[HN Gopher] Skilled tech workers snapped up despite downturn
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Skilled tech workers snapped up despite downturn
        
       Author : sizzle
       Score  : 116 points
       Date   : 2022-12-20 17:32 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.bbc.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.bbc.com)
        
       | Tade0 wrote:
       | My co-worker's engagement was recently reduced due to lack of
       | work matching his highly specific skills, so he's on the lookout
       | for another project.
       | 
       | He was told by one of the recruiters that while there are offers
       | for contractors such as us, it's the first time since time
       | immemorial when they're actually considerably lower than the
       | previous year.
       | 
       | Don't know what to make of this - could be just a negotiation
       | tactic but indeed the budget he was offered there was around 75%
       | of what he had in his previous main thing(our project is
       | technically his side gig).
       | 
       | Meanwhile Google was on a hiring spree around here for the past
       | few months, but the compensation offered is reportedly, ahem,
       | uninspiring.
       | 
       | Perhaps if enough companies do the same we'll be facing not a job
       | shortage, but a well-paid job shortage. I think it's possible.
        
       | ptero wrote:
       | Downturn is still very young. Many unprofitable companies can
       | continue to execute on their previous funding rounds which,
       | raised in the macro environment of zero-cost money, can provide
       | for a year or more of runway. Should this downturn become a
       | fairly severe recession, many more jobs may be hit affecting
       | hiring in skilled tech as well.
       | 
       | Not claiming that this _will_ happen, but many economists agree
       | that it is fairly likely. So even if you are in a very enviable
       | position in a skilled tech role and are inundated with recruiter
       | calls I would prep: take stock of your finances, determine your
       | _personal_ runway (how long can you maintain current quality of
       | life should your paychecks stop tomorrow) and plan accordingly.
       | My 2c.
        
         | oceanplexian wrote:
         | I think a lot more interesting things are going on with the
         | "tech recession" than meets the eye.
         | 
         | Unlike the crash in '08 and '01, the economy now has a hard
         | dependency on tech. There is no "going back" to the world of
         | the past. Smartphones aren't going to be "un-invented". People
         | aren't going to give up online shopping. Businesses aren't
         | going to give up targeted advertising and start buying ads on
         | AM Radio or something. If you look at the big picture, and
         | barring any wild developments like general intelligence AI, the
         | demand for skilled tech workers is only going to increase.
         | 
         | I don't think tech workers are invincible but I think tech is
         | now a requirement for economic growth, which poses a problem:
         | Business leaders and investors have been really ticked off by
         | the tech labor shortage. They tried to fix it with H1B, they
         | tried with all these "learn to code" programs. They tried boot
         | camps. They keep trying, and failing, because being a software
         | engineer requires a degree of intelligence and critical
         | thinking and there will always be a limited supply of that kind
         | of labor.
         | 
         | My pet theory is that some portion of the layoffs are being
         | engineered to undermine the remote work revolution, scare
         | people into accepting lower wages, and get back to "how things
         | were". But the economic need for tech is so large and the
         | supply of labor is so limited I don't see much changing.
        
           | vbezhenar wrote:
           | I feel that there's lot of bubbles which will burst and
           | release plenty of programmers to the job market. It's already
           | happening. And those programmers will not find work, not all
           | of them. We need smartphones, but we don't necessary need all
           | those "old moms social network" apps.
           | 
           | During rich years plenty of people came to the industry.
           | Plenty of them are smart and capable, so competition will
           | lower salaries and push some people from their levels.
           | 
           | And god save us if this AI thing will actually take off. It's
           | dumb but it's progressing.
        
             | mehphp wrote:
             | > And god save us if this AI thing will actually take off.
             | It's dumb but it's progressing.
             | 
             | I don't see how it does anything but progress. I obviously
             | have no idea how long it will take before it can replace a
             | software engineer but after playing around with ChatGPT and
             | seeing the code it can create, it's definitely progressing
             | faster than I thought it would.
        
         | strangattractor wrote:
         | IMO One of the best times to do a startup is during a downturn.
         | Startups typically don't even have a product for some time
         | after beginning. One of the worst scenarios is introducing your
         | product at the beginning of a downturn. Adoption rates tend to
         | be slower then because corporations are reducing spending.
        
           | ethbr0 wrote:
           | * If you can find funding or self-fund.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | time_to_smile wrote:
         | I still hear a lot of conversations that assume current trends
         | are temporary, that we'll return to an era of free money soon,
         | and we can finally stop worrying about this silly "profit"
         | nonsense to focus again on growth which is much more fun.
         | 
         | I won't believe this is near over until I see worldviews
         | fundamentally change.
        
           | bobthepanda wrote:
           | There is a lot of room between "era of free money" and 5%
           | rates.
        
         | VirusNewbie wrote:
         | What "unprofitable" companies are you talking about? Most of
         | the layoffs have come from very profitable companies that
         | trimmed a lot of fat they acquired.
         | 
         | Meta, Amazon, Stripe, Twilio, Salesforce etc are all profitable
         | companies. That's where the majority of non crypto layoffs came
         | from.
        
           | ketzo wrote:
           | Isn't that exactly the parent's point?
           | 
           | They are saying that many unprofitable companies _haven 't_
           | done their layoffs yet, because they're still coasting on
           | huge funding rounds from 2021. Thus, there are more axes yet
           | to fall.
           | 
           | Not sure how much stock I actually put in that argument --
           | lots of VC-funded companies are already doing layoffs, too --
           | but I think you're sort of agreeing with them.
        
