Slashdot Mirror


Dot-Commers vs. Government Contractors

StrangeBeer writes: "When the dot-Com movement went bust, it sent thousands of former employees running for cover (or the unemployment line, whichever was closer). One place they didn't go was the way of the Government Contractor who, incidentally, is doing just fine right now with or without a recession. Various reasons are given for this and one I'd like to point out is that the government managers would rather hire an underqualified person with a security clearance and later train them in their tradecraft. The vast majority of these kinds of employees are coming from other kinds of federal work (military, civil service, etc.) and not defunct dot-Com companies."

5 of 424 comments (clear)

  1. I work for a DoD contractor by wiredog · · Score: 5, Insightful
    As was pointed out in the article, many contractors will hire someone with a clearance and no experience because training them takes less time than clearing them does. A top secret clearance is a real meal ticket. The cultural differences are interesting. The government contractor expects to provide support for a product for years where the dot-com guy expects the product to be completely gone in less than a year. The government contractor wants coding standards and lots of documentation, so that if the programmer gets run over by a bus someone else can step in. The dot-com guy doesn't have the time, or inclination, to do documentaton, and often feels that coding standards are an infringement on his creativity. The contractor expects to stick with the same company, often the same project, for years. The dot-com guy expects to go from place to place following the money or the latest new exciting thing.

    I work for a DoD contractor, and there's a war on. Woo! hoo! I'm gonna buy a house!

    When life hands you a lemon, make lemonade.

  2. Re:Why not work for the gov right now? by 2Flower · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'd like to second this. I got VERY lucky... just coming out of college and looking for my first job, I NEEDED something in the area, stable, and with decent pay. I found a job as a webmonkey (with training opportunities for database programming and multimedia) for the FDA's Center For Devices and Radiological Health.

    The practical upshot is that I got lots of great training via the Killing-- err, the Learning Tree, expanded my skills tremendously, started out with a fairly eeeh salary but am now living quite comfortably... and most importantly, I did all of right at the start of the .Com Crash.

    If I had jumped in on the corporate entry level (not that there were many jobs for someone who previously thought Cold Fusion was a physics thing) I'd probably have bounced around a couple jobs, maybe had to move once or twice, and definitely not had the ability to save money and get nice and financially stable. While others were auctioning off their Aeron chairs to afford cold cans of beans, I was sittin' pretty on my cheapo Ikea office stool (with homemade padding).

    There are drawbacks. One, you don't start out with the Hat Made Of Money. If you can live 'comfortably' and likely single without needing a ferrari, this is not a huge hurdle. Two, if you're young, a lot of government employees are not. I'm the youngest guy in my office by about ten years. Three, no, the work is not very sexy. I view work as a means to an end (end meaning "$$$" which I spend on things I WANT to do). If a sexier job with the same amount of stability pops up, I'll go for it, but until then make mine federal.

  3. Indeed by FatHogByTheAss · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I've found, as a general rule, that people with some military training and background are generaly better engineers than your typical CS grad, as they have a real understanding of what mission critical means.

    A 21 year old kid who has legitimately been responsible for someone elses life is far more experienced than the valedectorian at your local code monkey U.

    --

    --
    You sure got a purty mouth...

  4. I'm a government consultant by bryan1945 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I thought about jumping into the .com arena during the heyday, but I held back for some vague reasons. Sure, I only got my ok raises every year rather than huge bonuses and such, but I still have my job and have increased my income 50% in 4 years. I liked my job, I liked my coworkers, and I liked where I lived- why should I have jumped for the possible big gains? Turns out I was right, at least for my circumstances.

    Some possible reasons why .comers won't go to government positions:
    1) Less flexibility in hours and attitude.
    2) Lots of military types in upper management.
    3) Sensible business plans where everyone does NOT get $2000 chairs.
    4) You actually have to work rather than just hype vapor.
    5) You actually have to produce something, or provide a service, rather than just market yourself.
    6) Generally need to have multiple skills in a variety of areas, rather than be _The Wizard_ in only one area.
    7) MCSEs don't count as degrees in this line of work.

    There's probably more, but this was just off the top of my head, and this is just my take from what I've seen of friends, coworkers, and acquaintances.

    --
    Vote monkeys into Congress. They are cheaper and more trustworthy.
  5. Stop bashing .com workers... by curunir · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm so sick of everyone bashing .com workers. The media is so quick to label everything .com a failure. The reality that many of us .com'ers know is that the .com bubble burst because of terrible business plans and greedy venture capitalists. It was *rarely* because engineers weren't able to get the job done.

    People have the mistaken idea that just because workers were given more freedom, that the quality of their work suffered. The idea that people working for .com's don't document their work is just wrong. Every .com I worked for (and there were 5) highly valued detailed functional and technical specs. We had coding standards which included fully commenting code. The difference was, we didn't have two years to complete the product. It was always ASAP. As a result, we did view our work less as striving toward a finished product and more toward meeting a deadline and then revisiting it again to add in the features that product planning decided were necessary.

    It is truly a shame that so many great ideas are being discarded by labeling them part of the .com phenomenon. Ideas like respecting your workers and trying to create an environment where they can achieve as much as possible. From someone who saw them first hand, these ideas worked. Some amazing things were accomplished by tech workers at .coms...they just didn't have any business application.

    So, if you have to slam the .coms, talk about the marketing people who spent millions on advertisements before the company saw revenues, let alone profits. Don't blame it on the engineering teams...we did our job.

    --
    "Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos!"