[HN Gopher] Tell HN: The ratio of wants-to-be-hired to is-hiring...
___________________________________________________________________
Tell HN: The ratio of wants-to-be-hired to is-hiring is at a record
high 0.94
Counting the comments in the who wants to be hired thread and
dividing by the number of comments in who is hiring = 0.94. A year
ago it was 0.23. Here's a plot with the data from the past couple
of years - https://pasteboard.co/tjZd0PgTI8GK.png (posting this
about a day after the April thread opened)
Author : jstx1
Score : 307 points
Date : 2023-04-04 14:38 UTC (8 hours ago)
| rossdavidh wrote:
| Very interesting chart, thanks! One comment, is that it is
| probably more a measure of "which way is the balance of power
| tilting" than it is "what is the actual ratio". Many employers
| who could not find anyone would post the job everywhere they
| could think of, while people looking just read the "who is
| hiring" posts and then applied to the employer rather than post
| in the "who wants to be hired". Now the shoe is on the other
| foot, but that doesn't mean the ratio has shifted all that much
| in reality. It is a definite sign as to which side has the
| surplus, however.
| tempsy wrote:
| Can a once trendy tech company like Birds scooter (stock at 22
| cents down -98%) really be considered to have the upper hand?
|
| I think if you're a FAANG employer that is considered "safe"
| definitely yes, but there's a pile of zombie companies that
| have been wrecked by end of ZIRP and have a hard time
| understanding how they retain or hire anyone.
| nico wrote:
| People are realizing that AI is changing everything and they
| don't want to do BS work that can be automated.
|
| They are getting inspired by the coming revolution.
|
| Interesting times we are living in.
| ed_balls wrote:
| in 2019 it was about 0.32
|
| First who wants to be hired
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7685170
|
| https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1350A5KGgmGI3Ed-tC7MP...
| gabrielsroka wrote:
| This JavaScript seems to work. You can run it from the browser
| console or from node.js. (async function () {
| // see https://hn.algolia.com/api console.clear();
| const posts = {}; var page = 0; var
| oldDate; while (true) {
| console.log('fetching page', page); const r =
| await fetch(`https://hn.algolia.com/api/v1/search_by_date?tags=
| story,author_whoishiring&page=${page++}`); const
| res = await r.json(); if (res.message) {
| console.log(res.message); } else {
| for (const h of res.hits) { var match;
| if (match = h.title.match(/Who wants to be hired\? \((.*)\)/i))
| { var date = match[1];
| if (date != oldDate) {posts[date] = {}; oldDate = date;}
| posts[date].wants = h.num_comments;
| if (posts[date].hiring) posts[date].ratio = posts[date].wants /
| posts[date].hiring; } else if (match =
| h.title.match(/Who is hiring\? \((.*)\)/i)) {
| date = match[1]; if (date != oldDate)
| {posts[date] = {}; oldDate = date;}
| posts[date].hiring = h.num_comments;
| if (posts[date].wants) posts[date].ratio = posts[date].wants /
| posts[date].hiring; } }
| } if (page == res.nbPages) break; }
| console.table(posts); })();
| madcaptenor wrote:
| seems like it wouldn't be too hard, just tedious, to compile
| all the data.
| madcaptenor wrote:
| Fine, I'll start. These threads are easily found in Google.
|
| January 2020: 244 wants to be hired / 697 hiring = 35%
|
| February 2020: 227 / 677 = 34%
|
| March 2020: 349 / 776 = 45%
|
| April 2020: 521 / 601 = 87%
|
| May 2020: 329 / 686 = 48%
|
| June 2020: 305 / 659 = 46%
|
| July 2020: 280 / 680 = 41%
|
| August 2020: 410 / 828 = 50%
|
| September 2020: 346 / 698 = 50%
|
| October 2020: 295 / 810 = 36%
|
| November 2020: 259 / 807 = 32%
|
| December 2020: 274 / 766 = 36%
|
| January 2021: 286 / 846 = 34%
|
| February 2021: 232 / 1052 = 22%
|
| March 2021: 227 / 964 = 24%
| ed_balls wrote:
| Date | Who is hiring? | Who wants to be hired | ratio
|
| Jan 2019,966,265,0.27
|
| Feb 2019,847,197,0.23
|
| Mar 2019,880,246,0.27
|
| Apr 2019,881,324,0.36
|
| May 2019,1020,286,0.28
|
| Jun 2019,800,232,0.29
|
| Jul 2019,907,479,0.52
|
| Aug 2019,861,284,0.32
|
| Sep 2019,724,180,0.24
|
| Oct 2019,905,406,0.44
|
| Nov 2019,760,270,0.35
|
| Dec 2019,907,271,0.29
| ed_balls wrote:
| https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&qu
| e...
|
| https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&qu
| e...
