9 ms·

Laid-off tech workers choose stability over status

103 points by Stratoscope 4y ago

Stratoscope 4y ago
https://archive.is/2Ll06 https://archive.is/2Ll06
sys_64738 4y ago
Those high paying positions that came with all the perks need to be unlearned. Many of those folk will have trouble adjusting to lower pay and lesser perks. Such companies might not be willing to risk hiring them.
- hezralig 4y ago
  Or perhaps the bar will be forced to raise at other companies as these senior employees change the culture from within. You can't close Pandora's box and expect the world to remain unchanged.
  - monero-xmr 4y ago
    No, middle managers earning $500k total comp for 30 hours of work and flirting with unionizing are never coming back. It’s over
    - ajmurmann 4y ago
      Why are you so certain of that? They never earned that much because they were unique talented, but because demand was so high and you couldn't find anyone cheaper filling the requirements. Why are you sure demand won't return?
    - paulpauper 4y ago
      people said the same in 2016, 2020, 2012, etc. Bigger tech companies and winner-take-all markets means bigger salaries and more perks to attract top talent when the stakes are so high. The next big arms race is AI. You can be sure tech companies are offering huge salaries for top talent there too.
      - thematt 4y ago
        Perhaps, but the difference between now and then was all those years had near-zero interest rates. It's a lot easier for tech (and growth companies in general) to stage a comeback in that macro environment. Especially when it comes to issuing all the RSUs to fund those compensation packages.
    - pfannkuchen 4y ago
      Has it even stopped? From where I am sitting it doesn’t look like it has stopped, just that a small subset of people who were doing it previously are no longer doing it now.
  - civilized 4y ago
    They weren't uniquely talented.
- horns4lyfe 4y ago
  Maybe the CEOs should have to be the ones to cut down on perks and pay. Naw, that’s crazy
  - htag 4y ago
    In 2023 Meta will fire about 20,000 people, and Zukerberg will pull about $30,000,000 from the company. If Zukerberg took 0 it would save about 1500 per laid off person. Tech is generally cutting costs at a large enough number that C-suite compensation packages couldn't cover it.
    - karpierz 4y ago
      You're seeing up a false dilemma where either there are layoffs or Zuck's party gets cut. You could layoff a hundred fewer people and cut Zuck to 0 for the same savings.
      - shagie 4y ago
        https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/feb/16/meta-to-pay-more-for-mark-zuckerbergs-personal-security-amid-job-losses https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/feb/16/meta-to-p... > Meta’s board declared that the 40% increase was “appropriate and necessary under the circumstances” and was in place “to address safety concerns due to specific threats to his safety arising directly as a result of his position as Meta’s founder, chairman, and CEO”. > The tech mogul’s salary is just $1 a year – but his earnings are far more. Zuckerberg ranks as the 16th richest person in the world on the Forbes billionaire list due to his shareholdings in Meta. In 2021 he received compensation from the company worth $27m. https://www.theregister.com/2022/04/12/mark_zuckerberg_gets_a_26m/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/04/12/mark_zuckerberg_gets_... > There were no bonus or stock awards given to Zuckerberg in 2019, 2020, or 2021, but that "other" amount increased by nearly $2 million each year. The bulk of this goes to pay for the Zuckerberg family's security at home and while traveling, even for personal reasons. > Zuckerberg and COO Cheryl Sandberg both get an allowance for personal and family security, which Meta said is necessary to address specific threats to their safety. "We require these security measures for the company's benefit because of the importance of Mr. Zuckerberg and Ms. Sandberg to Meta, and we believe that the scope and costs of these security programs are appropriate and necessary," the proxy statement said. > Zuckerberg is in the unique position, Meta said, of being synonymous with the company because of the size of its user base and its continued presence thanks to less-than-positive legal and media attention. "As a result, negative sentiment regarding our company is directly associated with, and often transferred to, Mr Zuckerberg."
