13 ms·

Real talk here, and I'm sorry for being "that guy" Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axle of layoffs when most people are in a chronic state of tec

Real talk here, and I'm sorry for being "that guy" Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axle of layoffs when most people are in a chronic state of tech job hopping? I know multiple people who have worked their entire career thus far without ever staying at a place for more than 3 or 4 years. Some no more than two. Tech job culture is practically a mono culture with "hop jobs" being a hallmark. From an employers perspective it's not laying off a bunch of family members (Southwest has an average tenure of 11.5 years), it's laying off a bunch of people who were gonna dip in 6 months to a year anyway. I know this is controversial take, but recognize that the tech industry is an outlier industry, with outlier amounts of money and outlier amounts of volatility.

CaffeineLD50 2y ago
I resent the fake legal douche move of falsely asserting "low performance" as the rationale for their cuts. Some people work hard and take pride in their work. And on top of their gaming down our wages with h1b workers and low benefit contracting they have the gall to assert we're low performers when what they want is a $20 million bonus for their execs. But yeah, I see your point.
filoleg 2y ago
I cannot speak for layoffs in all industries ever, but I agree with your assessment of layoffs in big tech from personal experiences. I have way too many “lifer” friends in big tech who are deadly scared of layoffs and job hopping. They are also the ones who rarely got promoted and havent had a significant pay bump pretty much ever. On another hand, half my team at a big tech company got laid off back at the start of 2023. 4 months later, I caught up with them over drinks, and the results were rather interesting. They all got around 4-6mo worth of severance pay, spent 2-3 months just skiing/traveling/hiking/vacationing, then 1 month or so interviewing, and then starting their new jobs shortly after. All seemed rather happy, both with their new positions/pay (which had a significant paybump) and, essentially, paid vacation break they took right before. It seems like the heavity majority of those stressed about layoffs in big tech are lifers and those who are chronically averse to and dread the interview process.
- nquicksherlock 2y ago
  I don't think that this narrative works in the current job environment. But nice try.
- lumost 2y ago
  Big tech interviews tend to be daunting. Many long term employees lose the skill, and fear the impact of work interruption on their resume as well as their ability to get in again. Anecdotally, the LC bar for many firms has risen to the point that passing requires at least one through of the question before. If you Time bound your practice per question to 20 minutes, this means that you can solve most LC problems at least once in around 8 weeks of 40 hour weeks. Or 6 weeks at 60 hours. Not a pleasant way to spend two months - but not impractical. I'm unclear what employers are deriving from this exercise at this point.
  - WalterBright 2y ago
    > I'm unclear what employers are deriving from this exercise at this point It filters out the complete frauds. Yes, there are people who know all the right things to say in a job interview, but cannot code at all. If you hire one of them, it takes a bit to find out they cannot code, and a bit longer to fire them, so you're out $$$$ paying their salaries for nothing. For example, a recruiter I know will ask a tech candidate "what is 20% of 20,000?" A significant percentage cannot answer the question. Some even cry. It's shocking. A friend of mine was looking at getting a FAANG job. He was worried about the leetcode tests. I suggested he spend a month going through the leetcode books studying them - that the return on his time investment doing that will be one of the best ROIs he's ever done. He did, and got the job. (Although the LC was just a first gate one had to go through to get to the real job interview.) Personally, I have no idea how I'd do on an LC test without prep. But I don't have a problem with studying it to get a top job.
    - indigodaddy 2y ago
      I get that perhaps you were using the proverbial "I" in your last sentence as an example of something everyone should be willing to do in/for their career, but does someone of your stature even need a real interview, much less a LC test, to obtain a top job? It's kind of funny imagining a young tech bro interviewing you, tbh.
clusterhacks 2y ago
Maybe that perception that people chronically job hop is not true? I would welcome a data source that shows chronic job hopping is the norm. Anecdotally speaking, I spent 6+ish years at my first "old tech" company. My org in this (very large) company was constantly simmering with resource actions (mostly small scale layoffs). There was lots of negative energy there. I left to take a programming/data analytics gig in a large, privately held financial company that had never had a layoff. This was unfortunately timed, 2 years later the financial crisis of 2008 kicked off and I (and my entire team) were all laid off. I have been with my current employer for approaching two decades and several of my peers have been on our team for that much time. I have had a SINGLE manager in that time window. I can't even name all the managers I had in my first job due to near-constant re-orgs and layoffs.
- DamonHD 2y ago
  I contracted/consulted around London for decades, and though I was with some clients for many years in total, others were much shorter, and short entries on a CV were not seen as a red flag AFAIK. (Well, there was one hiring manager idiot who could not conceive of anything other than linear non-concurrent contracts as being honest - that interview did not go well, but I dodged a bullet!)
- Ancalagon 2y ago
  Another anecdote from my part. I graduated in roughly 2015. I've had 5 software eng jobs since then. Each one I've had at least 2 different managers in the average 2 years I spent in each. My latest role, however, I was at for 2.5 years and had 6(!) managers. I had originally intended to stay at that role longer term but it was obvious the constant managerial turnover was a negative for my career growth - so I hopped again. I've not experienced a layoff, but I also think its extremely abnormal to be in a position for so long and only have one manager.
- ajkjk 2y ago
  It seems impossible to think that it's not true given how fundamental it is to (new) tech culture.
  - 2y ago
napierzaza 2y ago
[dead]
whiplash451 2y ago
The thing is, the tech industry is also an outlier in a sense that the quality of the job you find varies massively depending on (1) the timing, sometimes literally by a few weeks and (2) whether you already have a job or not. And so, layoffs are not "just another bump" in people's career. They represent a major net negative for people who would otherwise have much more control over the trajectory.
atrettel 2y ago
This is an interesting question to ask, though I personally would not attribute it to "culture" as much as it may be a product of the environment people are put in. From my experience, there are a lot of jobs that make it difficult to continue past a few years, so job hopping is the inevitable outcome of that. I think many companies need to examine why they have a lot of turnover instead of attributing it all to individual employees. And to be frank, layoffs are scary for any industry, because they usually are correlated with layoffs at other companies. A rising tide lifts all boats, but a sinking tide is difficult to escape. You might be laid off at a time when there is no other job to hop to.
- bigtimesink 2y ago
  > there are a lot of jobs that make it difficult to continue past a few years This has been a lot of my career. All my long, successful jobs have lasted around 2-3 years, and it's the time it takes for the company to realize the initiative wasn't worth it. I count four of these stints where I left, and the team was essentially dissolved within a year. I'm not saying I was the key person for the project; I just saw the writing on the wall. It's been career limiting not having a large-scope project on a growing team, but I don't know if this is something about me, something about the projects I'm a good fit for, or the reality that a lot of projects and teams don't survive 5 years, and I've been exposed to some survivor bias of smart people who have gotten lucky.
  - atrettel 2y ago
    That is a great example of what I was talking about. Another example is the changing nature of the contracts people are hired under. I'm a scientist, and a lot of positions are inherently term-limited. You end up with a lot of organizations with two different groups of employees: employers who have worked there for decades, and employers who are temporary and work there for a few years hoping to be converted to permanent. Just like in the situation you describe, if you end up on a project that just isn't working out, that does not bode well for your own prospects. That has nothing to do with your own capabilities or how hard you worked on the project. And just like you mention, a lot of the "permanent" people have survivorship bias and do not really understand that they ultimately got lucky and timed the market well. (Or many of the permanent people were hired as permanent staff originally and do not understand the conditions under which new staff are hired.)
no_wizard 2y ago
The tech industry also doesn’t reward loyalty, even at big tech. There’s a reason for the low tenure at most firms and it’s primarily due to the lack of rewarding experience and depth of field knowledge at most companies. When you have to get a new job just to get a salary increase that keeps up with inflation you are going to see a lot of job hopping when the skills of the workforce are generally in demand. How often is it that someone leaves because they can get paid better elsewhere? Why do we think this wouldn’t drive the primary cause of people leaving companies? Where the fuck is the company showing any loyalty to its workforce?
- generic92034 2y ago
  > Where the fuck is the company showing any loyalty to its workforce? They have been and are out there. But all it takes is a change on C level and cost cutting suddenly is everything, loyalty a thing of the past. That is, you cannot count on loyalty anymore, even if the company you are working for is currently showing it (or seems to).
- ltbarcly3 2y ago
  Big tech employees have been abandoning companies the second they can get higher TC for decades, and as soon as the companies start firing a very small fraction (in a lot of cases people who were coasting or incompetent) its a problem of morality? You can really see what people are made of when they face adversity. Good luck.
  - no_wizard 2y ago
    Big tech employees are a fraction of all tech employers and employees. There’s problem so systematically pervasive that you see this across the board. Companies do not value long term retainment of employees up and down the size spectrum and it’s very clear in how they behave. They don’t award experience and depth of knowledge in any way that is indicative of fostering retention
  - int_19h 2y ago
    Big tech employees have been doing that because they see new hires (who have themselves switched from another big tech company!) get a lot more comp than their meager raise. Don't blame the workers from reacting to the signals that company is sending through its own deliberate actions.
jasonlotito 2y ago
> when most people are in a chronic state of tech job hopping? Citation needed. The vast majority of people in tech that I know do NOT job hop. So please, I need a citation, not your feelings.