|
| Date | Who is hiring? | Who wants to be hired | ratio
|
| Jan 2015,334,98,0.29
|
| Feb 2015,643,169,0.26
|
| Mar 2015,680,177,0.26
|
| Apr 2015,952,194,0.20
|
| May 2015,891,199,0.22
|
| Jun 2015,759,276,0.36
|
| Jul 2015,1094,142,0.12
|
| Aug 2015,974,176,0.18
|
| Sep 2015,872,188,0.21
|
| Oct 2015,1136,99,0.08
|
| Nov 2015,896,99,0.11
|
| Dec 2015,1000,95,0.09
| ed_balls wrote:
| Date | Who is hiring? | Who wants to be hired | ratio
|
| Jan 2016,471,110,0.23
|
| Feb 2016,781,127,0.15
|
| Mar 2016,825,202,0.24
|
| Apr 2016,719,280,0.38
|
| May 2016,983,166,0.16
|
| Jun 2016,1007,248,0.24
|
| Jul 2016,898,209,0.23
|
| Aug 2016,945,118,0.12
|
| Sep 2016,911,162,0.17
|
| Oct 2016,989,261,0.26
|
| Nov 2016,1121,249,0.22
|
| Dec 2016,840,120,0.14
| ed_balls wrote:
| Date | Who is hiring? | Who wants to be hired | ratio
|
| Jan 2017,939,275,0.29
|
| Feb 2017,1236,106,0.08
|
| Mar 2017,1069,114,0.10
|
| Apr 2017,956,163,0.17
|
| May 2017,1096,236,0.21
|
| Jun 2017,994,101,0.10
|
| Jul 2017,982,105,0.10
|
| Aug 2017,955,224,0.23
|
| Sep 2017,957,113,0.11
|
| Oct 2017,1136,126,0.11
|
| Nov 2017,1199,145,0.12
|
| Dec 2017,1000,69,0.06
| ed_balls wrote:
| Date | Who is hiring? | Who wants to be hired | ratio
|
| Jan 2018,911,84,0.09
|
| Feb 2018,1070,76,0.07
|
| Mar 2018,1187,85,0.07
|
| Apr 2018,1084,142,0.13
|
| May 2018,1198,69,0.05
|
| Jun 2018,911,90,0.09
|
| Jul 2018,860,122,0.14
|
| Aug 2018,1025,83,0.08
|
| Sep 2018,922,73,0.07
|
| Oct 2018,1110,113,0.10
|
| Nov 2018,1057,162,0.15
|
| Dec 2018,954,182,0.18
| ritzaco wrote:
| Added (blindly) the above data to a spreadsheet with a
| graph here[0].
|
| If anyone wants to add the 2019 data in a comment, I'll
| update the sheet.
|
| [0] https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1bjPl3a0ciH6U9
| -OaLXGQ...
| madcaptenor wrote:
| There's already a comment from ed_balls with the 2019
| data.
| ritzaco wrote:
| added, but I see the bigquery script that's now the top
| comment makes it redundant.
| [deleted]
| iLoveOncall wrote:
| There are quite a lot of people hiring which have multiple job
| postings though.
|
| It doesn't invalidate that it is the highest but it doesn't mean
| that it's almost 1:1.
|
| It also doesn't mean that those people are out of a job. My
| company is mandating RTO 3 days a week, that's a good reason to
| look for a new position, while still being employed.
| 0xbadcafebee wrote:
| Yep. Large corporate (non-tech) job boards have hundreds of
| listings open for tech jobs
| karaterobot wrote:
| I think it might invalidate it. At the very least it points out
| that this is really measuring the ratio of _comments_ , not
| jobs and candidates.
| jasonlotito wrote:
| That's what the post says.
|
| > Counting the comments in the who wants to be hired thread
| and dividing by the number of comments in who is hiring.
| karaterobot wrote:
| Yep, saw that.
| iLoveOncall wrote:
| I think it doesn't invalidate it because this situation of
| having multiple job postings for a single comment is not new
| and I imagine is relatively the same every month.
| Tade0 wrote:
| For a few months now, whenever I looked at the "Who is hiring?"
| thread I couldn't help but think "truly, who is?"
| thomasahle wrote:
| Still below 1 though.
| setgree wrote:
| The true ratio of would-be-hired to is-hired on HN is lower than
| 0.94. Many (most?) posts in the who's hiring thread mention
| multiple positions, e.g. the word "engineers", plural, occurs 91
| times on the first page.
| jstx1 wrote:
| Sure but the same consideration applies to previous months too
| and the point of the post was about the trend (being so much
| higher than usual), not about the actual value of the ratio
| (which on its own seems irrelevant and hard to interpret).
| Kranar wrote:
| Much like looking at an exchange rate between two currencies,
| what matters isn't the exact ratio at any one moment but how
| that ratio changes over time.
| dudul wrote:
| I have to say the amount of spam emails I'm getting from
| recruiters has decreased a lot - also I took a new job a few
| months ago so maybe I'm just being filtered out for now.
| Ancalagon wrote:
| Idk if it my experience is abnormal, but I'm still getting a
| shit ton of recruiter inmail. When I look into the salary
| ranges, they are about what I was seeing in 2021.
|
| Maybe I'm just lucky. But for anyone else looking - chin-up, I
| think there are more opportunities out there still.
| zucked wrote:
| Similar experience. Since October of 22' the number of
| recruitment mail I'm getting has decreased from several a week
| to a few a month.
| varispeed wrote:
| I am getting about the same number of offers, but the pay has
| dropped substantially.
|
| It's depressing, as if I would be looking for a job now, I'd
| rather look for non-tech job that is paying less than selling
| my knowledge so cheap.
|
| Alternatively I'd go off the market completely and use any
| safety nets I've been paying massive amounts of tax for years.
| tayo42 wrote:
| I'm getting alot less and the ones I am getting are real low
| balls in comp often.
| kilroy123 wrote:
| I'm getting none these days.
| dalys wrote:
| I quit to run my own businesses in the pandemic and the amount
| of LinkedIn messages have increased. I'm not even in tech
| anymore. I'm not getting a huge amount by any means, but during
| 2023 exactly one per week on average. If anyone in EU willing
| to relocate to Stockholm with background in backend python /
| full stack, I guess I can connect you to at least 10
| recruiters. Many of them explicitly ask for referrals.
| [deleted]
| WinstonSmith84 wrote:
| I'd like to see a bit more data pre-covid, but this is a very
| insightful and concerning chart. Btw, to me it's not relevant
| whether we still see more comments into the is-hiring vs. wants-
| to-be-hired, this ratio doesn't mean much, there are other
| variables to consider. It's rather the uptrend which is
| meaningful.
