Slashdot Mirror


Hunting For a Tech Job In 2015

Nerval's Lobster writes It's a brand new year, and by at least some indications the economy's doing pretty well, which means that a lot of people will begin looking for a new, possibly better job. If you're looking to trade up, here are some tips, some of which are pretty standard-issue ("Update resume," etc.), and others that could actually stand you in good stead, including using the Bureau of Labor Statistics to judge the median salary for a position before negotiating with HR. According to Glassdoor, Dice, and other sources, the average salary for many kinds of tech workers will only rise over the next year, so it really could be a good time to see what's out there. Good luck.

33 of 174 comments (clear)

  1. economy doing well? by umdesch4 · · Score: 5, Funny

    "and by at least some indications the economy's doing pretty well"

    Which indications are those? Forgive me, but I don't watch CNBC.

    1. Re:economy doing well? by lgw · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Where do you live? Here in the Seattle area, the economy is booming. From fast food to construction right through to dev jobs, everyone is hiring like crazy. There are about 20 new buildings (mostly highrises) going up in downtown Seattle, and apartments are going up everywhere in the suburbs. No question things are doing well here. Where's the suck?

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:economy doing well? by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 2

      The money won't just appear out of thin air, you know?

      Have you seen the valuations for Snapchat and WhatsApp - or Facebook for that matter? We're well into Dot Com Boom 2.0.

      Just remember to get out before it all evaporates...

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:economy doing well? by ranton · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Couldn't help but notice the distinct lack of industry in your raving about how wonderful things are for you. I mean, having lots of commerce and residential is great, but how is anybody supposed to pay for it? The money won't just appear out of thin air, you know?

      Complaining about a lack of manufacturing jobs in today's economy is little different than complaining about the lack of agricultural jobs. Yes these have historically been sectors of the economy where the majority of people worked, but that is no longer the case. The lack of agricultural and manufacturing jobs are not a sign of a weak economy, they are the sign of a strong one.

      Manufacturing and agricultural output are still good metrics for measuring an economy, and the United States is certainly strong there.

      --
      -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke
    4. Re:economy doing well? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 2

      The money won't just appear out of thin air, you know?

      Yes it does. The Fed can easily expand or shrink the M1/M2 money supply to meet the needs of growing economy. Saying money can't appear out of thin air is as silly as saying the earth is flat.

    5. Re:economy doing well? by buddyglass · · Score: 2

      Lots of businesses are relocating to Texas due to low taxes. Texas has relatively high rates of blacks and Hispanics. Also relatively high crime. Especially in the urban areas where these businesses are relocating. So your logic fails. "Security" is not a major expense. State taxes and cost of labor are.

      Also- Atlanta is "blacker" than Detroit and has markedly lower crime.

    6. Re:economy doing well? by meustrus · · Score: 4, Interesting

      There's an important difference between the dot-com boom of the 90s and now. In the 90s you needed lots of capital and the smartest minds available to get online. Now you don't. Anybody with a little bit of programming skill can write an app in weeks and make it available to everyone. Anyone who needs a server can get an AWS instance and expect it to scale up when they need it to. Anyone who needs revenue can get a Google AdSense account. And anyone who actually needs substantial capital can point to Facebook's success. Not that Facebook or any other capital-driven businesses are immune. There may well be a bust. But the industry is more mature, the rewards are easier to define, and nobody wants to see their kids' faces when their investment decisions contribute to Facebook's demise.

      --
      I sometimes ask revealing, often ignorant-seeming questions. Maybe they're harder to answer than you think.
    7. Re:economy doing well? by Archtech · · Score: 2

      Exactly. Check out, for example, this: http://www.paulcraigroberts.or...

      Or this: http://www.paulcraigroberts.or...

      If Roberts' in-your-face tone doesn't suit you, try the soberly factual John Williams at http://www.shadowstats.com/

      --
      I am sure that there are many other solipsists out there.
    8. Re:economy doing well? by meustrus · · Score: 2

      Cheaper than robots? The 21st century will see the end of unskilled labor from the mainstream economy

      Let's have a thought experiment. Say that every year, machines replace 40,000 unskilled hours per week with 4,000 skilled hours per week maintaining the machines. The machines are equivalent to the human workers in economic output, so the revenue stays the same. Where does the money go? Should there be 1/10 as many workers working full time or the same number of workers working 1/10 of the hours? Should the skilled hours be worth 10x as much as the unskilled hours? Or should the skilled workers be paid the same or slightly better wages?