huang_chung 2y ago
Well, getting fucked out of your 401k money 6 months before it vests stings some.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  Is that an average time given a 12 month vesting schedule? edit: Actually curious about the dead comment. What companies have multi year 401(k) vesting? Every company I have worked at or seen does a match on a 12 month schedule or less. Are they thinking of stock options?
  - huang_chung 2y ago
    Two years is more typical.
  - mrmayhem 2y ago
    [dead]
  - Barracoon 2y ago
    IIRC Amazon has a 2 years 401k match vesting period.
    - s1artibartfast 2y ago
      Interesting. per this article, Amazon 401k has a cliff vesting on matched funds at 3 years of employment. After reading around, it seems like 3 years is the legal maximum for 401k cliff vesting, with 6 years permitted for incremental vesting. https://www.consiliowealth.com/insights/breaking-down-amazons-401k-and-vesting-options https://www.consiliowealth.com/insights/breaking-down-amazon...
saghm 2y ago
I think there are two reasons: choosing to change jobs on your own gives you ability to pick a time when it's minimally disruptive to yourself and your actual family, and then the pretend "family" vibe you cite is pushed by the employer in the first place. Companies insising on a game of make-believe where the relationship between employer and employee isn't transactional makes it hard not to be bothered by the hypocrisy. I agree that on average, the tech industry isn't as bad as other industries often are, but I don't see why that's a compelling argument not to care about the fact that it still could be better. There's nothing stopping me from wanting fewer tech layoffs and better conditions for workers in other industries as well (and in some circumstances even advocate for that even knowing that it might require changes to my own quality of life to achieve that; as a trivial example, I go out of my way to tip much larger than 20% when I use Uber because I'd rather risk getting ripped off than a driver not getting paid a fair wage for the work they do for me, even if it's at my own expense). At the end of the day, everything is a balancing act, and the amount of change most of us can make as individuals is a drop in the bucket compared to the unfairness that people have to deal with every day. We all have to make judgement calls on where to take a stand and where to play it safe to avoid making things harder for ourselves without actually making a difference that ends up helping anyone, and if people are acting in good faith when trying to make those choices, I don't see any value in criticizing what they end up deciding. If anything, most of us in tech are probably in far more of a comfortable position to be able to speak out against employers (either or own or those in industries where workers are treated even worse), so I think there's a reasonable argument that it's more important for us to because of that. It's not a zero-sum game though; pointing out tech employer hypocrisy doesn't inherently take anything away from pointing out even worse things that other employers do.
- carlob 2y ago
  > I go out of my way to tip much larger than 20% when I use Uber because I'd rather risk getting ripped off than a driver not getting paid a fair wage for the work they do for me, even if it's at my own expense Honest question, as a European who doesn't fully understand tipping culture: don't you think that this might be perpetuating a culture of exploitation? Wouldn't you rather spend your money on taxis that at least have some regulations if you are afraid the drivers are getting the wrong end of the deal?
giantg2 2y ago
I've worked over 12 years at the same company. Finding a new job would be difficult as remote pays lower and isn't the best fit for me, my area isn't known for tech job, my spouse doesn't want to relocate, I work for one of the biggest employers in my area (fewer choices outside the company), and we are seeing the highest sector unemployment since the dot com bubble. Oh, and my disability makes it all worse. My job has been an absolute hell hole for the past 2 years, but internal and external job opportunities have been extremely limited.
oytis 2y ago
There is attrition and there are layoffs. With attrition someone leaves every year or so, you part on good terms, and the company hires a replacement on a similar level and location. Layoffs means reducing headcount, your team ends up weaker than it was, and everyone is left wondering if they are next.
pjmlp 2y ago
Depends on the country, in many European countries job hopping is not well seen regardless of the industry.
lr4444lr 2y ago
I think your idea is a good faith argument, but it's a fallacy: high turnover on a job because of stiff competition for labor is not a "tech culture" issue, and it's not at all the same impact on a person as changing due to a layoff.
owl_vision 2y ago
In tech, consultancy usually last between 3 months and 18 months, so one can have many consulting positions of under 2 years.
shortrounddev2 2y ago
I think many people at big tech companies like Facebook truly drank the koolaid there, and when they got laid off it laid bare that the companies they worked at were just companies. Facebook, Google, Amazon, etc are no better than Microsoft, IBM, Oracle, or whatever other 20th century company they had come to represent the answer to. I think a LOT of people had really tied their identities up in being a big tech employee and when they got laid off it was like being cast out of paradise
- disgruntledphd2 2y ago
  To be fair, Facebook was a really really great place to work for the five years I was there. Given that, it's not surprising that people got comfortable. Like, I've gone from 200 connections at FB to less than 100 over the years of layoffs.
PhasmaFelis 2y ago
> Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axle of layoffs when most people are in a chronic state of tech job hopping? Most of us job-hop because we have to, not because we want to. There's a class of people in the tech industry who like to write blogs about how fun and fulfilling it is to constantly change jobs and roles. Those people are highly visible but not representative. Most humans find constant change and uncertainty stressful, not exhilarating.
- mrmayhem 2y ago
  [dead]
abeppu 2y ago
I think the other side of it is: - Detail-oriented nerds with a rich mental framework around things like optimization, making decisions based on data, perhaps statistical approaches to uncertainty get frustrated when they see their organization making big, irreversible choices without the benefit of all available information. From the IC or line-manager level there may be a bunch of information which you can tell was not taken into consideration. - Process-oriented people who have put a bunch of effort into planning, goal-setting and measurement based on seemingly reasonable assumptions like "this team that provides service X will continue to exist for the duration of project Y which depends on X" get frustrated when execs throw everything into disarray ... and then 3 weeks later want to know why Y is off track. As the article describes, often lay-offs end up being bad for the company, not just the employees who get terminated. Even if you're not let go, or even if you just care about the value of your vested equity, it can be quite frustrating to see this happen. And often, because layoffs are generally planned in secret, leadership explicitly precludes the possibility of getting input from the experts in their organization. While perhaps some layoffs ultimately turn out ok, I think generally the people who go through them can tick off a list of parts of it that were ill-considered and needlessly disruptive, in part b/c of this lack of trust and communication.
slackernews9 2y ago
"Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axel of foreclosure when most people are in a chronic state of moving house?"
dghlsakjg 2y ago
Citing an airline for longevity is a bit disingenuous. I’m not sure how it works with support staff, but aircraft crew have contract structures that so heavily favor seniority that most pilots and FAs will never leave a major willingly during their career. Your observation, to me, seems more like: tech companies reward new employees over old, airlines do the extreme opposite.
biztos 2y ago
I get the point, but I don't think that's universally true. Especially in the less glamorous corners of the tech industry -- yes, you have some younger people looking to bounce, but most of the people who actually keep the lights on have full lives outside of work and all things being equal, they'd rather stick around than deal with the hassle of finding a new job. They're only going to leave if you create a toxic work environment or underpay them by double-digit percentages. For those industries, I don't think they're getting much from the layoffs besides the short-term "we did layoffs" C-suite bonus. If you're in the Widgetmaker Control Systems industry, why do you want to make your workforce think they have to leave in 3-4 years?
dan-robertson 2y ago
I guess there are a broad range of perspectives and how loud people are is going to depend on their perspectives. Some reasons to dislike layoffs: - visas may be dependent on employment, and can make changing jobs harder. In the United States, lots of visa rules are at the discretion of the government (eg how long one may live in the United States on an employer-sponsored visa while unemployed) - the recent (and dot-com era) tech layoffs have been cyclical: many companies are in layoff-mode or hiring-spree mode at the same time. The time when many companies are not hiring is the worst time to be thrust into the job market - people may have other job security worries – big tech companies tend to always be growing so it is worrying if they are laying people off instead of moving them from a failing business line to a new one - in general some people may have a lot of anxiety about changes to income. If you are applying for new jobs while currently holding another, there is much less pressure than if you’re unemployed and need to find a new job (and possibly at a pay cut requiring outgoings to be reduced) before you run out of savings, especially if you don’t have much in savings compared to outgoings, which may be the case for some tech workers (some people spend a lot, or have much of their wealth tied up in property or have a family which requires spending more on eg housing or school fees). The much-worse consequences of failing to get a new job may increase the pressure/stress/discomfort - this reveals an obvious truth about where the power lies in ‘engineering-focused’ companies and people don’t like it - people can see a layoff as being like a firing and therefore be unhappy due to hurt pride (or worries about being less desirable in the job market) - the lack of agency in a layoff is unpleasant. It is quite different from choosing to apply to other jobs.
mock-possum 2y ago
I mean in all fairness, I move around because I’m looking for a place to stay - if I’m not enjoying myself at my job, why would I stick around? And conversely, when I find a spot I like, why job hop? And besides, the last time I was laid off, it was from a place I’d been at nearly 5 years, a place that did feel almost like family - that’s why I stayed as long as I did.
m104 2y ago
Because a lot of tech workers today aren't actually job hopping and instead get very cozy in a job and a team and a career trajectory, which feels unfairly ripped away during layoffs for reasons that don't feel connected to their personal performance.
bongodongobob 2y ago
Because it's usually only true in your early 20s. Then you find a place and stay. These people bragging about company hopping every 3 or 4 years don't do that for 20 years.
