Hacker News Reader

Comment by Retric | Hacker News Reader

Exactly, large companies are going to get more than 5% turnover per year simply from people retiring / dying. If they cut back on hiring they can fairly quickly shrink and retraining is cheap when your willing to let a 50 year old worker sit in a room at full pay.

The real issue is older workers are expensive and companies want a cheap workforce not lower headcount. Society on the other hand benefits when older workers are employed and can't supply unlimited quantities of well trained and cheap workers.

View on HN

In Japan, cutting back on hiring is a huge problem. If you don't get a job straight out of college, you're effectively a second-class citizen. There is no second chance, there is no plan B. The job for life cuts both ways in Japan.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simultaneous_recruiting_of_new...

This represents a giant economic opportunity for any company willing to be less stupid.

A lot of it is ingrained in Japanese culture. The foreign firms (and smaller ones) have much more flexibility.

Sort of - it's a coordination problem.

If everyone else believes that second-round hires are also second-rate hires, you can't necessarily break the standard alone. First-round hires will see you as a bad company and pass, and business partners will doubt your work and look to your competitors.

Not all systemic inefficiencies are available to be fixed by individual companies; if the rest of society will punish you too badly for deviating then the inefficient solution is the "smart" one.

(Of course, there might be an opportunity to staff an American tech startup or something that doesn't need those social connections.)

Maybe an opportunity for Japanese working remotely for foreign companies?

Foreign language teaching in Japan is notoriously poor, which severely limits the opportunities for remote work. Remote work wouldn't provide many of the non-cash benefits of being a salaryman - social status, access to housing and credit and a multitude of other things.

Aha, that sounds reasonable. But still, can't help but think that there is some untapped potential here. Imagine someone from the outside learning Japanese and then hire a bunch of "second tier" japanese would-be-but-never-became salarymen. Is it unthinkable that this could foster a special loyalty to this hypothetical company?

One of the smart things my company has done in Japan is hire much higher than industry average number of women and be ahead of industry in support for maternity etc. Most Japanese companies don't really support career growth of women and so we've been lucky to access a lot of great talent.

I think being from the US you underestimate the scale and reach of the enormous vertically integrated corporations of Japan. The US has antitrust laws which allow for a lot more potential disruption. Japan does not.

This is gradually changing. I worked for a small Japanese company that eventually went under and if I look at my ex coworkers they are doing well. Some of them became freelancer/consultants and are being paid more than people I know who work at Sharp and have been hired directly out of university.

Freelancers generally get paid more on an hourly basis than full time in part because their hours aren't guaranteed. I think in Japan this also could be due to the implied longer term guarantees implied in the full time salaries that don't need to be paid to freelancers.

Yes, definitely and as I mentioned in another comment, people who are not employed with a full time position will have a lot of difficulties getting a loan from a bank.

But, in the case of my ex-coworkers, the difference is significant enough that they are in a much better situation in term of how much money they earn and how much hours they work than people working at let's say Sharp (and Sharp is still much better than a lot of places with full time employees because they limit overtime).

My understanding is that ending up as a Freelancer is really the worst possible outcome for a Japanese salaryman.

It's not surprising they earn more because salaryman salaries are very low but they have no social status, job security, benefits, or pension that their old job gave them.

They do have pensions and health care but they have to pay for it out of their salary (which also explains the difference in term of earnings).

However at least for Software Engineers (I don't have experience in other fields), the difference is big enough to more than make up for the price of health care and pension and the loss of benefits. The only real problem is the lack of social status which means that it's very hard for a freelancer to get a bank loan to buy an house or an apartment.

> If you don't get a job straight out of college, you're effectively a second-class citizen. There is no second chance, there is no plan B.

How is this any different here in the 'States? If I'm still looking for work after I graduate, any interviews will have an unanswerable question: "why haven't you done anything since (graduation date here)?"

To some degree, you can do something. Contribute to OSS, or work for a charity, while looking for paid work and you can use this question as an opening.

On the other hand, studies have shown that starting a career in a bad economy will damage your salary for life...

There are plenty of answers that will be acceptable to many employers - "I've taken a gap year to go travelling", "I've been taking my time to find the best opportunity", "I've been working towards a Masters", "I've been looking after an elderly relative", "I've been doing charity work" or even "it's a tough economy, I haven't found anything yet".

A gap in your employment history isn't ideal, but it isn't a complete showstopper, especially if you have valuable STEM skills. It's possible to retrain and change careers, it's possible to get a job through pure gumption, it's possible to work your way up from sales clerk to area manager. Not easy, but possible.

To most Japanese companies, the idea of offering a salaried position to a 22 year old is simply inconceivable. Either you get hired out of college and become a salaryman, or you bear the black mark of the freeter for the rest of your life. If you're a freeter, your chances of prosperity and security are essentially nil.

The situation for young Americans is less than ideal, but the situation for young Japanese people is Kafkaesque.

If you let attrition drive headcount, you're going to end up with only the people who can't quit and find another job. Seen it happen.

Yup, voluntary redundancy was jokingly called the 'muppet retention policy' in a previous job. You announce to your staff that the company has some trouble, and allow all the bright, motivated, and in-demand folks to jump ship with a redundancy package, then you get to soldier on with everyone who's left, but now thoroughly demotivated.

The side effects of labour laws (and, to be clear, I am a big supporter or social / economic justice) can be really difficult.

This is very true. Look at the large US companies that were reluctant to have formal layoffs. They generally had near-monopoly positions, that enabled them to be lazy. (Ma Bell, I'm looking at you!)

Sounds like the US Federal government lately.

I've seen it described as the Dead Sea Effect.

Notably, the usual reason to dismiss older, experienced workers is that they cost more. That's why you don't retrain them for entry-level work or some unrelated task.

At the point where you're paying them to do literally nothing, there's not much reason not to redirect employees internally.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com