| mtnGoat wrote:
| I've always found the who's hiring threads to be interesting. I
| don't think all of those companies are actively hiring, but
| rather like to look like they are for some reason I don't
| understand. My reasoning is two fold: I applied to some a couple
| years ago while job hunting and got worse response rate than most
| other sources. And some seem to be hiring for the same position
| for many months in a row. Though the second reason could be due
| to having extremely high set of requirements, but is usually a
| sign of a company to avoid in my experience.
| giraffe_lady wrote:
| To placate overworked employees begging for relief.
| hollaur wrote:
| Many companies post jobs just for backlinks or to get more
| traffic to their site.
| muzani wrote:
| I'd like to see data go all the way back to 2020, which was when
| some people said had the worst job market, because of the global
| lockdowns. But thanks for the data anyway.
|
| It does amuse me that we're _still_ at more people hiring than
| looking for jobs. It 's a stark contrast to other industries,
| where the power is normally in the hands of employers.
|
| Another thing to consider is that we've had layoffs recently,
| i.e. people without jobs encouraged to find new jobs. In the
| past, wants-to-be-hired may be a little low because usually
| people don't want to be seen looking for a job while employed.
| comfypotato wrote:
| Also consider that HN isn't exactly indicative of any typical
| job market. This is a pretty niche forum even in the context of
| software and tech. It's still interesting, and there's insight
| to be gained. (For example, I expect a lot the the high-powered
| developers who were affected by recent layoffs in big tech are
| over-represented here.)
| dayvid wrote:
| A few months into the pandemic was one of the best job markets
| for tech as more people were online than ever. A lot of my
| coworkers jumped to different companies or startups with huge
| salary bumps.
| muzani wrote:
| I benefited from that too, but The Great Resignation happened
| in 2021 I believe. Which was followed by layoffs from the
| overhiring, lol
|
| But there was some data on HN about how the start of the
| pandemic was terrible, worse than last year, at least. And
| there were some sales graphs that reflected this too.
| ed_balls wrote:
| I've compiles a list from 2015
| https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1350A5KGgmGI3Ed-tC7MP...
| peruvian wrote:
| I think a lot of people don't post on who wants to be hired and
| instead just browse who's hiring.
| TheGeminon wrote:
| Thats also balanced by the fact that many postings are for
| multiple positions (though I would probably still tip it
| towards more job seekers)
| muzani wrote:
| I did both but had much better responses on WWTBH. A lot of
| the companies that approached were really good, paid well,
| respectful, etc. Funny enough, I had actually applied for one
| of those companies elsewhere and they didn't process the
| application until they realized I was on HN.
| Atlas22 wrote:
| Thanks for sharing this, I always figured the contacts in
| WWTBH would be mostly low quality (similar to recruiter
| spam) so never bothered before. But now that I actually
| think about it some of the best jobs I've ever had were
| companies that approached me.
| jonpurdy wrote:
| Similar, last time I was looking (2020) I posted in both
| and had good responses from quality companies. Basically
| any HN thread has yielded vastly better opportunities than
| anywhere else (direct apply, linkedin, etc).
| zeven7 wrote:
| > they didn't process the application until they realized I
| was on HN
|
| I have been on the other side of that. I hired guy I found
| on HN (one of the best guys I've ever worked with) and
| later discovered he had applied earlier through another
| source but I overlooked it (some sources for candidates can
| be an absolute fire hose).
| roncesvalles wrote:
| >people don't want to be seen looking for a job while employed
|
| IMO this is the biggest factor causing the slowdown in tech
| hiring. Right now people just want to stay put wherever they
| are. In the past when someone jumps to another company, it
| opens a headcount where they were, which gets filled with
| someone who also jumped another company, which caused a
| headcount to be created there, ad infinitum causing a constant
| cacophony of job postings, like a "velocity" of jobs akin to
| velocity of money.
|
| The combination of slack in the system (unemployed people being
| hired), low attrition, and some backfills not being done
| creates a giant dampener on the velocity.
| ipaddr wrote:
| 1/2 the companies posting jobs are not really hiring. There may
| be positions available if someone wows them or if they can find
| talent for cheap.
|
| The languages in demand change is probably more interesting.
| Less react positions, rails holding strong, python over taking,
| first time no php jobs offered.
| jonnycoder wrote:
| I suspect this is the case as well. I've been applying for
| senior software engineer positions since mid January and I
| have way more auto-declines the next day after applying than
| I do initial phone calls with the company recruiter. I have a
| decent mix of experience and results in Python, C++ embedded,
| NodeJS, NoSQL dbs and CI/CD and I typically match 80% of the
| requirements+bonus requirements. One company even said last
| week that they liked my background because of the scope of
| work/results compared to faang resumes (I only have 2nd tier
| tech company experience).
| throwawaysleep wrote:
| > It does amuse me that we're still at more people hiring than
| looking for jobs. It's a stark contrast to other industries,
| where the power is normally in the hands of employers.
|
| Is it? Unemployment is still incredibly low and labour
| shortages continue to be reported.
| ChuckNorris89 wrote:
| Incredibly low unemployment doesn't necessarily mean all good
| news for all workers. You can cut or reduce unemployment
| benefits, and with the massive increase in CoL, energy and
| food in the last couple of years, people will desperate
| enough to accept any job or even several jobs in parallel, no
| matter how bad they are, and boom, you have almost no
| unemployment.
|
| Sure, there isn't a shortage of jobs, but they also don't pay
| terribly great either considering the CoL increases.
|
| So, IMHO, some unemployment is good. It means people have
| options and are not desperate enough to quickly jump to
| places with bad pay or poor working conditions, as those will
| always exit, even when the economy is doing good.
| red-iron-pine wrote:
| It had the worst job market -- if you weren't able to work from
| home. Most of the world ain't in STEM.
|
| Many of us, myself included, already did that. I had to wear a
| mask to do my "morning commute" to get coffee, but otherwise my
| 9-5 was mostly the same.
| dimitrios1 wrote:
| Most of STEM isn't at home, either.