             | VirusNewbie wrote:
             | If a company isn't doing layoffs now, when there is
             | basically a free pass PR wise, they must be _extremely_
             | over confident or delusional.
        
               | whatshisface wrote:
               | If you're describing it as a PR pass they don't have one.
        
               | ketzo wrote:
               | Not that you're wrong, but aren't you kinda describing
               | the archetypal VC-funded startup founder? :D
        
           | adventured wrote:
           | While you're correct about most of those, Twilio has been an
           | epic loss-making machine its entire existence.
           | 
           | $1.1 billion operating loss the past four quarters on a mere
           | $3.6b in sales. $915m operating loss fiscal 2021, $492m
           | operating loss 2020, $369m operating loss 2019, $108m
           | operating loss (on $650m in sales) for 2018, and so on. They
           | have always lost money and are currently gushing red ink.
           | 
           | It's definitely part of the reason their stock has collapsed
           | in such a dramatic way (a particularly unsupported valuation
           | previously). While even most highly profitable tech stocks
           | have dropped by a lot, Twilio's drop of ~89% is largely
           | reserved for the group of very unprofitable extreme valuation
           | tech stocks.
        
           | meltyness wrote:
           | Profitable, but not consumer facing, advertising driven
           | revenues may be volatile, depending on how sophisticated a
           | thief the company is.
        
           | mrtksn wrote:
           | Here is graph visualising the layoffs:
           | https://www.visualcapitalist.com/visualizing-tech-company-
           | la...
           | 
           | November appears to be the exception where those profitable
           | big company layoffs dominate but it's still not by much.
           | 
           | The long tail is the king, as always.
        
             | VirusNewbie wrote:
             | The graphs aren't very accurate. Reports 8k twitter
             | layoffs???
        
               | ojbyrne wrote:
               | The source (https://www.trueup.io/layoffs) says 3750 FTE
               | and 4400 Contractors were laid off. Which looking around
               | the web seems accurate.
        
           | ptero wrote:
           | Profitable big tech layoffs are, in my opinion, a different
           | phenomenon. Those companies are trying to get their PE up to
           | be competitive with fixed rate assets. Otherwise, their share
           | prices will suffer even more. For example, Google's PE of 19
           | is OK in the era of a free money, but not so good when rates
           | are at 5% and defensive sectors yield 7+%. But the key thing
           | is that the layoffs are not an existential question for them
           | -- they are profitable and can continue to run for years even
           | if their shares suffer. It would be a bad business decision,
           | but will not lead to a quick death.
           | 
           | I was talking about smaller, unprofitable, non-market
           | dominating firms. If they are not profitable they will have
           | to raise or die. And raising in the environment of 5+% rates
           | and poor overall tech stock performance may get _brutal_.
           | Currently, many of those companies still have significant
           | runways (because they were able to raise a lot earlier), but
           | this will start running out in the next several months. This
           | may already be starting: two of my friends who work in such
           | small companies (robotics and lasers) are sensing job
           | uncertainty ahead. My 2c.
        
             | TheCoelacanth wrote:
             | It's not an existential question for the companies, but it
             | could be for the people making the decisions. If
             | shareholders aren't happy with the company's performance,
             | the CEO might find themselves getting replaced.
        
           | trustfundbaby wrote:
           | Carvana, Vroom, Bird, Helbiz, FuboTv, Shift, Wework, 23andMe
           | to name a few, theres many more.
           | 
           | Their stocks are either in or dangerously close to penny
           | stock category.
        
           | aadvark69 wrote:
           | Twilio is NOT profitable
        
         | highwaylights wrote:
         | Those of us that have been through this before won't be
         | suckered in by it.
         | 
         | Where I am, 2008 wasn't too bad in tech, but the aftermath of
         | the dotcom bust was like the end of Infinity War, just there
         | one day and then gone.
         | 
         | No-one expects their career to end at the gilded hand of a
         | giant purple alien.
        
           | dasil003 wrote:
           | One thing to keep in mind is that in the Dotcom bubble, the
           | web was brand new. On the talent side, we were still figuring
           | everything out. Most software engineers were used to either
           | desktop app development, or expensive enterprise server
           | development. Most designers were print designers, with UX
           | design having not really emerged from the early human-
           | computer interaction days where it was still more technical
           | than humanities.
           | 
           | At the same time, the web had only proven that regular people
           | were willing to try it, but there was no meaningful consumer
           | or advertiser money flowing through it for another ten years.
           | So basically you had a perfect storm of a bunch of people
           | trying to figure out something from scratch and massive over
           | investment from VCs. When the music stopped it was a
           | bloodbath because there was so little actual revenue.
           | 
           | I don't see the same thing happening now because the web is
           | firmly embedded in our lives and someone needs to maintain
           | all this code. I'm honestly more worried about environmental
           | threats and the sustainability of our way of life than the
           | economy per se.
        
