The feels like exceptionally lazy reporting in the NYT. What was the expectation, that tech companies would be up and to the right perpetually? That public tech companies are immune to general market downturns?<p>While a lot of tech companies are going through post-pandemic layoffs, most of them have headcounts that are still larger than where they were in Feb 2020, and have valuations that show steady growth.<p>My prediction is that over the next decade we're going to see a narrative in the media that hiring is still exceptionally difficult in the technology sector. There's a very real chance that this round of layoffs drives students and recent graduates into other industries if big tech is no longer seen as an easy path to outsized compensation. It was real side effect of the dotcom bust and the 2008 recession.<p>I'm excited to see what new companies are going to form in the next few years now that it's a tiny bit more difficult for the big tech companies to suck up all the oxygen in the room.
It’s hard to just blame the employers when I have seen so many people, most especially on HN, dying to treat employers as fashion accessories. Don’t tell me the rest of you haven’t seen developers fawning over themselves to become a part of FAANG. Even with the layoffs I still see people on here dreaming of FAANG.
There is a disconnect between “tech talent” and the overlap of layoffs. Sure, some firms have downsized across the board, but plenty of layoffs we are seeing in the last 12 weeks is focused on areas other than engineering.
Across the executive mea culpas, there is this theme of "I over estimated demand". But, one could take the perspective that they correctly hired to extract value during peak demand, because on average each new resource is profitable, and are now are reducing resources because there is less value there to extract. An investor could argue that it is irresponsible not to hire for peaks and thus leave value inthe market. Tech jobs are always tied to the ups and downs of economic cycles. Perhaps the mea culpas are really "this cycle ended before I expected it to". Some roles and some firms are more buffered than others. It would be nice to know how volatile your value is.
In the past year, I have worked with people making six figures in technical positions that know as much about computers as my grandmother. And I'm not exaggerating (and she's no Grace Hopper). Like, doesn't understand the basics of how a computer works, much less an operating system (and I don't mean the kernel, I mean like, what a shell is, how programs are executed, environment variables, file permissions, devices, local networking, local storage, symbolic links, user accounts, etc).<p>There is a sea of candidates who are both insanely ill-equipped, yet pass interviews regularly. I believe the competent candidate pool was probably exhausted 5 years ago, and businesses just kept hiring clueless people because they felt they had no choice. They aren't given enough user support and no training at all. As a result, employees are much less productive, struggling to do basic computing tasks when they were hired as technical people. And yet are payed vast sums by companies with more money than sense.
Yesterday a friend working in an EE capacity told me he was laid off in the morning and by late afternoon was asked to come back as a contractor.<p>Meta may be trying to give Wall Street signals they are being prudent by cutting costs in the press, but actions are showing awareness that they need to double down to win.
I agree..this article seems very click-baitish, which I sadly clicked on.<p>What company wouldn't want to hire the best? I've been casually making mental notes of the positions/titles of the groups impacted, and it follows common sense that talent acquisition, administrative, junior level employees, units that no longer support the business mission, and low-performing employees (or ones that don't fit the culture) were let go.<p>If anything, the article could have pointed out that the performance expectations have been shifted-up a notch or two as the remaining employees (once considered to be high-performers) are now "average". This could become a vicious negative feed-back cycle if not appropriately managed.<p><i>sigh</i> Corporate life can definitely be a drag. The holidays can't come fast enough!
NYT, and left in general, don’t like the tech that much. It creates inequality, with value going to a small group of talented people. They have responded with regulations, taxation, painting the tech in media in bad ways, highlighting its negative consequences, etc.<p>Look into relationship of EU with technology.