wepple 4y ago
“Stability” over status: the article goes on to say that people are choosing (amongst other things) to freelance. It then goes on to talk about people moving to startups? I’m not sure the author had a real point here. I’d love some hard data on how many people are pivoting to canned food companies after FAANG life
- htag 4y ago
  [flagged]
- bb88 4y ago
  There is something to be said about being a former FAANG worker getting paid above average salary at (insert boring tech company here). Partially because maybe if they weren't seen as a 10x developer at FAANG with the competition all trying to make the next promotion, they surely might be close to one in any other company depending upon how good/bad that company's hiring has been (often terrible). Many F500 companies have crummy tech stacks and lousy in house developed systems that would be better replaced with counterpart open source systems. An ex-FAANG worker in the right job might be able to be a 10-100x force multiplier, just by building the right tech to make other developer's job simpler.
  - boredtofears 4y ago
    Highly doubt the bottom performers at FAANG during a period of mass overhiring are that much better than any average programmer at a boring tech co.
    - bb88 4y ago
      I don't doubt there are low performers at FAANG. I just believe when you're doing a 10% layoff, there's no way you're not going to cut high performers as well. Some layoffs are just purely based upon the department level.
      - ycombobreaker 4y ago
rr808 4y ago
uh is there a choice?
- brutusurp 4y ago
  Seriously. Perhaps this article written from a multi-verse perspective, one in which the author lives in a version of the world that didn't experience one of the greatest wealth grabs of all time by C-suite and the like (their reward for repeated execution of poor and ill-timed investments, of course). Since when is freelance "stable"? Since when is any job "stable"? It's a job, one we have to do because capitalism and healthcare. That's not stability; it's coercion.
bbbbzzz1 4y ago
Interesting an article like this would not mention h1b at all. On Blind you see posts of people laid off from fang willing to settle for whatever pay as long as the employor can sponsor their visa to avoid deportation
- ETHisso2017 4y ago
  Yes, it is interesting. I'm curious what the experience of H1bs who've been let go recently
  - hackernewds 4y ago
    Getting deported OR settling for first acceptance jobs within 60 days. OR going to Canada that has opportunistically opened their doors. OR going back home.
    - ianai 4y ago
      I’m sorry it’s like that here in the US. We should be all about immigration like we were back when.
      - midoridensha 4y ago
        Obviously, the American voters don't want lots of immigration any more. They said so quite clearly when they voted for Trump. Even well before that, America's immigration system (namely the H1-B) was highly exploitative. Prospective immigrants should think a lot about why they want to go so badly to a country that clearly doesn't want them, and look for countries that treat immigrants better.
- ornornor 4y ago
  In my personal opinion, H1b visas are made this way so that the people on them are kept docile and will pretty much accept anything from employers who are then free to abuse them.
- tommek4077 4y ago
qmarchi 4y ago
Disclaimer: Was laid off in Jan. from Google. Previously worked at Walmart. What I'm seeing is those that were impacted by the layoffs are still looking for tech industry jobs as a primary, but not completely shutting down non-tech positions. There's definitely a heightened focus on the work and impact that a role can achieve though, working on big things where a lot of their large systems experience can be useful. Places that, despite "current macroeconomic conditions" , are still growing and need that experience.
- wucaworld 4y ago
  We’re you at Walmart labs? Pretty impressive jump from Walmart to google. Any tips as to how you did it? Did you leetcode grind?
  - guessmyname 4y ago
