5 ms·

You're the type of person I don't hire: > As developers Developers aren't special. They are a profession which doesn't even necessitate advanced degrees/certi

You're the type of person I don't hire: > As developers Developers aren't special. They are a profession which doesn't even necessitate advanced degrees/certifications like most other high-pay industries (med/law/finance/engineering). This instantly comes across as self-importance. > we should always be looking out for our best interests Sure, but not at the expense of my company. I'm assuming you have some experience based on your commentary. My expectation of a senior dev isn't to just hit keys and write 600 functions before they leave my company. I expect them to make everyone around them better. That doesn't happen if you spend your lunch hours looking for the next job. > The whole idea of company loyalty is bs in my opinion None of this is about company loyalty. It's about hiring useful employees that don't cost you money. Hiring is expensive. A rule of thumb for a medium sized company is that it takes 1 years salary to hire someone worth that salary. So If I'm paying you a salary of $100k, In six months I've actually spent $150k. When you put the numbers on paper, anyone viewing them would call me an idiot.

angryasian 10y ago
agree you can replace the word developers with any other term. The difference is that developers are in very high demand right now. We should take advantage of the environment while we can. >not at the expense of my company. I'm sorry, we're all mercenaries for hire. What will you do for me if your company needs to do layoffs or is closing ? Theres more cases where companies hire and layoff fast or screw over employees than those that actually care about the employees. >It's about hiring useful employees that don't cost you money I admit its hard to measure the direct benefit to revenue over those 6 months, but I would argue these figures.
- lloyd-christmas 10y ago
  > I'm sorry, we're all mercenaries for hire. Most people I know don't have this view. Ask around and you'll be surprised at how few people think this way. You'll probably get this perspective only if your job IS contracting, e.g. designers. > What will you do for me if your company needs to do layoffs or is closing Most companies have some form of severance, and it's typically more than enough to keep you going during your job search. Since you've mentioned how in demand we are, it shouldn't be of any concern. > I would argue these figures. Here's a good read: http://web.mit.edu/e-club/hadzima/pdf/how-much-does-an-employee-cost.pdf http://web.mit.edu/e-club/hadzima/pdf/how-much-does-an-emplo... My father does physician hiring. His costs run 4-5x salary. Lets run some numbers: Imagine I cost my company $50 an hour in salary, and earn them $150 an hour (revenue of 3-5x salary is ballpark for most companies, we'll go for the low end for some perspective). As a senior dev, I have to sit in all the interviews of people potentially joining my team. Imagine we have 10 people that make it through the HR round. I have to participate in 10 interviews, and then likely 3 more for the final round. My cost for round 2 is: 10 people x 2 hours x (150 lost revenue + 50 salary paid) = $4k My cost for round 3 is: 3 x 8 x (150 + 50) = $4.8k My company has already dropped $8.8k on my involvement solely in the interview room for your typical entry level position. This doesn't even include my involvement in onboarding, training, pre-interview prep, post-interview review, etc. This is also JUST ME, and a very lowball figure at that. Now factor in the cost of the HR round, recruiters, background checks, the other devs in the interviews with me, etc. It adds up very, very quickly. Moral of the story: People are expensive and it's really not all that difficult to quantify it.
LyndsySimon 10y ago
> So If I'm paying you a salary of $100k, In six months I've actually spent $150k. When you put the numbers on paper, anyone viewing them would call me an idiot. What I see is that the person's salary is not the biggest part of their total cost to you as an employer, particularly in the first year or two when you're amortizing out your acquisition cost. If you're paying them $100k, six months in your total cost is $150k. If they are qualified for a job at another company that pays $150k, perhaps you should have bumped their salary to the $150k that is apparently the market value of their labor - after all, is it better to spend $150k and lose that employee to someone paying them 50% more, or to spend $175k and have that third-party offer not be attractive to them?
- lloyd-christmas 10y ago
  > What I see is that the person's salary is not the biggest part of their total cost to you as an employer This is exactly why salaries are pretty negotiable. > If they are qualified for a job at another company that pays $150k We address this once a week on HN. People don't pay for qualifications, they pay for most recent salary. They'd still stick around for 6 months and then look for their next 10% bump. A "6 months here and there" person isn't magically going to change their perspective on life just because they finally had the opportunity to work for me! People that are willing to stick around typically aren't just using me for their "my last salary was...", and they are much more likely to get salary bumps within (which does actually happen, contrary to popular belief).
  - eropple 10y ago
    > A "6 months here and there" person isn't magically going to change their perspective on life just because they finally had the opportunity to work for me I've seen those people stick for multiple years when they found the right fit. Of course, they got paid for their time and their employers worked to keep them happy because that right fit understood their value. I'll be real with you: from every post you've made in the thread, this isn't the employee's problem. This is a you problem. You want to hire people who actively work against their own interests. That's super gross.

