|
You're being hired for a position, not a career.
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 20:54 |
|
|
rscott posted:It's neoliberalism as a mindset. Capital looks all over the world for the best return, that's globalism in a nutshell. Labor isn't that lucky, what with citizenship and immigration frictions and all of that junk, but moving all over the United States every 3-5 years in an effort to get the best wages in your chosen career is becoming increasingly necessary and the expected. Things that tie you down to an area, like family, friends, a mortgage, or children are a hindrance to making a living wage in our post industrial economy. Part of that is inevitable simply because it is easier than ever to move cross country, but quite a lot of it is caused by a race to the bottom between various regions and locales in the US competing to offer the most favorable tax status and least regulated labor rights to companies in an effort to attract them, which is a microcosm of the situation in the wider world.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
go3 posted:You're being hired for a position, not a career. It's almost like our system is lovely for the people doing the bulk of the work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2016 23:10
|
|
|
rscott posted:It's neoliberalism as a mindset. Capital looks all over the world for the best return, that's globalism in a nutshell. Labor isn't that lucky, what with citizenship and immigration frictions and all of that junk, but moving all over the United States every 3-5 years in an effort to get the best wages in your chosen career is becoming increasingly necessary and the expected. Things that tie you down to an area, like family, friends, a mortgage, or children are a hindrance to making a living wage in our post industrial economy. Part of that is inevitable simply because it is easier than ever to move cross country, but quite a lot of it is caused by a race to the bottom between various regions and locales in the US competing to offer the most favorable tax status and least regulated labor rights to companies in an effort to attract them, which is a microcosm of the situation in the wider world. Again, not really. Companies are perfectly able and willing to offer a wide variety of jobs and pay scales. What they're not willing to do is promote existing employees to a significant degree. So you could have low or non-existent raises for years, get an offer from another company, work there for two years, and get an offer back from the first company for a lot higher than what you made earlier, despite the fact that the only change is that you're not presently working at the original company.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
rscott posted:It's neoliberalism as a mindset. Capital looks all over the world for the best return, that's globalism in a nutshell. Labor isn't that lucky, what with citizenship and immigration frictions and all of that junk, but moving all over the United States every 3-5 years in an effort to get the best wages in your chosen career is becoming increasingly necessary and the expected. Things that tie you down to an area, like family, friends, a mortgage, or children are a hindrance to making a living wage in our post industrial economy. Part of that is inevitable simply because it is easier than ever to move cross country, but quite a lot of it is caused by a race to the bottom between various regions and locales in the US competing to offer the most favorable tax status and least regulated labor rights to companies in an effort to attract them, which is a microcosm of the situation in the wider world. You seem to be ignoring the fact that low wages and poor regulations correlate to 'this place needs jobs'. The fact that capital seeks those places out is not terrible. Like how do you see protections functioning in the U.S. without hurting the prospects of, say, the rust belt attracting new investment.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2016 23:37
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Again, not really. Companies are perfectly able and willing to offer a wide variety of jobs and pay scales. What they're not willing to do is promote existing employees to a significant degree. This sounds retarded.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
computer parts posted:So you could have low or non-existent raises for years, get an offer from another company, work there for two years, and get an offer back from the first company for a lot higher than what you made earlier, despite the fact that the only change is that you're not presently working at the original company.
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
Lucy Heartfilia posted:This sounds retarded. Its very retarded but is the logical conclusion you begin referring to people as 'resources'. If you start looking at employees as people that can learn and grow their skillset and become capable of more than they were initially hired to do, they you might actually see them as a person and not just a line on a spreadsheet and that can cause problems when you need to start deleting those lines on a spreadsheet. Unless of course you're smart enough to realize that this resource can be given additional responsibilities with no increase in pay. Now we're cookin' with gas!
|
|
#
?
