4 ms·

This seems to be a VERY widely held belief but the numbers don't back it up. http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes151132.htm http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes151

by VLM 10y ago

This seems to be a VERY widely held belief but the numbers don't back it up. http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes151132.htm http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes151132.htm "Metropolitan areas with the highest employment level in this occupation:" There's only 40K jobs in SV, and if you go on HN reputation you'd think there's only like 3 jobs in all of Chicago, but the actual number is closer to 20K. As a practical matter it will not matter much if there are 40K jobs or 20K jobs in a legacy geographic location, because my first choice will always be remote anyway. Given that almost all jobs on a percentage basis are outside SV, by definition your best next job will almost certainly be out of state no matter where you live, in or out of CA.

vonmoltke 10y ago
It's not just a matter of how many jobs there are, it is also a matter of how many employers there are and how flexible the employers are. An area with 20,000 jobs split between 400 employers may well be better for mobility than an area with 30,000 jobs split between 20. Similarly, an area where employers post laundry list job reqs and get picky about them is not going to be an easy area to switch jobs in, regardless of how many total jobs there are. Tens of thousands of tech job openings are controlled by companies who don't actually believe there is a talent shortage and will treat you accordingly.
- ryandrake 10y ago
  Not only that. Number of jobs > number of open job postings > number of actual open jobs > number of job openings available to external applicants > number of job openings that are actually trying to get filled (as opposed to just fishing) > number of job openings actually likely to be filled. But your right, number of companies is very relevant, since you interview for a company not a single job opening. 30,000 jobs at 20 companies represents 20 chances, not 30,000 chances.
maverick_iceman 10y ago
You forgot to include SF itself which adds another 22950 jobs.
acchow 10y ago
Current labor size isn't a measure of velocity. If people spend less time at a job, then there are more job openings. People leave jobs and get hired quicker.

by VLM 10y ago

vonmoltke 10y ago

It's not just a matter of how many jobs there are, it is also a matter of how many employers there are and how flexible the employers are. An area with 20,000 jobs split between 400 employers may well be better for mobility than an area with 30,000 jobs split between 20. Similarly, an area where employers post laundry list job reqs and get picky about them is not going to be an easy area to switch jobs in, regardless of how many total jobs there are. Tens of thousands of tech job openings are controlled by companies who don't actually believe there is a talent shortage and will treat you accordingly.

ryandrake 10y ago
Not only that. Number of jobs > number of open job postings > number of actual open jobs > number of job openings available to external applicants > number of job openings that are actually trying to get filled (as opposed to just fishing) > number of job openings actually likely to be filled. But your right, number of companies is very relevant, since you interview for a company not a single job opening. 30,000 jobs at 20 companies represents 20 chances, not 30,000 chances.

maverick_iceman 10y ago

You forgot to include SF itself which adds another 22950 jobs.

acchow 10y ago

Current labor size isn't a measure of velocity. If people spend less time at a job, then there are more job openings. People leave jobs and get hired quicker.