             | snovv_crash wrote:
             | It's a lot like the current crypto scene
        
             | senko wrote:
             | > So basically you had a perfect storm of a bunch of people
             | trying to figure out something from scratch and massive
             | over investment from VCs.
             | 
             | This could describe today, with crypto (tech still looking
             | for solutions to problems that aren't scams), AI (great
             | potential but mostly in a gimmick phase right now), and VCs
             | coming from a decade of record-low rates causing extreme
             | valuations across the board ($5M seed rounds, etc).
             | 
             | If you exclude Big Tech (which also took a beating but is
             | managing), the smaller tech scene is ripe for a disruption
             | of a very uncomfortable kind.
        
               | eastbound wrote:
               | > crypto, AI and VC
               | 
               | I'm pretty happy for all those sectors to tank, they
               | don't produce value that people would pay for, while we
               | struggle finding competent people for product startups
               | generating 500k per employee.
        
               | Beaver117 wrote:
               | Collectively crypto failures might have lost more money
               | than the dot com crash
        
           | Firmwarrior wrote:
           | I've been asking around about the dot com bust, trying to get
           | a better picture of it
           | 
           | The problem is that most of the people I've talked to were
           | employed at huge, profitable companies that made actual
           | products. So it was just a blip for them.
           | 
           | I was working on web development after school and got laid
           | off, but all that meant was I had to eat the food my parents
           | made for me instead of eating at fast food places with my
           | friends..
        
             | screwturner68 wrote:
             | The dot com bust was a bit of a perfect storm, lots of
             | people weren't needed because Y2K was over, lots of dumb
             | ass startups with no product and no revenue disappeared and
             | finally 9/11 gave everyone an excuse to chop heads because
             | the economy was surely tanking. The first two were going to
             | happen no matter what an the third just amplified the
             | situation. Through all of it there was still hiring, the
             | week I got hired the company that hired me laid off 12,000
             | people.
        
             | haakonhr wrote:
             | I've actually met a couple of people randomly on flights
             | that worked as software developers until the dotcom bubble
             | burst. They both said they couldn't find anything the
             | following years so they changed careers: one became a
             | carpenter and the other ended up as an accountant.
        
             | ghaff wrote:
             | Cisco, EMC, Sun... were all huge (and formerly profitable)
             | companies making actual products and got absolutely
             | hammered when dot com busted. Personally I was very lucky--
             | got a job with a small firm whose CEO I knew well and was
             | (at the time) still doing OK though it went through a
             | fairly long rough patch.
             | 
             | But no small number of people, including many who had
             | worked at large firms, basically left tech.
        
             | UncleOxidant wrote:
             | I decided to leave my job of 8 years in July of 2001 (the
             | layoffs in tech had started by then, but really built up
             | momentum a bit after that). At the time I was doing
             | software development for a semiconductor company and it
             | just seemed like after 8 years there I wasn't going
             | anywhere and we'd recently paid off our house so I figured,
             | what the heck, I can find another gig in 6 months, I'll
             | take some time off. When I started looking around in Jan
             | '02 it took several months to find a 3 month contracting
             | gig. After that was over I decided to go back to school and
             | get a masters degree which I did. Had a few conctracting
             | gigs after that but steady work didn't return until '05. So
             | yeah, my timing wasn't great, but I did get my masters
             | degree.
        
             | [deleted]
        
             | davidrupp wrote:
             | I had just switched from IBM 370 mainframe assembler to
             | Java in mid-2000, worked for several months at iXL, a then-
             | typical consulting company with high margins and
             | correspondingly high "bling" -- elaborate office
             | furnishings, massive plasma TVs in the conference rooms,
             | massages, beer cart Fridays, et cetera. That got crushed in
             | the dot-bomb, followed soon after by 9/11. I managed not to
             | have to return to my former vertical (airline
             | reservations), but I definitely had to scramble to stay
             | relevant. I work at Amazon now (usual disclaimer; opinions
             | my own, etc.).
        
             | d_burfoot wrote:
             | > I was working on web development after school and got
             | laid off, but all that meant was I had to eat the food my
             | parents made for me instead of eating at fast food places
             | with my friends..
             | 
             | A good reminder that economic downturns can be actually
             | healthy for people, families, and the environment. With
             | less money, people will drive less, travel less, drink
             | less, eat less meat, spend more time with loved ones, etc
             | etc
        
             | spamizbad wrote:
             | The workers hit the hardest during the dotcom bust were
             | people who recently skilled-up in HTML/CSS and basic web
             | design. There was a massive hiring spree for people with
             | these skills and a huge number of those jobs completely
             | evaporated by 2001. Many of those people ended up just
             | leaving tech all together.
             | 
             | Those jobs never really came back as websites became more
             | "Dynamic" and CMSes began to proliferate: So rather than
             | hiring 20 web developers converting copy and design to
             | websites you could hire a 1-3 engineer(s) to customize and
             | run your CMS and non-technical people can provide the
             | content.
        
             | strangattractor wrote:
             | Finding work was not all that bad depending on your skill
             | set. In fact I started doing consulting after leaving my
             | startup. Was one of the most profitable and enjoyable times
             | of my career. Having been through several downturns in tech
             | I tend to view them as shifts. Early 80's personal
             | computers -> late 80's early 90's connectivity (modems) BBS
             | networks -> 2000 Internet etc.
             | 
             | Understanding and adapting to those changes are key. Next
             | up -> IOT - computers in everything - applying AI - Biotech
             | - ? Generally something expensive has to become cheap for
             | the masses. Hayes modems took $1200 - $2000 devices down to
             | <$300. Ethernet made LANs cheap. Twitter made stupidity
             | availability massively scalable for zero dollars:)
        
             | tunesmith wrote:
             | I got laid off twice during the Dotcom bust. Remember that
             | it dovetailed into the post-9/11 stuff too. In Q4 2001,
             | there was just nothing. Intel and Nike were advertising web
             | development positions for $12/hour (not a typo) and were
             | getting flooded with applications. I ended up cold-calling
             | various local businesses, got a freelance php/mysql
             | contract for $20/hour, found a different perl/oracle
             | contract for $55/hour in May of 2002, and worked my way
             | back up from there.
        
