9 ms·
It's clear you are not a hiring manager. There aren't thousands of highly qualified engineers looking for work. I can't tell if this a troll post or not.
by doug_durham 21d ago
It's clear you are not a hiring manager. There aren't thousands of highly qualified engineers looking for work. I can't tell if this a troll post or not.
- zdragnar 21d agoReally? Last time I was involved in hiring, about two years ago, we had hundreds of applications in a day or so. What changed?
- binarymax 21d agoYes, there are thousands of qualified engineers looking for work.
- deleted 21d ago[deleted]
- lokar 21d agoIt’s a big industry. There are many roles at many different levels of expertise and experience. Many can’t find locals.
- 15155 21d ago> Many can’t find locals. *for the price they want to pay.
- lokar 21d agoYou can’t get them to apply. They are already very well paid. It’s a finite pool that is not large enough. Bidding up pay won’t change that. Instead you just hire overseas.
- 15155 21d agoPaying more will inherently mean that people cross-train to reap the financial rewards.
- lokar 21d agoThey already pay mid 6 to low 7 figures. The people who can and are willing have already moved over.
- Rumudiez 21d agoCare to share with rest of the class what the role is, then?
- lokar 20d agoPrincipal and distinguished engineers, some Sr staff.
- Rumudiez 20d agoworking with what tech? you didn't answer the question to a reasonable extent. it seems odd you need to hire people into principal and "distinguished" titles, you should be promoting from senior/staff to fill those internally. unicorn hunting is an organizational problem, not a useful reflection of the hiring market
- lokar 20d agoMost people who make it to staff will not ever be qualified to sr staff, then the same for each next level. All of the big tech companies I’ve worked for were founded by immigrants, and had many key immigrants in early Sr positions building the company.
- Rumudiez 20d agotrapped in a bubble… nobody is good enough to work here. go back to bangladesh where all your sr staff must live still couldn’t answer a basic question. I know I wouldn’t be hiring you with this communication track record
- mixmastamyk 21d agoMillions depending on how you cut it.
- logicchains 21d agoThey would be looking for work with you if you were offering them better pay and conditions than where they're currently working.
- whatever1 21d agoMoney does not fix the supply problem the parent comment pointed out (at least for fields that need multi year training). Let’s say that tomorrow we need 1M nuclear physicists. How can money help? You still need to wait for the talent pipeline to divert.
- throwaway85825 21d agoFortunately such ridiculous hypotheticals have no correspondence to reality. Most every job can be easily trained or cross trained. Mathematicians make good physicists. Nor is there some foreign pipeline of a million physicists. Such ridiculous argument exist only to perpetuate the lie of a skills shortage and deny the wage shortage.
- doc_ick 21d agoThey may make good physicists, but not great physicists. Similar to saying I know how to drive a car, now let me win the inde 500. Things take to for specialization, even with the advent of guessing and checking machines (llms).
- throwaway85825 21d agoA shocking number of innovations in x field are because y person brought an idea that maps from z field. Cross functional teams are important and mathematicians can and absolutely do make top level contributions to physics. One of the math problems recently publicized as having being solved by was actually just discovering that a German mathematician had published a solution in the 1950s.
- 21d ago
- 999900000999 21d agoI’m very pro immigration, but “Americans are lazy and stupid , thus unfit for hiring” isn’t a winning argument. Tons of Americans are out of work. I’ve personally seen my wages drop by at least 20$ an hour as well as the work being less stable. Gasp, you might need to train someone a bit or have employees that will say no if you ask them to work on Christmas. If I ran the H1B program it would be an unrestricted work permit with an automatic pathway to a GC after 5 years. Don’t get *convicted* of a felony and here you go.
- g3f32r 21d ago> If I ran the H1B program it would be an unrestricted work permit with an automatic pathway to a GC after 5 years. Don’t get convicted of a felony and here you go. Why would this policy be beneficial to Americans?
- Synthetic7346 20d agoIt benefits American entrepreneurs - they could hire from a diverse pool of people instead of waiting for local talent pools to develop? Not everyone is capable of building FAANG levels of talent pipelines to convert interns into eventual staff eng
- g3f32r 19d ago1) It benefits an extremely tiny slice of American entrepreneurs by allowing them to operate directly against the best interests of the broader American labor force? 2) This posits that there must be a large pool of highly trained and specialized Staff Eng sitting idly in other countries just waiting to be poached. What are those countries doing which is generating a huge untapped pool of labor? If that _is_ the case, then why aren't entrepreneurs in those countries capitalizing on the idle labor? --- Maybe I'm entirely too cynical - but I simply don't believe that #2 is true. There isn't a huge Indian talent pipeline just pumping out hoards of incredible world-class engineers worthy of poaching, yet America is entirely incapable of producing the same tier of engineer. I think it's purely a function of depressing labor costs at the lower end of the labor ladder and over the last ten years has actually just been an immigration pipeline with pay-to-play schemes on both ends.
- jimbo808 21d agoIt's clear you are not considering the long-term effects of labor policy. If we want a stronger domestic workforce, the answer is to incentivize Americans to develop the skills we need and to train them when they do not already have those skills. Mass importing foreign labor is not a substitute for building and investing in the domestic workforce.
- maest 21d agoBtw, this is analogous to the argument for positive discrimination: Preferentially treat one group of people (non-white/women/Americans) even if in the short term the revealed preference of businesses is to hire a different group of people (white/men/immigrants), such that, in the long term, the first group of people can develop the necessary skills to compete with the second group. Short term pain for long term gain.
- deleted 19d ago[deleted]
- consensus1 21d agoNo it's really not the same because we have laws against racial discrimination, but it is the entire purpose of the state to represent the interests of its citizens above all others.
- BobbyJo 21d agoThe arguments can be the same but have entirely different hidden variables that make it fine to use the argument in one context and not the other. Also, this ignores that the government works for citizens, no matter their race. Promoting racial equality among citizens is a function that the government might undertake. Pursuing policies that favor citizens over non-citizens falls in line with that same reasoning.
- tayo42 21d agoHiring is such a shit show, there's no reason to assume the people doing the hiring know what they're doing. Like HR has to insert them selves into the process
- deleted 21d ago[deleted]
- deleted 21d ago[deleted]