TrackerFF 2y ago
Job hopping is done to maximize your salary in the least amount of time - but everyone knows that there's a ceiling. You can't just keep job hopping for the rest of your career, and magically end up making 25% more every time you hop to the next gig. Sooner or later you'll start to reach a ceiling, and have to defend your salary more. The idea is that if you can end up hitting that ceiling in 10 years by job hopping, that's better than spending 25 years at one place to hit the same figure. The earlier you have maximized your salary, the more you can invest and hopefully retire earlier. Now, once you hit that ceiling - it kind of sucks to be in a constant state of job hopping. You actually don't get rewarded, and it is more stress than anything. And the older you get, the more stability you'll value - after all, you probably have a mortgage, kids, and all that to account for.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
yodsanklai 2y ago
It's a chicken and egg problem. If people feel they could have a meaningful career in a given place, they would stay longer. When you see your teammates getting laid off one after the other - including people with 5-10 years of seniority and history of good performance, you start to wonder whether you should have any sense of loyalty to the company. I joined my company with the naive hope there would be some sentiment of family/community and that I'd do a big chunk of my career there. But after seeing how they treat employees, I'm looking for the way out.
hankchinaski 2y ago
I agree with parts of what you say. I’m a career contractor or job hopper. I like it this way. I also am aware of the volatility of the industry. I prefer hopping and getting 20% pay bump each year. This more than offsets the risk of being laid off and staying a few months without income.
iancmceachern 2y ago
Many of the stereotypes you mention are for startup founder / early employee types. That's not everyone, it's just who's on HN. Most employees of these companies are just regular people wanting regular jobs.
- paulddraper 2y ago
  What % of the your coworkers have been there 5+ years?
  - lazyasciiart 2y ago
    I work at salesforce. 100% of my immediate team and gotta be over 50% of my broader team. We’ve barely hired since 2020.
  - iancmceachern 2y ago
    100% (I have owned and worked at my own company for 10 years) Anecdotally, I've also worked at many startups that became big companies through acquisition and Let me tell you - J&J has a lot of employees who have been there more than 5 years, thousands. They also had several big layoffs of such people during the process.
grandempire 2y ago
Different groups of people. Some confidently job hop, others live in fear of losing a comfortable job. There are deep differences in expectations and attitudes in these areas, driven by family, culture, and upbringing.
- lurking_swe 2y ago
  i agree with this. However… It’s worth mentioning (as a public FYI) that it’s not smart to _expect_ to stay with a company for 10+ years, from a risk mitigation perspective. At least not in 2025. It’s kind of like picking a stock. Purposely picking just 1 stock for your portfolio carries great risk. Likewise, picking 1 job and/or 1 tech stack and hoping for the best is also high risk. It’s smart to at least dabble in new trendy technology for 1-2 days a month. Maybe review basic leet code questions once a year. Maybe every 2-3 years, apply somewhere else and go through the interview process strictly for practice. Who knows, maybe you’ll get a great offer? Just examples of what one can do to reduce the risk when a layoff occurs. Regardless of what your culture taught you, try to reduce your risk. It might be outside your comfort zone, but better to be uncomfortable than unemployed. Don’t put all your eggs in one basket (one company, one tech stack). Keep your interview skills a _little_ sharp so that you don’t panic if a layoff occurs. It’s just common sense.
  - grandempire 2y ago
    I agree. Jobs can go away at anytime for any reason. What really hurts is when people think their devotion and sacrifice means it wont apply to them. Set expectations accordingly.
al_borland 2y ago
I’ve been at my company working in tech for 19 years and I hate the pushing of job hopping as a norm. Job hoppers have no skin in the game. They don’t need support what they build, they don’t get to see where it fell short… they really can’t learn from their experiences and mistakes. What they do isn’t in the best interest of the company, it’s just enough (an MVP if you will) to add to the resume so they can leverage it for a bump in pay on their next job. I see wave after wave of job hoppers hired to “transform” the organization and all they ever do is repeat the same old mistakes, which we could tell them if they weren’t too arrogant to listen. Every job hopper I’ve worked with has simply been a distraction to the greater goals of the organization to serve the customer. I’ve lost all patience and respect for the people who practice it, and the companies that set themselves up in a way which encourages it. I don’t know how we find our way back, but I think companies and employees would all be better off with some stability and more long term thinking.
- jagraff 2y ago
  I think the solution for this would be for companies to proactively raise wages in order to keep up with the market.
  - al_borland 2y ago
    Yes, but it also takes some level of patience on the part of the employee. Corporate bureaucracies often move slow, and they also want to see you can do the job first. I’m seeing most younger people don’t seem to have patience for this. They also grossly overestimate their knowledge and ability. I’ve seen a significant number of people talk like they mastered a job after 1 year, then they stared asking me how they could get on my team doing what I do. I did the job they were doing for 10+ years. The reason they think it’s easy is because I defined the processes of how to do it all, wrote all the documents on how to do it, made a training program they went through, and worked with other teams to remove a lot of the toil. I then started building tools to make it easier for anyone off the street to do a lot of the work, and do it at scale. Thats why I have the job I have; it wasn’t given to me, I created it out of a desire to make the team better after realizing we could only go so far if I just worked faster. They didn’t see any of that. For those that seemed interested, I’d give them the tools they needed to help, to see if they were the type to do this kind of stuff. I’d provide feedback, answer questions, or do anything else I could to help them. Out of the dozen or so who asked, only 1 person has done it to a limited degree. Thats why companies don’t just offer it up quickly and easily. A lot of people talk, but not many back it up.
soerxpso 2y ago
That's kind of a chicken and egg issue, isn't it? Why is it that employees can get more money/promotions from a company they have no relationship with, than from a company where they've already been working for multiple years and have more company-specific knowledge than their replacement will? Unlike with government work, years at the company isn't really considered when deciding who layoffs are going to hit. You're proposing that tech workers should loyally stay at the same company for 10 years, make less money, and then get laid off just as easily anyway?
- shagie 2y ago
  > Why is it that employees can get more money/promotions from a company they have no relationship with, than from a company where they've already been working for multiple years and have more company-specific knowledge than their replacement will? Short form: Lack of headcount at the various levels, and the responsibilities at the different levels would skew to "staff developers doing junior tasks because there are no juniors." -- Many times promotions need an available headcount at that level. The promotion also reflects a change in responsibilities. The company couldn't have an entire team of staff engineers thinking about things without writing code - so there's an entire setup for "this is how much is budgeted for these roles and these responsibilities." You could have headcount for 20 developers (1:3 junior to mid), two tech leads, and a staff level architect. That doesn't you could hire / promote 23 staff and have them writing code. So when a mid level progresses, it isn't always possible to say "you're a tech lead now" as that would mean fewer developers writing code... Unless you're also going to get to the point where your 23 staff engineers are also being tasked with writing the unit tests as if they were a junior developer still learning the codebase. So in many cases, the mid level developer looking for more has to go somewhere else. This isn't as much of an issue in a large company where there's more room to move between teams and new positions opening as attrition happens (in the organization I work for, attrition is most likely to happen from retirement). There's also the aspect of not every company has the same revenue. If you are at the point where you want to make more and the company can't budget for that... then you're looking somewhere else.
sgustard 2y ago
The average tenure of an employee at HP is 6.6 years (source: Google AI) to pick a company that may be outside your bubble. And the lifelong career holding older employee at a legacy enterprise tech company is the kind of worker who is most adversely affected by an unexpected return to the job seeking pool.
shepherdjerred 2y ago
Tech is a huge field. If you work in big tech or well-known companies, it is common to job-hop. If you're at something more established, traditional, or mid-sized, you'll probably find lifers. Additionally, I think fewer people are job-hopping considering the market is so competitive. I would expect new grads to start staying at their first job for longer, too.
willsmith72 2y ago
2 way street. you say "it's laying off a bunch of people who were gonna dip in 6 months to a year anyway." to the new grad, it's "wow half my team just got laid off when the company seems to be doing fine, i guess i better not get too comfortable here"
stego-tech 2y ago
