4 ms·

I've been contacted by a number of recruiters recently who are recruiting for positions that are paying FAR more than the market average of just a few years ago

I've been contacted by a number of recruiters recently who are recruiting for positions that are paying FAR more than the market average of just a few years ago. I'm talking an average increase of over 50%. I'm honestly concerned that my entire team, after having received low percentage pay increases in the past year, is going to end up leaving within the next 4-6 months, and I'm not sure the product is capable of surviving that sort of brain drain. I've tried to warn my manager multiple times about the situation, but he's not the kind of guy to attempt to swim against the stream with upper management.

TavsiE9s 4y ago
I’ve heard the whole “money can’t be everything when deciding on a job” a couple of times when discussing salaries recently. Mostly from companies who realise they can’t or don’t want to compete with the market. Shrug and move on. They’ll learn eventually.
- ghaff 4y ago
  >They’ll learn eventually. A lot of companies just can't afford to match big tech Silicon Valley salaries in general. They may make exceptions for specific individuals but my impression is there's a fairly widespread attitude, however resigned, that if you can get a job with Facebook and you're fine with that, we're not going to try to outbid them.
- Silhouette 4y ago
  Money is at least understandable. It is a finite resource after all. What I really don't get is employers who are still pushing for other conditions that will deter good people from applying - things like annoying processes or insisting on hybrid working instead of allowing fully remote if there is no clear benefit to those policies.
  - MisterBastahrd 4y ago
    It's true. We are based out of Dallas and we interviewed a great QA candidate this week from the East Coast who, when asked what the reason for looking for another job was, said that their employer had a hybrid policy, but after having experienced fully remote working, they never wanted to go back to that.
    - Silhouette 4y ago
      I recently saw an open survey by a recruiter who I think works mainly with experienced software contractors. He was asking what everyone's priorities were when choosing their next gig. Almost without exception the responses were a good rate, being fully remote and being outside IR35 (an infamous government regulation here in the UK that makes some types of gig very unattractive). The next most popular was having a simple application process with anything more than one discussion widely considered excessive for a short contract. Obviously the rate is a money thing. You can only escape IR35 based on what your working arrangements are so if you're caught then you just have to accept that some people won't work with you. But for almost all software development gigs there is no sensible reason to exclude good people because they often prefer fully remote work and in the world of contracting you're just shooting yourself in the foot if you expect anyone good to go through "only" three or four stages of your application process.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

TavsiE9s 4y ago

I’ve heard the whole “money can’t be everything when deciding on a job” a couple of times when discussing salaries recently. Mostly from companies who realise they can’t or don’t want to compete with the market. Shrug and move on. They’ll learn eventually.

ghaff 4y ago
>They’ll learn eventually. A lot of companies just can't afford to match big tech Silicon Valley salaries in general. They may make exceptions for specific individuals but my impression is there's a fairly widespread attitude, however resigned, that if you can get a job with Facebook and you're fine with that, we're not going to try to outbid them.
Silhouette 4y ago
Money is at least understandable. It is a finite resource after all. What I really don't get is employers who are still pushing for other conditions that will deter good people from applying - things like annoying processes or insisting on hybrid working instead of allowing fully remote if there is no clear benefit to those policies.
- MisterBastahrd 4y ago
  It's true. We are based out of Dallas and we interviewed a great QA candidate this week from the East Coast who, when asked what the reason for looking for another job was, said that their employer had a hybrid policy, but after having experienced fully remote working, they never wanted to go back to that.
  - Silhouette 4y ago
    I recently saw an open survey by a recruiter who I think works mainly with experienced software contractors. He was asking what everyone's priorities were when choosing their next gig. Almost without exception the responses were a good rate, being fully remote and being outside IR35 (an infamous government regulation here in the UK that makes some types of gig very unattractive). The next most popular was having a simple application process with anything more than one discussion widely considered excessive for a short contract. Obviously the rate is a money thing. You can only escape IR35 based on what your working arrangements are so if you're caught then you just have to accept that some people won't work with you. But for almost all software development gigs there is no sensible reason to exclude good people because they often prefer fully remote work and in the world of contracting you're just shooting yourself in the foot if you expect anyone good to go through "only" three or four stages of your application process.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]