Ask HN: Is the Job Market Actually Bad?
I’m not trying to brag, I am just genuinely confused. I got laid off recently and I had a new job within a week because I constantly get contacted by recruiters both through LinkedIn and directly by email. I’ve never sent an application to anyone and I’ve had dozens of interviews in the past year while I was looking for a new job before getting laid off.
I would have had a new one earlier except I was aiming for fully remote and a big raise, and I failed their correspondingly difficult evaluations. Never got ghosted, never had to deal with AI, never had to fill out an application. I took a local, in office offer that I would have ignored if I were still employed.
Currently I’m waiting for a final decision from another fully remote company and I’m in midstage with 2 more.
I’m not a super genius engineer, and I don’t have any fancy companies on my resume. How unusual is this experience?
99 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 91.6 ms ] threadAt the top you said you had a new job after a week, then why are you waiting on a second and continuing interviewing with two other companies.
As someone who has made hiring and firing decisions at the Board level, the people who are the most severely affected were either (in no order):
1. Working remotely in North America but demanding Bay Area salaries without the chops to justify it.
2. Working in Western Europe (they complain more about stuff irrelevant to the business but shy away from business critical decision making when offered the opportunity, unlike their Czech, Polish, Romanian, and Bulgarian peers despite us paying €90k-150k TCs across the EU, and Warsaw+Prague becoming Berlin level expensive).
3. Bootcamp grads who never fixed skills issues (foundational knowledge is foundational for a reason).
4. Getting paid Bay Area or Seattle salaries while living in LCOL regions like RTP. The whole point of a Cary office was inshoring - the talent was meh but if we needed a cheap QA engineer or move ops for a stagnant part of our business in 2019 we'd move that job and BU there. They didn't realize they were viewed as at the bottom of the totem pole skills wise.
-------
So long as you keep your skills sharp, have foundational computer science and engineering knowledge, and live in the primary tech hubs globally, it's a pretty good market.
-------
Edit: can't reply
> What, in your opinion are the “foundational” CS skills the #3 people are missing
If you've survived this long, I think you will be fine. But I'd recommend anyone from a bootcamp to take an OS course comparable to CS61 [0], an algos course comparable to CS170 [1], and a programming language design course comparable to CS421 [2].
There is foundational design and architectural patterns and knowledge that are taught in OS, Programming Language Design, and Algos classes that cannot be taught in a bootcamp.
My recommendation for people in your shoes is to do GATech's OMSCS or UPenn's online MCIT to learn some of the foundational stuff you were never introduced to at a bootcamp.
[0] - https://cs61.seas.harvard.edu/site/2025/
[1] - https://cs170.org/
[2] - https://cs421-sp26-web.pages.dev/
- CRUD generation by running through JIRA tickets and clearing backlogs seem to be replaced by agentic workflows. So if you were an extremely productive dev who would machete your way through CRUD and API integrations, agentic workflows do it better, faster and for cheaper. I can point CC, Codex (Cursor in progress) at design specifications and it can turn those into perfect Django apps with well written test cases like there's no tomorrow. It might not make sense for such a business to continue to hire humans to do the same work
- Tokens for frontier models over the API are really expensive. I am personally aware of some companies that have monthly high five figure token expenses and one company that has a monthly six five figure token expense.
It's still worth it because they are churning out code 24x7 vs a typical human's 8x5 if you're putting in the right workflows, guardrails in place - that's a 4x productivity gain.
You're getting done in a month, what a full quarter would require humans to do. However, the company still has to pay for that and unless they are signing up 4x more paying net new customers every month with 0 churn, engineers have to be let go to pay for those tokens.
How much are you getting paid?
Going into the office is important too, are you in sf?
Maybe you're just lucky.
I took a position 1 level down from previous to pay the bills. Am now interviewing for positions 2 above since I’m already performing at that level and my current company is too bureaucratic to bump me quick enough.
He looked for a job for 13 months. One of the top 3 smartest people I’ve ever known looked for seven months and had to take a big step back in his career, despite having Amazon and Home Depot on his resume.
Both of them said that even getting an interview was almost impossibly hard.
These are people in different parts of the county, and in different industries.
I think we have a serious problem on our hands with employment that’s probably not getting better any time soon.
From Google: The Jevons paradox occurs when technological improvements increase the efficiency of a resource, but the resulting drop in cost causes demand to rise so much that total consumption of that resource increases rather than decreases.
The message being, it may seem now that because the friction for creating software is so minimal now that there will be no need for software engineers in the future. But historically when friction has been reduced, we have seen an increase in demand that outweighs the efficiency gain, increasing total consumption. I believe that software won't be an exception to this millennia-old pattern.