    > We’re you at Walmart labs? Pretty impressive jump from Walmart to google. Any tips as to how you did it? Did you leetcode grind? The engineering practices at Walmart are quite similar to those at Google. As someone who also made the transition from a smaller company to Big Tech, I can say that while the user base is much larger, the engineering practices and quality remain relatively consistent. If you’re looking to land a job at a Big Tech company and want to practice by solving LeetCode problems, go for it. However, keep in mind that solving these problems alone won't guarantee you a job.
  - shagie 4y ago
    I haven't worked at either... but I did work at a regional retail company. Walmart is a massive logistics company that dwarfs any other - save maybe Amazon (and it would be interesting to see the break down side by side). I believe it is dangerous to put the FAANG companies on such a pedestal. Consider even McDonalds Tech Labs - which sold to IBM which was doing some rather interesting things with machine learning, and bilingual natural language processing (drive throughs). My point is one of "Walmart to Google is likely much less of a jump than people imagine... other than the name attached." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walmart_Labs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walmart_Labs
chihuahua 4y ago
I went from 20 years of several FAANG jobs to working for a small tech company with about 300 engineers. It was a bit of a rude awakening. The technology stack is a house of cards consisting of hundreds of homegrown wrappers around AWS. Everything is brittle, undocumented, and constantly changing. Every little thing is a huge pain in the ass.
- greesil 4y ago
  I think they meant job stability not system stability.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - dadoge 4y ago
    Right, cuz 300 people tech companies are known for their job stability…. /s
    - statictype 4y ago
      300 is a pretty large number. I’m not sure why you added a /s in there.
      - noisy_boy 4y ago
        Maybe the /s makes sense for people in 10000 employee companies :)
        bluefirebrand 4y ago
        I think I'd be more worried about my job in a 10000 person company than a 300 person company. If Im in a 300 person company I'm probably one of 40-60 devs, and most of my peers know me and have met me. If I'm a senior dev, there's a good chance I'm on first name basis with the executive team, and they know what I work on and the impact I have. There's a lot better chance of me being able to demonstrate my value and avoid being let go if cuts are needed. At a 10000 person company I'm basically guaranteed to just be an employee number next to a salary number in a spreadsheet, when it comes time for cuts.
wucaworld 4y ago
This is slightly off topic but wondering how those left behind are faring? I wonder if the situation has gotten a lot more toxic (was never a bed of roses) except now big tech employers know they hold the cards? Are people getting overworked more than before? Are some people coasting hoping to get severance?
- yodsanklai 4y ago
  I suppose everybody sees it differently, but in my case I'd say no visible change as my team hasn't been directly impacted so far and we don't talk much about this situation. But I can tell that some people are worried and I suspect people work more. Nobody wants to get laid off in that context, and it's better to have good performance, even if it's not the only criteria. There's also less money to spend, less traveling, no more interviewing, no headcount. One question is when is it going to stop? how many rounds of layoffs before things stabilize? will it ever be like "before" considering there's not much room for growth.
AndrewKemendo 4y ago
I’m coming up on a year of my post layoff sabbatical and there’s no world where I go back to corporate America - which to be clear is any tech company also. It’s so obviously bad for society to be the high risk exploratory appendages of the financial markets. Make no mistake Venture Backed “Tech” and “startups” are the means through which capital accretes value. While I’m on the extreme end, I’m hearing echoes of this from others who at the senior level who have been in tech for a few rounds as engineers.