Mar 12, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
If swapping jobs every time you want to "move up" is the only way to go how does anyone ever get long service leave? Is portable LSL common in the tech industry or something?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
Tasmantor posted:If swapping jobs every time you want to "move up" is the only way to go how does anyone ever get long service leave? Is portable LSL common in the tech industry or something? Lol you know the answer
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 00:05
|
|
|
Cicero posted:I agree that this is kind of dumb and frustrating, but on the other hand, the cross pollination that happens when people frequently change jobs is part of what made Silicon Valley's tech industry so strong. The ideal for a company is probably a mix of old-timers with institutional knowledge and newbies that bring with them new ideas/best practices. Yeah, but the ideal for getting a company *funded* is everybody under 30. Or in India or Russia. e: I have negotiated for extra vacation when moving from one company to another. Sometimes they'll do it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
Lucy Heartfilia posted:This sounds retarded. Retarded, but extremely common. I'm on my fourth company in eight years now, specifically due to the huge disconnect between outside hire wages and internal raises/promotion benefits. quote:If swapping jobs every time you want to "move up" is the only way to go how does anyone ever get long service leave? Is portable LSL common in the tech industry or something? If by long service leave you mean "more vacation due to years of service," you negotiate it into your contracts when you get an offer. "Hey, I have ten years of experience; I'd be getting 15 days of vacation at place X, so you have to beat that." Then the employer either meets your demand or they don't, and you decide if it's worth it. At my current role, I was offered 5 days of vacation (company's year-one vacation total) and settled on 15 after negotiation. The place job-hopping does break down is in pension eligibility (if it's even offered). You never really accrue any pension credits at your workplaces. That being said, it's so easy to legally nullify a pension in the USA that there's no point banking on one anyway. Bank on the salary and put your own money away, because hoping for a pension (even one you've vested in) is a fool's game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 00:22
|
|
|
Lucy Heartfilia posted:This sounds retarded. Welcome to the IT industry, where the titles are made up and the raises are nonexistant. Tasmantor posted:If swapping jobs every time you want to "move up" is the only way to go how does anyone ever get long service leave? Is portable LSL common in the tech industry or something? I'm not familiar with the concept. Leave is what they reduce every year because it costs too much productivity when you've 'right sized' your staffing to mean that anyone wanting a day off is actively hurting your ability to hit deliverables. Liquid Communism fucked around with this message at 01:07 on Mar 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 01:05
|
|
|
Tasmantor posted:If swapping jobs every time you want to "move up" is the only way to go how does anyone ever get long service leave? You tell your next employers you can start working there in a month or two.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 01:15
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:You tell your next employers you can start working there in a month or two. More than once I have quit and then returned to the same company (with no intervening employment) just to get a sabbatical.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 01:25
|
|
|
What
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
A year's worth of experience in a non-poo poo position raises your (bubble-driven) market rate more than any normal company will ever give as an annual raise. It might make more sense to just pay people more, but I don't know any companies besides Netflix that actually do it. The numbers just seem too insane to budget. I've had five jobs in the past four years (obviously, some of them were rapidly-corrected mistakes), and my salary has gone from 80 to 180. Who the gently caress would approve raises like that? Of course, kids fresh out of the right college who manage to get duelling offers from Facebook and Google will get low 200s. I'm curious to see what their careers look like in the fullness of time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 02:17
|
|
|
The biggest problem is that you don't get competent programmers for cheap. Programmers are expensive to hire but programming is a slow, difficult thing pretty much no matter how you slice it. Everybody wants veteran coders but not many places are willing to pay to develop new veteran coders.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:Everybody wants veteran coders but not many places are willing to pay to develop new veteran coders.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 03:05
|
|
|
Tasmantor posted:If swapping jobs every time you want to "move up" is the only way to go how does anyone ever get long service leave? Is portable LSL common in the tech industry or something?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 03:42
|
|
|
Cicero posted:Swapping jobs isn't the only way to move up, it's just the fastest way. And not all companies really suck at compensation, Google has been quite fair to me, at least so far. Hahahahaha, you work for the top tech company in the world and your perspective is incredibly skewed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 03:50
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Again, not really. Companies are perfectly able and willing to offer a wide variety of jobs and pay scales. What they're not willing to do is promote existing employees to a significant degree. When I was working private sector I knew people that pulled this after HR flatly stated 5% was the largest raise they could give them. They came back a year later thee positions higher with a 30-40% bump in pay. Sometimes I wondered if the company was actually using it as a way to get information about their competitors' operations.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 03:58
