Granted, there are a set of people who are very good at job-hopping while executing a performance of being a top performer. But maybe a company will do just fine those people hop away. Maybe it would do better.
The handwringing and psuedo-calculus of cuts does further damage to any interesting work.
Can't do interesting work when instead you have to fill in for a job previously covered by a junior engineer.
It'd take a hell of a company culture to fight these trends.
And obviously, not laying off people has a much smaller impact on staffing and the work one is doing, so I'd like that part better as well.
You need the sort of work I do when you’re trying to get more done with less. Do I prefer using these skills to prevent over hiring in the first place? Of course I do. I’ll even take it for winding down a cash cow so we can start new product lines.
The “goodness” of most people who conflate new with better is a matter of prospects. This kid is going to be amazing someday. In a downturn you need amazing now, not some day.
But above the curve, everything else matters a lot, especially having a good boss / project leader and a project that makes sense / is actually used by people.
Advice to reduce the wages of all individuals is disconnected from reality and likely originates from someone who is insulated from the practical implications of such a decision, such as those in an academic setting.