543
submitted 4 months ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/technology@lemmy.world

‘I’m proud of being a job hopper’: Seattle engineer’s post about company loyalty goes viral::undefined

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Odelay42@lemmy.world 192 points 4 months ago

Most people over-index on maximizing compensation or holding on to stability. But there’s more to work than money and stability. Work is about growth, building connections, working on things you care about, being challenged and creating a legacy.

Fucking legacy? Is this a joke? Who gives a shit about what shitty products they launch for FAANG companies? I certainly don't - not beyond keeping my resume and portfolio up to date.

Compensation and stability are the only things that matter beyond basic working conditions and a non-toxic environment.

[-] rockSlayer@lemmy.world 93 points 4 months ago

Well in my case I created a legacy by helping to unionize my workplace. I don't even care if I'm ever remembered for that, not many legacies can be beat

[-] SK4nda1@lemmy.ml 30 points 4 months ago

Very nice! Unionization is the only way to make employera care about workers rights.

[-] AA5B@lemmy.world 18 points 4 months ago

My legacy is my kids, and that’s time no company can take from me

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] morrowind@lemmy.ml 17 points 4 months ago

Man we've lost something along the way. When did our jobs become purely a means of money and contributing nothing to society.

[-] transientpunk@sh.itjust.works 109 points 4 months ago

When society began treating people as an exploitable resource.

[-] GladiusB@lemmy.world 31 points 4 months ago

100 percent. My work is treated as a commodity. Why wouldn't I consider the company one as well?

[-] morrowind@lemmy.ml 14 points 4 months ago

I always found the name of the department "Human Resources" quite demeaning.

[-] CrowAirbrush@lemmy.world 54 points 4 months ago

Mine turned into that when it stopped paying enough to provide me with basic needs.

If it's fuck me, then it's fuck all y'all too.

[-] fidodo@lemmy.world 26 points 4 months ago

When they started treating employees and disposable cogs to be exploited.

[-] puppy@lemmy.world 20 points 4 months ago

The exact moment the employer only cared about money and not its employees or contributions to the society.

[-] redfox@infosec.pub 15 points 4 months ago

Executives used to be stewards of the company. They took care of brand, and people.

Then we switched to a bottom line focus. Now, profit, stock prices are the only thing that matters.

Shortcuts, layoffs, benefit cuts, etc are the only way to offset not making continuous market growth, and still rack ridiculous profits.

Also, great deal of Americans started not giving a shit about where the product comes from or who makes it. We want the cheapest thing, fast. Just has been our personal priorities.

There's not much incentive for a company to consider it's corporate image, contributions to community and public, etc.

I'd say that's when.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Static_Rocket@lemmy.world 14 points 4 months ago

I don't know man, I've always liked the idea of a project outliving me. Though for the sanity of future engineers I hope that is not the case. Today's solutions are usually just tomorrow's problems.

[-] nxdefiant@startrek.website 21 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

On a long enough timeline, all things end, and tech has hyper accelerated timelines.

I was once interviewed by a guy who asked for my biggest failure, which was basically "favorite open source project didn't work out". He let me know he worked on an early competitor of the X windowing system and really believed in it. And we laughed about that. (He hired me).

So yeah, I kinda agree with this job hopper guy on everything but legacy, but only because we really don't get to have a say on what our code ends up meaning to anyone. The sands of time are nothing compared to the brutality of tech stack churn.

[-] PhAzE@lemmy.ca 13 points 4 months ago

Who invented Google home? Like, what's the person's name? What about the person that designed the Sonos Move?

There's no legacy. There's business objectives and getting those completed so upper management can move their plans forward. Who gets them there is irrelevant.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] foggy@lemmy.world 116 points 4 months ago

Ain't nobody giving increases like new bosses.

You want loyalty? That's what pensions were for. Fuck your 401k, I can invest myself, thanks.

You want loyalty? Give better increases.

[-] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 27 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

At the end of the day, software developers desire two things: An interesting technical challenge, and fair pay/benefits for the work done. If you can't provide either, you have a problem. Not the employee.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] StereoTrespasser@lemmy.world 22 points 4 months ago

Fuck your 401k, I can invest myself, thanks

You can't match your own contributions, though.

[-] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 39 points 4 months ago

I've never seen a place that matches as much as a new job would pay.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] foggy@lemmy.world 17 points 4 months ago

Often times the 'match' isn't matched fully until you've been an employee for x years. Ask your HR department about their vesting schedule! 🤓

[-] chiliedogg@lemmy.world 17 points 4 months ago

Well.... yeah. That's how they use benefits to encourage loyalty.