Because not every company gives severance during layoffs. As someone who got RIFed (again - fourth time in my 15yr career), this is the first time I've had severance, and the first time I had a notice period that wasn't just "till the end of the month". As such, layoffs are traumatic just on their own. Adding more rapid-fire context (for the sake of brevity): * Parents changed jobs every few years growing up, which meant a new city, new home, new schools, and a complete cycling of relationships (forcibly out with the old, forcibly in with the new) * I watched layoffs in non-tech sectors gradually go from tech-style severance packages, to no packages beyond the required WARN notice period payouts, to filing the notices and hoping nobody asks, to now just paying out any damages after-the-fact in lawsuits * I spent ~15mo unemployed during the "Great Recession" of '08, ending up having to move to another region of the country for work and spending a night homeless, followed by six-months couch surfing, then another month in a hotel before finally having an apartment again So all that put together, layoffs and job changes are incredibly traumatic experiences I do my best to avoid at all costs. I am one of those "lifers" who would much rather hunker down for a good wage today, buy a home, sock away savings, and work my way up an internal career ladder than throw myself into an entirely new workplace, colleagues, culture, and standards every year or two. I claw for multiple roles in an org (at the most recent one, I was juggling roles on Private Cloud & Public Cloud, Governance Councils, leading a CaaS ops overhaul, plus other PoCs) specifically to make myself as indispensable as possible and position myself on the internal promotional ladder, because I'd rather stay with one org provided I can eke out a modest living and take care of those I care about (myself included). Now all that aside, there's also the reality that wage growth from job hopping hasn't turned out to be as big as folks thought. The real growth comes from career promotions, which companies hate doling out internally for profoundly stupid and arbitrary reasons (hence job hopping). I get the impression most folks would stay put if they could get the growth in their career they wanted, but companies would rather hire someone externally to fill a spot than promote someone internally operating at that level; I am very much in that group myself. Heck, we're seeing that now with folks not leaving jobs because they're having difficulty finding that growth (in comp and title) elsewhere, as everyone kind of knuckles down for tough times ahead. That taste of stability will create more "lifers" as you put it, especially when the world outside is increasingly unstable; it's natural that humans (and most animals) will seek stability in times of crisis, taking only as much risk as necessary to preserve their survival. Something the article doesn't get into is the knock-on effect of layoffs in future business: if workers are let go for what they perceive to be arbitrary or irrational reasons, they're less likely to want to do business with that company again in the future. This is particularly why tech companies offer such good severance packages, as it's their mea culpa of sorts by trying to buy themselves a good reputation on the way out the door. When everyone is doing it though (like the current layoff cycles), it becomes a broader disgust or distaste for established vendors in general, and those workers - when they land a new role - are likely to want to migrate off their employer's products unless their career is tied to it somehow. This can reduce business after cuts had already been made, potentially putting an organization into a cycle of self-harm wherein more cuts are made in response to declining business, which then causes more declines in business, which leads to more cuts, etc. This in turn leaves a huge opening for new startups to enter the hole left behind by established players, undercutting them on pricing and providing better service. So taking all of that into context when reading the article again, and it paints a pretty telling picture of widespread mismanagement at companies doing unwarranted and highly traumatic layoffs. If the only thing your leadership can do to grow the business is to layoff staff, that's a pretty telling sign that business ain't doing so great in general and leaders are out of ideas to improve it.
kristianc 2y ago
Kind of sucks when you have stock…
BugsJustFindMe 2y ago
> Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axle of layoffs when most people are in a chronic state of tech job hopping? When I leave a job, I leave on good terms, they're always sad to see me go but understanding, and I always give my employer 6 or more weeks notice with the additional offer that they can still reach out to me for help if they need after that for as long as my memory remains helpful. A couple even took me up on my offer and asked to pay me for my time. The time I got caught in a layoff I had the door slammed in my face literally minutes later and barely two weeks severance contingent on signing away rights. So, fuck me I guess. Maybe the workers who complain understand that circumstances are not always equal.
bodegajed 2y ago
It's an outlier because unlike other service industries the software has global presence. An app written by software engineers laid-off 3 years ago will still run by itself with exceptions like servers running out of disk space. Unlike other services industry tech workers get laid off for: 1. When the product has failed market-fit and company is not raising anymore capital. 2. When the backlog has been cleared. Tech workers get more pay by job hopping.
palata 2y ago
Have you ever seen a tech company where the workers actually stay? Where you can find employees who have been there for up to 30 years? I have. You know what striking difference I found with BigTech and their layoffs? These companies don't do layoffs. They are stable, employees feel secure and can evolve in their career without leaving. You know what employees say about their company? "It doesn't give the highest salary, but it's safe and rewarding, and you can actually evolve in your career". Turns out that if people are actually happy, they stay.
- bigfatkitten 2y ago
  > Have you ever seen a tech company where the workers actually stay? Where you can find employees who have been there for up to 30 years? Old tech. Places like Motorola and, at least until recently, IBM.
bsder 2y ago
> Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axle of layoffs when most people are in a chronic state of tech job hopping? 1) Because layoffs are a timeline not in your control. Leaving a job under my timeline is very different than suddenly being out of a job on somebody else's timeline. On my timeline, I know what my financial situation is and have likely planned around it. Layoffs, on the other hand, can catch people at vulnerable points. Even if you don't get laid off, you will likely have hoarded cash and adjusted major purchases just in case you did. 2) Because most "tech" workers are NOT in a chronic state of job hopping. Most people working "tech" are in boring businesses doing 8-to-4, have a mortgage, a spouse, and maybe a child or two. They have friends and support networks where they are. They are reasonable at their job, but nothing outstanding that would set them apart from the masses. Moving to another job in the same area is probably not an easy task--either the area has a single big employer or the scattered "tech" jobs are kind of rare. And even if the area has another job, your commute may change from reasonable to absurd. In the worst case, your spouse also gets laid off since tech companies are like sheep and will do layoffs simultaneously for "reasons". Now, you may have to completely leave the area to find a new job. This all sucks for people who are just getting by day to day. 3) Unless you have really good personal networks right now, job hopping is really difficult. Sure, senior people can just call up "so-and-so" and wind up with an interview tomorrow. Junior people, not so much.
sys_64738 2y ago
Maybe in your early years when stability doesn't matter to you. When you have a mortgage, a family, and obligations then you care about your job. Putting food on the table and paying bills becomes your highest priority. As to tech industry as an outlier, it's not so much that as it's not yet been reigned in yet. Technical jobs are just another tool to execute a business mission and once utility is gotten from AI to effectively reduce costs then costs will be reduced. That means bye bye to big salaries and hello to new reality. So enjoy the gig while it pays.
1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago
Layoffs save money. They work for that purpose. Perhaps the blog post assumes some other purpose. I am not getting it. This appears to be nothing more than complaining, not "real talk". But being published from a domainname like "thehustle.co", nonsensical gibberish comes as no suprise. If the title was "Tech Companies Don't Work", then this might be a good segue into discussing layoffs. For example, layoffs could be evidence of so-called "tech company" dysfunction or mismanagement. But, for some, the "outlier amounts of money" suggest these companies do "work". If the companies survive after layoffs, then clearly layoffs do "work" for the purpose intended.
johnnyanmac 2y ago
Keep in mind that only the most extreme, financially focused workers are doing what you describe. Like ones that are young and single. In addition, let's not pretend thos also isn't by design from the companies. They stopped doing tenure based rewards and are harder than ever to get a raise from. Those people are simply reacting to the terms the companies set.
hintymad 2y ago
> Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axle of layoffs when most people are in a chronic state of tech job hopping? I know lots of people hop jobs to get promoted. It's understandable too: promotion has become a prestige. It hurts to see coworkers get promoted yet oneself stays at the same place, let alone promotion is the only way to get a larger package. Personally, I think the promotion culture, especially the one popularized by Meta, is pretty ruinous to the tech companies, as many people exclusively focused on getting promoted. That means first write less code but draw more boxes, then draw fewer boxes and write more docs, and then write fewer docs but go to more meetings. Soon it's hard to distinguish a high-level engineer from a technical PM, from a director (except that the IC does not have direct report), or even from a program manager. The end result is that the company gets more bloated, slows down every day, and produces bullshit systems. When those ICs go out to interview, all they can do is throwing around a few terms and fail miserably on even the most basic questions.
beefnugs 2y ago
Really you dont see the difference between the little guy who has a family and barely affords rent and food doing all the extra work and calculating and saving to make the risky jump when he feels comfortable, vs a giant corporation sitting on 10 years of runway no matter what they do indiscriminately cutting and shoving dozens of "little guys" into unplanned for stress and upheaval?
throwaway2037 2y ago
I don't work in Silicon Valley, nor pure tech, but in many industries, the quickest way to climb titles and pay is to move to a new firm. Plus you can avoid the friction of asking for a better title or pay as your current firm. (And getting a "no" is horrible for your self-esteem.) Can you blame these people for leaving a job for better title/pay? I cannot. Better: I would expect HN to applause! "Stick it to the man!"
ajuc 2y ago
It's not controversial, it's the truth. BTW I worked for 6 years at one company, then I started job-hopping every 2-3 years. Much better for career.
kelnos 2y ago
Because of two things I can think of: 1. People like to control when they leave a company and join a new one. Most people will have a new job lined up, papers signed, before they put in their resignation at their old job. Getting laid off means a scramble to find something new. There's generally a big power imbalance between an employer and employees; the employee having the power to interview around and leave on their timetable is one of the less common cases where the employee has control over their own destiny. 2. While sometimes layoffs are isolated to a company, at other times (as we've seen over the past several years) it's indicative of an industry-wide trend. In this case, employees should definitely be worried about layoffs, as there well be a lot of their fellow workers competing for a smaller number of job opportunities.
ike2792 2y ago
I think job hopping happens for the same reasons layoffs do: short-term thinking on management's part. I've been an engineering manager for 8 years now and have observed that a) giving an external candidate a $10-15K bump during negotiations is fairly easy while b) giving that same bump to an existing employee is practically impossible. Engineers learn that moving every 2-4 years is the way to keep their salary growing, while the same companies that claim to not be able to pay them more happily dish out even more money to hire their replacements.

