4 ms·

isn't this the same with tech jobs though? you are just as replaceable and the interview process is only there to filter out the bad candidates it's only more

isn't this the same with tech jobs though? you are just as replaceable and the interview process is only there to filter out the bad candidates it's only more intense because the cost/risk ratio is magnitudes higher

diveanon 5y ago
This is a gross simplification and really trivializes the struggle of people not privileged enough to work in our industry.
- tsumnia 5y ago
  I actually disagree. If you're going to look down at "those people" making the company run, then yeah, us techies are just as easily trawled through and filtered via intense programming interviews. What's the turnover time for SWEs at Amazon anyway?
- grp000 5y ago
  I think it captures the main point that Amazon hiring procedures for 99.9% of people are based on optimizing their bottom line. If they want something specific, they'll acquire it/copy the idea. Backend optimizations/tooling stuff I don't know. Maybe they're recruiting those people based on their research credentials.
nexuist 5y ago
We don't earn better pay and benefits because we are special, brilliant people. We are given these benefits because there is a perpetual labor shortage of people who have enough tech experience to do their employers' bidding and nobody will show up if they don't doll these out. In other words, we are a fluke, and we'll lose these benefits once they figure out how to commoditize software development. Which is a pretty strong argument for a tech workers union (as well as a warehouse workers union), if not now, a few more years down the line when salaries go down as a result of saturation.
- ushakov 5y ago
  yes and i don't disagree with that yet, have you seen how many bootcamps and hype there is about tech industry? anyone wants to be in, anyone wants the perks the companies will do anything to trivialise our job and race wages to the bottom, so they could justify spending less money on "human resources"
  - _jal 5y ago
    Well, yes. As an engineer, you are a very expensive resource, probably working in a department that's considered a cost center. "Rightsizing" those is great for the bonus.
- 908B64B197 5y ago
  > Which is a pretty strong argument for a tech workers union Wrong approach. Push for real engineering certifications instead. Keeps the free market (no promotions based on seniority) but weeds out the "6 month bootcamp fullstack engineer" disaster from your codebase.
  - throwanem 5y ago
    That's going to be tough to get backing for, and should be. With no meaningful labor coordination, the only way that happens is for a few unaccountable people get together and dream up their idea of what that certification looks like, then do a lot of politics to stick everyone else with it. Sure, maybe you open-source the initial development, but you can't open-source the politics because nobody can have a sensible conversation with a million people working at at least partial cross purposes, and so when you're doing the politics you make a lot of compromises that nobody gets a say in. Best case you fail, worst case you succeed and everyone is stuck with the result, which inevitably favors employers because why do they even participate if they don't get something at least a little more like a buyer's market out of it? So nobody with any experience, maybe even nobody with any common sense, participates in whatever process you have from the design side, because all that does is waste time lending legitimacy to something that's guaranteed to be a bad deal for labor. You haven't even sold me on it! Of course, if you have buy-in and trust from a sizable and valuable labor base first, all this changes. But that means a tangible history of success as part of the leadership of a union, and you've already ruled that out. What you're proposing would be more like a guild, which is actually a model that can work when the people who run it also monopolize the local industry and can exclude anyone who doesn't meet their standards - including preventing other business owners from defecting and hiring skilled upstarts who the guild won't accept for inevitable and again political reasons. Management in this industry isn't that coordinated either, and can't be without being a lot more oligopolistic than it already is. Maybe in a few decades. Right now I don't see it.
908B64B197 5y ago
> you are just as replaceable and the interview process is only there to filter out the bad candidates That's one way of running a tech company but what you'll end up with is going to look more like one of those comically bad bodyshops that's used for outsourcing. These have a turnover so high it's almost impossible to find someone with more than two years of experience. And, well, the results speak for themselves. Truth is there are people out there that are trying really hard to commoditize software engineering, with bootcamps and whatnot. And honestly, I'm not impressed one bit. Best way to build the best software (it's a winner take all market remember?) is simply to bite the bullet and go get the best talent out there. The 10x rule is well and alive.
- ushakov 5y ago
  what would be your suggestion then? become a 10x developer? i think we should stop competing and just self-employ ourselves
- PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
  > That's one way of running a tech company at least as far as TFA is concerned, it's not really about "a tech company", but a shipping/receiving/warehouse facility.