               | ch4s3 wrote:
               | Wow, $55/hour is pretty decent salary in most of the US
               | today, kudos.
        
               | tunesmith wrote:
               | It was 1099, not W2. But yeah, that contract is when
               | things started feeling "normal" again.
        
               | UncleOxidant wrote:
               | For software development, though, $55/hour doesn't seem
               | great in 2022. I was getting $50/hr contracting back in
               | 2002.
        
               | ch4s3 wrote:
               | Sure, but it was framed as a rebuilding step 20 years ago
               | and inflation adjusted its like $165,000/yr. Making that
               | in the trough of a recession after a lay off seems great
               | to me.
        
               | screwturner68 wrote:
               | Yep I was getting $57/h in the spring of 2001, then the
               | party stopped.
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | I got laid off about a week after 9/11 though the writing
               | was on the wall before that anyway. I consider myself
               | super-lucky to land a job in about a month after a lunch
               | discussion I had with someone I knew about 3 days after I
               | was laid off. Nothing else, including discussions with
               | other people I knew, was leading to anything at all.
        
       | 908B64B197 wrote:
       | I feel the recent rounds of layoffs were a bit overblown (perhaps
       | because it affected well-known companies? and Meta isn't very
       | liked by traditional media outlets).
       | 
       | A lot of layoffs targeted "tech-adjacent" or "non-technical"
       | positions too (perhaps this
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34039816 can shed a light on
       | how essential these jobs were). Some of it were expected, like at
       | Microsoft where they trim about 1% of the workforce deemed
       | underperforming on an annual basis.
       | 
       | The market is still incredibly hot for high performing engineers,
       | especially senior. I think where the squeeze really happened are
       | junior positions, but I still see a strong market for qualified
       | candidates. It's certainly not like back in 2015 where you would
       | see junior hires come in with only a coding bootcamp on their
       | resume.
       | 
       | Now something I noticed is a renewed interest for startups,
       | especially from experienced engineers who might have "cashed out"
       | in the last few years and have bit of runway. Crypto and Twitter
       | both created their fair share of well-off engineers that are
       | looking for their next challenge.
       | 
       | > Craig Freedberg, from UK-based specialist recruitment firm,
       | Robert Half, says businesses will still have a need for tech
       | resources and software development projects.
       | 
       | > However, he thinks companies will be reluctant to expand their
       | workforces and will instead turn to temporary tech workers.
       | 
       | Maybe in the UK, but it's not what I've seen this side of the
       | pond.
       | 
       | Brexit made the UK a risky destination to start or operate a
       | business, and out of control inflation didn't help. Salaries
       | adjusted to cost of living have decreased, inducing an even
       | larger brain drain. Temporary resources are good for the
       | immediate bottom-line but when has this ever worked out? Long
       | term, it generally means a loss of technical expertise for a
       | company. The reason a lot of UK businesses are doing it might
       | also be that Brexit made it much harder to secure finding, as
       | investors aren't too confident in the UK's future.
       | 
       | > Could this erode Silicon Valley's attraction for ambitious
       | software engineers and developers? After all, other cities like
       | Lisbon and Toronto are offering attractive tax breaks in the hope
       | of attracting tech entrepreneurs.
       | 
       | Startups aren't worried about taxes. They are worried about
       | funding. The real question here is are Toronto and Lisbon
       | attractive places to secure funding? That's what matters to
       | founders.
       | 
       | > Author Margaret O'Mara does not see a big exodus. "Companies
       | come here for the talent, to recruit the best people, and that's
       | still happening in Silicon Valley," she notes.
       | 
       | > But venture capitalist Lu Zhang views it another way. "The new
       | normal will be to rely on the core values within Silicon Valley
       | to help founders get started and create their initial products
       | and learn about market fit, but then to expand outside those
       | borders to leverage talent outside Silicon Valley and remotely
       | hire from other tech hubs."
       | 
       | From my experience that's already the case. However, long term,
       | I've seen a lot more employees move from other tech hubs to the
       | Valley than the opposite.
       | 
       | Every time I've been pitched the "next Silicon Valley" or that
       | innovation just wasn't going to happen in the Valley anymore, the
       | correct bet was to ignore it. I don't see how this time is
       | different.
        
       | jeffwask wrote:
       | There was an entire layer of software companies that were
       | struggling to hire and fill roles because the big players were
       | hoarding talent. All those companies are still hiring, the roles
       | may not be as flashy, and the challenges may be different but
       | they all need good engineers.
        