CaffeineLD50 2y ago

I resent the fake legal douche move of falsely asserting "low performance" as the rationale for their cuts. Some people work hard and take pride in their work. And on top of their gaming down our wages with h1b workers and low benefit contracting they have the gall to assert we're low performers when what they want is a $20 million bonus for their execs. But yeah, I see your point.

filoleg 2y ago

I cannot speak for layoffs in all industries ever, but I agree with your assessment of layoffs in big tech from personal experiences. I have way too many “lifer” friends in big tech who are deadly scared of layoffs and job hopping. They are also the ones who rarely got promoted and havent had a significant pay bump pretty much ever. On another hand, half my team at a big tech company got laid off back at the start of 2023. 4 months later, I caught up with them over drinks, and the results were rather interesting. They all got around 4-6mo worth of severance pay, spent 2-3 months just skiing/traveling/hiking/vacationing, then 1 month or so interviewing, and then starting their new jobs shortly after. All seemed rather happy, both with their new positions/pay (which had a significant paybump) and, essentially, paid vacation break they took right before. It seems like the heavity majority of those stressed about layoffs in big tech are lifers and those who are chronically averse to and dread the interview process.

nquicksherlock 2y ago
I don't think that this narrative works in the current job environment. But nice try.
lumost 2y ago
Big tech interviews tend to be daunting. Many long term employees lose the skill, and fear the impact of work interruption on their resume as well as their ability to get in again. Anecdotally, the LC bar for many firms has risen to the point that passing requires at least one through of the question before. If you Time bound your practice per question to 20 minutes, this means that you can solve most LC problems at least once in around 8 weeks of 40 hour weeks. Or 6 weeks at 60 hours. Not a pleasant way to spend two months - but not impractical. I'm unclear what employers are deriving from this exercise at this point.
- WalterBright 2y ago
  > I'm unclear what employers are deriving from this exercise at this point It filters out the complete frauds. Yes, there are people who know all the right things to say in a job interview, but cannot code at all. If you hire one of them, it takes a bit to find out they cannot code, and a bit longer to fire them, so you're out $$$$ paying their salaries for nothing. For example, a recruiter I know will ask a tech candidate "what is 20% of 20,000?" A significant percentage cannot answer the question. Some even cry. It's shocking. A friend of mine was looking at getting a FAANG job. He was worried about the leetcode tests. I suggested he spend a month going through the leetcode books studying them - that the return on his time investment doing that will be one of the best ROIs he's ever done. He did, and got the job. (Although the LC was just a first gate one had to go through to get to the real job interview.) Personally, I have no idea how I'd do on an LC test without prep. But I don't have a problem with studying it to get a top job.
  - indigodaddy 2y ago
    I get that perhaps you were using the proverbial "I" in your last sentence as an example of something everyone should be willing to do in/for their career, but does someone of your stature even need a real interview, much less a LC test, to obtain a top job? It's kind of funny imagining a young tech bro interviewing you, tbh.

clusterhacks 2y ago

Maybe that perception that people chronically job hop is not true? I would welcome a data source that shows chronic job hopping is the norm. Anecdotally speaking, I spent 6+ish years at my first "old tech" company. My org in this (very large) company was constantly simmering with resource actions (mostly small scale layoffs). There was lots of negative energy there. I left to take a programming/data analytics gig in a large, privately held financial company that had never had a layoff. This was unfortunately timed, 2 years later the financial crisis of 2008 kicked off and I (and my entire team) were all laid off. I have been with my current employer for approaching two decades and several of my peers have been on our team for that much time. I have had a SINGLE manager in that time window. I can't even name all the managers I had in my first job due to near-constant re-orgs and layoffs.

DamonHD 2y ago
I contracted/consulted around London for decades, and though I was with some clients for many years in total, others were much shorter, and short entries on a CV were not seen as a red flag AFAIK. (Well, there was one hiring manager idiot who could not conceive of anything other than linear non-concurrent contracts as being honest - that interview did not go well, but I dodged a bullet!)
Ancalagon 2y ago
Another anecdote from my part. I graduated in roughly 2015. I've had 5 software eng jobs since then. Each one I've had at least 2 different managers in the average 2 years I spent in each. My latest role, however, I was at for 2.5 years and had 6(!) managers. I had originally intended to stay at that role longer term but it was obvious the constant managerial turnover was a negative for my career growth - so I hopped again. I've not experienced a layoff, but I also think its extremely abnormal to be in a position for so long and only have one manager.
ajkjk 2y ago
It seems impossible to think that it's not true given how fundamental it is to (new) tech culture.
- 2y ago

napierzaza 2y ago

[dead]

whiplash451 2y ago

The thing is, the tech industry is also an outlier in a sense that the quality of the job you find varies massively depending on (1) the timing, sometimes literally by a few weeks and (2) whether you already have a job or not. And so, layoffs are not "just another bump" in people's career. They represent a major net negative for people who would otherwise have much more control over the trajectory.

atrettel 2y ago

This is an interesting question to ask, though I personally would not attribute it to "culture" as much as it may be a product of the environment people are put in. From my experience, there are a lot of jobs that make it difficult to continue past a few years, so job hopping is the inevitable outcome of that. I think many companies need to examine why they have a lot of turnover instead of attributing it all to individual employees. And to be frank, layoffs are scary for any industry, because they usually are correlated with layoffs at other companies. A rising tide lifts all boats, but a sinking tide is difficult to escape. You might be laid off at a time when there is no other job to hop to.

bigtimesink 2y ago
> there are a lot of jobs that make it difficult to continue past a few years This has been a lot of my career. All my long, successful jobs have lasted around 2-3 years, and it's the time it takes for the company to realize the initiative wasn't worth it. I count four of these stints where I left, and the team was essentially dissolved within a year. I'm not saying I was the key person for the project; I just saw the writing on the wall. It's been career limiting not having a large-scope project on a growing team, but I don't know if this is something about me, something about the projects I'm a good fit for, or the reality that a lot of projects and teams don't survive 5 years, and I've been exposed to some survivor bias of smart people who have gotten lucky.
- atrettel 2y ago
  That is a great example of what I was talking about. Another example is the changing nature of the contracts people are hired under. I'm a scientist, and a lot of positions are inherently term-limited. You end up with a lot of organizations with two different groups of employees: employers who have worked there for decades, and employers who are temporary and work there for a few years hoping to be converted to permanent. Just like in the situation you describe, if you end up on a project that just isn't working out, that does not bode well for your own prospects. That has nothing to do with your own capabilities or how hard you worked on the project. And just like you mention, a lot of the "permanent" people have survivorship bias and do not really understand that they ultimately got lucky and timed the market well. (Or many of the permanent people were hired as permanent staff originally and do not understand the conditions under which new staff are hired.)

no_wizard 2y ago

The tech industry also doesn’t reward loyalty, even at big tech. There’s a reason for the low tenure at most firms and it’s primarily due to the lack of rewarding experience and depth of field knowledge at most companies. When you have to get a new job just to get a salary increase that keeps up with inflation you are going to see a lot of job hopping when the skills of the workforce are generally in demand. How often is it that someone leaves because they can get paid better elsewhere? Why do we think this wouldn’t drive the primary cause of people leaving companies? Where the fuck is the company showing any loyalty to its workforce?

generic92034 2y ago
> Where the fuck is the company showing any loyalty to its workforce? They have been and are out there. But all it takes is a change on C level and cost cutting suddenly is everything, loyalty a thing of the past. That is, you cannot count on loyalty anymore, even if the company you are working for is currently showing it (or seems to).
ltbarcly3 2y ago
Big tech employees have been abandoning companies the second they can get higher TC for decades, and as soon as the companies start firing a very small fraction (in a lot of cases people who were coasting or incompetent) its a problem of morality? You can really see what people are made of when they face adversity. Good luck.
- no_wizard 2y ago
  Big tech employees are a fraction of all tech employers and employees. There’s problem so systematically pervasive that you see this across the board. Companies do not value long term retainment of employees up and down the size spectrum and it’s very clear in how they behave. They don’t award experience and depth of knowledge in any way that is indicative of fostering retention
- int_19h 2y ago
  Big tech employees have been doing that because they see new hires (who have themselves switched from another big tech company!) get a lot more comp than their meager raise. Don't blame the workers from reacting to the signals that company is sending through its own deliberate actions.

jasonlotito 2y ago

> when most people are in a chronic state of tech job hopping? Citation needed. The vast majority of people in tech that I know do NOT job hop. So please, I need a citation, not your feelings.

huang_chung 2y ago

Well, getting fucked out of your 401k money 6 months before it vests stings some.