While what "software engineering" may look like might change, I still believe strongly that people who understand software will actually be in higher demand than ever in the future.
- AI (as in: stupid AI wrappers "disrupting" shit)
- FinTech
- Gambling
- AI in FinTech
That's about 99% of jobs advertised. No idea how hard it's to get hired, but even jobs on offer are shitty.
- I’m only applying with climate tech companies
- I’m trying to transition back to engineering after a detour into product
- I’m trying to pivot into more hardware-focused roles
Most companies I apply to don’t respond at all, and I’ve had about 6 phone screens, two technical interviews, and one “we’d love to hire you once we get the funding for this position sometime in June”.
So from my perspective, the job market is awful, but YMMV.
P.S. if you’re working on any clean energy related software, I’d be a great addition to your team — https://matthewgerring.com
When I focused on areas I had some more credible experience in, I got significantly better engagement and eventually found a very narrow niche where I had substantial success.
I think we're partially adjusting to a world where employers expect a very narrow experience match to their role. Employers are also paying a premium within that narrow match.
When it’s ideation from customer interviews with a designer and an engineering manager, it’s fantastic. I like solving problems and I don’t really care about the specific technical approach, so that’s where I want to be. However I will happily write the code (or review it, or just wrote specs or whatever it is we do now since December 2025) if there’s no one else around to do it.
If you're getting recruiters continually its probably less about your qualification (not to downplay them, I'm sure they're lovely) and more about being on a handful of company's candidate and talent banks.
Everyone hates resumes, and being involved in any process a company can pay to bypass them is a huge advantage.
You know what's even more exhausting for an employer than having to invest energy into the top of your hiring funnel? Having to redo it every few months because an ATS filtered much of the cream off the top and sent you keyword stuffers to choose between.
If I had stayed for job hunting, I would be unemployed IMO.
i'm also pivoting in this direction after attending too many sessions and networking, but getting it a point of employment does not seem a reality.
I do see a lot of resumes that are really bad, though. Other people need a lot of help communicating during interviews. Some people go through their careers getting jobs during easy times where hiring managers will overlook a lot of things and be willing to take a chance on candidates with not so great resumes or communication skills that need help. That all stops in a job market like this where hiring managers aren’t going to waste their time on anything other than the 5-10 best applicants they get.
There’s a lot of cope material out there that shifts all of the blame to the companies: Stories about “ghost jobs” or beliefs about nepotism or “you dodged a bullet” comfort when someone doesn’t get hired. With half of the people I talk to getting them to accept that they need to improve how they’re applying and interviewing instead of blaming external factors is most of the battle. For the other half it can be things like focusing too narrowly (only FAANG, only remote, only a big title, only a compensation number they got 3 years ago during COVID and now they don’t want anything less) or some times just poor luck.
- it's not as bad as it was in the last several months
- it's still very hard to get noticed, get interviews, etc there's so much noise on both sides that personal references are much more important than front door applications. This was always the case but much more now
- there were previously a lot of jobs for low agency people who were good at doing what they were told and meeting specs, AI is taking these as if you are willing to spend hours per week writing specs and checking results then tokens are better bang for buck than freelance devs now
- approximately all the demand now is for directly AI related plays and even people who get them don't feel secure because the whole industry feels so unstable and bubbly, but there's no money in anything not AI now
I think this needs to be caveated by the fact that the job market is seasonal. The beginning of the year is usually the best part for jobs since departments have shiny new budgets, with a boost again around March-April as people quit after getting their bonuses triggering of another set of churn.
If you do not think this is true, then ask yourself whether the company is attempting to use AI. THAT IS WHAT THEY WANT AND VALUE. The safer and easier you are as hire the better you will be.
So yes. You were probably hired because you are not a super genius and because you don't have a fancy company name. Not despite it, but because of it.
The question I have is why do I now think many corporations are "too stupid to succeed"? I know they will not fail, but the panicky rush for the supposed safety of AI is stunning.
I've had mixed results overall. Primarily looking at senior+ TPM, TPGM, SI roles. My network is hard to leverage due to being remote for so long. Lots of cold applications. 25% of applications got recruiter responses within a day, 25% within a week, 50% blocked at ATS, ghosted, or hiring being re-evaluated. Not as many direct recruiter outreaches as I've received in the past.
From the JD side, salaries seem to be more stratified and requirements, even for lower roles, seems to be higher than before. I've seen quite a few requests for 10+ years experience for mid-level PGM roles. In loose convos with friends, everyone wants a big name on a resume but no longer will pay a premium to get it.