| Herval_freire wrote:
| >It does amuse me that we're still at more people hiring than
| looking for jobs. It's a stark contrast to other industries,
| where the power is normally in the hands of employers.
|
| No 0.94 is a sample that comes with a huge margin or error.
|
| It very well could be that the actual ratio is that there are
| more programmers then jobs.
| ghaff wrote:
| Jobs and salaries are also not interchangeable. One can
| believe (rightly or wrongly) that many developers who have
| mainstream skills/experience, a good resume & network, aren't
| too old, etc. can land a new job in a reasonable length of
| time--while acknowledging that it may be at a total
| compensation dip if they were with a high-paying company.
| [deleted]
| prottog wrote:
| > It does amuse me that we're still at more people hiring than
| looking for jobs. It's a stark contrast to other industries,
| where the power is normally in the hands of employers.
|
| In my area, many businesses outside of the tech sector is
| actively hiring and can't find enough people. I think Covid
| triggered a demographic shift with many Boomers retiring (or
| dying) and that gap has not been filled.
| incone123 wrote:
| This is an interesting contrast with another comment that
| said it should be possible to find another tech job if (among
| other factors) the candidate was not too old.
| ShadowBanThis01 wrote:
| Given that Boomers are around 80, I suspect most of them were
| already retired.
| duderific wrote:
| Boomer generation is born 1946 - 1964 so most are probably
| around 70ish, with many younger and older.
| richiebful1 wrote:
| 1946-1964 (the US Census definition of boomers) is "around
| 80" at the high end.
|
| My dad's a boomer, he's still working.
| ShadowBanThis01 wrote:
| Yeah, I don't really subscribe to this seemingly ever-
| expanding definition of "Baby Boomers." It was supposed
| to be babies born in the euphoria right after WWII, but
| now extends for 20 years.
|
| The ever-expanding "millennials" label is even more
| absurd. It originally meant people graduating college
| around 2000: a very specific group. Now, again, it has
| blown up to include decades of people.
|
| After Boomers, all the labels are just idiotic. Let's all
| just refer to age groups using [gasp] numbers.
| sangnoir wrote:
| > It originally meant people graduating college around
| 2000:
|
| This is not how generational cohorts work. AFAIK, what
| counts as a generation can refer to people born over from
| 10, and up to 33 year period depending on who you ask.
|
| "Millennial" is not precise term, it simply refers to
| people younger than Gen X and older than Gen Z.
| UlisesAC4 wrote:
| > It does amuse me that we're still at more people hiring than
| looking for jobs. It's a stark contrast to other industries,
| where the power is normally in the hands of employers.
|
| I am sure that there is a huge margin of error. I have been
| looking a job for 5 months. Granted, I have not used Who's
| hiring threads religiously and I am sure that there are
| positions that I applied where something with better
| qualifications was chosen.
| pcthrowaway wrote:
| To post in the WWTBH thread, you need to share your contact
| info, and probably some information about yourself, so it can't
| be an anon account.
|
| Which means, if you're employed and looking elsewhere, you have
| to be comfortable with your employer potentially discovering
| your eye is wandering. Which I for one, definitely wouldn't
| want to do right now.
|
| So I imagine the WWTBH posts are really just the tip of the
| iceberg (there may be more than one employed person looking for
| every unemployed one that feels comfortable posting there)
|
| Compared to the Who is Hiring posts which companies have no
| reason to be concerned about posting (well, maybe if they're
| simultaneously laying off and pretending that they need to
| reduce headcount when it's really about reducing the average
| wage)
| mortenjorck wrote:
| _> It does amuse me that we 're still at more people hiring
| than looking for jobs_
|
| I would definitely not read that from the data. I don't know
| what percentage of current seekers post in the wants-to-be-
| hired thread, but as a potentially-outlying anecdote, I didn't
| until I had already been looking for three months.
|
| I would hypothesize that there's a psychological barrier to
| posting in WWTBH, even if you've been laid off and have no
| current employer you wouldn't want seeing it - there's a
| certain vulnerability in putting yourself out there versus
| privately applying to jobs. For me, it took a certain level of
| desperation with my search to make the jump from browsing the
| hiring thread to finally posting in the other thread this
| month.
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| Did you get anything from your "who wants to be hired" post?
| It's not been clear to me that it's a useful thing to do.
| matttb wrote:
| I just got a lot of spam email until I asked the mods to
| delete my post and the spam vanished
| mightybyte wrote:
| I have received a referral bonus that traced directly back
| to a "who is hiring" post. Haven't posted on "who wants to
| be hired" though.
| recfab wrote:
| I posted last month and didn't hear anything from it. I'm
| hoping this month is more fruitful.
| ryandrake wrote:
| Also, I believe that, like official job postings, a lot of
| "Who's Hiring" posts are just kinda-serious fishing
| expeditions. A lot of companies say they're hiring but in
| reality it's because they always have their bait in the
| water, waiting for some outlier good deal on a top talent,
| but otherwise not really hiring.
|
| EDIT: The same is probably true for job seekers, too, now
| that I think about it. As another commenter noted, a lot of
| people are being frog-marched back to physical offices at
| gunpoint, and are probably low-key fishing for a sweet
| remote-only gig.
| klyrs wrote:
| I wouldn't call it a psychological barrier so much as a game-
| theoretical one. If an employer knows that an employee is
| looking for jobs, their continued employment would be at
| risk, they could be silently passed over for promotion, etc.
| I suspect that most people posting in WWTBH are currently
| unemployed.
| onionisafruit wrote:
| This is my first month looking. I thought about posting
| yesterday, but I am very shy about putting my name on the
| internet. That insecurity won the day. I hope you get good
| results from your post.
| devoutsalsa wrote:
| I've definitely resisted posting in the past. The primary
| reason was I simply didn't want to post while I had a job.