s1artibartfast 2y ago
Is that an average time given a 12 month vesting schedule? edit: Actually curious about the dead comment. What companies have multi year 401(k) vesting? Every company I have worked at or seen does a match on a 12 month schedule or less. Are they thinking of stock options?
- huang_chung 2y ago
  Two years is more typical.
- mrmayhem 2y ago
  [dead]
- Barracoon 2y ago
  IIRC Amazon has a 2 years 401k match vesting period.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    Interesting. per this article, Amazon 401k has a cliff vesting on matched funds at 3 years of employment. After reading around, it seems like 3 years is the legal maximum for 401k cliff vesting, with 6 years permitted for incremental vesting. https://www.consiliowealth.com/insights/breaking-down-amazons-401k-and-vesting-options https://www.consiliowealth.com/insights/breaking-down-amazon...

saghm 2y ago

I think there are two reasons: choosing to change jobs on your own gives you ability to pick a time when it's minimally disruptive to yourself and your actual family, and then the pretend "family" vibe you cite is pushed by the employer in the first place. Companies insising on a game of make-believe where the relationship between employer and employee isn't transactional makes it hard not to be bothered by the hypocrisy. I agree that on average, the tech industry isn't as bad as other industries often are, but I don't see why that's a compelling argument not to care about the fact that it still could be better. There's nothing stopping me from wanting fewer tech layoffs and better conditions for workers in other industries as well (and in some circumstances even advocate for that even knowing that it might require changes to my own quality of life to achieve that; as a trivial example, I go out of my way to tip much larger than 20% when I use Uber because I'd rather risk getting ripped off than a driver not getting paid a fair wage for the work they do for me, even if it's at my own expense). At the end of the day, everything is a balancing act, and the amount of change most of us can make as individuals is a drop in the bucket compared to the unfairness that people have to deal with every day. We all have to make judgement calls on where to take a stand and where to play it safe to avoid making things harder for ourselves without actually making a difference that ends up helping anyone, and if people are acting in good faith when trying to make those choices, I don't see any value in criticizing what they end up deciding. If anything, most of us in tech are probably in far more of a comfortable position to be able to speak out against employers (either or own or those in industries where workers are treated even worse), so I think there's a reasonable argument that it's more important for us to because of that. It's not a zero-sum game though; pointing out tech employer hypocrisy doesn't inherently take anything away from pointing out even worse things that other employers do.

carlob 2y ago
> I go out of my way to tip much larger than 20% when I use Uber because I'd rather risk getting ripped off than a driver not getting paid a fair wage for the work they do for me, even if it's at my own expense Honest question, as a European who doesn't fully understand tipping culture: don't you think that this might be perpetuating a culture of exploitation? Wouldn't you rather spend your money on taxis that at least have some regulations if you are afraid the drivers are getting the wrong end of the deal?

giantg2 2y ago

I've worked over 12 years at the same company. Finding a new job would be difficult as remote pays lower and isn't the best fit for me, my area isn't known for tech job, my spouse doesn't want to relocate, I work for one of the biggest employers in my area (fewer choices outside the company), and we are seeing the highest sector unemployment since the dot com bubble. Oh, and my disability makes it all worse. My job has been an absolute hell hole for the past 2 years, but internal and external job opportunities have been extremely limited.

oytis 2y ago

There is attrition and there are layoffs. With attrition someone leaves every year or so, you part on good terms, and the company hires a replacement on a similar level and location. Layoffs means reducing headcount, your team ends up weaker than it was, and everyone is left wondering if they are next.

pjmlp 2y ago

Depends on the country, in many European countries job hopping is not well seen regardless of the industry.

lr4444lr 2y ago

I think your idea is a good faith argument, but it's a fallacy: high turnover on a job because of stiff competition for labor is not a "tech culture" issue, and it's not at all the same impact on a person as changing due to a layoff.

owl_vision 2y ago

In tech, consultancy usually last between 3 months and 18 months, so one can have many consulting positions of under 2 years.

shortrounddev2 2y ago

I think many people at big tech companies like Facebook truly drank the koolaid there, and when they got laid off it laid bare that the companies they worked at were just companies. Facebook, Google, Amazon, etc are no better than Microsoft, IBM, Oracle, or whatever other 20th century company they had come to represent the answer to. I think a LOT of people had really tied their identities up in being a big tech employee and when they got laid off it was like being cast out of paradise

disgruntledphd2 2y ago
To be fair, Facebook was a really really great place to work for the five years I was there. Given that, it's not surprising that people got comfortable. Like, I've gone from 200 connections at FB to less than 100 over the years of layoffs.

PhasmaFelis 2y ago

> Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axle of layoffs when most people are in a chronic state of tech job hopping? Most of us job-hop because we have to, not because we want to. There's a class of people in the tech industry who like to write blogs about how fun and fulfilling it is to constantly change jobs and roles. Those people are highly visible but not representative. Most humans find constant change and uncertainty stressful, not exhilarating.

mrmayhem 2y ago
[dead]

abeppu 2y ago

I think the other side of it is: - Detail-oriented nerds with a rich mental framework around things like optimization, making decisions based on data, perhaps statistical approaches to uncertainty get frustrated when they see their organization making big, irreversible choices without the benefit of all available information. From the IC or line-manager level there may be a bunch of information which you can tell was not taken into consideration. - Process-oriented people who have put a bunch of effort into planning, goal-setting and measurement based on seemingly reasonable assumptions like "this team that provides service X will continue to exist for the duration of project Y which depends on X" get frustrated when execs throw everything into disarray ... and then 3 weeks later want to know why Y is off track. As the article describes, often lay-offs end up being bad for the company, not just the employees who get terminated. Even if you're not let go, or even if you just care about the value of your vested equity, it can be quite frustrating to see this happen. And often, because layoffs are generally planned in secret, leadership explicitly precludes the possibility of getting input from the experts in their organization. While perhaps some layoffs ultimately turn out ok, I think generally the people who go through them can tick off a list of parts of it that were ill-considered and needlessly disruptive, in part b/c of this lack of trust and communication.

slackernews9 2y ago

"Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axel of foreclosure when most people are in a chronic state of moving house?"

dghlsakjg 2y ago

Citing an airline for longevity is a bit disingenuous. I’m not sure how it works with support staff, but aircraft crew have contract structures that so heavily favor seniority that most pilots and FAs will never leave a major willingly during their career. Your observation, to me, seems more like: tech companies reward new employees over old, airlines do the extreme opposite.

biztos 2y ago

I get the point, but I don't think that's universally true. Especially in the less glamorous corners of the tech industry -- yes, you have some younger people looking to bounce, but most of the people who actually keep the lights on have full lives outside of work and all things being equal, they'd rather stick around than deal with the hassle of finding a new job. They're only going to leave if you create a toxic work environment or underpay them by double-digit percentages. For those industries, I don't think they're getting much from the layoffs besides the short-term "we did layoffs" C-suite bonus. If you're in the Widgetmaker Control Systems industry, why do you want to make your workforce think they have to leave in 3-4 years?

dan-robertson 2y ago

I guess there are a broad range of perspectives and how loud people are is going to depend on their perspectives. Some reasons to dislike layoffs: - visas may be dependent on employment, and can make changing jobs harder. In the United States, lots of visa rules are at the discretion of the government (eg how long one may live in the United States on an employer-sponsored visa while unemployed) - the recent (and dot-com era) tech layoffs have been cyclical: many companies are in layoff-mode or hiring-spree mode at the same time. The time when many companies are not hiring is the worst time to be thrust into the job market - people may have other job security worries – big tech companies tend to always be growing so it is worrying if they are laying people off instead of moving them from a failing business line to a new one - in general some people may have a lot of anxiety about changes to income. If you are applying for new jobs while currently holding another, there is much less pressure than if you’re unemployed and need to find a new job (and possibly at a pay cut requiring outgoings to be reduced) before you run out of savings, especially if you don’t have much in savings compared to outgoings, which may be the case for some tech workers (some people spend a lot, or have much of their wealth tied up in property or have a family which requires spending more on eg housing or school fees). The much-worse consequences of failing to get a new job may increase the pressure/stress/discomfort - this reveals an obvious truth about where the power lies in ‘engineering-focused’ companies and people don’t like it - people can see a layoff as being like a firing and therefore be unhappy due to hurt pride (or worries about being less desirable in the job market) - the lack of agency in a layoff is unpleasant. It is quite different from choosing to apply to other jobs.

mock-possum 2y ago

I mean in all fairness, I move around because I’m looking for a place to stay - if I’m not enjoying myself at my job, why would I stick around? And conversely, when I find a spot I like, why job hop? And besides, the last time I was laid off, it was from a place I’d been at nearly 5 years, a place that did feel almost like family - that’s why I stayed as long as I did.

m104 2y ago

Because a lot of tech workers today aren't actually job hopping and instead get very cozy in a job and a team and a career trajectory, which feels unfairly ripped away during layoffs for reasons that don't feel connected to their personal performance.

bongodongobob 2y ago

Because it's usually only true in your early 20s. Then you find a place and stay. These people bragging about company hopping every 3 or 4 years don't do that for 20 years.

