This isn't controversial and it happened in the dot-com bubble aftermath
For many, they were never deeply committed to IT anyway and were only following good/easy-to-attain positions
For some, they had bills to pay and couldn't afford to wait things out
The most interesting class of workers in this round are the (former) FAANG cohort of overcompensated middle-performers. These people were gut-punched by their layoffs, and they will be gut-punched again when they see future offers that may be 50% of what they were making before. HN isn't receptive to these types of observations so it will likely just have to sink in over time...the days of coding React for two hours a day and pulling in total comp of $400k are probably gone forever.
Agreed. One of my friends started casually looking for a job before the bloodbath began. He was being very picky and was in an employee market where he could command a large salary. Now he feel like a chump, because he can't start a conversation for more than 30% less than what he used as a baseline in October.
That must be one of the more extreme examples. I'm probably being under compensated at the moment, but about half of recruiters reaching out are matching my salary.
Is there any data on the % of layoffs on actual technical folk (SWEs, etc...) vs non-technical staff (recruiters, etc...)? That's one thing I wonder, as a SWE. Is the market actually now flooded with SWEs, or was the actual number of laid of SWEs a much lower percentage of the total people laid off?
No idea what the answer to this is, but for the sake of one data point: my employer let 25 (out of 150) people go, of which 2 were SWEs, and a few more were from the data science team. Beyond that, it was product designers/managers, cx, recruiters etc.
It makes me wonder too, after the diversity/inclusion role related post[0] saying their departments were basically stripped, it seems like those were a big part of the layoffs of each big tech company.
To the other tech companies that didn't irresponsibly add massive headcount over the last few years.
We slowed hiring because it was impossible to hire above a certain skill threshold within realistic comp structures for a year or so there. Turns out most of that equity given out in competing offers ended up being largely worthless
12 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 43.5 ms ] threadThis isn't controversial and it happened in the dot-com bubble aftermath
For many, they were never deeply committed to IT anyway and were only following good/easy-to-attain positions
For some, they had bills to pay and couldn't afford to wait things out
The most interesting class of workers in this round are the (former) FAANG cohort of overcompensated middle-performers. These people were gut-punched by their layoffs, and they will be gut-punched again when they see future offers that may be 50% of what they were making before. HN isn't receptive to these types of observations so it will likely just have to sink in over time...the days of coding React for two hours a day and pulling in total comp of $400k are probably gone forever.
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34596849
We slowed hiring because it was impossible to hire above a certain skill threshold within realistic comp structures for a year or so there. Turns out most of that equity given out in competing offers ended up being largely worthless
Just kidding, had to say it though.