| The second is that you can't delete old HN comments, and I
| don't feel like having an "I need a job" comment on my
| permanent record. I'm not opposed to posting, but I haven't
| felt the desire to post.
| leonidasv wrote:
| FYI, you can get old posts deleted by contacting the
| moderators via email.
|
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23623557
| devoutsalsa wrote:
| Good to know, thanks.
| selimthegrim wrote:
| I've always been able to delete my comments on that post
| without having to email anybody
| mortenjorck wrote:
| Can confirm. My WWTBH comment from yesterday shows me a
| delete link, as well as a non-expiring edit link.
| leonidasv wrote:
| The delete button is time-limited. I think it's about
| 24~36 hours. After that, you can't delete without
| emailing the mods.
| selimthegrim wrote:
| I just deleted my comment on the last thread from a month
| ago with the button.
| chucksmash wrote:
| That's basically my outlook, I wouldn't post in the WWTBH
| thread. In addition to the reasons you listed, I'd also add
| that while my identity certainly isn't hidden and I'm not out
| here being controversial, my HN posts are decidedly more of
| the "my thoughts are my own" variety and not something I'd
| link a hiring manager to otherwise.
| bilsbie wrote:
| That seems like a good signal to track.
|
| Btw does anyone ever get hired from the who wants to be hired
| thread?
| steve_adams_86 wrote:
| I've been contacted through who's hiring a lot, though
| ultimately I was hired at a company where I knew the team well
| and was aligned with their goals/methodology/comp/etc.
|
| I have the impression that who's hiring is an excellent place
| to put yourself out there, though. I had a lot of exciting
| leads (a few of which I still follow because I liked the people
| I interviewed with and what they were building).
| bradlys wrote:
| I'll balance it out because you're getting selection bias with
| how you asked this question.
|
| I never got contacted. For me, I assume it's because every
| employer in SV is overloaded with candidates and doesn't need
| to seek them out on HN. (I work in the bay)
| SCUSKU wrote:
| I got my current job via a post on Who's Hiring. The company is
| wonderful, and it turns out the past 3-4 newest engineers were
| also hired this way!
| ginger_beer_m wrote:
| It would also be interesting to know the reverse question:
| anyone ever got a job from who's hiring thread?
| hnrodey wrote:
| I've received several responses from Who Wants Hired posts.
| Lichtso wrote:
| I did. My first "real" job (as in not an internship). Two and a
| half years and counting.
|
| Edit, found it:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24038518#24042409
| Letter4742 wrote:
| I did.
| ativzzz wrote:
| +1 for current job being from that thread
| amelius wrote:
| > That seems like a good signal to track.
|
| It doesn't take into account who currently has a job.
| newbie578 wrote:
| The few times I posted, my email got scraped and I received
| some offers which were all not job offers..
| matttb wrote:
| This was my experience as well. Not a single real inquiry,
| just spam. I asked the mods to delete my posts on those
| threads and the spam email vanished
| ShadowBanThis01 wrote:
| But you were awash in "hrony MILFs," Vi@gra, and mortg@ges,
| right?
| nfriedly wrote:
| Adding one more voice to the chorus: I got my current job from
| posting in the who wants to be hired thread.
|
| (It was about 3.5 years ago in my case, but presumably it still
| works today.)
| bryanlarsen wrote:
| I did.
| raydev wrote:
| Yes, but it was 2019 and I think the thread I posted in maxed
| out around 100 total comments.
| nati0n wrote:
| I got hired from that thread, for what it's worth. Love my job.
| alain94040 wrote:
| Yes. I think of 5 people I contacted over 3 years, one got
| hired. (and it was a very successful hire)
| red-iron-pine wrote:
| Anec-data but I found this site via a friend who frequented
| here, and he had previously gotten a job with a start-up via
| one of those posts.
|
| He rapidly left -- maybe 6-9 months? -- but got a job
| nonetheless.
| xtracto wrote:
| I was contacted by several people (including 2 YCombinator
| startups) in the past. In the end we didn't close with any of
| them, but they were good "leads". And for one of them I made a
| friend/acquintance in the other side of the world (I'm in
| Mexico, he is in Australia) which I think is cool :).
| [deleted]
| TradingPlaces wrote:
| Still under parity, which is amazing
| ed_balls wrote:
| Here is the data from 2015
| https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1350A5KGgmGI3Ed-tC7MP...
|
| Ratio Who wants to be hired?/Who is hiring?
|
| 2015 0,20
|
| 2016 0,21
|
| 2017 0,14
|
| 2018 0,10
|
| 2019 0,32
|
| 2020 0,44
|
| 2021 0,26
|
| 2022 0,40
|
| 2023 0,83
| richarddeasis wrote:
| I definitely regret not interviewing for jobs right away when I
| graduated a few months ago. At the moment I was thinking that in
| a few months the job market would still be hot.
|
| A few months ago, recruiters were reaching out to me. I started
| applying last week and a single job posting would have more than
| 1k applicants which was not the case months ago.
|
| On top of that, as a new grad, finding early career positions is
| difficult. Most of the opening are SR level.
| siftrics wrote:
| You should be applying before you graduate, regardless of the
| status of the job market.
| richarddeasis wrote:
| I was offered some jobs and a few internship. But a few
| months ago I was considering going to get my masters, mba, or
| law school. My parents algo got sick during that time and i
| had to take care of them. So it wasn't really a priority for
| me at that time to get a job vs other urgent matters.
| bumby wrote:
| Don't be afraid to apply for jobs that are (slightly) outside
| your experience range. Often, these posts are "pie in the sky"
| wants, not hard requirements.
| richarddeasis wrote:
| Good to know! Now I just got to keep grinding to be
| competitive against more experienced devs applying for the
| same position. Seems like its gonna be really difficult when
| theres gonna be at least a few hundreds of them applying for
| the same position.