TrackerFF 2y ago

Job hopping is done to maximize your salary in the least amount of time - but everyone knows that there's a ceiling. You can't just keep job hopping for the rest of your career, and magically end up making 25% more every time you hop to the next gig. Sooner or later you'll start to reach a ceiling, and have to defend your salary more. The idea is that if you can end up hitting that ceiling in 10 years by job hopping, that's better than spending 25 years at one place to hit the same figure. The earlier you have maximized your salary, the more you can invest and hopefully retire earlier. Now, once you hit that ceiling - it kind of sucks to be in a constant state of job hopping. You actually don't get rewarded, and it is more stress than anything. And the older you get, the more stability you'll value - after all, you probably have a mortgage, kids, and all that to account for.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

yodsanklai 2y ago

It's a chicken and egg problem. If people feel they could have a meaningful career in a given place, they would stay longer. When you see your teammates getting laid off one after the other - including people with 5-10 years of seniority and history of good performance, you start to wonder whether you should have any sense of loyalty to the company. I joined my company with the naive hope there would be some sentiment of family/community and that I'd do a big chunk of my career there. But after seeing how they treat employees, I'm looking for the way out.

hankchinaski 2y ago

I agree with parts of what you say. I’m a career contractor or job hopper. I like it this way. I also am aware of the volatility of the industry. I prefer hopping and getting 20% pay bump each year. This more than offsets the risk of being laid off and staying a few months without income.

iancmceachern 2y ago

Many of the stereotypes you mention are for startup founder / early employee types. That's not everyone, it's just who's on HN. Most employees of these companies are just regular people wanting regular jobs.

paulddraper 2y ago
What % of the your coworkers have been there 5+ years?
- lazyasciiart 2y ago
  I work at salesforce. 100% of my immediate team and gotta be over 50% of my broader team. We’ve barely hired since 2020.
- iancmceachern 2y ago
  100% (I have owned and worked at my own company for 10 years) Anecdotally, I've also worked at many startups that became big companies through acquisition and Let me tell you - J&J has a lot of employees who have been there more than 5 years, thousands. They also had several big layoffs of such people during the process.

grandempire 2y ago

Different groups of people. Some confidently job hop, others live in fear of losing a comfortable job. There are deep differences in expectations and attitudes in these areas, driven by family, culture, and upbringing.

lurking_swe 2y ago
i agree with this. However… It’s worth mentioning (as a public FYI) that it’s not smart to _expect_ to stay with a company for 10+ years, from a risk mitigation perspective. At least not in 2025. It’s kind of like picking a stock. Purposely picking just 1 stock for your portfolio carries great risk. Likewise, picking 1 job and/or 1 tech stack and hoping for the best is also high risk. It’s smart to at least dabble in new trendy technology for 1-2 days a month. Maybe review basic leet code questions once a year. Maybe every 2-3 years, apply somewhere else and go through the interview process strictly for practice. Who knows, maybe you’ll get a great offer? Just examples of what one can do to reduce the risk when a layoff occurs. Regardless of what your culture taught you, try to reduce your risk. It might be outside your comfort zone, but better to be uncomfortable than unemployed. Don’t put all your eggs in one basket (one company, one tech stack). Keep your interview skills a _little_ sharp so that you don’t panic if a layoff occurs. It’s just common sense.
- grandempire 2y ago
  I agree. Jobs can go away at anytime for any reason. What really hurts is when people think their devotion and sacrifice means it wont apply to them. Set expectations accordingly.

al_borland 2y ago

I’ve been at my company working in tech for 19 years and I hate the pushing of job hopping as a norm. Job hoppers have no skin in the game. They don’t need support what they build, they don’t get to see where it fell short… they really can’t learn from their experiences and mistakes. What they do isn’t in the best interest of the company, it’s just enough (an MVP if you will) to add to the resume so they can leverage it for a bump in pay on their next job. I see wave after wave of job hoppers hired to “transform” the organization and all they ever do is repeat the same old mistakes, which we could tell them if they weren’t too arrogant to listen. Every job hopper I’ve worked with has simply been a distraction to the greater goals of the organization to serve the customer. I’ve lost all patience and respect for the people who practice it, and the companies that set themselves up in a way which encourages it. I don’t know how we find our way back, but I think companies and employees would all be better off with some stability and more long term thinking.

jagraff 2y ago
I think the solution for this would be for companies to proactively raise wages in order to keep up with the market.
- al_borland 2y ago
  Yes, but it also takes some level of patience on the part of the employee. Corporate bureaucracies often move slow, and they also want to see you can do the job first. I’m seeing most younger people don’t seem to have patience for this. They also grossly overestimate their knowledge and ability. I’ve seen a significant number of people talk like they mastered a job after 1 year, then they stared asking me how they could get on my team doing what I do. I did the job they were doing for 10+ years. The reason they think it’s easy is because I defined the processes of how to do it all, wrote all the documents on how to do it, made a training program they went through, and worked with other teams to remove a lot of the toil. I then started building tools to make it easier for anyone off the street to do a lot of the work, and do it at scale. Thats why I have the job I have; it wasn’t given to me, I created it out of a desire to make the team better after realizing we could only go so far if I just worked faster. They didn’t see any of that. For those that seemed interested, I’d give them the tools they needed to help, to see if they were the type to do this kind of stuff. I’d provide feedback, answer questions, or do anything else I could to help them. Out of the dozen or so who asked, only 1 person has done it to a limited degree. Thats why companies don’t just offer it up quickly and easily. A lot of people talk, but not many back it up.

soerxpso 2y ago

That's kind of a chicken and egg issue, isn't it? Why is it that employees can get more money/promotions from a company they have no relationship with, than from a company where they've already been working for multiple years and have more company-specific knowledge than their replacement will? Unlike with government work, years at the company isn't really considered when deciding who layoffs are going to hit. You're proposing that tech workers should loyally stay at the same company for 10 years, make less money, and then get laid off just as easily anyway?

shagie 2y ago
> Why is it that employees can get more money/promotions from a company they have no relationship with, than from a company where they've already been working for multiple years and have more company-specific knowledge than their replacement will? Short form: Lack of headcount at the various levels, and the responsibilities at the different levels would skew to "staff developers doing junior tasks because there are no juniors." -- Many times promotions need an available headcount at that level. The promotion also reflects a change in responsibilities. The company couldn't have an entire team of staff engineers thinking about things without writing code - so there's an entire setup for "this is how much is budgeted for these roles and these responsibilities." You could have headcount for 20 developers (1:3 junior to mid), two tech leads, and a staff level architect. That doesn't you could hire / promote 23 staff and have them writing code. So when a mid level progresses, it isn't always possible to say "you're a tech lead now" as that would mean fewer developers writing code... Unless you're also going to get to the point where your 23 staff engineers are also being tasked with writing the unit tests as if they were a junior developer still learning the codebase. So in many cases, the mid level developer looking for more has to go somewhere else. This isn't as much of an issue in a large company where there's more room to move between teams and new positions opening as attrition happens (in the organization I work for, attrition is most likely to happen from retirement). There's also the aspect of not every company has the same revenue. If you are at the point where you want to make more and the company can't budget for that... then you're looking somewhere else.

sgustard 2y ago

The average tenure of an employee at HP is 6.6 years (source: Google AI) to pick a company that may be outside your bubble. And the lifelong career holding older employee at a legacy enterprise tech company is the kind of worker who is most adversely affected by an unexpected return to the job seeking pool.

shepherdjerred 2y ago

Tech is a huge field. If you work in big tech or well-known companies, it is common to job-hop. If you're at something more established, traditional, or mid-sized, you'll probably find lifers. Additionally, I think fewer people are job-hopping considering the market is so competitive. I would expect new grads to start staying at their first job for longer, too.

willsmith72 2y ago

2 way street. you say "it's laying off a bunch of people who were gonna dip in 6 months to a year anyway." to the new grad, it's "wow half my team just got laid off when the company seems to be doing fine, i guess i better not get too comfortable here"