       | cgb223 wrote:
       | Personal anecdote:
       | 
       | Am a Senior PM laid off from a Big-N tech company who has
       | launched multiple 9 figure revenue generating products.
       | 
       | The market, despite the economy and the time of year isn't great,
       | but it's not terrible.
       | 
       | I've had lots of first and second interviews and a surprising
       | amount of final rounds given all of the above.
       | 
       | That said most all of those came from recruiters reaching out as
       | opposed to applying directly.
       | 
       | Unlike a month ago, my LinkedIn is EMPTY in terms of recruiter
       | messages.
       | 
       | It's been over a week since anyone's reached out but I figure
       | that's a function of the time of year.
       | 
       | To compare to Spring of this year when I was interviewing (while
       | still employed) I had many, many, more recruiters reaching out
       | than anything I've seen in the last 3 months, and the caliber of
       | jobs was higher quality.
       | 
       | It sucks being unemployed during the holidays and not getting the
       | reach I had before. It's a little scary, but I keep reminding
       | myself that it's that time of year with holidays, no budget, etc
       | and it'll get better in January (hopefully).
       | 
       | I'm no 100x rockstar coder, but I've added real, quantifiable
       | value at companies where it's a real challenge to launch anything
       | quickly and successfully. It's not nearly as rosy a picture as
       | the BBC presents. I hope it gets better soon.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | devmunchies wrote:
         | It's known that tech recruiting has its most active months in
         | spring/summer. Its more in line with the school year[1] than
         | the calendar year.
         | 
         | [1]: probably because parents don't like big changes while
         | their kids are on a schedule and because new grads, and
         | _possibly_ (on a more evolutionary-biological level) because
         | people are more active after winter as they begin foraging
         | /farming/building, venturing out, etc.
        
         | creaghpatr wrote:
         | >Unlike a month ago, my LinkedIn is EMPTY in terms of recruiter
         | messages.
         | 
         | A lot of in-house recruiters may have been laid off during that
         | time, so might not directly correlate with new job postings
         | volume/quality (obviously still related though).
         | 
         | On the upside, wherever you land, they are more likely to be
         | investing thoughtfully rather than tacking on headcount.
        
         | dimal wrote:
         | I noticed that the number of recruiter messages I get on
         | LinkedIn was proportional to the number of replies I give to
         | the messages in my inbox. When I'm active, I get more interest.
         | Like, going from 0-1 new recruiter messages to 5-7 a week.
         | Maybe I'm imagining things, but it would make sense that if you
         | just have your profile set to "Looking for work" but you're not
         | actually talking to anyone, you're sending a signal that you're
         | not actively looking, and you're going to fall to the bottom of
         | the pile. Send a few "Sorry for the delay in responding.
         | $YOUR_PRODUCT sounds interesting. Can you tell me more,"
         | messages to the most recent messages in your inbox and see if
         | it gets things unstuck.
        
         | dist1ll wrote:
         | It's the end of the fiscal year. No one wants to drown in paper
         | work during the holidays.
        
         | bdcravens wrote:
         | Not discounting real issues going on in the economy, but most
         | stuff grinds to a halt in December, even when things are
         | rocking.
        
         | thatfrenchguy wrote:
         | It's the week before Christmas, half the people are gone
         | already, and of the half is not at 100% anymore. January will
         | get better :)
        
         | pnutjam wrote:
         | I'm a linux sysadmin / devops guy who went through this
         | recently. When I started looking, end of September, I had a ton
         | of interest from recruiters who wanted to chat. I also applied
         | to a ton of jobs. Week 2 looked a little sparse. By week 3 I
         | was getting interviews daily. It took 6 weeks, but I ended up
         | with about 6 solid offers and I turned down another 2 or 3 that
         | wanted to make offers, or continue interview rounds. I landed
         | an awesome job at the very end of November. Things will pick up
         | in January, good luck.
        
         | sizzle wrote:
         | Wait till everyone gets their Q1 bonus for a flood of job
         | vacancies early next year.
        
       | dzonga wrote:
       | companies printing money i.e profitable not funded by cheap vc
       | money are not affected by the current downturn. unless it is
       | industry wide e.g covid which affected the cash flow of travel
       | tech companies. likewise for financial companies e.g HFT. of
       | course certain skills get saturated and get replaced. normal
       | course of market adjustment.
        
         | negamax wrote:
         | 100x this. Most companies with large layoffs had pie in the sky
         | valuations due to pandemic money printing. They were never
         | profitable. VCs with wads were searching for next 20x in three
         | months
        
         | treis wrote:
         | >companies printing money i.e profitable not funded by cheap vc
         | money are not affected by the current downturn.
         | 
         | Google, Amazon, and Meta have all laid people off and they
         | basically own dollar printing presses.
        
           | izzydata wrote:
           | I imagine that all those companies are big enough to have
           | segmented departments that can be determined to be
           | unprofitable by themselves. Amazon made plenty of profit, but
           | they doesn't mean they should keep employing everyone from
           | the Alexa department that only lost money.
        
             | [deleted]
        
         | friedman23 wrote:
         | Of course they will be affected if their customers are
         | unprofitable and are forced to cut costs or go out of business.
        
       | dahateb wrote:
       | As someone with 13 years of experience in Backend Development and
       | Devops and currently working in a startup that might run out of
       | money next year, would it make sense to start looking for a new
       | job right now or just wait it out? Also considering that I'm
       | working in Europe where job protection laws are quite strict and
       | having worked in a company for 3 years will give you strong job
       | security. So basically I will be one of the last ones to be laid
       | off.
        
         | KptMarchewa wrote:
         | No job protection laws will protect you from losing job when
         | startup runs out of business. Look for a new job now.
        