      Let's say all 40,000 unskilled hours are the entire economic activity of a company. If the company continues to employ the same workers, trains them to maintain the machines, and pays them 10x the rate for 1/10 the work, everything stays exactly the same (this never happens). If the company trains 1/10 of the workers to maintain the machines, laying off the rest, and pays the maintenance 2x the rate for the same number of hours (optimistic), the company now pays 2/10 as much for the same economic activity, leaving the other 8/10 for other activities. Where will that money go? Where should it go? How much of a raise for the management is appropriate? How much of the money can they use to expand? What is the likely expansion? Does the business plan scale up or would it have to change? Does scaling up displace other businesses with other workers?

      What about the laid off workers? In a small local economy, the layoffs could easily destroy an entire town. The remaining workers only need so many new clothes, new cars, new toys, and nights eating out. Even if we assume they will spend all of their money in the local economy, that's still 2/10 of the money now supporting the service industry. Restaurants and outlet stores will close, putting more people out of work in a cascade of unemployment. Can the company expand local jobs with its new profits to make up for this? Will it?

      When a business becomes more efficient, what is the ideal mix of lay-offs, pay raises, and work hour reductions? How does the answer change depending on whether you are a worker for the company, the owner of the company, a service worker in the company's town, a worker in the same industry in another town, a political leader interested in the most economic progress for voters, or a political leader interested in the most economic progress for campaign donors? Is the ideal outcome maximum economic output, maximum investment in the local community, or something else?

      These are questions we must think of now more than ever before. There have been gains in efficiency before, but nothing like what we will see in the 21st century. We stand at the threshold of machines replacing all unskilled work, from retail to agriculture to manufacturing to restaurants to transportation. Nearly all of our needs and desires can be met with machines, but only if we still have jobs.

      --
      I sometimes ask revealing, often ignorant-seeming questions. Maybe they're harder to answer than you think.
    9. Re:economy doing well? by buddyglass · · Score: 2

      I work for a company that makes apps for small community banks. We have about 300 apps in the Google Play store and another 450 in the Apple store (our iPad version is technically a separate app.) So it's not quite a 1-1 from app to company.

    10. Re:economy doing well? by datavirtue · · Score: 2

      I think that for some time now taxation has served two purposes:

      1) To burn money offsetting and providing a controlling mechanism of the money supply
      2) To burden businesses and individuals into using debt as a means to organically create money

      So taxes effectively become interest paid by the people to the major banks that operate out of the discount window, while the creation of debt increases the money supply and taxation acts to decreases it. The taxes go into a set of coffers (not directly) that are not counted as part of the M1 or M2 (or whatever designation now exists). Ostensibly I think this money is loaned to entities outside the US through commercial and international banks. When the money supply is not decreased you potentially rob the citizens of wealth while those loaning (controlling) the money do not assume that risk and enjoy all of the benefits (whatever those are). Now one might think that this tax money that is cleverly siphoned off acts as a currency to trade for commodities and it does, but the main purpose is to broker power. An obtuse change in function whereby it is used by the lower classes to buy commodities while the comptrollers use it to buy power. Maybe I'm crazy but this is the way I see it. This system fascinates me and I have spent a lot of time thinking about it. Perhaps this could all be a natural consequence but we as a people permit it to continue. There is a choice in how we treat our most important un-natural resource. The system of income and use taxation should really be halted and any collected taxes (sales taxes) should be used to directly pay for certain line items. As long as we agree to let the government force us into the arms of banks (income taxation) this highly inefficient system will continue bleed off wealth from the rightful owners on a periodic basis.

      --
      I object to power without constructive purpose. --Spock
    11. Re:economy doing well? by cheesybagel · · Score: 2

      Funny that you talk about Oz because it is all an allegory about the different kinds of currency. You have the greenback Emerald City where the Wizard of Oz lives, the golden Yellow Brick Road, and the silver Magic Slippers. Which somehow got turned into ruby in the movie.

    12. Re:economy doing well? by buddyglass · · Score: 3, Informative

      How many of those apps are simply re-branded versions of some core you wrote?

      All of them. The company couldn't exist if we had to code up a unique app for every customer. My point is that the fact of there being "lots of apps in the store" doesn't mean the number of app "producers" is correspondingly large. I thought I made that clear when I said, "it's not quite a 1-1 from app to company".

  2. Wow, no by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Insightful

    others that could actually stand you in good stead, including using the Bureau of Labor Statistics to judge the median salary for a position before negotiating with HR.

