4 ms·

>> The odd thing about software engineering is the number of these jobs that remain unfilled. As an example, Microsoft has 3,746 engineering jobs available plus

>> The odd thing about software engineering is the number of these jobs that remain unfilled. As an example, Microsoft has 3,746 engineering jobs available plus probably another 1,000 technical roles in sales, service, and support. You'll find pretty similar numbers across the FAANGs and other major tech companies and VC start ups. So you've got lots of open roles and lots of developers that could double their salary but the connection is not being made. >> Contrast with something like law. Law Firms will fill the roles they have with the best lawyers they can find. There's not a bunch of open slots at top firms that aren't getting filled because they can't find associates that will raise the bar. Microsoft often calls me also. And i ignore the recruiter calls. The reason they have "3,746 engineering jobs available" is probably because it is a raw deal compared to the alternatives -- especially once you account for moving to Seattle and paying Seattle rents. They would have to increase salaries, and poof, all the openings would disappear. Alternatively, they can make the jobs WFH and they would disappear, because i'd be very interested to apply to these jobs if it didnt involve relocating to Seattle, I could live somewhere with sensible housing costs. Anyone can create underpaid openings and they will go unfilled. I want a personal trainer for $5/hr. Except it doesnt make sense for a personal trainer after accounting for costs, especially given alternatives. >> Contrast with something like law. Law Firms will fill the roles they have with the best lawyers they can find. There's not a bunch of open slots at top firms that aren't getting filled because they can't find associates that will raise the bar. Look at the Cravath pay schedule. If you paid these sums to SWEs, those positions would also get filled really fast.

treis 6y ago
>Anyone can create underpaid openings and they will go unfilled. Sure, but these positions are not underpaid. They are often 2-3 times what other software engineers make. Location can explain some of it, but in other industries that stuff tends to equalize. >Look at the Cravath pay schedule. If you paid these sums to SWEs, those positions would also get filled really fast. That's pretty close to what the FAANGs pay and they're sitting on thousands of open positions. I doubt Cravath even has one open slot.
- TuringNYC 6y ago
  Totally disagree. Engineers are rational. If these were appropriately paid, engineers would go there and take the job. The positions are obviously not underpaid at face value nor are they underpaid on an absolute scale -- but they ARE underpaid relative to what is expected (experience, skills), and what has to be given up (cost of living.), and what you actually get (cash comp vs stock w/ vesting periods) Cravath pays cash salaries, not step-vested stock that can fall long before it vests. There is no comparison. If there were a comparison, people would be flocking to these FAANG jobs. The fact that there openings again suggests there is something amiss.
  - treis 6y ago
    >Totally disagree. Engineers are rational. If these were appropriately paid, engineers would go there and take the job. As far as I can tell engineers are falling over themselves to take these jobs. It's the FAANGs et. al. that are rejecting them for, as you note in your other post, rather arbitrary reasons. It's an extremely unusual situation.
    - TuringNYC 6y ago
      Well thats the thing, some of these positions are expecting absolute 0.1% rocket scientists (IMHO unnecessarily) but w/o the rocket scientist pay. Remember that some of that top talent are well into their career, they have families, kids with health costs, school districts, college funds, etc. So its a raw deal to offer them just enough to jam them into a 1br or 2br apartment. Why would someone with years of experience and family obligations take such a terrible deal? The salaries are great for entry level graduates, but in many cases the requirements (either explicit or via tests) are not selecting for entry level graduates. W/r/t the requirements, I'm not even sure being able to rebalance a B-Tree on pencil and paper -- without a computer or debugging code -- is reflective of any real situation i've ever encountered in my career. It is a fair test if you just want really sharp people...but then you better be offerring really sharp salaries.
  - ghaff 6y ago
    Cravath also has a pretty simple pipeline for the most part. Try to hire the top grads from a relative handful of top law schools. Associates are mostly up or out. Rinse and repeat.

treis 6y ago

>Anyone can create underpaid openings and they will go unfilled. Sure, but these positions are not underpaid. They are often 2-3 times what other software engineers make. Location can explain some of it, but in other industries that stuff tends to equalize. >Look at the Cravath pay schedule. If you paid these sums to SWEs, those positions would also get filled really fast. That's pretty close to what the FAANGs pay and they're sitting on thousands of open positions. I doubt Cravath even has one open slot.

TuringNYC 6y ago
Totally disagree. Engineers are rational. If these were appropriately paid, engineers would go there and take the job. The positions are obviously not underpaid at face value nor are they underpaid on an absolute scale -- but they ARE underpaid relative to what is expected (experience, skills), and what has to be given up (cost of living.), and what you actually get (cash comp vs stock w/ vesting periods) Cravath pays cash salaries, not step-vested stock that can fall long before it vests. There is no comparison. If there were a comparison, people would be flocking to these FAANG jobs. The fact that there openings again suggests there is something amiss.
- treis 6y ago
  >Totally disagree. Engineers are rational. If these were appropriately paid, engineers would go there and take the job. As far as I can tell engineers are falling over themselves to take these jobs. It's the FAANGs et. al. that are rejecting them for, as you note in your other post, rather arbitrary reasons. It's an extremely unusual situation.
  - TuringNYC 6y ago
    Well thats the thing, some of these positions are expecting absolute 0.1% rocket scientists (IMHO unnecessarily) but w/o the rocket scientist pay. Remember that some of that top talent are well into their career, they have families, kids with health costs, school districts, college funds, etc. So its a raw deal to offer them just enough to jam them into a 1br or 2br apartment. Why would someone with years of experience and family obligations take such a terrible deal? The salaries are great for entry level graduates, but in many cases the requirements (either explicit or via tests) are not selecting for entry level graduates. W/r/t the requirements, I'm not even sure being able to rebalance a B-Tree on pencil and paper -- without a computer or debugging code -- is reflective of any real situation i've ever encountered in my career. It is a fair test if you just want really sharp people...but then you better be offerring really sharp salaries.
- ghaff 6y ago
  Cravath also has a pretty simple pipeline for the most part. Try to hire the top grads from a relative handful of top law schools. Associates are mostly up or out. Rinse and repeat.