4 ms·
I think the "creates 200 jobs" usage is completely fair here. The thing is due to be operational in 2022, so that's two years of work for 200 people, and the on
by ryanwaggoner 6y ago
I think the "creates 200 jobs" usage is completely fair here. The thing is due to be operational in 2022, so that's two years of work for 200 people, and the ongoing operation jobs will be "a few dozen", not 5-10. The article makes all this clear.
More broadly, infrastructure jobs are still jobs, even if they only last a few years instead of indefinitely. The average tenure of a software engineer at a big tech company is less than that; is it fair to say they don't have jobs? It's not like we're ever going to run out of projects to improve the world, so these 200 workers will hopefully finish this job and move onto the next "job-creating project".
- take_a_breath 6y ago==The average tenure of a software engineer at a big tech company is less than that; is it fair to say they don't have jobs?== I don’t follow, after a software engineer leaves the big tech firm, the job still exists. They hire someone else to do it. In this instance the job doesn’t exist after 2 years. It’s also probably not 2 full years for those jobs as they are typically brought in with teams to perform their function (dig, foundation, build, framing, electrical/water/gas, finishing) then move on.
- rjsw 6y agoSoftware projects finish just like civil engineering ones do.
- take_a_breath 6y agoHiring a software engineer as a full-time employee for a temporary software project, then firing them, is a poor use of company resources. If you are talking about a contract software engineer, then you are correct that the worker rolls off. We typically don't see those considered "full-time jobs created" because they have a well-defined term and are never employees of the company.