When I hit 5 years, I vest and my employer begins double-matching, including retroactive contributions. I put in 7%, so in another 2 trays they'll put 70% of my annual salary into my retirement all at once.

It heavily encourages loyalty because it's genuinely a great benefit. I have no problem with that.

I work for money, and the reward for loyalty is more money.

Beats the hell out of a pizza party.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 114 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Companies get mad when the employees look at their jobs the way execs look at their employees. Cue outrage. The only reason they mad is because they own the newspapers, too.

The audacity of these removed. I have a mercenary outlook on work too. If you love me, keep paying me good.

I'm not loyal to anybody, I'm a demon / I have no loyalty for anyone, never did, never will

[-] ZeroTemp@lemmy.world 41 points 4 months ago

I've been practicing the mercenary method for about 5 years now. Since then I've significantly increased my salary and I've been a lot happier at work. That on top of learning to say "no" has improved my career life exponentially. NO loyalty. No unpaid overtime. No going above and beyond for a company that isn't going to return the favor.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] starclaude@lemmy.world 17 points 4 months ago

they dont even pay enough for our loyalty lmao

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] MajorHavoc@programming.dev 110 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

"Having hired over 500 engineers personally in my career, if your resume came across my list, I would definitely pass."

Heh.A job seeker with three FANG companies on their resume does not give a shit if this random person would bin their resume.

Also, I'm trying to imagine a scenario where having needed to hire 500 people, personally, in a single career isn't embarrassing.

Edit: "You think you suck at retention? Let me tell you how my year went!"

[-] thesmokingman@programming.dev 28 points 4 months ago

Your second paragraph tells you who you’re trying to find in your third paragraph: FAANG. Hiring 500 engineers and bragging about it something you can do when you’re just interested in shareholder value not customer experience.

I wouldn’t hire the guy in the article because I haven’t seen strong candidates come from FAANG and I’ve been very happy to lose the people I did to FAANG because they weren’t good engineers, they just knew how to leetcode and tunnel vision trivia.

[-] kn0wmad1c@programming.dev 12 points 4 months ago

Hasn't it changed from FAANG to MAANA?

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] abhibeckert@lemmy.world 22 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

It's not about having FANG in your job history. It's about switching companies three times in three years.

Where I work, we tend to lose money on new hires for an average of the first six months. That's time where not only the new engineer isn't very productive, but other engineers on the same team aren't very productive. They're sinking time into difficult conversations like "yeah you need to go back and redo the last two weeks of work — it's perfectly good code, but you used library X, and we decided four years ago to is use library Y because X has this rare edge case issue when combined with library Z which we also use...".

If someone only works with us for a year... we haven't made enough of a profit to cover the losses in the first half of their employment with us. If you want to work for us, we're not going to force you into a multi-year contract but we do want to be as confident as possible that you're going to stay here long term.

I wouldn't turn someone down for changing jobs three times in three years... but I would definitely ask what happened. And they better answer with something that will happen at my company.

I’m trying to imagine a scenario where having needed to hire 500 people, personally

It takes, what, 10 minutes to read a resume? 30 minutes interview someone? Lets round that up to one hour to cover discussing two promising candidates with a colleague... it's still only 500 hours of work. Or 12 weeks. Obviously you also need to read all the resumes and do interviews with people who were turned down but over an entire career working in HR for a large company... 500 people isn't that many at all.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] fidodo@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

Sometime who's hired that many people would understand how job hunting works more. If you've worked at 3 FANG companies in 3 years, you're not quitting your job then interviewing, you're interviewing while you're employed and only quitting when you've secured the next job. Also, with a beefy resume like that, companies will be reaching out to you to poach you, and in those cases they can't complain about the work history because they're the ones trying to steal you away.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world 84 points 4 months ago

Companies are forcing return to office policies as a covert way of doing layoffs without compensation, if they're not kicking people out with the thousands and are shocked to discover workers are now not particularly loyal to employers.

They also hate it when employees use the exact same economic reasoning as they do to maximize revenue and take opportunities.

[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 82 points 4 months ago

Companies: "You are nothing but a cog in a machine. You will be placed in the machine if and only if you help the machine generate maximum profit. If your presence ever causes the machine to generate less than maximum profit you will be summarily discarded."

Employees: "Okay, so you try to get the maximum profit for you and I try to get the maximum profit for me."

Companies: surprisePikachu.jpg

[-] AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works 61 points 4 months ago

I've averaged ~12 job hops in the last 6 years and I wouldn't change a thing. Compensation growth has been roughly 6.05x. The previous 6 years was...maybe 3? And maybe 2x.