         | anonporridge wrote:
         | The longer you wait to jump ship, the less time you'll have to
         | establish and prove your value at a new company, making it more
         | likely that you'll be first in line on the chopping block if
         | the new company also ends up with layoffs in the next few
         | years.
         | 
         | It really all depends on how many years you can survive without
         | a job from your savings and how much faith you have in your
         | startup to survive long term. You seem to be in a high risk,
         | high reward situation which necessarily has no one right answer
         | because every person has different risk tolerances. If you can
         | survive 2-3 years without a high paying tech job, and don't
         | have a family to support, the reward of sticking it out might
         | be worth the risk. Only you can answer that.
        
       | chomp wrote:
       | This has been my experience too. Companies never stopped looking
       | for senior talent. Junior talent is getting squeezed. Quite a few
       | people in my circle have been getting job offers after
       | interviewing at one or two companies, it's still somewhat of a
       | hot market.
        
         | madaxe_again wrote:
         | I'm seeing the opposite at PE-backed firms. Blackstone, for
         | instance, have been firing anyone who costs anything, and
         | moving every technical role to the lowest bidder. I've watched
         | the entire technical and leadership teams for businesses get
         | fired this year, and replaced with $10/hr coders.
         | 
         | It's going to make them look rosy for the next few Qs while
         | everyone else haemorrhages cash. Long term, not so much, but
         | the long term isn't important to the market.
        
           | starwind wrote:
           | Seems like business as usual for private equity
        
           | WrtCdEvrydy wrote:
           | There's no future beyond the current quarter.
        
         | paxys wrote:
         | Junior talent isn't getting squeezed either; there are just too
         | many unqualified people trying to break into the industry. The
         | time when you could get a high paying tech job with a bootcamp
         | certificate or a couple of trivial projects on your Github is
         | over. People with CS degrees, internships or a year or two of
         | professional experience are fine.
        
           | chomp wrote:
           | I guess that is true. I mentor CS students at my local
           | university and they're having tougher times breaking into the
           | industry than past years. We helped them with resumes and
           | making contacts, and where maybe 3/4 of students previously
           | would have been placed by now, only maybe 1/4 are getting
           | placed. Companies in my area seem interested in talking to
           | students, but not actually hiring them (yet.) A couple
           | students got job offers in place 6 months out (!)
           | 
           | I do believe the bootcamp certificate crowd will have a
           | harder time than this though. I'm seeing way more "degree
           | required" postings than I did 5 years ago.
        
             | paxys wrote:
             | > A couple students got job offers in place 6 months out
             | (!)
             | 
             | This is standard in the tech industry. The bulk of college
             | hiring happens August-October for start dates in May-August
             | or even later. And the local market is always going to be
             | difficult in non tech hubs. Relocation is almost always a
             | requirement for the better jobs.
        
               | bobkazamakis wrote:
               | Maybe in the 90s? You speak pretty confidently about
               | this, but relocation being necessary is not even close to
               | the truth.
        
             | screwturner68 wrote:
             | I've mentored a couple of college kids and have pointed out
             | some good jobs at good companies and the response I got was
             | "they're boring". They might be boring but they pay well
             | and have good benefits, I guess it's got to be a
             | generational think because I would have jumped all over a
             | $80K gig at a boring company vs a $32K gig at some BS
             | startup at 23-24.
        
           | spamizbad wrote:
           | The problem is the "funnel" is clogged. You can slip through
           | with a referral, a degree from a tier-1 school, and/or some
           | solid internships but everyone else just has to hope they get
           | lucky.
           | 
           | I do agree about the under-qualified part though. We do some
           | basic technical pre-screening that has candidates spend maybe
           | 15 minutes answering 2 fizzbuzz-style questions just to save
           | everyone time and there's a solid minority of candidates that
           | can't do a question they didn't rehearse in leetcode
           | training.
        
           | Apocryphon wrote:
           | I'm still uncertain when that was ever so easy. Leetcode,
           | take home exercises, and all of the hiring processes that are
           | the stuff of a hundred irate blog articles posted to HN have
           | been around since the late 2000s. And it feels like bootcamp
           | grads were feeling the squeeze as early as ~5 years ago.
        
             | Hermitian909 wrote:
             | I know someone who founded a bootcamp around 2010.
             | According to him they had a 99% placement rate within 3
             | months of finishing bootcamp till around 2015, with
             | starting comp in the 80-120k range.
             | 
             | The basic setup over 3 months:
             | 
             | 1. Crash course in basic dev tooling setup (git etc.)
             | 
             | 2. Crash course in data structures and algorithms (e.g.
             | leetcode)
             | 
             | 3. Crash course in setting up a production environment
             | 
             | 4. Group interview prep sessions post-graduation
             | 
             | According to him this worked because:
             | 
             | 1. There was very little talent on the market at all
             | 
             | 2. Very few CS students had any experience writing
             | production code, even for toy apps. This meant their ramp
             | up time was often slower than bootcamp grads
             | 
             | 3. There was a backlog of otherwise highly competent people
             | trying to break into tech that just needed guidance on how
             | to get in
             | 
             | None of these things are true anymore and he has sinced
             | closed his bootcamp since it began to felt exploitative.
        
             | BlargMcLarg wrote:
             | A few decades ago maybe. It is _easier_ compared to the
             | other majors, but _easy_ makes it sound like a firm
             | handshake is the only necessity. Hasn 't been like that
             | since 2008 minimum.
        