- leethomas 4y ago
  What do you figure is next for you?
  - AndrewKemendo 4y ago
    I’m starting a Residential trash/recycling hauling cooperative No investors, democratic organization, our vision is to give economic power to the working class
- eulers_secret 4y ago
  I’m at 1 year and 9 days since I quit my corporate job for sabbatical. I really loved chasing whatever I fancied, and just living life. I’ve leaned so much, read so much, matured mentally, repaired relationships and friendships. I feel ready to go back, but I will miss it. It’s nice to have the days stretch endlessly before and behind you, to mark the passage of time mainly by seasons, and to really feel like a human instead of a mule. My previous job was horrible though, I may even have light PTSD! The only reason I don’t go work for USPS or drive a bus is because I think other companies are much better. Job hunt is gonna be brutal and dehumanizing, though. I may just wait more, and I won’t be shy about withdrawing my candidacy in the face of red flags!!
  - ornornor 4y ago
    Similar situation (albeit 18 months for me) and similar feelings. I wish I didn’t have to work ever again (ie it would be a choice and an option, not an obligation) but I’m not there yet. It is hard to find a job that isn’t soul sucking and/or that doesnt feel pointless though. Even more so after such a long break and realizing how much of the things people spend money on are a direct result of working too much and being advertised at too much so they don’t have any time to do basic things for themselves or want things they don’t need at all.
fortissimohn 4y ago
> That said, there is still an appetite for talent at well-funded, early-stage companies in emerging areas, including electric-vehicle batteries, as the auto industry shifts away from gas-powered cars, and artificial intelligence, a technology with the potential to change industries that has prompted a global race to build AI products. My Wellfound (previously AngelList) inbox begs to differ!
908B64B197 4y ago
Just a reminder that the WSJ and Washington Post has been pushing a lot of articles over layoffs in tech, overinflated SWE salaries and generally pushing the narrative that tech workers are "overpaid" and that it's time for this to end. With the Washington Post, of course, being owned by Bezos, and the timing of these articles coinciding with the RTO policy at Amazon I can't help to think that this isn't a coincidence. Reminder that most "tech workers" laid offs were in non-technical positions as well (ie not engineers). HR, recruiting, DEI... https://interviewing.io/blog/2022-layoffs-engineers-vs-other-departments https://interviewing.io/blog/2022-layoffs-engineers-vs-other... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-24/tech-layoffs-are-hitting-diversity-and-inclusion-jobs-hard https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-24/tech-layo... https://www.computerworld.com/article/3690309/about-those-tech-layoff-headlines-most-companies-arent-firing-it-workers.html https://www.computerworld.com/article/3690309/about-those-te... https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2023-03-07-do-recent-layoffs-mean-the-tech-talent-crunch-is-over https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2023-03-0... https://techreport.com/news/3493451/microsoft-layoffs-ethics-and-society-team-fired/ https://techreport.com/news/3493451/microsoft-layoffs-ethics... EDIT: Wrongfully attributed ownership to the WSJ to Bezos. Thank you smallmind for pointing it out.
- smallmind 4y ago
  Wall Street Journal is owned by News Corp, which is controlled by Rupert Murdoch. Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post.
- kiba 4y ago
  I am not aware of WSJ being owned by Jeff Bezos.
  - renewiltord 4y ago
    This is a common mistake made on HN, often used as an explanatory factor for something else. "Because the WSJ is owned by Jeff Bezos, " It's what really is amusing about a lot of the rhetoric around LLMs when they say this: it's the most human thing they're doing.
iamnotsure 4y ago
[flagged]
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
tripleaaa 4y ago
[dead]
- mmmmmbop 4y ago
  This is interesting, but somehow also a bit creepy.