No degree seems to be a bigger gate now than it was the last time I was searching. Being a generalist also seems to be more of a risk but I'm sure that's at least partly a fault in my own framing. I do not play the LinkedIn game well. My major contributions have been either inside a company (internally-focused, hard to share publicly or company-specific), mildly popular open source dev work (>100 stars), or things actually used everywhere but no one cares because it's not "real" dev work (created puppetlabs-firewall module, 10M+ downloads, adopted as part of Puppet Enterprise, used globally, no one cares). Without a strong public profile in a specific direction, I've been told I read as too hard to quantify.
Overall, it seems "bad" in that everyone is battling uncertainty about where things are going and being more vigilant to avoid the wrong hire. Credentials and resume pedigree seem to matter more than ever and roles are much more vertically aligned than I've seen them in the past. If you're good, with some amount of credentials, and a lot of vertical ownership then you'll probably be fine though it might take longer. If you're a generalist who's hard to pin down, you might be in for some pain.
I did have one surprise rejection during a screening call due to the fact that I had 4 years of compsci but no degree. I don't recall that happening before in ~30 years. I don't believe it was listed as a hard requirement, else I wouldn't have applied.
My (small sample size) experience was that the "nice to have" lists of keyword soup got larger, but companies remained pretty flexible about them. Probably because for most roles, LLMs can help developers paper over these experience gaps.ie - React shops were cool with my recent Vue experience as a substitute, since I was primarily a backend guy anyway
Not rejecting your experiences, just adding to the anecdata
Candidate-wise, everyone is slinging ChatGPT'd resumes left and right, which just leads to an arms race where the other side has to use LLMs to filter them, which just makes the situation even worse. The bar for "senior software engineer" is insanely low right now (and no, Leetcode doesn't count - I'm talking more pragmatic skills like being able to use a *nix terminal).
Employer-wise, everyone wants a unicorn that will lick their ass but isn't willing to pay (in either money or benefits) well for said service. Then they complain that "nobody wants to work anymore" or that there are no good candidates. Well, it's just that the good ones don't even bother applying.
As a result, lucky, good actors on either side find themselves via networking, while the less lucky ones are left to swim in a sea of trash.
Everyone had to start doing that to get through the often dumb-as-a-brick ATS system filtering that became farcical - I remember applying for one position that was around building care and management systems for pregnant mothers - EHR, practice management, claims benefits, etc., all of which I had over a decade of experience in. "Name something that might stand you out from the crowd." "In addition to all this I've also delivered 12 babies as a paramedic". Twenty minutes later "we are looking for candidates whose experiences and skill sets are more closely aligned with the role we are looking to fill". That was my push to realize "I need to do something to ATS optimize my resume and plan otherwise I'll be unemployed for months."
> Employer-wise, everyone wants a unicorn that will lick their ass but isn't willing to pay
"Principal Product Manager. Must have 10-15 years experience, much of it in healthcare domain, including leadership and team ownership. Salary range: $90-130K".
Yup.
You see the same offer by the same company for months! with the same generic reject (seriously I think no even check the resume or whatever!).
Then, a lot of fake I-am-a-AI "companies and middleman and such things.
Ironically, I have been contacted more by somebody looking here in hn than in all the job boards!
The jobs advertised on there are real...
I'd been on the job market four months. Every day I did the rounds: Levels, Wellfound, YC/jobs, Glassdoor, Indeed, LinkedIn.
It is what it is, as a crappy jobs market.
Wellfound? I didn't ever hear from anything from their job ads.
And I'm pretty certain that whatever Wellfound/AngelList was, it has become a company that just markets resume writing services, resume review services, all sorts of other services that draw in your money somehow.
Why do I say that?
120+ applications on Wellfound since then. Crickets. Absolutely nothing.
One day I got an email, "Your profile has been viewed!". Weird, never seen an email like that from Wellfound. Indeed, "You have 1 profile view in the last 90 days".
Huh. 120+ applications, 120+ times me answering filling out Wellfound's content questions on "why you would be a good fit for this role", "tell us about x and y and z", no interviews, no contact, only ONE company has ever even viewed my profile (and for what it's worth, it's not a company that has any positions open).
Well, maybe my answers suck, you say. Maybe my resume isn't as impressive as I think it is.
But similar answers and the same resume get me fairly steady hits on every other site I mentioned, I've got to multiple final rounds, I've been explicitly told I was hirable, I was just the number two, I was "in the top three".
And to be clear, many of the companies I see on WF are advertising on other sites too.
My suspicion? WF does take job listings, but they also harvest them from other sites - the job is real, but there's no-one from the employer reviewing the applications to their "phantom" job... and meanwhile all people like me are doing are providing content for WF to harvest and train models for their AI-driven resume writing and review service and other products.
My AI video interview? Viewed... zero times.
Huh.