »

remram wrote: post #906
wreath wrote: post #683

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a huge difference when you compare absolute numbers for sure. But also there is a huge difference in taxes. You could argue 1200 is not so bad when you pay 25% taxes instead of 40% for example.

You don't pay income taxes when unemployed.

That's not what I meant. When you are employed in tech and pay say 25% taxes, saving 1200 for a bad day (when you are unemployed and have to pay insurance yourself) is not so bad compared to when you pay 40 taxes.
Post reply on HN