               | Apocryphon wrote:
               | I wonder if any company really only asked fizzbuzz for
               | the technical segment.
        
               | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
               | Back in the dotcom boom, most certainly. I had a friend
               | who had taken exactly one programming course in some
               | obscure financial language and she got hired at the, to
               | her, insane amount of $45/hour. At that time, pretty much
               | any warm body that had ever looked at a computer was
               | being hired.
        
               | chucky_z wrote:
               | I used to ask it for a pre-pre screen. It had a maybe 20%
               | fail rate.
        
           | seaucre wrote:
           | the main bootcamp in my city is still doing quite well, but
           | it's not startups that are hiring - it's big banks and the
           | companies the contract out to them. many of the bootcamp
           | grads are only getting QA positions, but that's still a step
           | up from their old work, and some are still getting entry
           | level developer positions.
        
           | dr-detroit wrote:
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | devmunchies wrote:
       | An employer's market changes the dynamic, which can be to your
       | benefit if you're a top engineer. I expect that companies can lay
       | off the bottom 10% and then turn around and hire the top 5% in
       | the market who will replace the laid off 10%.
       | 
       | Kind of risky to join a new company though because if they do
       | layoffs, recent hires or more likely to get the axe.
        
         | FooBarBizBazz wrote:
         | This sounds like anti-worker sentiment trying to sneak in on
         | people's egos. It doesn't pass the common sense test, for me.
         | 
         | It sounds like you're saying that companies are going to lay
         | off (say) half their workforce, and replace them by a handful
         | of "10x engineers" who they pay twice as much.
         | 
         | Is there any evidence that this happens?
         | 
         | It sounds to me like saying that luxury mansions go up in a
         | housing market crash, or blue chips went up in 1929.
         | 
         | I don't think it describes reality.
        
           | devmunchies wrote:
           | I wouldn't say it's "anti-worker", just armchair discussion
           | of supply-demand economics. You can't improve worker
           | conditions without an honest characterization of market
           | dynamics. It pretty straightforward that a decrease of "open
           | positions" (the supply of jobs) and the increase in
           | "candidates looking for work" (the demand for jobs) would
           | afford employers the leverage to change their hiring
           | strategies.
           | 
           | Combine that with post-covid environment where employers want
           | to boost productivity to prior levels, and as they see other
           | companies successfully perform layoffs without huge hits to
           | productivity or stock price, and you get a perfect storm.
           | 
           | And yes, most companies that have had had layoffs are still
           | hiring, but obviously more selectively.
           | 
           | Follow up:
           | 
           | > It sounds like you're saying that companies are going to
           | lay off (say) half their workforce, and replace them by a
           | handful of "10x engineers" who they pay twice as much
           | 
           | they don't have to be 10x engineers, just perceived as better
           | than their current "hand". Put some card back in the pile,
           | draw some new ones from the deck. And they don't have to pay
           | them twice as much either (unless a really desirable
           | skillset), it's an employers market.
        
       | yevpats wrote:
       | Downturn didnt even really start. Wait like 8 more months and put
       | your seatbelts now.
        
         | mardifoufs wrote:
         | On the other hand we will probably keep hearing "it's getting
         | worse in 2 more weeks" doomerisms until the downturn clears up.
        
         | acchow wrote:
         | We don't know.
         | 
         | Currently, the fed is still saying December's CPI print (coming
         | on January 12) may be high. But looking at the futures market,
         | it seems like almost everything is down significantly and we
         | might see the first CPI print of 0% MoM in a year. Is the fed
         | keeping this narrative to temper the market and slow it down?
         | Or do they know something we don't?
         | 
         | If January 12 shows 0% or even negative MoM, it's possible
         | interest rates could come down in 2023.
        
         | trustfundbaby wrote:
         | I don't think that massive downturn people are thinking is
         | coming ... is going to come. The job market is too strong
         | (because of lower immigration, and how many exited the job
         | market during covid) and so is the housing market.
         | 
         | I thinks its going to be more like this for the next 8-12
         | months, until the fed stops raising interest rates, and then it
         | will be a mad dash to get everything going again.
        
           | projectazorian wrote:
           | This. Because of 2008 and Covid people have a bias toward
           | thinking that every economic slowdown is destined to be a
           | massive dislocation.
        
         | disambiguation wrote:
         | maybe this is true, maybe not, but from the perspective of a
         | worker, employed, or otherwise, what does it matter?
         | 
         | if you're employed you still need to be working hard, like
         | always
         | 
         | if you're unemployed you still need to be seeking employment,
         | like always
         | 
         | so, why do i care about the economy? is there something i'm
         | supposed to be doing about it?
        
         | yardie wrote:
         | It feels like we've been waiting 6 months for the last 12
         | months for the downturn to start any day now. We're in
         | uncharted territory. The economy sucks yet people are employed,
         | wages are down, and cost of living is way up.
        
           | benjaminwootton wrote:
           | People were talking about a recession in mid 2021 as I
           | remember it. Still waiting....
        