    Wow, no, do not do that, the BLS statistics are LOW for huge sections of the United States. Remember, these are the numbers used to pay H1 visas, and they include jobs that aren't necessarily what you would think of when you think of a programmer (like the guy at my brother's company who gets paid $40k to write SQL queries, and not necessarily efficient ones. That's all he can do).

    Secondly, when you are negotiating salary, always ask above the median (and that's assuming the median is correct). You can go lower later, but it's hard to negotiate higher than what you initially ask for.

    --
    "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    1. Re: Wow, no by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Informative

      That's nothing. I won't get out of bed for less than $250K. Just not worth it.

      Yeah. That's the right attitude. Let the recruiters know what we are worth.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
  3. Getter by better if you have skills... by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The only people we hire now have relevant experience and skills in our very specific field, and experience commensurate for the position we are posting. We have sadly given up on new graduates; they are too flakey, having never held an actual job before, and needing substantial training to get to a point where they can generate revenue... and leave. Now is a great time for people that graduated around 2010, found a job in their field at terrible pay, and are now ready for an actual career.

    1. Re:Getter by better if you have skills... by Anrego · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Personally I don't see anything specifically wrong here.

      There's a reason experience costs more: it's valuable. If a company can afford to exclusively hire experienced people it's probably not a terrible idea.

      Hiring new grads is a cost savings measure, and as was said, it usually comes with the expected downsides of hiring someone who's never held an actual dev job before. Employers weight the pros and cons and proceed accordingly.

  4. tldr: if you have to use dice to get a job by xxxJonBoyxxx · · Score: 3, Insightful

    tldr: if you have to use dice to get a job you're already f***ed

    1. Re:tldr: if you have to use dice to get a job by Anrego · · Score: 2

      Indeed.

      If any of the advice in this for lack of better word "article" was a big surprise, you haven't got a chance. This is the kind of advice people looking for a McJob need. I'm surprised they didn't mention wearing a suit if you have one and not being too obvious about your mom giving you a ride there.

  5. Re:Best advice I heard, and followed by lgw · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Get the hell out of the tech industry. I went back to school, got my PharmD and couldn't be happier.

    Won't you be surprised when the pharmacy robots displace you. Better to learn to program those robots, if you can!

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  6. Dice = Contract Jobs by JakFrost · · Score: 4, Informative

    I've always been disappointed in Dice.com since it's so full of slimy recruiting firms and even slimier head-hungers offering low-paying contracts. It's so full of Indian firms that it resembles a tech call-center from India and I don't bother anymore to list my resume there since I'll be flooded with worthless contracts in cities that I have no interest in working with. These worthless recruiters don't bother reading your profile or requirements (Perm-Only, Local Area Only) and just spam e-mail and call you with keyword matching crap short-term and low-paying contracts from cities across the nation that you have no interest in working in or moving to. Half the time I can't understand their thick Indian accents either and I wouldn't bother working with them if they can't even communicate well enough with them.

    Dice.com is the slums of Tech Recruiting.

    1. Re:Dice = Contract Jobs by antdude · · Score: 3, Interesting

      So, what are good web sites that are not like Dice.com these days then? I used to use it back in early 2000s.

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
    2. Re:Dice = Contract Jobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      To be honest, I don't think any really exist.

      Employers who hire new grads tend to go straight to the universities. Past that, I suspect most decent jobs are found either through networking or by going to places and asking if they are hiring (this can be surprisingly effective, and a lot of places appreciate the initiative).

      It has been awhile since I've heard about someone getting a good job by sending a resume in to some random job they saw posted somewhere. It's always "I have a friend who is working there" or "I heard they won contract X so I went down and talked to them".

      Places like dice.com are, as said, shitty short term contract work. Most companies worth working for do their own HR and have enough contacts through their own employees to find good people.

    3. Re:Dice = Contract Jobs by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 3, Informative
    4. Re:Dice = Contract Jobs by pls2917 · · Score: 4, Informative

      http://careers.stackoverflow.c... I found my current job there and it's the only place we advertise

  7. Re:Best advice I heard, and followed by slazzy · · Score: 2

    Robots might replace pharmacy technicians someday, but we'll always need pharmacists, let alone PharmDs.

    --
    Website Just Down For Me? Find out
  8. Painted into a corner by jandersen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I think the tech industry has painted itself into a corner. I had the misfortune to lose my job early in 2013 and spent almost the whole year looking before I found something; during that whole period I actually saw the same, relatively few jobs being readvertised over and over, with very little new showing up. The sector I was looking at was what you'd call 'devops', and it seemed like the companies were trying to get people with long experience in both development and system administration, but they weren't willing to pay more than what you'd pay for a middle ranking call-center operator. I can't quite imagine how anybody can imagine that being an attractive proposition to anybody with the qualifications.