angryasian 10y ago

agree you can replace the word developers with any other term. The difference is that developers are in very high demand right now. We should take advantage of the environment while we can. >not at the expense of my company. I'm sorry, we're all mercenaries for hire. What will you do for me if your company needs to do layoffs or is closing ? Theres more cases where companies hire and layoff fast or screw over employees than those that actually care about the employees. >It's about hiring useful employees that don't cost you money I admit its hard to measure the direct benefit to revenue over those 6 months, but I would argue these figures.

lloyd-christmas 10y ago
> I'm sorry, we're all mercenaries for hire. Most people I know don't have this view. Ask around and you'll be surprised at how few people think this way. You'll probably get this perspective only if your job IS contracting, e.g. designers. > What will you do for me if your company needs to do layoffs or is closing Most companies have some form of severance, and it's typically more than enough to keep you going during your job search. Since you've mentioned how in demand we are, it shouldn't be of any concern. > I would argue these figures. Here's a good read: http://web.mit.edu/e-club/hadzima/pdf/how-much-does-an-employee-cost.pdf http://web.mit.edu/e-club/hadzima/pdf/how-much-does-an-emplo... My father does physician hiring. His costs run 4-5x salary. Lets run some numbers: Imagine I cost my company $50 an hour in salary, and earn them $150 an hour (revenue of 3-5x salary is ballpark for most companies, we'll go for the low end for some perspective). As a senior dev, I have to sit in all the interviews of people potentially joining my team. Imagine we have 10 people that make it through the HR round. I have to participate in 10 interviews, and then likely 3 more for the final round. My cost for round 2 is: 10 people x 2 hours x (150 lost revenue + 50 salary paid) = $4k My cost for round 3 is: 3 x 8 x (150 + 50) = $4.8k My company has already dropped $8.8k on my involvement solely in the interview room for your typical entry level position. This doesn't even include my involvement in onboarding, training, pre-interview prep, post-interview review, etc. This is also JUST ME, and a very lowball figure at that. Now factor in the cost of the HR round, recruiters, background checks, the other devs in the interviews with me, etc. It adds up very, very quickly. Moral of the story: People are expensive and it's really not all that difficult to quantify it.

LyndsySimon 10y ago

> So If I'm paying you a salary of $100k, In six months I've actually spent $150k. When you put the numbers on paper, anyone viewing them would call me an idiot. What I see is that the person's salary is not the biggest part of their total cost to you as an employer, particularly in the first year or two when you're amortizing out your acquisition cost. If you're paying them $100k, six months in your total cost is $150k. If they are qualified for a job at another company that pays $150k, perhaps you should have bumped their salary to the $150k that is apparently the market value of their labor - after all, is it better to spend $150k and lose that employee to someone paying them 50% more, or to spend $175k and have that third-party offer not be attractive to them?

lloyd-christmas 10y ago
> What I see is that the person's salary is not the biggest part of their total cost to you as an employer This is exactly why salaries are pretty negotiable. > If they are qualified for a job at another company that pays $150k We address this once a week on HN. People don't pay for qualifications, they pay for most recent salary. They'd still stick around for 6 months and then look for their next 10% bump. A "6 months here and there" person isn't magically going to change their perspective on life just because they finally had the opportunity to work for me! People that are willing to stick around typically aren't just using me for their "my last salary was...", and they are much more likely to get salary bumps within (which does actually happen, contrary to popular belief).
- eropple 10y ago
  > A "6 months here and there" person isn't magically going to change their perspective on life just because they finally had the opportunity to work for me I've seen those people stick for multiple years when they found the right fit. Of course, they got paid for their time and their employers worked to keep them happy because that right fit understood their value. I'll be real with you: from every post you've made in the thread, this isn't the employee's problem. This is a you problem. You want to hire people who actively work against their own interests. That's super gross.