diveanon 5y ago

This is a gross simplification and really trivializes the struggle of people not privileged enough to work in our industry.

tsumnia 5y ago
I actually disagree. If you're going to look down at "those people" making the company run, then yeah, us techies are just as easily trawled through and filtered via intense programming interviews. What's the turnover time for SWEs at Amazon anyway?
grp000 5y ago
I think it captures the main point that Amazon hiring procedures for 99.9% of people are based on optimizing their bottom line. If they want something specific, they'll acquire it/copy the idea. Backend optimizations/tooling stuff I don't know. Maybe they're recruiting those people based on their research credentials.

nexuist 5y ago

We don't earn better pay and benefits because we are special, brilliant people. We are given these benefits because there is a perpetual labor shortage of people who have enough tech experience to do their employers' bidding and nobody will show up if they don't doll these out. In other words, we are a fluke, and we'll lose these benefits once they figure out how to commoditize software development. Which is a pretty strong argument for a tech workers union (as well as a warehouse workers union), if not now, a few more years down the line when salaries go down as a result of saturation.

ushakov 5y ago
yes and i don't disagree with that yet, have you seen how many bootcamps and hype there is about tech industry? anyone wants to be in, anyone wants the perks the companies will do anything to trivialise our job and race wages to the bottom, so they could justify spending less money on "human resources"
- _jal 5y ago
  Well, yes. As an engineer, you are a very expensive resource, probably working in a department that's considered a cost center. "Rightsizing" those is great for the bonus.
908B64B197 5y ago
> Which is a pretty strong argument for a tech workers union Wrong approach. Push for real engineering certifications instead. Keeps the free market (no promotions based on seniority) but weeds out the "6 month bootcamp fullstack engineer" disaster from your codebase.
- throwanem 5y ago
  That's going to be tough to get backing for, and should be. With no meaningful labor coordination, the only way that happens is for a few unaccountable people get together and dream up their idea of what that certification looks like, then do a lot of politics to stick everyone else with it. Sure, maybe you open-source the initial development, but you can't open-source the politics because nobody can have a sensible conversation with a million people working at at least partial cross purposes, and so when you're doing the politics you make a lot of compromises that nobody gets a say in. Best case you fail, worst case you succeed and everyone is stuck with the result, which inevitably favors employers because why do they even participate if they don't get something at least a little more like a buyer's market out of it? So nobody with any experience, maybe even nobody with any common sense, participates in whatever process you have from the design side, because all that does is waste time lending legitimacy to something that's guaranteed to be a bad deal for labor. You haven't even sold me on it! Of course, if you have buy-in and trust from a sizable and valuable labor base first, all this changes. But that means a tangible history of success as part of the leadership of a union, and you've already ruled that out. What you're proposing would be more like a guild, which is actually a model that can work when the people who run it also monopolize the local industry and can exclude anyone who doesn't meet their standards - including preventing other business owners from defecting and hiring skilled upstarts who the guild won't accept for inevitable and again political reasons. Management in this industry isn't that coordinated either, and can't be without being a lot more oligopolistic than it already is. Maybe in a few decades. Right now I don't see it.

908B64B197 5y ago

> you are just as replaceable and the interview process is only there to filter out the bad candidates That's one way of running a tech company but what you'll end up with is going to look more like one of those comically bad bodyshops that's used for outsourcing. These have a turnover so high it's almost impossible to find someone with more than two years of experience. And, well, the results speak for themselves. Truth is there are people out there that are trying really hard to commoditize software engineering, with bootcamps and whatnot. And honestly, I'm not impressed one bit. Best way to build the best software (it's a winner take all market remember?) is simply to bite the bullet and go get the best talent out there. The 10x rule is well and alive.

ushakov 5y ago
what would be your suggestion then? become a 10x developer? i think we should stop competing and just self-employ ourselves
PaulDavisThe1st 5y ago
> That's one way of running a tech company at least as far as TFA is concerned, it's not really about "a tech company", but a shipping/receiving/warehouse facility.