|
| Not sure what would motivate an employer to hire early career
| vs someone with 5 years of experience. Maybe paying new hires
| less than experienced ones?
| willmeyers wrote:
| Doesn't the whoshiring threads get filled out throughout the
| week. Shouldn't a better analysis be done this weekend?
| soneca wrote:
| This happened last month too, a data analysis of Who Is Hiring
| one or two days after it is published with a pessimistic
| conclusion.
|
| Then, one week later, you realize the number of posts is back
| to an ok level (even improving)
| colmanhumphrey wrote:
| Here is a chart going back to 2014:
| https://slight.run/graphs/colman/ratio_of_seekers_to_hirers_...
|
| Not quite as drastic as yours, but still not ideal.
|
| The underlying query and data source:
| https://slight.run/apps/colman/job_seekers_vs_job_hiring_hac...
|
| I'm restricting to top-level comments here, because those seem
| like a better proxy than all comments (excluding some discussion
| on a given post for example).
| carabiner wrote:
| Looks like your chart only goes up to 2022 October? Whereas
| OP's goes up to today.
| ppaattrriicckk wrote:
| If anybody is interested, maybe this should be considered along
| with the core inflation rates - which is high in the US (peaked
| at 7% within the last 12 months and currently at 5.5%) and
| possibly still rising in the EU (12-month peak [now] at 5.7%).
|
| If the central banks are going to stick to their declared
| purpose of keeping this around 2% we're still in for further
| rate hikes, I would imagine.
|
| * https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/core-inflation-
| ra...
|
| * https://tradingeconomics.com/euro-area/core-inflation-rate
|
| I know it's not within the desired behaviour on HN to simply
| write "thank you!", and I hope I did provide a bit more than
| just that. That being said: Thank you! Also to ed_balls and
| madcaptenor for collecting data in the other thread.
| SilasX wrote:
| To answer what you were probably going to look for in the link:
| peak was March 2020 (1.19), when Covid got real, bottom was
| April 2018 (0.067), don't know any particular significance of
| that month.
| qqqwerty wrote:
| FED started raising interest rates in 2017[1]. The market
| didn't really start reacting until 2018, and by 2019 the FED
| got cold feet and was lowering rates again.
|
| [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/DFEDTARU
| version_five wrote:
| April 2018 sounds about right for the tech bubble peak - iirc
| softbank was still in full swing, everyone was
| "blitzscaling", it was peak exuberance. Not that the music
| stopped right after that, but even into 2019 things were
| starting to decline and the VC industry was getting slightly
| more conservative.
| david927 wrote:
| I was curious and wanted to put that same data together -- so
| thanks.
|
| That curve looks terrible and yet it confirms what I expected.
| myth_drannon wrote:
| April was the lowest count for "Who is hiring" ever.
| abledon wrote:
| matches the jobs available trend in NA:
| https://www.trueup.io/job-trend
| burlesona wrote:
| I think you'd have to go further back to have better context,
| April 2021 was pretty frothy.
|
| But yes, the job market has cooled dramatically.
| projectazorian wrote:
| There's an odd dynamic in the market right now. In addition to
| layoffs, people who are subject to RTO are trying to find jobs at
| remote employers, so there's an abnormally high number of
| already-employed folks on the job hunt right now. Not to mention
| all the juniors having trouble finding work at the moment.
|
| Meanwhile remote employers are seeing less employee turnover, so
| don't need to do much hiring, especially since many grew
| headcount considerably in 2021/2022. Which means many of those
| people looking for remote jobs aren't finding a lot of success.
| (We're remote and hiring for backfills only right now, not that
| there are many of those - and I suspect a lot of other companies
| are in the same spot.)
|
| Remote roles are likely over-represented on HN, so if there are a
| lot of candidates chasing those roles, you'd expect a lot of
| growth in "who wants to be hired" posts.
|
| I'd expect this dynamic to shift in the back half of the year.
| People are finding out about promotions and comp changes around
| this time and many will be disappointed. This will likely cause a
| lot of people sitting tight at remote companies to get back on
| the market. Some will find roles elsewhere, creating more
| backfills and more hiring.
|
| Not to mention that there's a glut of late-stage companies
| seeking to IPO when the IPO market reopens, likely later this
| year or early next. When companies IPO they usually hire a lot
| beforehand to tighten up processes, then do even more hiring a
| few months later as existing employees get their exits and decide
| to move on or take a break.
|
| So the medium/long term outlook is still positive, at least.
| UncleOxidant wrote:
| I still see plenty of remote jobs to apply for on LinkedIn, but
| I have noticed that there are a lot more applicants now. A few
| months back it would often be single digit numbers of
| applicants. Now it will often be well into the double digits of
| applicants.
| WinstonSmith84 wrote:
| I'm afraid it's not the only explanation (economy), but it's
| still a very good reason. Looking at myself, I've been working
| remotely for the last 7 years and there is just no way back,
| even if another company would pay me 2x or 3x more. Remote
| working is a massive perk and thanks (due) to Covid, a lot of
| people became aware of this.
| mythrwy wrote:
| Yes. Additionally I'm not moving across the country to live
| in a strange and expensive city to work on your CRUD app.
|
| There is no way back, even at 2X or 3x more.
| hdjjhhvvhga wrote:
| The salary I get now (working remotely) allows me to work
| for 3 months and relax for 9, should I desire to do so. I
| guess if someone offered me 9X more for working in the
| office, I would agree - but I'd quit after 3 months to
| enjoy my freedom for the next 3 years. (Or, what is more
| probable, take a less paid but remote job as I enjoy doing
| what I do and want to stay competitive in the market.)
|
| Less than that - sorry, I'm not interested.
| recfab wrote:
| I'm not sure I could go back to in-office work, but also
| moving cross country isn't even feasible for me at this
| stage in my life, even if I wanted to.