|
|
|
Tasmantor posted:If swapping jobs every time you want to "move up" is the only way to go how does anyone ever get long service leave? Is portable LSL common in the tech industry or something? "wikipedia posted:It (long service leave) remains one of the great entitlements for working Australians and one that is peculiar to the Australian labour market. But to actually answer your question many of the larger tech companies offer sabbaticals, whether it's 1 month after 5 years, 8 weeks after 7 years, or whatever. WampaLord posted:Hahahahaha, you work for the top tech company in the world and your perspective is incredibly skewed. He's not wrong though. For most people, the easiest way to increase salary is to job hop, and if you aren't at a company that has sufficiently high pay then laterally moving to one that does is usually the best option. For people who are very good at their jobs and are already at companies that pay a lot, the fastest way to increase salary is usually to get promoted. After a certain point it can get hard to negotiate promotions and raises via job hopping (or even to retain an equivalent title), especially if your prior company has had a lot of stock appreciation. But making it to senior or beyond senior at a company that has similar comp to Google gets very lucrative (250-400k is the ballpark for total compensation at senior and it grows very rapidly beyond that level). blah_blah fucked around with this message at 04:17 on Mar 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 04:13
|
|
|
Lucy Heartfilia posted:This sounds retarded. I told a VP of Engineering that I worked with that it was pretty obvious that the easy way (and only at a sadly large number of places) to get promoted was to company hop and he disagreed quite vehemently. He wasn't a VP of Engineering at the company he had been working at 6 months prior to this conversation.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 05:04
|
|
|
ocrumsprug posted:I told a VP of Engineering that I worked with that it was pretty obvious that the easy way (and only at a sadly large number of places) to get promoted was to company hop and he disagreed quite vehemently. gently caress that guy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 05:07
|
|
|
blah_blah posted:He's not wrong though. For most people, the easiest way to increase salary is to job hop, and if you aren't at a company that has sufficiently high pay then laterally moving to one that does is usually the best option. For people who are very good at their jobs and are already at companies that pay a lot, the fastest way to increase salary is usually to get promoted. After a certain point it can get hard to negotiate promotions and raises via job hopping (or even to retain an equivalent title), especially if your prior company has had a lot of stock appreciation. But making it to senior or beyond senior at a company that has similar comp to Google gets very lucrative (250-400k is the ballpark for total compensation at senior and it grows very rapidly beyond that level). I hate everything about this.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 05:10
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:I hate everything about this. If job hopping was universally the best option then that would be a much worse state of affairs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 05:22
|
|
|
Furthermore, if you stay too long at a company (barring a ridiculous success like Google or Facebook) there's a definite taint of "why didn't anybody else want to hire him/her?" Staying at a known sinking company is very bad for the resume; people are saying in press interviews right now that they wouldn't hire anybody with Yahoo as their last job, because the assumption is that they're losers or they would have gotten out years ago.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 05:26
|
|
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:Furthermore, if you stay too long at a company (barring a ridiculous success like Google or Facebook) there's a definite taint of "why didn't anybody else want to hire him/her?" Staying at a known sinking company is very bad for the resume; people are saying in press interviews right now that they wouldn't hire anybody with Yahoo as their last job, because the assumption is that they're losers or they would have gotten out years ago. I disagree with you about the 50+ thing (I think the way the industry has grown there just aren't very many 50+ programmers to hire when compared to the masses of 25 year olds you can hire) but this is totally true. Staying somewhere longer than three years is career death unless you are at a director level or higher.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 07:15
|
|
|
I feel like I should chime in with this not being a tech only situation. It's a known thing in advertising across the board, and I've worked with multiple people who left a company for 6 or less months so they could get the promotion/pay raise they wanted at their original company. Loyalty can be rewarded, but being a mercenary will pay dividends.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 07:29
|
|
|
Reading this thread as someone who graduated with a non-tech degree in 2007 makes me want to jump off a bridge. Hearing people toss out figures like 80,000-200,000 as no big deal is extremely disheartening. Someone talk me down, please. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 07:47
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:Reading this thread as someone who graduated with a non-tech degree in 2007 makes me want to jump off a bridge. Hearing people toss out figures like 80,000-200,000 as no big deal is extremely disheartening. Someone talk me down, please. If you die, take a few oligarchs with you to hell. If you don't die by drowning in a pool of capitalist blood, you're doing it wrong!
