Maybe that is one of the reason headcounts have ballooned and complexity has increased so much -- an attempt to minimize individual impact.
(edit- NOT knocking internal tooling, it's just that it is traditionally considered a cost center)
Maybe that is one of the reason headcounts have ballooned and complexity has increased so much -- an attempt to minimize individual impact.
(edit- NOT knocking internal tooling, it's just that it is traditionally considered a cost center)
Why the knock on internal tooling? If internal tooling helps a value-add position go 10% faster, that's worth a lot. And most likely it isn't just one position, it's many.
If this is your impression of internal tooling, then your internal tooling team is terrible.
The places I've worked with good internal tooling teams provided a dramatic decrease in time to delivery. Automated failovers? Don't have to write it, it's in internal tooling. Automatically rebalancing traffic across datacenters? Already in the framework. Service discovery? You already know.
I could go down the list, but with a good internal tooling team, the only thing I've ever had to worry about was my app's business purpose. I don't have to muck with configuring monitoring, or load balancers, or getting authentication to talk to another app, or how to get a database, or etc.
The difference in time to delivery is dramatic.
Places I've worked without internal tooling take like 2 weeks just to get infra for a static HTML site.
The places I've worked with bad internal tooling take 3 weeks to do the same thing, because you'll spend a week arguing about whether the tooling works.
The places I've worked with good internal tooling take like 15 minutes to do it. I spend longer reviewing an MR than I do deploying infra.
Tooling is a huge part of the reason companies throw fistfuls of money at clouds. They could get compute on-demand cheaper from Leaseweb or OVH or hundreds of other companies, but they don't. They pay the premium for AWS or Azure or GCP, and it's because of the tooling.
This historically was the some for technology in general. When grandpa was the chief of data processing in the 1980s for some insurance company, he wasn't making FANG salaries. But the IBM dudes were.
No one's making a value judgement. The direct numbers just aren't comparable.
That's unfortunately not how markets work. If you create 10M of value every year, and are only paid 250K for doing it, it's because there is someone else out there who is willing to do it for the same. (Yes, there are asymmetries in information and power, but broadly, tech salaries are market-driven)
Like others point out, it's incredible the US hasn't mass outsourced their work to Europe yet.
Are we arguing against the attempt when a quick glance at the financials for FAANG and Co shows ample profit margins available for worker compensation?
[1] https://www.nlrb.gov/about-nlrb/rights-we-protect/the-law/em...
Also it’s not like tech today is mostly people whose first language is English - no judgements
There is a wide gap between capital sucking up all of the productivity with workers being slave labor and Marxists seizing the means of production and burning it all down; neither is being argued for, but somewhere solidly in the middle of those extremes. Capital makes some sort of return, value is created, workers are treated fairly, receive reasonable compensation for the value they're creating, and have a seat at the table of the org, and everyone goes home happy. If someone is more of an Ayn Rand/Libertarian/individual exceptionalism sort of a person, this view is likely unpalatable, and there is no common ground to meet at.
Never mind just the quality of workers available for the price you have set as the threshold.
I’m referring to major tech companies that already have foreign headquarters just expanding overseas.
Arguably one of the best at doing this is Apple. A similar product exists and has cheaper options (various Android flavors) but people prefer their green text bubbles and status symbol brand effect.
It turns out someone identifying a market opportunity, getting funding, renting office space, hiring HR, infrastructure, service and support personnel, product designers, QA, sales, etc, etc all costs a surprising amount of money and effort that for some reason all those people feel they deserve to be paid for..
Otherwise, someone would've collected some VC money, hired the best of the best code monkeys for $1M+ each, and taken over some tech niche by now
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...
Lucy finds out and orders Steve and Larry to stop doing that.
Now Steve shares salary data with Teddy and Teddy tells Steve what the market average is. Larry also shares salary data with Teddy and also learns what the market average is.
No collusion! But the effect is the same. That's why they earn the big bucks.
You mixed up the analogy though. Rather it should be that tomato seller 1 talks to tomato seller 2 down the road and they agree to never charge less than x$ for 1 pound of tomatoes thus removing market forces and creating an artificial floor for tomato prices
We are the practitioners realizing that dream for our masters.
This is true of every industry going on decades of increasing productivity and stagnating pay. What's new here besides greater awareness and labor churn? Will there be an actual change going forward? Of course the demographics favor workers now, but the laws and politics often don't. Immigration and outsourcing and automation can change that power dynamic very quickly. What're you going to do? Form a union? Start a company? Vote? Quit and work elsewhere? Interesting times we live in.
> Maybe that is one of the reason headcounts have ballooned and complexity has increased so much -- an attempt to minimize individual impact.
All of my friends and aquaintinces in nursing, tax, retail, and trucking have a few people who are trying to break into programming because of the benefits and pay. Outsourcing, scope creep, and automation exist and are expanding in my industry as well. How long until this drags down programmers as well?
Quit and work for myself. Personally I'm sick of the capped upside with working in tech (among myriad other issues) and the kinda shit you have to pull to raise it.
Not to discount other departments like marketing or operations -- they are important too. But they don't make the product, they are more numerous, and more interchangeable.
Not sure how important that is, though. Often the product gets sold despite of the product, thanks to marketing, operations, logistics, sales, support, legal and management (product/project).
Genuinely curious but do you consider product/project management to also 'be making the product'?
That’s a tautology though. They wouldn’t hire someone to break even and they wouldn’t hire someone to make a little more money since there’s work and risk in hiring.
I mean, I’ve seen people working in retail make this same point. And I’m not saying either of you are invalid in your claim, thats just how work is, it seems
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploitation_of_labour#Surplus...
It can be difficult to remember that the system wasn't always like this.
However, that revenue goes to support accountants, lawyers, marketing, internal tools, HR, healthcare, employer side taxes travel that’s not related to a customer, infrastructure costs, etc.
I am not saying in a perfect world I shouldn’t be making more and honestly, I probably could. But, I like having a large corporation to take care of all of the stuff I mentioned above.
Due to the nature of my employment and some benefits, it doesn't make sense to leave right now. But you can bet that I will be out the door the minute the clock ticks to the appropriate date.
Do the monetary value of these cover for the missing 4x on your base?
I'm very confident that I could buy a nice house in a low cost of living area, throw together a SaaS that pulls in a few grand a month, and then work on a more ambitious business while living comfortably. BUT if that ticking time bomb in my chest goes off while I'm doing that, my family will be relatively fucked. (~$250k life insurance payout plus our ~$500k net worth, so the wife will suddenly have to become a working mother with out of date skills in a relatively crappy locale..)
So in my case, it's worth sticking around at BigCo for another year or two and getting in shape while I'm still under the benevolent gaze of Master Faang
EDIT: Dang, I've been a fool.. looks like it's only about $100 a month for $1M in life insurance actually, haha. Maybe I should sneak out of here sooner rather than later
I didn’t become a Marxist until I hit six figures, but dang it I want the wealth produced by my labor!