stego-tech 2y ago

Because not every company gives severance during layoffs. As someone who got RIFed (again - fourth time in my 15yr career), this is the first time I've had severance, and the first time I had a notice period that wasn't just "till the end of the month". As such, layoffs are traumatic just on their own. Adding more rapid-fire context (for the sake of brevity): * Parents changed jobs every few years growing up, which meant a new city, new home, new schools, and a complete cycling of relationships (forcibly out with the old, forcibly in with the new) * I watched layoffs in non-tech sectors gradually go from tech-style severance packages, to no packages beyond the required WARN notice period payouts, to filing the notices and hoping nobody asks, to now just paying out any damages after-the-fact in lawsuits * I spent ~15mo unemployed during the "Great Recession" of '08, ending up having to move to another region of the country for work and spending a night homeless, followed by six-months couch surfing, then another month in a hotel before finally having an apartment again So all that put together, layoffs and job changes are incredibly traumatic experiences I do my best to avoid at all costs. I am one of those "lifers" who would much rather hunker down for a good wage today, buy a home, sock away savings, and work my way up an internal career ladder than throw myself into an entirely new workplace, colleagues, culture, and standards every year or two. I claw for multiple roles in an org (at the most recent one, I was juggling roles on Private Cloud & Public Cloud, Governance Councils, leading a CaaS ops overhaul, plus other PoCs) specifically to make myself as indispensable as possible and position myself on the internal promotional ladder, because I'd rather stay with one org provided I can eke out a modest living and take care of those I care about (myself included). Now all that aside, there's also the reality that wage growth from job hopping hasn't turned out to be as big as folks thought. The real growth comes from career promotions, which companies hate doling out internally for profoundly stupid and arbitrary reasons (hence job hopping). I get the impression most folks would stay put if they could get the growth in their career they wanted, but companies would rather hire someone externally to fill a spot than promote someone internally operating at that level; I am very much in that group myself. Heck, we're seeing that now with folks not leaving jobs because they're having difficulty finding that growth (in comp and title) elsewhere, as everyone kind of knuckles down for tough times ahead. That taste of stability will create more "lifers" as you put it, especially when the world outside is increasingly unstable; it's natural that humans (and most animals) will seek stability in times of crisis, taking only as much risk as necessary to preserve their survival. Something the article doesn't get into is the knock-on effect of layoffs in future business: if workers are let go for what they perceive to be arbitrary or irrational reasons, they're less likely to want to do business with that company again in the future. This is particularly why tech companies offer such good severance packages, as it's their mea culpa of sorts by trying to buy themselves a good reputation on the way out the door. When everyone is doing it though (like the current layoff cycles), it becomes a broader disgust or distaste for established vendors in general, and those workers - when they land a new role - are likely to want to migrate off their employer's products unless their career is tied to it somehow. This can reduce business after cuts had already been made, potentially putting an organization into a cycle of self-harm wherein more cuts are made in response to declining business, which then causes more declines in business, which leads to more cuts, etc. This in turn leaves a huge opening for new startups to enter the hole left behind by established players, undercutting them on pricing and providing better service. So taking all of that into context when reading the article again, and it paints a pretty telling picture of widespread mismanagement at companies doing unwarranted and highly traumatic layoffs. If the only thing your leadership can do to grow the business is to layoff staff, that's a pretty telling sign that business ain't doing so great in general and leaders are out of ideas to improve it.

kristianc 2y ago

Kind of sucks when you have stock…

BugsJustFindMe 2y ago

> Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axle of layoffs when most people are in a chronic state of tech job hopping? When I leave a job, I leave on good terms, they're always sad to see me go but understanding, and I always give my employer 6 or more weeks notice with the additional offer that they can still reach out to me for help if they need after that for as long as my memory remains helpful. A couple even took me up on my offer and asked to pay me for my time. The time I got caught in a layoff I had the door slammed in my face literally minutes later and barely two weeks severance contingent on signing away rights. So, fuck me I guess. Maybe the workers who complain understand that circumstances are not always equal.

bodegajed 2y ago

It's an outlier because unlike other service industries the software has global presence. An app written by software engineers laid-off 3 years ago will still run by itself with exceptions like servers running out of disk space. Unlike other services industry tech workers get laid off for: 1. When the product has failed market-fit and company is not raising anymore capital. 2. When the backlog has been cleared. Tech workers get more pay by job hopping.

palata 2y ago

Have you ever seen a tech company where the workers actually stay? Where you can find employees who have been there for up to 30 years? I have. You know what striking difference I found with BigTech and their layoffs? These companies don't do layoffs. They are stable, employees feel secure and can evolve in their career without leaving. You know what employees say about their company? "It doesn't give the highest salary, but it's safe and rewarding, and you can actually evolve in your career". Turns out that if people are actually happy, they stay.

bigfatkitten 2y ago
> Have you ever seen a tech company where the workers actually stay? Where you can find employees who have been there for up to 30 years? Old tech. Places like Motorola and, at least until recently, IBM.

bsder 2y ago

> Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axle of layoffs when most people are in a chronic state of tech job hopping? 1) Because layoffs are a timeline not in your control. Leaving a job under my timeline is very different than suddenly being out of a job on somebody else's timeline. On my timeline, I know what my financial situation is and have likely planned around it. Layoffs, on the other hand, can catch people at vulnerable points. Even if you don't get laid off, you will likely have hoarded cash and adjusted major purchases just in case you did. 2) Because most "tech" workers are NOT in a chronic state of job hopping. Most people working "tech" are in boring businesses doing 8-to-4, have a mortgage, a spouse, and maybe a child or two. They have friends and support networks where they are. They are reasonable at their job, but nothing outstanding that would set them apart from the masses. Moving to another job in the same area is probably not an easy task--either the area has a single big employer or the scattered "tech" jobs are kind of rare. And even if the area has another job, your commute may change from reasonable to absurd. In the worst case, your spouse also gets laid off since tech companies are like sheep and will do layoffs simultaneously for "reasons". Now, you may have to completely leave the area to find a new job. This all sucks for people who are just getting by day to day. 3) Unless you have really good personal networks right now, job hopping is really difficult. Sure, senior people can just call up "so-and-so" and wind up with an interview tomorrow. Junior people, not so much.

sys_64738 2y ago

Maybe in your early years when stability doesn't matter to you. When you have a mortgage, a family, and obligations then you care about your job. Putting food on the table and paying bills becomes your highest priority. As to tech industry as an outlier, it's not so much that as it's not yet been reigned in yet. Technical jobs are just another tool to execute a business mission and once utility is gotten from AI to effectively reduce costs then costs will be reduced. That means bye bye to big salaries and hello to new reality. So enjoy the gig while it pays.

1vuio0pswjnm7 2y ago

Layoffs save money. They work for that purpose. Perhaps the blog post assumes some other purpose. I am not getting it. This appears to be nothing more than complaining, not "real talk". But being published from a domainname like "thehustle.co", nonsensical gibberish comes as no suprise. If the title was "Tech Companies Don't Work", then this might be a good segue into discussing layoffs. For example, layoffs could be evidence of so-called "tech company" dysfunction or mismanagement. But, for some, the "outlier amounts of money" suggest these companies do "work". If the companies survive after layoffs, then clearly layoffs do "work" for the purpose intended.

johnnyanmac 2y ago

Keep in mind that only the most extreme, financially focused workers are doing what you describe. Like ones that are young and single. In addition, let's not pretend thos also isn't by design from the companies. They stopped doing tenure based rewards and are harder than ever to get a raise from. Those people are simply reacting to the terms the companies set.

hintymad 2y ago

> Why do tech workers get so wrapped around the axle of layoffs when most people are in a chronic state of tech job hopping? I know lots of people hop jobs to get promoted. It's understandable too: promotion has become a prestige. It hurts to see coworkers get promoted yet oneself stays at the same place, let alone promotion is the only way to get a larger package. Personally, I think the promotion culture, especially the one popularized by Meta, is pretty ruinous to the tech companies, as many people exclusively focused on getting promoted. That means first write less code but draw more boxes, then draw fewer boxes and write more docs, and then write fewer docs but go to more meetings. Soon it's hard to distinguish a high-level engineer from a technical PM, from a director (except that the IC does not have direct report), or even from a program manager. The end result is that the company gets more bloated, slows down every day, and produces bullshit systems. When those ICs go out to interview, all they can do is throwing around a few terms and fail miserably on even the most basic questions.

beefnugs 2y ago

Really you dont see the difference between the little guy who has a family and barely affords rent and food doing all the extra work and calculating and saving to make the risky jump when he feels comfortable, vs a giant corporation sitting on 10 years of runway no matter what they do indiscriminately cutting and shoving dozens of "little guys" into unplanned for stress and upheaval?

throwaway2037 2y ago

I don't work in Silicon Valley, nor pure tech, but in many industries, the quickest way to climb titles and pay is to move to a new firm. Plus you can avoid the friction of asking for a better title or pay as your current firm. (And getting a "no" is horrible for your self-esteem.) Can you blame these people for leaving a job for better title/pay? I cannot. Better: I would expect HN to applause! "Stick it to the man!"

ajuc 2y ago

It's not controversial, it's the truth. BTW I worked for 6 years at one company, then I started job-hopping every 2-3 years. Much better for career.

kelnos 2y ago

Because of two things I can think of: 1. People like to control when they leave a company and join a new one. Most people will have a new job lined up, papers signed, before they put in their resignation at their old job. Getting laid off means a scramble to find something new. There's generally a big power imbalance between an employer and employees; the employee having the power to interview around and leave on their timetable is one of the less common cases where the employee has control over their own destiny. 2. While sometimes layoffs are isolated to a company, at other times (as we've seen over the past several years) it's indicative of an industry-wide trend. In this case, employees should definitely be worried about layoffs, as there well be a lot of their fellow workers competing for a smaller number of job opportunities.

ike2792 2y ago

I think job hopping happens for the same reasons layoffs do: short-term thinking on management's part. I've been an engineering manager for 8 years now and have observed that a) giving an external candidate a $10-15K bump during negotiations is fairly easy while b) giving that same bump to an existing employee is practically impossible. Engineers learn that moving every 2-4 years is the way to keep their salary growing, while the same companies that claim to not be able to pay them more happily dish out even more money to hire their replacements.