           | vikingerik wrote:
           | The economy doesn't suck. Most of the 2022 numbers that look
           | bad are really artifacts of year-over-year reporting, being
           | compared to numbers from 2021 that were artificially high
           | because of time-shifted demand from the pandemic in 2020.
           | Compare 2022 to 2019 and most things look fairly normal for a
           | three-year period.
           | 
           | Remember the "great resignation"? That was never a thing -
           | people aren't leaving the workforce - it was just time-
           | shifted demand for job switching that didn't happen during
           | the pandemic, so that some transient numbers looked high.
        
       | lovich wrote:
       | Is anyone aware of how hard covid hit the software engineering
       | community via early deaths/retirements? This downturn is going to
       | be weird all over the economy because unlike normal recessions
       | its coming right after a structural change to the labor market
       | which is why were still seeing historically low unemployment
       | rates despite these rate hikes and layoffs. Every company who was
       | profitable to begin with has been hungry to snap up employees
       | still.
       | 
       | Not saying this is necessarily true with software since were a
       | niche of the economy and may have a different outlook, but the
       | affect of covid on our number would help figure that out
        
         | trustfundbaby wrote:
         | > Is anyone aware of how hard covid hit the software
         | engineering community via early deaths/retirements?
         | 
         | Can you provide some data around that?
        
           | lovich wrote:
           | I phrased that awkwardly. I meant, does anyone know where/if
           | that data exists. I didn't mean to ask it rhetorically.
        
           | rurp wrote:
           | This article[0] doesn't discuss the tech industry
           | specifically, but Jerome Powell recently stated that deaths
           | from covid is a notable factor in the labor shortfall. Those
           | deaths, along with early retirements and decreased
           | immigration, have left the labor market about 3.5 million
           | people lighter than it would have been without covid.
           | 
           | [0]https://www.axios.com/2022/12/16/the-missing-workers-who-
           | are...
        
         | madengr wrote:
        
       | cheriot wrote:
       | Great to hear that those laid off have jobs to find.
       | 
       | This round of layoffs has only been the end of easy money. If we
       | have an actual recession it will get worse. Now's the time to
       | think through emergency funds and contingency plans.
        
       | LatteLazy wrote:
       | All the news I read is lay-offs, recessions and downturns.
       | 
       | All the emails I get are from recruiters begging for me to apply
       | to their clients' many openings.
       | 
       | And I am not Skilled really.
       | 
       | I am not one for conspiracy theories (except for some really
       | niche little ones :) ) but it does make me wonder how much the
       | media follows facts and how much it follows the mood. People seem
       | in the mood for a recession more than actually in one...
        
         | screwturner68 wrote:
         | I've heard nothing but the warning of a massive recession since
         | about 2015, half the pundits are telling me the world is going
         | to end in the next six months and the other half say the pump
         | is primed and the good times will be back in the next 6 months.
         | I guess we'll find out who's right in the next 6 months...or
         | not.
        
         | yrgulation wrote:
        
         | disambiguation wrote:
         | the #1 influence on the american economy is the Fed, and if
         | they raise interest rates - which is likely - then it will
         | cause a recession. (see Volcker)
         | 
         | of course there are no guarantees, we can't predict the timing
         | or severity of the markets' reaction, but its not a complete
         | fiction of the media and mood.
        
       | jti107 wrote:
       | if you're willing to relocate and not picky there are tons of
       | state/federal programming jobs. couple co-workers got picked up
       | by NASA for Javascript/C++ programming
        
         | AB1908 wrote:
         | How does one look for these? Looking for junior roles.
        
       | mkl95 wrote:
       | Tech salaries are keeping up with inflation in my area. Employers
       | expectations are proportional though.
        
       | tluyben2 wrote:
       | Because I am working on some new products and finally without a
       | NDA (since a decade), I can make some noise about myself again,
       | so I am polishing my LinkedIn, Twitter, Mastodon and website; I
       | am getting rather a lot of recruiter noise even some direct
       | companies. I am skilled but not looking. It seems a way better
       | market than when I switched off my LinkedIn. But that can hardly
       | be...
        
         | HeyLaughingBoy wrote:
         | Recruiters have gotten a lot more aggressive on LinkedIn in the
         | last year.
        
       | Beaver117 wrote:
       | I mean it's still easy to get interviews. They still make you
       | solve Leetcode hards and system designs which needs months of
       | prep
        
         | ornornor wrote:
         | Chatgpt to the rescue!
        
           | carabiner wrote:
           | Yes, it was never possible to google leetcode solutions
           | before.
        
             | Beaver117 wrote:
             | I'd still hire someone whos able to google a vague problem
             | (not from leetcode) during an interview, piece together
             | information, code it, and get away with it. That shows at
             | least some knowledge, skill, and potential. But using
             | chatgpt requires no skill. Shame
        
         | danesparza wrote:
         | Not all of them.
        
       | Haga wrote:
        
       | ChuckMcM wrote:
       | This was true during the dot com bust as well. Basically good
       | technical talent is good technical talent right? If things are
       | similar to the dot com post partum it won't be as great for
       | middle/line managers. Those folks often found themselves with a
       | management practice from a company that failed, and that sort of
       | tainted them as well seeing as "management" was considered the
       | reason things failed at the company. In the early 2000's I saw a
       | lot of resumes of "engineers" where their last job was
       | management. Sometimes that was fine, they had kept themselves
       | fresh while managing, sometimes not so much.
        
       | Melatonic wrote:
       | Anybody want to start a company specializing in de-clouding
       | companies that went all in and now want to switch to a hybrid
       | approach?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-12-20 23:01 UTC)