Hacker News Reader

Comment by pram | Hacker News Reader

I've had two job offers from AWS for SA and TAM and I turned both down. The actual position was always lower than what I was originally interviewing for (Senior instead of Staff)

Literally the only company I've seen that does that. It's like a bait and switch. If I'm not actually qualified just say no lol

View on HN

I'm at the point of my career where it's all about the manager, the hours, the comp, and the kind of work I'll be doing. I no longer care as much about the title or level. In fact if the level is lower, great -- I'll have an even easier time getting high perf scores.

These days, when I negotiate for a new job in Big Tech, I first and foremost maximize base pay. That's [1] immediate (no waiting for vest or anything), [2] durable (carries forward into future jobs), [3] non-variable (doesn't arbitrarily change much year to year while at the same company), and [4] the basis for bonus.

Then, I pay very close attention to who my manager will be. In fact I've once switched companies just to follow a great manager.

After that, I make sure I won't be carrying a pager that can ever "go off" in the middle of the night. That's a non-negotiable for me at this point in my career.

Then I negotiate up-front for a couple of pre-planned multi-week trips in my first two years to get around the bullsh*t of "you don't get real vacation time until you've earned it by staying at the company long enough."

Finally I look at the small print in the non-compete and the benefits. Oh wait, you mean my long-term disability coverage won't actually become effective until I've been with the company for 12 months? Nope; it's effective immediately. Oh, you want 18 months of non-compete? Nope, you're doing what every other company does. 12 months.

I'm finding that I'm in way too high demand among tech employers to put up with anything less. I am well aware that my demands are too much for places like Amazon, which is no skin off my back.

> After that, I make sure I won't be carrying a pager that can ever "go off" in the middle of the night. That's a non-negotiable for me at this point in my career.

I'm currently in undergrad so starting my actual "career" still seems far enough off for me, but serious question how do people actually accept that? Will I have to accept that when I apply for junior/entry level positions? I don't think I'm asking too much if I want to have a full night sleep and a strong work/life divide. I might be a bit young and naive, but I hope I won't get comfortable with living at the beck and call of my employer. People are more than just their individual contribution to lining the pockets of their bosses, no?

It's entirely dependent. This is also partially why "do you have a good manager" is included. I've had a few that absolutely will be in the line of fire first, and not make their team do anything they wouldn't do themselves.

From experience: a good team/manager, when forced to do this, will often freely be first on call, give you a day off after if you had an incident at night or let you sleep in til noon or later without complaint, etc.

If you are European or similar country with better working conditions/employee laws, it will be less painful. IIRC, in US salaried tech employees can effectively have unlimited unpaid overtime as a specific exemption.

Good advice about managers, it sounds like it may take a while to settle down and find a team that fits. It's good that you have been able to find a manager and team that actually works as a, well, team.

> IIRC, in US salaried tech employees can effectively have unlimited unpaid overtime as a specific exemption.

Yeah I see that daily with my dad working from home. He works at a local newspaper (wait those still exist?) doing stuff with maps, datavis and page layout/design. He works probably twice the amount of hours he gets paid for early morning until late at night, and can never take time off even with his measly "paid vacation time" allotment. He somehow manages to trudge along, which is unimaginable to me. Generational difference? Or maybe I just don't have the full picture yet

Unfortunately, you don't always know if on-call will be involved until you start at the job. Often many companies don't even hire you with a particular role in mind, instead you are matched to a team after you're signed on. (Especially for new grads). And sometimes on-call is introduced in an existing role, it can be difficult to refuse, especially for people in more junior roles.

But definitely ask about on-call when interviewing, in case they say they have it you can bail out before you sign.

I ask about it repeatedly to all interviewers to the point that some companies disqualify me. Call it a survivorship bias in reverse. It doesn't always work, amazingly, but it always sends a strong signal.

It depends a lot on the company and specific role. As a junior person there is a higher chance that the position you apply for will require this kind of commitment but not all. Just make sure you ask during the interview process.

> switched companies just to follow a great manager.

This is gold. I'm starting to realize (20 years in) that who you work with, and for, makes the difference. I really need to make this a priority for my next gig.

>Oh, you want 18 months of non-compete?

Is this even enforceable? Maybe if your C level, and they pay you while you wait.

Depending on what state you're in, yes, it may very well be enforceable. If you'd like to test those waters, more power to you. I wish you luck.

What did you do in your career to get to a point where you could ask for those things?

Nothing spectacular, really. After 20 years of working at several FAANGs, you just tend to move up the ranks to senior/staff-level positions. You also build a reputation that can follow you around the industry as people you've worked with also move around.

Once you're pegged for a Google L6/Facebook E6/Microsoft 67/etc. role, there's a lot that those companies are willing to agree to in order to get you on-board vis-a-vis Google L3/Facebook E3/Microsoft 59/etc.

I think down leveling is quite common, especially at higher levels as the expectations grow quite a bit between senior and staff. Depending on the position, actually filling it with +/-1 of the target level is a win. Interviewing is expensive and if a candidate is good for the role, but perhaps just a bit below the bar, then a recommendation to hire at L-1 tries to keep the candidate and give them a career path.

This is from my perspective at Google, I've never worked at Amazon.

My friend works there and said that virtually everyone gets dropped a rank on the way in. It’s so common that people commonly introduce themselves as “I’m an X but pre-Amazon I was an X+1”.

Sounds like an HR policy to reduce labor costs. As long as Amazon keeps a steady supply of labor behind you and at least some of them don't have other comparable options, they're going to agree to these terms and their hiring teams are going to continue this nefarious practice. Some may agree to it alone in an unconscious sunk cost fallacy.

There really need to be laws with teeth about false advertisement from both employees and employers so we can skip this sort of non-sense false advertising.

If someone was L+1 at a similar-tier company, why would they accept the downlevelling instead of a finding a suitable gig elsewhere? Is Amazon that appealing? Are openings that scarce?

Compared to smaller/less prestigious/non-tech companies, a certain level at Amazon/Google/FB will generally come with a higher expectation for technical competence, as well as more comp -- even an L4, mid level engineer at Google makes like 250k. So someone who's a "Senior Software Engineer" from some rando firm in the Midwest may still be doubling their salary or more.

The extreme version of this is being CTO as a startup of 10 people vs CTO at a company of 10,000.

AFAIK, there is no Staff designation. On the IC track, L6 is Senior, L7 is Principal, and L8 is Senior Principal.

Yes whatever is above Senior, I don't have every corporations IC structure memorized

http://levels.fyi is a great reference for converting between levels at different companies. Cuts through a lot of the bullshit recruiters and HR will try to sell you.

This might be a dumb question but if it's standard to drop everyone a level (I've heard this too) is it possible to interview for Principal or something where they would drop you back to Staff?

I’d interview for CEO instead and see where that lands me.

Funny but also not a bad approach to life

Realistically, the expectations for technical competence for a senior engineer are going to be higher at a huge successful tech behemoth like Amazon or Google than most smaller companies (though maybe not tech start ups), especially non-tech ones.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com