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

“Great resignation” wave coming for companies

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

921–930 of 1001 posts

Re: “Great resignation” wave coming for companies

#921

Post by xyzzyz »

nomel wrote: post #866
lanstin wrote: post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After a few demoralizing layoffs you have a tendency for talented folks to leave once the picture is clear. Does management think software is an investment or a cost? If you can work where it is an investment, do so.

> After a few demoralizing layoffs you have a tendency for talented folks to leave once the picture is clear From what I've experienced, there's a double whammy here. Only the talented folks remain, but they all know better than to stick around, so the company dies shortly after.

Yes, that's why companies don't like to fire people in general. Alas, sometimes the choice is between firing people, taking morale hit and likely dying later, or not firing anyone, and dying much sooner and with certainty.

Re: “Great resignation” wave coming for companies

#922

Post by ashneo76 »

dehrmann wrote: post #521
ciisforsuckas wrote: post #143

They want us back in the office July 16... I'm going to pass so found a new remote role with higher salary and equity. I will be part of this wave. I didn't realy even try with how insane the market is especially if you are specialzed in the current hotness. Moreso, the rise of fully remote role has opened up our ideas about our current living situation. The real estate market in our city is shattered and broken. So…

Mostly for more junior people, be very careful with this. Even if companies make sure promotions happen equally for on-site and remote, you'll learn everything slower. This could be new technology, a new language, or things about the company's infrastrucutre, but it will all be slower, and don't be surprised when people who are on-site seem better at their jobs.

Please don't spread FUD. I was onsite and still learned slower. It all depends on your team and documentation. I mentor people remotely and they have been successful

Re: “Great resignation” wave coming for companies

#923

Post by BobbyJo »

aahortwwy wrote: post #918
BobbyJo wrote: post #890

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're focusing on the wrong things (for instance, no one called anyone a leech). The fact is, we don't live in a post-scarcity society yet. Until we do work can't be about meaning, it has to be about need. Look around your house and life. Count the number of things you own and services you use that are not fun to make or maintain. Until that number hits 0, the majority of society will need to be forced to do…

Post-scarcity is often talked about in binary terms. We've either reached post-scarcity or we haven't. I believe the transition to post-scarcity will be gradual, that it will happen faster in some sectors of society than others, and that this process may take multiple generations to complete. This has been the case with every other major economic shift, why would it not be the case with post-scarcity? If this is how…

We are indeed already a little ways down that road, and the answer we've come to is: Everyone still has to work.

Most jobs that people have now aren't strictly necessary. If everyone gave up their leisure time to do all of their own cooking and cleaning, a massive set of jobs would disappear overnight. If we all at local, another. And the list goes on. Effectively, what happens is, we invent new jobs that are based on want as opposed to need. It's easy to look at that picture and say 'there is so much unnecessary work that happens!' but really, that X% of the economy based on want is required for price discovery of the rest. That is what your last paragraph is touching on, how do we decide who does what and how much? In capitalism, the answer is price discovery, and for that to work, everyone has to participate in the market.

Re: “Great resignation” wave coming for companies

#924

Post by guythedudebro »

lanstin wrote: post #607
jjk166 wrote: post #563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Switching jobs is probably less disruptive to their status quo then going back to the office. Maybe for a little while when there are lots of jobs offering WFH and competing for a small number of people switching jobs. However if you invert that by having lots of jobs simultaneously require people to come back into the office and lots of people simultaneously seeking new employment, then that job hop is likely to b…

Not for software in US or India I don’t think. I am not manager but do lots of interviewing and OMG people who can code and think and talk are so so precious. We would hire all remote in a jiffy, unless asking salary is higher than budget. When it is coming down to it, my company is picking lower salary over in office.

I can talk precisely and concisely. My code is slowly written but solid. Why dont my interviewers make me feel precious?

Re: “Great resignation” wave coming for companies

#925

Post by BobbyJo »

maybelsyrup wrote: post #898
BobbyJo wrote: post #890

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're focusing on the wrong things (for instance, no one called anyone a leech). The fact is, we don't live in a post-scarcity society yet. Until we do work can't be about meaning, it has to be about need. Look around your house and life. Count the number of things you own and services you use that are not fun to make or maintain. Until that number hits 0, the majority of society will need to be forced to do…

Meaning, in my view, is not a switch; it's a dial. We can have some more than we have now. Overall I agree with you: I'm not naive, nor am I a utopianist. I'm fine with more equitable. But we're so entrenched in the status quo that it feels like you have to talk like a revolutionary to get even a shred of "a little more equitable". Edit: wait though what's a "post-scarcity" economy, anyway, concretely? I've heard sin…

Post-scarcity just refers to a time after scarcity, which is defined as limited resources. In a world that is post-scarcity, everyone can have everything they want (materially) without infringing on anyone else's ability to have the same.

