6 ms·
This is wrong wrong wrong. Here's why most developers keep quitting: it's because for them the grass really is always greener on the other side. Usually by abou
by anonacct37 9y ago
This is wrong wrong wrong. Here's why most developers keep quitting: it's because for them the grass really is always greener on the other side. Usually by about 20%.
I can only assume that right now the best developers are vastly underpaid relative to their worth. Why? Because it turns out every time they get annoyed with their current company they can send out some feelers and get a 20% raise. Most people can't do that. Most teachers can't just quit and get a 20% raise yearly. Do this a few times and ultimately you realize that your intrinsic value didn't really increase 1.2^3 (72%) over the last 3 jobs, it's just that companies were always willing to pay more if they needed to, but (if you were being honest about current salary) only in increments of 20%.
If they were willing to pay more, you were worth it.
There are very very few companies that exist right now that give you crappy work but top notch comp for that work. For those companies, there is not a "huge retention problem", it's just a normal-sized retention problem where in addition to paying their developers based on value they also try to ensure they get to mix things up a bit and enjoy a conference or two.
Most companies don't want to pay for retention. It's pretty sad that most companies can't make staying at their current company more attractive than the risk of starting a new job with a team/company that's unknown.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- stcredzero 9y agoMost companies don't want to pay for retention. I'll venture to say this: Not every project knows how to produce long term value, and not every shop is a good long term steward of value. This is a big factor in retention, in part because it's correlated with meaningful work.
- dlwdlw 9y agoI have a theory that most people in the US are overpaid. However the overpayment is a strategy by management so that they themselves can be even more overpaid. This can be afforded because the overpaid people are locked into middle class life scripts driving up cost of living (houses) so that they are still reliant on the jobs. It's potential "fuck u" money but isn't because of the attractive force of a domain and resistance to change. (ironically the same arguments some techies deride locals for for not moving some place cheaper) There is excessive profit taking at all levels including the IC level, however market dynamics actually create greater and greater differences in wealth despite the trickle down.
- Terr_ 9y agoIf most people are "overpaid", why have wages dropped relative to productivity for decades?
- 36bydesign 9y agoI have a theory that facts don’t matter
- Terr_ 9y ago"Strange, yet symbolically compelling."
- a3n 9y agoI have a theory that most people in the US do not work in SV-like jobs.
- thehardsphere 9y agoYour theory is not based upon sound economics. If everyone was colluding in the way you describe to pay themselves more, then a situation would emerge where companies that didn't comply with this conspiracy would be significantly more profitable than those that did. Note that, although managers may wish to throw money around because it's not theirs, shareholders view every penny spent on salaries as an expense that eats into their profits. They have an incentive to insist on lower employee salaries whenever possible, and they're typically the ones who make the rules in most firms. Also, if situations like that could exist, you wouldn't only see them in the US.
- durgiston 9y agoI think this is inertia from the housing bubble in 2008. After that, companies didn't have a retention problem with employees because everyone was terrified of not having a job for even a brief time. But since then, the economy has recovered (at least for this fairly high class) and also the ACA means that (at least for now...) you aren't as dependent on your job as you used to be. So you can afford to look around, and all the employers have the money to pay you what you are worth. They just don't remember that they have to do it to their existing employees too. They have forgotten to pay for retention, and I suspect that barring a new crisis (which I admit is more likely now) employers will start to realize again that retention is cheaper than searching for and training new employees
- rjblackman 9y agothis is largely my experience, usually I leave because I hear of others at my "level" that are earning more and I start to believe that the company I am at has fallen behind, then I ask for a raise, they don't give it to me and I leave for more money. rinse, repeat. I am underpaid at the moment but what's keeping me around is I get to do what I want and there is not the pressure I had elsewhere.
- a3n 9y ago> Most companies don't want to pay for retention. But many companies, the companies with that 20% greener grass, are willing to give a complete stranger a 20% raise. "The irony ... the irony ..."
- manyxcxi 9y agoMost decent companies have two pools of money. One for raises, and one for retention. The key here is, the manager has to really fight for it. If they believe enough in the employee to battle for the retention dollars, I've typically seen it go well. Here's the key, a lot of managers are too afraid, confrontation averse, or short sighted to make a fight for their employee.
- x0x0 9y agoime, that's driven from the ceo/whoever actually runs eng down. Some places appreciate keeping the engineers who built a system around; other places prefer to pay more to hire new people and then have them spend 6 months getting up to speed. Those costs are invisible in the budget though; they just manifest as slower output.
- kamaal 9y agoI had a manager who used to tell, he was surprised how timid people at managerial levels act when it comes to fighting for their people. There are cases where there isn't even a competition for funds. All you need to do is ask for a raise and it passes through without any problems, managers just don't do it because they are too afraid of even making that very request.
- illys 9y agoMaybe most managers see themselves as Company Representatives to their staff, rather than Staff or Team Representatives to the company management. They do not fight for their people, they get work and outcome from them to achieve the company objectives. Most probably they are right if they consider who will give them their next career opportunity.
- 9y ago
- cfusting 9y agoI agree with the underpaid argument. Remove a few developers and shut down. Remove a few managers and get three hours a day back.
- autokad 9y agopay is a big one, another big one is rapport with coworkers. if someone likes going to work every day talking / interacting with their fellow employees, then its a lot harder to leave
- wingworks 9y agoYep exactly this, the job I had a few years ago wasn't the best pay (or work) but I stayed because the guys I worked with were awesome to chat with. Slowly, one by one they all left (for better pay/location), leaving only the lazy, soon after I left too. We often complained about the people doing bad work, but nothing much was ever done. Have yet to come across a similar workplace :(
- donretag 9y agoI am about to quit my job for every reason in the article, so perhaps you are wrong wrong wrong.