| brailsafe wrote:
| I agree with trivializing the prospect, but for me
| personally it's less about the nature of the work or the
| city, but the ludicrous instability that a company would
| hope you don't think about. It's fine if where you're
| coming from is a desolate market and you're wanting to
| seriously improve either your income or location for
| personal reasons, that's a sensible risk. But doing it for
| a more lateral move, or for marginal gains, I'd be asking
| myself how committed this employer is to having me; the
| answer is usually zero. So I go and get my expensive
| apartment in a scarce market and start working away on
| whatever inane problem company x is paying me for, and 2
| months in it turns out, "oops, we overhired and have to
| refocus our energy on digitizing, solutioning, and don't
| forget problemization and alignment".
|
| One case where this would be worthwhile though would be one
| where you wanted to move there anyway, and the company is
| arbitrary
| 71a54xd wrote:
| It also seems like the market has strongly skewed to the senior
| side of things (8+ yrs exp).
| Workaccount2 wrote:
| Our entry level guy is GPT-4.
| baremetal wrote:
| Yeah it's like having a junior you can hand small bits of
| code off too.
| dangwhy wrote:
| thats why i am seeing. And it was mostly young people that
| YOLO relocated to hawaii and breckenridge that are now
| looking for remote jobs so its double whammy for them
| wyclif wrote:
| Yep, I'm currently on the market and I'm seeing a lot of
| requests for impossibly high years of experience if you're a
| junior.
| gopher_space wrote:
| From my perspective few of the projects asking for this
| level of experience require it. I have no idea why people
| aren't recruiting curious randos off the street at $60k a
| pop, but I'd imagine that onboarding looks complicated if
| you can't tell the difference between infrastructure jank
| and your actual job.
| 23B1 wrote:
| I'm a CRO/CGO - a suit. My biggest struggle with HN wants-to-be-
| hired threads is that I desperately want to work with small and
| midsize startups who are serious about growth - but most of the
| JDs are for technical jobs.
|
| Besides the usual job boards, is anyone aware of a good place to
| connect with founders who want a healthy hockey stick and
| holistic, healthy growth?
| perlgeek wrote:
| I'd try the Acquired community, https://www.acquired.fm/
| 23B1 wrote:
| Thanks a ton, genuinely appreciate it.
| avinassh wrote:
| [dead]
| el_nahual wrote:
| One avenue is to go through the VCs.
|
| 1. Choose industries you like (fintech, hospitality, consumer,
| whatever) 2. There are ~5 or so VCs in each industry that are
| absolutely leaders 3. Often these VCs have roles for "Platform"
| or "Portfolio services" 4. Message that person (I like twitter
| for this over LinkedIn and even over email), sell yourself. 5.
| Usually this can result in an email that is sent to the entire
| portfolio telling them you're looking.
| 23B1 wrote:
| I feel like an idiot for not thinking of this sooner. Thank
| you, great advice.
| hv23 wrote:
| We're hiring a Head of Growth, how can I get in touch or share
| more?
| 23B1 wrote:
| Thank you, that's very kind of you:
| 05-trivet.turner@icloud.com
| ayewo wrote:
| There are a number of job boards you could try including the
| ones run by DemandCurve and MKT1
|
| https://jobs.demandcurve.com/
|
| https://www.mkt1.co/marketers
| 23B1 wrote:
| Amazing, thanks a ton.
| the_af wrote:
| As an aside, I'm not currently looking for a job (knock on wood)
| but people close to me are and... the interview process seems
| harder than ever.
|
| Now you get recorded, told you cannot alt-tab, take home
| assignments are very strict for companies that aren't even close
| to a FAANG (I mean, if you're applying to Google it comes with
| the territory, but why is your random startup so strict?), you
| are automatically graded on your command of English, etc.
|
| There are still the garbage job offers where they'll hire anyone
| with a pulse, but unless your situation is dire you don't want
| those.
|
| It all feels vaguely dystopic and depressing. The only
| consolation is that only now we realize what it felt for people
| outside our industry. We had it easy!
| dgb23 wrote:
| Which professions hire like this? I can't think of any.
| jpgvm wrote:
| Pretty much none that I'm aware of.
|
| My brother is an actual engineer. They get hired on past
| relevant experience and simple interview. Of course he also
| needs the relevant credentials and professional membership so
| there is that... you can't keep those if you mess up and you
| won't get recommendations if you are an ahole.
|
| A lot of my friends are doctors. If you are qualified and
| want the position it's yours. Demand > supply very much so.
|
| Hospitality is as cut-throat as always, everyone is welcome
| to try - it's up to you to survive. Though I guess the first
| few trial shifts are the most similar to programming in that
| way but it's still very much "can you do the job" not "can
| you remember this esoteric thing you might have done once in
| college but otherwise not touched in a decade".
|
| So yeah. Programming stands alone in this sort of gauntlet
| hiring system in my experience. Other fields are happy to
| take past experience and recommendations as they are instead
| of devising some sort of "test".
|
| I would say outside of programming there is a bit more of the
| personality test sort of things though - especially big
| corporates, you could probably screw one up badly enough for
| HR to block you.
| the_af wrote:
| Sorry, I worded it badly: I didn't mean other professions
| hire like this, only that we in software development lived in
| a microclimate where finding a decent job was easy. Now it's
| getting harder, I guess.
| asynchronous wrote:
| Yeah genuinely that reeks of someone who has never worked
| outside of tech. Job hiring sucks in a lot of fields but I
| would say the trades as a whole have this completely figured
| out and the process is nowhere near as obtuse as in tech.
| the_af wrote:
| Oh, I meant that we had it easy, not that the hiring
| process for other jobs looks similar.
| ShadowBanThis01 wrote:
| I'm approaching 30 years in software development, and I don't
| remember having a "technical" interview until this week.... in
| which I had two.