    So, it looks to me like a number of companies - almost all of them internet businesses - have painted themselves into a corner, where they deperately need highly qualified employees that they are never going to be able or willing to pay for.

    1. Re:Painted into a corner by ruir · · Score: 3, Informative

      I am also a sysadmin with some devop background. It would be interesting to know where you are coming from. I am employed, and have been contacted regularly by people both local and abroad outlets. As for the local ones, both in Portugal and Gibraltar, I have had enough. They ask for the moon, are clueless to know what they want, do not offer any specialisation path, and worse, the pay is low, even for the current market. Ireland seems to be an interesting proposition, Germany not so much, Europe of the North has some interesting projects going on, apparently for our mother tongue Brazil too. Australia seems to always have been very backwards in technology no idea why, and the African market for our ex-colonies was very hot ten years ago, but not anymore. Asia seems to have potencial at the moment, but I really do not know the market (my wife is Asian).

    2. Re:Painted into a corner by jandersen · · Score: 2

      Well, in 2013 I managed to get called to interviews and then subsequently being contacted about the same jobs for months afterwards by other agents, after I had been rejected. I think the interview part of it rules out the job being fake, but you're right about the fake adverts.

  9. The Truth about CV's from India by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Just because you worked on a project that used [insert product here] it does not make you an expert in that product OR even qualified to put it down on your CV

    Over the past 3-4 years I have seen hundreds if not thousands of CV's coming out of India that contain huge amount of Bullshit if not downright lies.
    Now we filter them out by asking them not overly difficult questions relating to the products they are supposed to be skilled in.
    Even then some seem to slip through the net.
    Many may be good on paper but totally lack initiative and problem solving skills.

    Having spent 6 months this part year working in Jaipur/Mumbai and Chennai I have now a team of four recruiters working on supplying the CV's only of those who are up to the job AND (and this is really important) won't move on to another job as soon as they begin to get useful to the project.
    They do this for CV Padding. Never mind the quality, feel the width.

  10. Wall Street is NOT the economy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wall Street has been doing well because of all that Fed money that has been printed in the last few years. It has absolutely nothing to do with economic or business fundamentals. It was all bullshit money.

    1. Hedge funds/billionaires being able to borrow at the Fed rate and at much higher margins than us peons (95% vs 50% for the rest of us) pumped the money into the stock markets.

    2. All the money floating around was used by corporations to do stock buybacks - not because their businesses were worth investing in (contrary to the myth taught in Finance classes and spewed by corporate PR departments) but because it allowed the CEOs and billionaires to get even richer.

    3. 1 & 2 were all done at our expense because it weakened the dollar - making consumer goods more expensive; while our wages haven't gone up. In the meantime, we are working longer and longer hours because in order to keep profits up, companies have been laying people off and making their current workforce work harder and longer.

    A plan that was supposed to help us out and get employment back to 2007 levels has horribly failed.

    1. Re:Wall Street is NOT the economy. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2

      In the meantime, we are working longer and longer hours because in order to keep profits up, companies have been laying people off and making their current workforce work harder and longer.

      As an I.T. contractor, my contracts over the last six years has explicitly forbidden me from working overtime. I can only work 40 hours per week, Monday through Friday, during normal business hours. Which is fine with me. The contract for my current job included paid holidays and 20 paid time off (PTO) days. The perks are getting better on my end.

      A plan that was supposed to help us out and get employment back to 2007 levels has horribly failed.

      This isn't a normal economy. If current job growth is maintained, it would still take two years to recover to 2007.

  11. Re:Best advice I heard, and followed by ranton · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Robots might replace pharmacy technicians someday, but we'll always need pharmacists, let alone PharmDs.

    I worked as a software developer in the pharmaceutical industry, and I assure you that PharmDs are just as in danger of being automated as pharmacy techs. Perhaps even more so because of their higher pay. Every seminar I sat through where our customers talked about their successes with our software measured success in number of jobs reduced (usually through attrition, not firing, but the net result is the same). One key metric of success was being able to get the same amount of work done with more pharmacy techs instead of PharmDs, thus reducing overall wages.

    PharmD jobs are almost the poster child for a high wage career that can be more easily replaced by automation than most low wage work. It is a career that requires very highly skilled workers because of the vast amount of knowledge they need to have. That is exactly the type of work that the new wave of AI is being designed to do. Like another poster already mentioned, Watson really is going to displace a good percentage of your industry's jobs.

    --
    -- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke