4 ms·

Layoffs aren't what are "rattling" folks in this industry, at least not the tech folks outside of FAANG. If you've worked in startup land, you've experienced la

Layoffs aren't what are "rattling" folks in this industry, at least not the tech folks outside of FAANG. If you've worked in startup land, you've experienced layoffs. Probably multiple rounds. You anticipate them, and they aren't scary because the market for your skills is so competitive. Our "Job Security" comes from the overall state of the hiring market, not finding a job at the most stable company and putting in 30 before retiring. If folks are rattled, its because of the state of the job market, something I'm actually curious about. Reporting on this would have actual value, as I'm still getting recruiter emails from many of the recent companies that have publicly said they are freezing/slowing down hiring and from many, many startups. This article just reads like schadenfreude for the majority of tech workers who have never experienced the job security of being at a giant engine growth that never stalled once for 10-15 years.

hotpotamus 4y ago
> I'm still getting recruiter emails from many of the recent companies that have publicly said they are freezing/slowing down hiring I wonder what a recruiter at a company with a hiring freeze in place is expected to do? I'd be inclined to say, "well then I'll be on vacation until you need me, thanks for keeping the paychecks coming", but I suspect that wouldn't work so well. I think they would want to "keep the pipeline flowing" or however you'd want to say it for a mix of practical as well as BS reasons.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- fragmede 4y ago
  Fired, probably. Recruiting, as a department, is unfortunately seen as expendable and the pipeline doesn't need to flow. Not that I think that's a smart decision.
  - paleotrope 4y ago
    Most tech recruiters seem to be recent college grades that have a string of a couple 6-12 month gigs before they move on. I am not really sure how any of these provide any value to the companies that hire them.
- mjr00 4y ago
  In my experience "hiring freeze" at a large company usually means "hiring freeze, but..." Exceptions can and will be made, but need higher level approvals. The problem at these companies is that managers just want to infinitely expand their teams, because more people in your chain of command = more important manager, so they tend to use all of their budget regardless of whether they actually need to expand staff by 10% this year. Naturally, these approved hires tend to be specialized senior positions that are seen as business-critical. In general, I think anyone with 10+ years experience will be fine, but now's a shit time to be a new grad trying to break into the market.
  - hotpotamus 4y ago
    Oh, I pretty much get all that, but I'm just saying that even if there was a 100% freeze, a recruiter at said company still needs to look busy somehow, but of course they're in a silly position if that's the case; though I assume they still have mouths to feed and provide health insurance for.
- b1gnasty 4y ago
  Totally, I suspect pursuing a bunch of these "opportunities" would lead to dead ends, but I'm not looking for a job currently so I haven't found out. This is why I'd find reporting that tries to figure this out a bit more interesting and relevant for most of our industry. Layoffs are inevitable, will getting a new job after be a lot more difficult? Is the current deluge of recruiter emails still being spammed at me an illusion/a lagging indicator of where the hiring market is actually at?

hotpotamus 4y ago

> I'm still getting recruiter emails from many of the recent companies that have publicly said they are freezing/slowing down hiring I wonder what a recruiter at a company with a hiring freeze in place is expected to do? I'd be inclined to say, "well then I'll be on vacation until you need me, thanks for keeping the paychecks coming", but I suspect that wouldn't work so well. I think they would want to "keep the pipeline flowing" or however you'd want to say it for a mix of practical as well as BS reasons.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
fragmede 4y ago
Fired, probably. Recruiting, as a department, is unfortunately seen as expendable and the pipeline doesn't need to flow. Not that I think that's a smart decision.
- paleotrope 4y ago
  Most tech recruiters seem to be recent college grades that have a string of a couple 6-12 month gigs before they move on. I am not really sure how any of these provide any value to the companies that hire them.
mjr00 4y ago
In my experience "hiring freeze" at a large company usually means "hiring freeze, but..." Exceptions can and will be made, but need higher level approvals. The problem at these companies is that managers just want to infinitely expand their teams, because more people in your chain of command = more important manager, so they tend to use all of their budget regardless of whether they actually need to expand staff by 10% this year. Naturally, these approved hires tend to be specialized senior positions that are seen as business-critical. In general, I think anyone with 10+ years experience will be fine, but now's a shit time to be a new grad trying to break into the market.
- hotpotamus 4y ago
  Oh, I pretty much get all that, but I'm just saying that even if there was a 100% freeze, a recruiter at said company still needs to look busy somehow, but of course they're in a silly position if that's the case; though I assume they still have mouths to feed and provide health insurance for.
b1gnasty 4y ago
Totally, I suspect pursuing a bunch of these "opportunities" would lead to dead ends, but I'm not looking for a job currently so I haven't found out. This is why I'd find reporting that tries to figure this out a bit more interesting and relevant for most of our industry. Layoffs are inevitable, will getting a new job after be a lot more difficult? Is the current deluge of recruiter emails still being spammed at me an illusion/a lagging indicator of where the hiring market is actually at?