|
| Both were with large, well-known companies. But the nature and
| outcome of the two were quite different. In one, the
| interviewer just dumped some code on the screen that had been
| clumsily obfuscated, and its intent and strategy rendered
| indecipherable.
|
| In the second, I was asked to provide code that did something,
| and then add an additional feature to it on demand. This is
| much more in line with what I expected, and to me more valid.
| And the whole interview was far more satisfying and
| invigorating.
|
| The first interview was so disappointingly "douchey Leetcode"
| that I dreaded all that would follow. It created conflicting
| feelings of, "I'm kind of over this type of work anyway; this
| may be a beneficial tipping point" vs. "I don't want to wuss
| out and run away from uncomfortable experiences."
|
| Now that I've had two opposing experiences in technical
| interviews, I feel more confident in judging their validity and
| my role in their outcomes... and calling out ones that are
| disrespectful.
| the_af wrote:
| Agreed that the second seems more reasonable!
|
| It matters a lot if the interviewer is not quizzing you on
| trivia or waiting for you to trip and fall.
|
| > _I feel more confident in judging their validity and my
| role in their outcomes... and calling out ones that are
| disrespectful._
|
| I wish we could all do that! One overlooked aspect of this
| humiliating process is that it saps your confidence. I've
| seen it happen. After a bunch of failed interviews, the
| person starts feeling it's their fault and that they cannot
| possibly be good, and this informs their attitude for the
| next challenge, which they fail, and so on.
| recfab wrote:
| > One overlooked aspect of this humiliating process is that
| it saps your confidence.
|
| This has been me on occasion during the last couple months
| of searching. I've been worried that my work history was
| too disjointed to tell a coherent story. Or that I'm not
| actually as skilled as I thought. Or that some skills have
| atrophied. Or they just aren't in demand anymore.
|
| I brought it up to a career coach (part of my severance
| package) and she seemed to think I was overqualified for a
| couple of them. I'm not sure that's true, and suspect she
| doesn't grok tech enough to make that assessment. But even
| if she's right, hell, something straightforward where I'm
| "overqualified" sounds kind of nice.
| ShadowBanThis01 wrote:
| Exactly. And then you wonder if you're just making excuses
| and trying to blame the test.
|
| But in the end you have to consider your past work, things
| you've built, and the value you've added to things. And,
| most of all, positive feedback you've received from
| colleagues or customers. I reflect on the fact that my
| colleagues have worked in my code, built entire new
| features of their own on top of it, and then vouched for me
| in job referrals that have their name on them. That's the
| most valuable confidence pill in your arsenal.
| arealaccount wrote:
| So too thorough is dystopic and depressing, not thorough enough
| is a garbage offer.
| the_af wrote:
| Yes, but if you are interpreting my comment in the best
| possible light it makes sense, right?
|
| - On one extreme, you have employers who are abusive during
| interviews. They record you, treat you like a cheater, forbid
| you from alt-tabbing or anything that you would normally do
| while on the actual job, ask for trivia knowledge you'd
| normally google, and when reviewing take home challenges they
| are _very_ strict. I assume this is because they have droves
| of candidates and can mistreat candidates till they find the
| perfect one?
|
| - On the other extreme, you have garbage consultancy/software
| factory work. Low quality, outdated tech, low pay, and
| they'll hire anybody who can demonstrate minimal expertise
| since they aren't interested in quality work but in selling
| billable hours.
|
| I expect what reasonable people want is a decent job which
| pays well, is not mind-numbingly boring and that challenges
| you, but also they don't want to be subjected to the
| humiliation of abusive interview processes that quiz on
| trivia and treat them like cheaters?
|
| I'm seeing more and more of the first kind of process, sadly.
| recfab wrote:
| > ...forbid you from alt-tabbing or anything that you would
| normally do while on the actual job, ask for trivia
| knowledge you'd normally google...
|
| I had to fill out a literal IQ test the other day. 15
| minutes, for 50 questions, and a note that you probably
| won't finish them, and not to use calculator. I'm out of
| practice for arithmetic tricks _because I've been out of
| school for 20+ years_. What exactly is that supposed to
| test, especially under such time pressure? This was
| followed by a personality test (no time limit).
|
| This is all before they even decide whether they even want
| to interview me.
|
| > - On the other extreme, you have garbage
| consultancy/software factory work. Low quality, outdated
| tech, low pay, and they'll hire anybody who can demonstrate
| minimal expertise since they aren't interested in quality
| work but in selling billable hours.
|
| I just had to pass on one of these. Not quite desperate
| enough to take it just yet. Time tracking software was
| already iffy. Having to interview again for each project
| was iffy. Basically, glorified contract work, but less
| stability. Oh, and they wanted me to screen record my tech
| assessment assignment.
|
| What cinched it for me, though, was the Glassdoor reviews:
| they boast about their star rating on Glassdoor, but the
| CEO would passive-aggressively rip into negative reviews,
| including one that told a former employee they were wrong
| for having a bad experience.
| thegabez wrote:
| Haven't done any interviews but did talk to a recruiter who was
| asking upfront if I was okay with a 6 day work week. Just a
| single data point, but I would assume employers are also trying
| to leverage the situation to get more out of their employees.
| wesnerm2 wrote:
| This post is not valid because most companies post jobs in
| Hackernews after several days. In addition, the is-hiring post
| opened on April 3, 2023--a little over 24 hours ago.
|
| As other people have noticed, April appeared to be the lowest
| month in new jobs, but the true numbers won't be evident until
| the month is over. The ratio will likely fall lower with the
| reasonable assumption that a greater proportion of people seeking
| work post earlier in the month than of companies seeking
| employees.
| krembanan wrote:
| It might even be >1 considering many postings in the Who's hiring
| have multiple comments (some 10+).
| atwebb wrote:
| Who's hiring also has many positions in each listing though, if
| that is consistent across time it wouldn't seem to matter as
| much.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-04-04 23:02 UTC)