3 ms·

10 years from now, the people that stopped hiring novices and juniors are going to be deeply regretting their past decisions. The people that kept hiring are go

10 years from now, the people that stopped hiring novices and juniors are going to be deeply regretting their past decisions. The people that kept hiring are going to be working with their newly-promoted-to-senior colleagues and be making significantly more progress than those that didn’t keep hiring.

daymanstep 7mo ago
Except they won't. They will just hire those new people away from the firms that trained them. That's what happens now and there's no reason why it won't happen in the future. This is why firms that do actual training have clauses written in the employment contract that says if you receive x months of training from them then you have to work for them for at least y number of years otherwise if you leave then you have to pay them for the cost of training you (which is written as a dollar amount in the contract). Companies that don't have that kind of clause in the contract are going to get screwed over when their newly trained employees get poached by other firms.
- BitsAndObjects 7mo ago
  That dynamic is nothing new. Years of experience to become a senior engineer is not “training” and not covered by what you’re describing. The shortage of senior engineers will be even worse than it is today. Not sure your argument really holds any water over a 10+ year period as I originally described.
- mschild 7mo ago
  Yes and no. I started my career with a graduate program from a larger company. I stuck around in that company for close to 5 years and would have liked to stay longer. My reason for leaving were the absence of a career progression. The first 3 years, the company had a great career progression path. Clear outlines what it needs for a promotion, fair and transparent pay, etc. That changed and despite hitting/exceeding my goals, I was denied a promotion twice with no good reason. My boss, who is fantastic, told me that he cannot give me a good reason because he himself did not receive one. So I left. Generally speaking, my cohort of the program was part of the company much longer than most employees. I don't think a single person left in the first 3 years. Attrition only started now that there was a general shift in the companies culture and communication.
- mxkopy 7mo ago
  It honestly seems a little control freakish to think this way. People leave companies and that’s a good thing, they explore the industry and generally become more capable. If you leave on good terms there’s nothing holding back a renewed relationship, now with the added benefit of new perspectives; maybe meeting at conferences or working on a project. My gut is telling me these companies don’t part on good terms with their employees.
- graemep 7mo ago
  It might happen, but there are risks. The obvious one is that the existing employers will make an effort to keep the best (promotions and pay rises) so people hiring away from them will get the people they do not need to keep. Those sorts of clauses are not legal everywhere. They would certainly be at least heavily restricted in the UK (on the other hand there are subsidies for some employer training and education here - which is why my daughter has an engineering degree without paying any fees). The author of the article is in Israel, and as an academic is in a different position to people in businesses.
BitsAndObjects 7mo ago
(IBM figured this out a couple of months ago, and explicitly announced tripling their hiring of juniors/grads in order to avoid ending up with a massive gap in the management/senior layers in future).
- kkapelon 7mo ago
  Link? Source?
  - BitsAndObjects 7mo ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47009327 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47009327 > “The companies three to five years from now that are going to be the most successful are those companies that doubled down on entry-level hiring in this environment,” Nickle LaMoreaux, IBM’s chief human resources officer, said this week.
adrianN 7mo ago
Ten years from now the people making these decisions have moved on to different companies and cashed their quarterly bonuses.
pezgrande 7mo ago
Will they? Just because you developed them that doesn't guarantee they will stay with you. It's been always the same issue tbh, but big companies could accept the risk because they pay the most competitive salaries anyways.

daymanstep 7mo ago

Except they won't. They will just hire those new people away from the firms that trained them. That's what happens now and there's no reason why it won't happen in the future. This is why firms that do actual training have clauses written in the employment contract that says if you receive x months of training from them then you have to work for them for at least y number of years otherwise if you leave then you have to pay them for the cost of training you (which is written as a dollar amount in the contract). Companies that don't have that kind of clause in the contract are going to get screwed over when their newly trained employees get poached by other firms.

BitsAndObjects 7mo ago
That dynamic is nothing new. Years of experience to become a senior engineer is not “training” and not covered by what you’re describing. The shortage of senior engineers will be even worse than it is today. Not sure your argument really holds any water over a 10+ year period as I originally described.
mschild 7mo ago
Yes and no. I started my career with a graduate program from a larger company. I stuck around in that company for close to 5 years and would have liked to stay longer. My reason for leaving were the absence of a career progression. The first 3 years, the company had a great career progression path. Clear outlines what it needs for a promotion, fair and transparent pay, etc. That changed and despite hitting/exceeding my goals, I was denied a promotion twice with no good reason. My boss, who is fantastic, told me that he cannot give me a good reason because he himself did not receive one. So I left. Generally speaking, my cohort of the program was part of the company much longer than most employees. I don't think a single person left in the first 3 years. Attrition only started now that there was a general shift in the companies culture and communication.
mxkopy 7mo ago
It honestly seems a little control freakish to think this way. People leave companies and that’s a good thing, they explore the industry and generally become more capable. If you leave on good terms there’s nothing holding back a renewed relationship, now with the added benefit of new perspectives; maybe meeting at conferences or working on a project. My gut is telling me these companies don’t part on good terms with their employees.
graemep 7mo ago
It might happen, but there are risks. The obvious one is that the existing employers will make an effort to keep the best (promotions and pay rises) so people hiring away from them will get the people they do not need to keep. Those sorts of clauses are not legal everywhere. They would certainly be at least heavily restricted in the UK (on the other hand there are subsidies for some employer training and education here - which is why my daughter has an engineering degree without paying any fees). The author of the article is in Israel, and as an academic is in a different position to people in businesses.

BitsAndObjects 7mo ago

(IBM figured this out a couple of months ago, and explicitly announced tripling their hiring of juniors/grads in order to avoid ending up with a massive gap in the management/senior layers in future).

kkapelon 7mo ago
Link? Source?
- BitsAndObjects 7mo ago
  https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47009327 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47009327 > “The companies three to five years from now that are going to be the most successful are those companies that doubled down on entry-level hiring in this environment,” Nickle LaMoreaux, IBM’s chief human resources officer, said this week.

adrianN 7mo ago

Ten years from now the people making these decisions have moved on to different companies and cashed their quarterly bonuses.

pezgrande 7mo ago

Will they? Just because you developed them that doesn't guarantee they will stay with you. It's been always the same issue tbh, but big companies could accept the risk because they pay the most competitive salaries anyways.