3 ms·
I guess the real question is do they have to be competent if they can hire 3 of them for the price of 1 in the US? Edit: Thought I would add my current experie
by wonderwonder 3y ago
I guess the real question is do they have to be competent if they can hire 3 of them for the price of 1 in the US?
Edit: Thought I would add my current experience with this. My company is replacing contracted staff with permanent staff but out of South / Central America. The salaries are pretty much 1/4 of the US salaries. The people I am given to thumbs up / thumbs down (and that's very much what it is) are just ok. A couple are good but the rest are meh. I am allowed to thumbs down maybe 1 out of every 4 before I get push back. So this is very much a real thing where the US engineers are stuck filling in the gaps when the company onboards very cheap but not very good engineers.
I am curious to see how this plays out in the long term
- throwaway5959 3y agoI’d rather have one competent software engineer than three incompetent ones. At any price.
- switch007 3y agoThen you aren’t ready to be a CTO at a public company! That long term thinking will get you nowhere!
- throwaway5959 3y agoAnother year of not being a sociopath I suppose.
- wonderwonder 3y agoThis is true for most of us under the c-suite. But for those in the CTO/CFO, etc. role it makes financial sense for them to chop labor costs even if projects take a little longer. It just means the few competent engineers have to work 2x as hard for the same salary. I hate it.
- throwaway5959 3y agoAgreed. There’s only so much you can cut costs. I feel like that’s the only focus for most companies now, not expanding revenue/markets, unfortunately.
- switch007 3y agoOr: does the incompetency only become apparent in 6-12 months, enough time for the CTO to perform another sleight of hand and distract people (or quit and move on)