103 points by Stratoscope 4y ago

https://archive.is/2Ll06 https://archive.is/2Ll06

Those high paying positions that came with all the perks need to be unlearned. Many of those folk will have trouble adjusting to lower pay and lesser perks. Such companies might not be willing to risk hiring them.

hezralig 4y ago
Or perhaps the bar will be forced to raise at other companies as these senior employees change the culture from within. You can't close Pandora's box and expect the world to remain unchanged.
- monero-xmr 4y ago
  No, middle managers earning $500k total comp for 30 hours of work and flirting with unionizing are never coming back. It’s over
  - ajmurmann 4y ago
    Why are you so certain of that? They never earned that much because they were unique talented, but because demand was so high and you couldn't find anyone cheaper filling the requirements. Why are you sure demand won't return?
  - paulpauper 4y ago
    people said the same in 2016, 2020, 2012, etc. Bigger tech companies and winner-take-all markets means bigger salaries and more perks to attract top talent when the stakes are so high. The next big arms race is AI. You can be sure tech companies are offering huge salaries for top talent there too.
    - thematt 4y ago
      Perhaps, but the difference between now and then was all those years had near-zero interest rates. It's a lot easier for tech (and growth companies in general) to stage a comeback in that macro environment. Especially when it comes to issuing all the RSUs to fund those compensation packages.
  - pfannkuchen 4y ago
    Has it even stopped? From where I am sitting it doesn’t look like it has stopped, just that a small subset of people who were doing it previously are no longer doing it now.
- civilized 4y ago
  They weren't uniquely talented.
horns4lyfe 4y ago
Maybe the CEOs should have to be the ones to cut down on perks and pay. Naw, that’s crazy
- htag 4y ago
  In 2023 Meta will fire about 20,000 people, and Zukerberg will pull about $30,000,000 from the company. If Zukerberg took 0 it would save about 1500 per laid off person. Tech is generally cutting costs at a large enough number that C-suite compensation packages couldn't cover it.
  - karpierz 4y ago
    You're seeing up a false dilemma where either there are layoffs or Zuck's party gets cut. You could layoff a hundred fewer people and cut Zuck to 0 for the same savings.
    - shagie 4y ago
      https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/feb/16/meta-to-pay-more-for-mark-zuckerbergs-personal-security-amid-job-losses https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/feb/16/meta-to-p... > Meta’s board declared that the 40% increase was “appropriate and necessary under the circumstances” and was in place “to address safety concerns due to specific threats to his safety arising directly as a result of his position as Meta’s founder, chairman, and CEO”. > The tech mogul’s salary is just $1 a year – but his earnings are far more. Zuckerberg ranks as the 16th richest person in the world on the Forbes billionaire list due to his shareholdings in Meta. In 2021 he received compensation from the company worth $27m. https://www.theregister.com/2022/04/12/mark_zuckerberg_gets_a_26m/ https://www.theregister.com/2022/04/12/mark_zuckerberg_gets_... > There were no bonus or stock awards given to Zuckerberg in 2019, 2020, or 2021, but that "other" amount increased by nearly $2 million each year. The bulk of this goes to pay for the Zuckerberg family's security at home and while traveling, even for personal reasons. > Zuckerberg and COO Cheryl Sandberg both get an allowance for personal and family security, which Meta said is necessary to address specific threats to their safety. "We require these security measures for the company's benefit because of the importance of Mr. Zuckerberg and Ms. Sandberg to Meta, and we believe that the scope and costs of these security programs are appropriate and necessary," the proxy statement said. > Zuckerberg is in the unique position, Meta said, of being synonymous with the company because of the size of its user base and its continued presence thanks to less-than-positive legal and media attention. "As a result, negative sentiment regarding our company is directly associated with, and often transferred to, Mr Zuckerberg."

wepple 4y ago

“Stability” over status: the article goes on to say that people are choosing (amongst other things) to freelance. It then goes on to talk about people moving to startups? I’m not sure the author had a real point here. I’d love some hard data on how many people are pivoting to canned food companies after FAANG life

htag 4y ago
[flagged]
bb88 4y ago
There is something to be said about being a former FAANG worker getting paid above average salary at (insert boring tech company here). Partially because maybe if they weren't seen as a 10x developer at FAANG with the competition all trying to make the next promotion, they surely might be close to one in any other company depending upon how good/bad that company's hiring has been (often terrible). Many F500 companies have crummy tech stacks and lousy in house developed systems that would be better replaced with counterpart open source systems. An ex-FAANG worker in the right job might be able to be a 10-100x force multiplier, just by building the right tech to make other developer's job simpler.
- boredtofears 4y ago
  Highly doubt the bottom performers at FAANG during a period of mass overhiring are that much better than any average programmer at a boring tech co.
  - bb88 4y ago
    I don't doubt there are low performers at FAANG. I just believe when you're doing a 10% layoff, there's no way you're not going to cut high performers as well. Some layoffs are just purely based upon the department level.
    - ycombobreaker 4y ago

rr808 4y ago

uh is there a choice?

brutusurp 4y ago
Seriously. Perhaps this article written from a multi-verse perspective, one in which the author lives in a version of the world that didn't experience one of the greatest wealth grabs of all time by C-suite and the like (their reward for repeated execution of poor and ill-timed investments, of course). Since when is freelance "stable"? Since when is any job "stable"? It's a job, one we have to do because capitalism and healthcare. That's not stability; it's coercion.

bbbbzzz1 4y ago

Interesting an article like this would not mention h1b at all. On Blind you see posts of people laid off from fang willing to settle for whatever pay as long as the employor can sponsor their visa to avoid deportation

ETHisso2017 4y ago
Yes, it is interesting. I'm curious what the experience of H1bs who've been let go recently
- hackernewds 4y ago
  Getting deported OR settling for first acceptance jobs within 60 days. OR going to Canada that has opportunistically opened their doors. OR going back home.
  - ianai 4y ago
    I’m sorry it’s like that here in the US. We should be all about immigration like we were back when.
    - midoridensha 4y ago
      Obviously, the American voters don't want lots of immigration any more. They said so quite clearly when they voted for Trump. Even well before that, America's immigration system (namely the H1-B) was highly exploitative. Prospective immigrants should think a lot about why they want to go so badly to a country that clearly doesn't want them, and look for countries that treat immigrants better.
ornornor 4y ago
In my personal opinion, H1b visas are made this way so that the people on them are kept docile and will pretty much accept anything from employers who are then free to abuse them.
tommek4077 4y ago

qmarchi 4y ago

Disclaimer: Was laid off in Jan. from Google. Previously worked at Walmart. What I'm seeing is those that were impacted by the layoffs are still looking for tech industry jobs as a primary, but not completely shutting down non-tech positions. There's definitely a heightened focus on the work and impact that a role can achieve though, working on big things where a lot of their large systems experience can be useful. Places that, despite "current macroeconomic conditions" , are still growing and need that experience.

wucaworld 4y ago
We’re you at Walmart labs? Pretty impressive jump from Walmart to google. Any tips as to how you did it? Did you leetcode grind?
- guessmyname 4y ago
  > We’re you at Walmart labs? Pretty impressive jump from Walmart to google. Any tips as to how you did it? Did you leetcode grind? The engineering practices at Walmart are quite similar to those at Google. As someone who also made the transition from a smaller company to Big Tech, I can say that while the user base is much larger, the engineering practices and quality remain relatively consistent. If you’re looking to land a job at a Big Tech company and want to practice by solving LeetCode problems, go for it. However, keep in mind that solving these problems alone won't guarantee you a job.
- shagie 4y ago
  I haven't worked at either... but I did work at a regional retail company. Walmart is a massive logistics company that dwarfs any other - save maybe Amazon (and it would be interesting to see the break down side by side). I believe it is dangerous to put the FAANG companies on such a pedestal. Consider even McDonalds Tech Labs - which sold to IBM which was doing some rather interesting things with machine learning, and bilingual natural language processing (drive throughs). My point is one of "Walmart to Google is likely much less of a jump than people imagine... other than the name attached." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walmart_Labs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walmart_Labs

chihuahua 4y ago

I went from 20 years of several FAANG jobs to working for a small tech company with about 300 engineers. It was a bit of a rude awakening. The technology stack is a house of cards consisting of hundreds of homegrown wrappers around AWS. Everything is brittle, undocumented, and constantly changing. Every little thing is a huge pain in the ass.

greesil 4y ago
I think they meant job stability not system stability.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- dadoge 4y ago
  Right, cuz 300 people tech companies are known for their job stability…. /s
  - statictype 4y ago
    300 is a pretty large number. I’m not sure why you added a /s in there.
    - noisy_boy 4y ago
      Maybe the /s makes sense for people in 10000 employee companies :)
      - bluefirebrand 4y ago
        I think I'd be more worried about my job in a 10000 person company than a 300 person company. If Im in a 300 person company I'm probably one of 40-60 devs, and most of my peers know me and have met me. If I'm a senior dev, there's a good chance I'm on first name basis with the executive team, and they know what I work on and the impact I have. There's a lot better chance of me being able to demonstrate my value and avoid being let go if cuts are needed. At a 10000 person company I'm basically guaranteed to just be an employee number next to a salary number in a spreadsheet, when it comes time for cuts.

wucaworld 4y ago

This is slightly off topic but wondering how those left behind are faring? I wonder if the situation has gotten a lot more toxic (was never a bed of roses) except now big tech employers know they hold the cards? Are people getting overworked more than before? Are some people coasting hoping to get severance?

yodsanklai 4y ago
I suppose everybody sees it differently, but in my case I'd say no visible change as my team hasn't been directly impacted so far and we don't talk much about this situation. But I can tell that some people are worried and I suspect people work more. Nobody wants to get laid off in that context, and it's better to have good performance, even if it's not the only criteria. There's also less money to spend, less traveling, no more interviewing, no headcount. One question is when is it going to stop? how many rounds of layoffs before things stabilize? will it ever be like "before" considering there's not much room for growth.

