4 ms·

Based on data from other "tech layoffs", very few if any core engineers will go. It'll be sales, recruitment, and an assortment of engineering-adjacent position

Based on data from other "tech layoffs", very few if any core engineers will go. It'll be sales, recruitment, and an assortment of engineering-adjacent positions like solutions, industrial design, data analytics, and product. I quite like this article from interviewing.io on the make-up of most layoffs by position based in LinkedIn data: https://interviewing.io/blog/2022-layoffs-engineers-vs-other-departments https://interviewing.io/blog/2022-layoffs-engineers-vs-other... If you look at pure software engineering, it's about 5%. When we say "tech layoffs" we default to thinking "technical people", but that's not really the case.

baumy 4y ago
This is extremely interesting data, and not what I would have expected. I'm aware HR and recruiting folks are having much much harder times than engineers in finding new positions, but assumed engineers had still been hit harder than that link shows. For companies outside the big techs that are still wildly profitable and sitting on mountains of cash, laying off people is largely about refocusing on actual profitable activity. Keeping engineers around makes sense for them. For companies that are on the cusp of profitability, or still actively burning through money, layoffs seem to be more about reducing burn, which means you're more likely to lay off highly paid engineers. Still, 5% seems low. How do you square this with the observation that every open SDE role at a company that pays at least somewhat decently seems to have hundreds of applications? If so few SDEs were really laid off, I wouldn't expect the SDE hiring market to have turned as drastically as it did since last summer / fall.
- philsnow 4y ago
  > For companies that are on the cusp of profitability, or still actively burning through money, layoffs seem to be more about reducing burn, which means you're more likely to lay off highly paid engineers. Bothering to do a layoff only makes sense if management wants to see the company survive. So, assuming that the only outcomes being targeted are the ones in which the company is still alive, consider the cost of replacing the employee later: at least right now, engineers are more expensive to hire than most other roles[0], so it could cost less overall to lay off HR/recruiting with the expectation that you'll backfill those roles in 9-18 months. [0] for various reasons; to hire for any given role, you have to source, engage/recruit, interview (which takes up the time of the people on the team they'll join), somehow pick one or more of the candidates, make offers, and then onboard them. These costs are largely the same for any role, except that interviewing engineers costs engineering time (and it's harder to get enough quality candidates in the top of the funnel for engineers than other roles, so you have to spend more HR/recruiter time there).
- ok_dad 4y ago
  > assumed engineers had still been hit harder than that link shows That's what they want you to assume, that way us engineers feel pressure to fall in line. Welcome to the disinformation era.
- bobthepanda 4y ago
  5% is still pretty substantial, and the hiring market has not expanded to keep pace in a relatively short time. Also, tech does have a lot of people on visa compared to other industries, who need to find a job within 60 days of termination or leave the country.
- wolpoli 4y ago
  > I'm aware HR and recruiting folks are having much much harder times than engineers in finding new positions Wouldn't HR and recruiting folks be able to look for work with companies the broader economy?
- 908B64B197 4y ago
  > I'm aware HR and recruiting folks are having much much harder times than engineers in finding new positions, but assumed engineers had still been hit harder than that link shows. Hardest hit positions are "tech adjacent". > For companies that are on the cusp of profitability, or still actively burning through money, layoffs seem to be more about reducing burn, which means you're more likely to lay off highly paid engineers. Twitter was an example of that, but it was massively overblown by the media due to the company profile (and the identity of the buyer!). Companies trimming senior talent are also slowing down the pace at which they can ship new features and products. That's ok short term, but longer terms, those that will be able to secure funding to keep their engineering will get ahead. > How do you square this with the observation that every open SDE role at a company that pays at least somewhat decently seems to have hundreds of applications? If so few SDEs were really laid off, I wouldn't expect the SDE hiring market to have turned as drastically as it did since last summer / fall. How many serious applications?
- roncesvalles 4y ago
  >How do you square this with the observation that every open SDE role at a company that pays at least somewhat decently seems to have hundreds of applications? This has always been the case.
VirusNewbie 4y ago
That data doesn’t have meta, google or amazon though???
- Aromasin 4y ago
  I did try to find data but couldn't. Pure anecdata from friends in the industry and observations from vlogs/blogs, it's very similar, maybe a bit higher - reaching 10% perhaps but not much more. The engineers that were axed were in business units that focused on unprofitable products, and couldn't or wouldn't relocate to other engineering teams in the company. Think Amazon's devices unit. Even then, the they were mostly kept around, and administrative roles were the first to go.
nblgbg 4y ago
This blog is old. Not sure when it was written and with more layoffs this year, it may not be true !
twalla 4y ago
> When we say "tech layoffs" we default to thinking "technical people", but that's not really the case. It sounds a little callous but the way I make the distinction is working _in_ tech vs working _on_ tech.
kccqzy 4y ago
I work in Big Tech. In the recent layoff, no software engineer was laid off within my org. But several program managers were laid off. I don't necessarily agree with that decision; they do the dirty work of pushing things forward, like doing cross-functional communication, thinking about timelines and milestones, organizing meetings and sometimes attending meetings on behalf of actual engineers. Without them, work is slower, more chaotic, and it is now impossible to ask a program manager to attend a meeting on your behalf. Guess what? Actual engineers' productivity drops. There is bloat, of course, but there is also a reason why those tech-adjacent positions exist.
- iguessthislldo 4y ago
  I agree. When I starting working we had a manager that was formerly a SWE on our team. They retired and were replaced by a series of people over the years that, for the most part, didn't have a programming background. At first I was a little dismayed over this, but I eventually realized it doesn't usually matter. It helps for them to have tech knowledge, but like you said they do things I wouldn't care for, but need to be done.
jtsnow 4y ago
Interesting data! And very different from the anecdotes presented in another top HN discussion today, detailing fierce competition with software engineer job postings receiving 100x the number of applicants compared to just a few months ago. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34913015 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34913015
- roncesvalles 4y ago
  Not inconceivable that a fraction of employed people will have started applying around "defensively" or just for practice.