The reason it gets brought up is because the moment one person's needs or wants infringe on another's, there needs to be a way to decide who gets what. Generally, this is what people are talking about when they talk about various economic systems. You come up with different mechanics that use the distribution of goods to incentivize the production of more goods.

The only way we escape the economic games that need to be played, to keep people working and producing things society needs, is if we no longer need them to produce anything. Then you no longer need the incentives and feedback loops that tie consumption to production, and people are generally free to do whatever the hell they want.

Re: “Great resignation” wave coming for companies

#926

Post by aahortwwy »

BobbyJo wrote: post #923
aahortwwy wrote: post #918

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Post-scarcity is often talked about in binary terms. We've either reached post-scarcity or we haven't. I believe the transition to post-scarcity will be gradual, that it will happen faster in some sectors of society than others, and that this process may take multiple generations to complete. This has been the case with every other major economic shift, why would it not be the case with post-scarcity? If this is how…

We are indeed already a little ways down that road, and the answer we've come to is: Everyone still has to work. Most jobs that people have now aren't strictly necessary. If everyone gave up their leisure time to do all of their own cooking and cleaning, a massive set of jobs would disappear overnight. If we all at local, another. And the list goes on. Effectively, what happens is, we invent new jobs that are based o…

> In capitalism, the answer is price discovery, and for that to work, everyone has to participate in the market.

This is precisely what I'm getting at. We've built a system on the assumption of a forty-hour full-time work week, with a goal of minimizing unemployment and (recently) maximizing labor market participation. We did this because we need participation in the market for effective resource distribution.

What happens when our economy simply does not need that much labor to produce all the economic output we want? Do we force people to continue participating in the labor market in makework jobs just so that they can have access to resources? To what extent are we already doing this?

Re: “Great resignation” wave coming for companies

#927

Post by timbo1642 »

screye wrote: post #263

> Surveys show anywhere from 25% to upwards of 40% of workers are thinking about quitting their jobs. This number is meaningless without previous year trends. In my circles, everyone from 25-35 is simultaneously preparing to FIRE and no-one that's 35+ has actually changed jobs despite being 'financially independent'. Expressing intent to resign, and actually resigning are completely different things. (edit: to clarif…

I'd bet that at least 25% of people always want to leave. Many if not most people aren't happy with their jobs and that's why their customer service is horrible.

Like you said, people want to, but that doesn't mean they will. Most people are broke as a joke, even many that make 6 figures.

People working from home have become really comfortable with not working. I know several people that do very little at home compared to what they did at the office. One of my friends works at UCLA (not as a teacher and not in the hospital) and she misses large conference calls and does maybe 3 hours of work a day at most when she used to do 8. She brags about going hiking and doing other things instead of working. I understand this is not the case with most people, but almost no one works nearly as hard from home.

They won't quit. Its all BS. If they are stupid enough to do so, they'll enjoy competing with hundreds if not thousands of people for a single job once people are forced off of unemployment.

Re: “Great resignation” wave coming for companies

#929

Post by Siira »

screye wrote: post #583
reverse_list wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These comments about how the market is on fire for developers always make me sad. Not your fault, but outside the US (and maybe western/northern Europe) you get lowballed hard, even with years of experience. And the supposedly lower CoL doesn't make up for it, at all, not even remotely. I'm not even talking about getting crazy bay area compensations, I'm talking about hoping something better than a $25k-$45k range fo…

Filter bubbles are incredibly dangerous. Every time I hang out my with most ambitious friends, I am reminded of how MSFT is 'low balling' company. That I could be making 2x if only I kept up with interviewing. On one hand, I can't avoid the objective truth of the statement. But, on the other hand, the hedonic treadmill is infinite. I'm glad I am not in the bay area. I would've been paralyzed by the persistent reminde…

> the hedonic treadmill is infinite

It actually diminishes very quickly for most people, which I suspect is why they aren’t that motivated.

Still true that being content with what you have can be a wise choice.

Re: “Great resignation” wave coming for companies

#930

Post by Siira »

alasdair_ wrote: post #854
mixmastamyk wrote: post #828

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do do do do… What are the issues with IQ tests?

> What are the issues with IQ tests? They can have cultural or social biases unless very carefully calibrated. Ideally you should be able to take anyone who speaks a reasonable level of English, give them test and have them get a score that matches their intelligence percentile. In practice, the tests are built for a particular socioeconomic class and type of person. As a trivial example, imagine the test uses the wo…

But these problems are also present in most other selection criteria? E.g., GRE is much easier if all your education and reading was in English. So I wonder if the real issue with IQ tests is actually that the elites can NOT game it as easily.
Post reply on HN