AndrewKemendo 4y ago

I’m coming up on a year of my post layoff sabbatical and there’s no world where I go back to corporate America - which to be clear is any tech company also. It’s so obviously bad for society to be the high risk exploratory appendages of the financial markets. Make no mistake Venture Backed “Tech” and “startups” are the means through which capital accretes value. While I’m on the extreme end, I’m hearing echoes of this from others who at the senior level who have been in tech for a few rounds as engineers.

leethomas 4y ago
What do you figure is next for you?
- AndrewKemendo 4y ago
  I’m starting a Residential trash/recycling hauling cooperative No investors, democratic organization, our vision is to give economic power to the working class
eulers_secret 4y ago
I’m at 1 year and 9 days since I quit my corporate job for sabbatical. I really loved chasing whatever I fancied, and just living life. I’ve leaned so much, read so much, matured mentally, repaired relationships and friendships. I feel ready to go back, but I will miss it. It’s nice to have the days stretch endlessly before and behind you, to mark the passage of time mainly by seasons, and to really feel like a human instead of a mule. My previous job was horrible though, I may even have light PTSD! The only reason I don’t go work for USPS or drive a bus is because I think other companies are much better. Job hunt is gonna be brutal and dehumanizing, though. I may just wait more, and I won’t be shy about withdrawing my candidacy in the face of red flags!!
- ornornor 4y ago
  Similar situation (albeit 18 months for me) and similar feelings. I wish I didn’t have to work ever again (ie it would be a choice and an option, not an obligation) but I’m not there yet. It is hard to find a job that isn’t soul sucking and/or that doesnt feel pointless though. Even more so after such a long break and realizing how much of the things people spend money on are a direct result of working too much and being advertised at too much so they don’t have any time to do basic things for themselves or want things they don’t need at all.

fortissimohn 4y ago

> That said, there is still an appetite for talent at well-funded, early-stage companies in emerging areas, including electric-vehicle batteries, as the auto industry shifts away from gas-powered cars, and artificial intelligence, a technology with the potential to change industries that has prompted a global race to build AI products. My Wellfound (previously AngelList) inbox begs to differ!

908B64B197 4y ago

Just a reminder that the WSJ and Washington Post has been pushing a lot of articles over layoffs in tech, overinflated SWE salaries and generally pushing the narrative that tech workers are "overpaid" and that it's time for this to end. With the Washington Post, of course, being owned by Bezos, and the timing of these articles coinciding with the RTO policy at Amazon I can't help to think that this isn't a coincidence. Reminder that most "tech workers" laid offs were in non-technical positions as well (ie not engineers). HR, recruiting, DEI... https://interviewing.io/blog/2022-layoffs-engineers-vs-other-departments https://interviewing.io/blog/2022-layoffs-engineers-vs-other... https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-24/tech-layoffs-are-hitting-diversity-and-inclusion-jobs-hard https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-01-24/tech-layo... https://www.computerworld.com/article/3690309/about-those-tech-layoff-headlines-most-companies-arent-firing-it-workers.html https://www.computerworld.com/article/3690309/about-those-te... https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2023-03-07-do-recent-layoffs-mean-the-tech-talent-crunch-is-over https://www.gartner.com/en/newsroom/press-releases/2023-03-0... https://techreport.com/news/3493451/microsoft-layoffs-ethics-and-society-team-fired/ https://techreport.com/news/3493451/microsoft-layoffs-ethics... EDIT: Wrongfully attributed ownership to the WSJ to Bezos. Thank you smallmind for pointing it out.

smallmind 4y ago
Wall Street Journal is owned by News Corp, which is controlled by Rupert Murdoch. Jeff Bezos owns the Washington Post.
kiba 4y ago
I am not aware of WSJ being owned by Jeff Bezos.
- renewiltord 4y ago
  This is a common mistake made on HN, often used as an explanatory factor for something else. "Because the WSJ is owned by Jeff Bezos, " It's what really is amusing about a lot of the rhetoric around LLMs when they say this: it's the most human thing they're doing.

iamnotsure 4y ago

[flagged]

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

tripleaaa 4y ago

[dead]

mmmmmbop 4y ago
This is interesting, but somehow also a bit creepy.