baumy 4y ago

This is extremely interesting data, and not what I would have expected. I'm aware HR and recruiting folks are having much much harder times than engineers in finding new positions, but assumed engineers had still been hit harder than that link shows. For companies outside the big techs that are still wildly profitable and sitting on mountains of cash, laying off people is largely about refocusing on actual profitable activity. Keeping engineers around makes sense for them. For companies that are on the cusp of profitability, or still actively burning through money, layoffs seem to be more about reducing burn, which means you're more likely to lay off highly paid engineers. Still, 5% seems low. How do you square this with the observation that every open SDE role at a company that pays at least somewhat decently seems to have hundreds of applications? If so few SDEs were really laid off, I wouldn't expect the SDE hiring market to have turned as drastically as it did since last summer / fall.

philsnow 4y ago
> For companies that are on the cusp of profitability, or still actively burning through money, layoffs seem to be more about reducing burn, which means you're more likely to lay off highly paid engineers. Bothering to do a layoff only makes sense if management wants to see the company survive. So, assuming that the only outcomes being targeted are the ones in which the company is still alive, consider the cost of replacing the employee later: at least right now, engineers are more expensive to hire than most other roles[0], so it could cost less overall to lay off HR/recruiting with the expectation that you'll backfill those roles in 9-18 months. [0] for various reasons; to hire for any given role, you have to source, engage/recruit, interview (which takes up the time of the people on the team they'll join), somehow pick one or more of the candidates, make offers, and then onboard them. These costs are largely the same for any role, except that interviewing engineers costs engineering time (and it's harder to get enough quality candidates in the top of the funnel for engineers than other roles, so you have to spend more HR/recruiter time there).
ok_dad 4y ago
> assumed engineers had still been hit harder than that link shows That's what they want you to assume, that way us engineers feel pressure to fall in line. Welcome to the disinformation era.
bobthepanda 4y ago
5% is still pretty substantial, and the hiring market has not expanded to keep pace in a relatively short time. Also, tech does have a lot of people on visa compared to other industries, who need to find a job within 60 days of termination or leave the country.
wolpoli 4y ago
> I'm aware HR and recruiting folks are having much much harder times than engineers in finding new positions Wouldn't HR and recruiting folks be able to look for work with companies the broader economy?
908B64B197 4y ago
> I'm aware HR and recruiting folks are having much much harder times than engineers in finding new positions, but assumed engineers had still been hit harder than that link shows. Hardest hit positions are "tech adjacent". > For companies that are on the cusp of profitability, or still actively burning through money, layoffs seem to be more about reducing burn, which means you're more likely to lay off highly paid engineers. Twitter was an example of that, but it was massively overblown by the media due to the company profile (and the identity of the buyer!). Companies trimming senior talent are also slowing down the pace at which they can ship new features and products. That's ok short term, but longer terms, those that will be able to secure funding to keep their engineering will get ahead. > How do you square this with the observation that every open SDE role at a company that pays at least somewhat decently seems to have hundreds of applications? If so few SDEs were really laid off, I wouldn't expect the SDE hiring market to have turned as drastically as it did since last summer / fall. How many serious applications?
roncesvalles 4y ago
>How do you square this with the observation that every open SDE role at a company that pays at least somewhat decently seems to have hundreds of applications? This has always been the case.

VirusNewbie 4y ago

That data doesn’t have meta, google or amazon though???

Aromasin 4y ago
I did try to find data but couldn't. Pure anecdata from friends in the industry and observations from vlogs/blogs, it's very similar, maybe a bit higher - reaching 10% perhaps but not much more. The engineers that were axed were in business units that focused on unprofitable products, and couldn't or wouldn't relocate to other engineering teams in the company. Think Amazon's devices unit. Even then, the they were mostly kept around, and administrative roles were the first to go.

nblgbg 4y ago

This blog is old. Not sure when it was written and with more layoffs this year, it may not be true !

twalla 4y ago

> When we say "tech layoffs" we default to thinking "technical people", but that's not really the case. It sounds a little callous but the way I make the distinction is working _in_ tech vs working _on_ tech.

kccqzy 4y ago

I work in Big Tech. In the recent layoff, no software engineer was laid off within my org. But several program managers were laid off. I don't necessarily agree with that decision; they do the dirty work of pushing things forward, like doing cross-functional communication, thinking about timelines and milestones, organizing meetings and sometimes attending meetings on behalf of actual engineers. Without them, work is slower, more chaotic, and it is now impossible to ask a program manager to attend a meeting on your behalf. Guess what? Actual engineers' productivity drops. There is bloat, of course, but there is also a reason why those tech-adjacent positions exist.

iguessthislldo 4y ago
I agree. When I starting working we had a manager that was formerly a SWE on our team. They retired and were replaced by a series of people over the years that, for the most part, didn't have a programming background. At first I was a little dismayed over this, but I eventually realized it doesn't usually matter. It helps for them to have tech knowledge, but like you said they do things I wouldn't care for, but need to be done.

jtsnow 4y ago

Interesting data! And very different from the anecdotes presented in another top HN discussion today, detailing fierce competition with software engineer job postings receiving 100x the number of applicants compared to just a few months ago. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34913015 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34913015

roncesvalles 4y ago
Not inconceivable that a fraction of employed people will have started applying around "defensively" or just for practice.