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 07:49
|
|
|
loving christ, you can't learn anything about my industry in just 2-3 years of working there. I know folks with 30 year pins.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 07:56
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:loving christ, you can't learn anything about my industry in just 2-3 years of working there. I know folks with 30 year pins. Sounds like your industry is about to get disrupted by a bunch of twentysomethings*  *Who copy what you're doing, hire more twentysomethings to work an extra 20h per week for the same pay, and ignore all regulation until the court cases catch up with them after a decade and a billion in profits
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 08:01
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Arsenic Lupin posted:Nope. Everybody wants programmers with >3 <10 years of experience. Once you're over 50 Silicon Valley doesn't want you, with rare exceptions. (This has made multiple newspapers.) That's the part that confuses me the most, honestly; I have a CS degree and did very, very well in college. I even studied math and design so I was more than just a CS major. I'm all like "I have several skills!" but every single position I see up anywhere is senior this, experienced that. I send in resumes anyway but I get returns of absolute silence or rejections. I can pass code tests, I can explain things beyond what the expect of a standard CS major, I can point to things I've done... But it's always "do you have three year's experience? No? Then go away." It's like...if nobody wants to let you get experience then you don't get experienced employees. I also keep seeing "go study tech!" everywhere. "There are hundreds of thousands of job openings! There aren't enough developers!" but 90% of the positions are companies trying to snipe each others' talent rather than letting a new guy enter the industry.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 09:02
|
|
|
It's all about them internships. There's a stupid high hire rate for folks who interned at the big tech companies.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 09:22
|
|
|
the talent deficit posted:I disagree with you about the 50+ thing (I think the way the industry has grown there just aren't very many 50+ programmers to hire when compared to the masses of 25 year olds you can hire) but this is totally true. Staying somewhere longer than three years is career death unless you are at a director level or higher.  gently caress this attitude
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 11:21
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:That's the part that confuses me the most, honestly; I have a CS degree and did very, very well in college. I even studied math and design so I was more than just a CS major. I'm all like "I have several skills!" but every single position I see up anywhere is senior this, experienced that. I send in resumes anyway but I get returns of absolute silence or rejections. I can pass code tests, I can explain things beyond what the expect of a standard CS major, I can point to things I've done... Don't forget, it's three years experience in a tech that's only been out for eighteen months in most cases. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 12:10
|
|
|
DrNutt posted:Reading this thread as someone who graduated with a non-tech degree in 2007 makes me want to jump off a bridge. Hearing people toss out figures like 80,000-200,000 as no big deal is extremely disheartening. Someone talk me down, please. Its all going on rent.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 12:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 20:54 |
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:That's the part that confuses me the most, honestly; I have a CS degree and did very, very well in college. I even studied math and design so I was more than just a CS major. I'm all like "I have several skills!" but every single position I see up anywhere is senior this, experienced that. I send in resumes anyway but I get returns of absolute silence or rejections. I can pass code tests, I can explain things beyond what the expect of a standard CS major, I can point to things I've done... Well most openings are for experience because most of the workforce has some. But companies aren't dumb. Entry people can do tedious work and if employers are lucky, deliver near senior results after a couple years for much less pay. So entry positions will open up. But another comment is that versatility doesn't always pay. I do a mix of different hardware, FPGA and some software. When I tested the waters for alternative positions a while back I hit a design firm that wanted exactly this. And I hit an opening that was FPGA only. The FPGA specialty would have paid way more. Also if you make it look like you're picky and that you need a position utilizing your specific skills, that's a turn off.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2016 15:52
|
|