I owe the big corps nothing. I meet expectations and deliverables and I support my team however I can, but that's about it.

[-] billwashere@lemmy.world 33 points 4 months ago

But eventually don’t you risk being unhireable with this sort of work history? We recently hired someone who had a similar work history and I remember that being very much a red flag when we hired them. Turns out the red flag should have been payed attention too since history is a good predictor of future behaviors.

As a hiring manager I would think twice about investing anything in an employee who jumps around THAT much. I mean I don’t blame you, I’ve had the same job for 23 years and I could be making a lot more money. But salary is not everything and I love my job. My mental health is very much an extra benefit.

[-] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 16 points 4 months ago

Even assuming that it's all W2, it's a self-resolving problem- if no one will hire you because you're unstable, you stay at the existing job. That works until either you've been there long enough to appear stable, or you find an employer that's not concerned about it.

[-] maynarkh@feddit.nl 14 points 4 months ago

That's assuming you don't get laid off, sadly. Ask me how I know.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[-] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 23 points 4 months ago

Easier and more straightforward to get a position and salary promotion by way of hopping jobs than it is to do within the same company.

It's really sad that this is the state of things but it is how it is.

[-] AlecSadler@sh.itjust.works 19 points 4 months ago

Sadly true. In my earlier years I watched new hires sometimes start at the same or more than I was getting after 1-2 mediocre raises.

At one of my last longer term jobs, I was miffed at the lack of compensation increases over the last 2 years, so I told them I was quitting. I even said I don't have anything lined up, but I just can't continue knowing the market is paying more. They ended up magically finding a 20% increase for me - where was that before?

[-] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

How do you even explain that during the hiring process? That's not even enough time to figure anything out

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (13 replies)
[-] jimmydoreisalefty@lemmy.world 56 points 4 months ago

He also noted higher pay and easier promotions. “I had a 20% pay bump moving from Amazon to Microsoft for the same role and job responsibilities,” Nguyen wrote.

[-] bobs_monkey@lemm.ee 95 points 4 months ago

Industries promote this, especially the publicly traded ones, whether they realize it or not (I'm sure they do). It looks worse on a corporate balance sheet and subsequent earnings quarterly earnings report to pay someone 20% more than to hire someone at a new pay scale. It's absolutely insane that we've gotten ourselves to this point as a society, but here we are.

[-] grabyourmotherskeys@lemmy.world 26 points 4 months ago

I think it's also very acceptable to have full time contractors on the payroll with no end date for the same reason.

load more comments (11 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] friend_of_satan@lemmy.world 24 points 4 months ago

When I moved to Silicon Valley the HR guy at my company was an old hippie who looked out for people. He told me the silicon valley way to get a raises is to tell your company that you have decided to take another job because it pays more, and you don't want to leave, but you have personal obligations like your girlfriend being pregnant that mean you have to take a higher paying job. Then if they don't give you a raise you find a new job that will.

[-] Coreidan@lemmy.world 18 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

And when you take the raise they’ll give you all the shit work until they find a replacement for you. If you legit have an offer from a different company take it.

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] inclementimmigrant@lemmy.world 35 points 4 months ago

So been working as a software engineer for twenty years now and seen the steady decline of workers. Started out as the last straggler for a pension, rapid decline of insurance, crap ass 401ks, the lack of employee investment and the chacing of the median salary.

I tell every new hire to spend a year here, get your experience, then look for another job, come back a few months later if you really like the work.

I mean honestly, fuck these corporations, they don't care or have loyalty to their employees and you can be screwed with a 401k anywhere so get you pay bump and fuck their expectations of loyalty.

[-] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 32 points 4 months ago

Nguyen previously wrote a guest post in Business Insider that detailed his post-graduation move from New York City to Seattle for a tech job and how it “turned out to be the loneliest time of my life.”

Sounds like The Seattle Freeze.

--

Anyway. Yeah, if I'm looking at a candidate and see they had three jobs in three years, that's a minus. Are they insufferable and they're being fired? Are they actually bad at their job? Even if they are good at their job, are they going to stick around here long enough to be worth the resources spent onboarding them?

It's a risky move.

Would be better if employers made more effort to retain people, but here we are.

load more comments (10 replies)
[-] festus@lemmy.ca 22 points 4 months ago

I think jumping after 1 year is a bit extreme, but after 3 years (my target was 2) I landed a new job I start soon! 47% salary increase plus better benefits and more time off - there's no way my current employer could ever match that!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Alpha71@lemmy.world 13 points 4 months ago

How is this even considered an article? The title is half the length of the article.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 22 Feb 2024
543 points (95.9% liked)

Technology

55919 readers
2561 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS