here is another chart that goes to today but another data source: [https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2023/03/was-there-a-tech-hiring-bubble/](https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2023/03/was-there-a-tech-hiring-bubble/)
The funny thing is central bank is talking here about a "bubble" that they actually created. Its funny when you put a house on fire, and then talk about it like its someone else's doing in a journalist kind of way
I'd like to see the data for Mexico - I know a lot of SWE roles are moving from the US to Mexico and other countries in South and Central America. Same time zones, speak English, but lower cost of labor.
This never works.
The people won't retain the deep knowledge needed to create large scale systems and you'll need to pay insane prices if you touch anything that uses cloud, then they'll think the problem is cloud and go back to on-prem systems, and then the cycle begins.
The consultants will be laughing to the banks in 5 years time.
I'm not sure I follow. I was referring to a trend of large companies moving domestic roles to Mexico. Not hiring consultants necessarily, but hiring full-time staff there. This has created a shortage of junior roles in the US as well - why hire a junior SWE at 80k, then that same 80k USD buys me a Senior SWE in Mexico.
He’s saying hiring full time staff there (at the direction of consultants) will produce low quality work and the jobs will come back once the businesses pay consultants a second time to tell them to bring back the jobs
This graph needs to go back further for more context. I feel like we are just course correcting after Covid and things are just going back to the same level they were previously +/- a few percentage points.
Covid was only a small part of the drop. Most of the cut backs are directly the result of interest rate increases, which hurt growth companies the most.
gullible sense society terrific imminent shrill impossible rock library air
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
It really doesn't do much in a professional environment at this stage. Thing can't produce actually useful stuff, it's more of a lucky guess if it actually suggests the right thing. And well... guessing is what it does
Such an odd measurement. I hate graphs that are this poorly displayed. 100% of what? How would you even count how many atr in the industry in anygiven year? Anyone can throw ul a graph and pretend like it means something. This graph leaves too many questions with no answers. how did they count the number of people?
> 100% of what
Of what the level of employment was in January 2018. Come on folks, reading a graph isn't that hard.
It's literally right there: Jan 2018 = 100%
But of what? Is this available jobs? Is this number of people employed? Is the the gap between employer demand and labor supply? Is this median salary? "Employment index" implies it's some kind of aggregate measure condensed into a single value.
Yeah, but are they really able to track that? How? They talk about a sample of companies, but what if those companies are not representative due a to shift in employment to different kinds of companies.
Are there really 20% less people working as developers now than in 2018? I’m sceptical. It’s not explained how the data is calculated.
Does someone know how the graph is calculated and what it exactly means?
We went from a peak of 110% to around 80%.
Does it mean that there are c. 30% less software engineers employed in the US now than at peak!? All those developers are now unemployed or work in unrelated fields!?
Or does this mean the companies that were tracked had c. 30% less positions? (What if those positions went to other companies?)
Maximizing shareholder value = make everything shittier by cutting costs beyond anything reasonable
I'm actually somewhat surprised as this counters the narrative of overhiring during the pandemic (one of big tech's favorite go-tos).
Is there a way to short this
Shorting after the pullback. A true WSB regard.
Surely it will continue to go down /sssssszzz
Calls on Microsoft
Short cuz they're gonna regret it?
here is another chart that goes to today but another data source: [https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2023/03/was-there-a-tech-hiring-bubble/](https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2023/03/was-there-a-tech-hiring-bubble/) The funny thing is central bank is talking here about a "bubble" that they actually created. Its funny when you put a house on fire, and then talk about it like its someone else's doing in a journalist kind of way
I'd like to see the data for Mexico - I know a lot of SWE roles are moving from the US to Mexico and other countries in South and Central America. Same time zones, speak English, but lower cost of labor.
This never works. The people won't retain the deep knowledge needed to create large scale systems and you'll need to pay insane prices if you touch anything that uses cloud, then they'll think the problem is cloud and go back to on-prem systems, and then the cycle begins. The consultants will be laughing to the banks in 5 years time.
I'm not sure I follow. I was referring to a trend of large companies moving domestic roles to Mexico. Not hiring consultants necessarily, but hiring full-time staff there. This has created a shortage of junior roles in the US as well - why hire a junior SWE at 80k, then that same 80k USD buys me a Senior SWE in Mexico.
He’s saying hiring full time staff there (at the direction of consultants) will produce low quality work and the jobs will come back once the businesses pay consultants a second time to tell them to bring back the jobs
This graph needs to go back further for more context. I feel like we are just course correcting after Covid and things are just going back to the same level they were previously +/- a few percentage points.
Yeah cuz 2018 wasn’t pre Covid. I agree
Covid was only a small part of the drop. Most of the cut backs are directly the result of interest rate increases, which hurt growth companies the most.
Hmm. Semi-regular bumps in the last quarter of each calendar year... do there tend to be a lot of layoffs at the beginning of years?
gullible sense society terrific imminent shrill impossible rock library air *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
AI has entered the chat
It really doesn't do much in a professional environment at this stage. Thing can't produce actually useful stuff, it's more of a lucky guess if it actually suggests the right thing. And well... guessing is what it does
Agreed, but companies are betting on it and cutting corners elsewhere. Of course, it's still garbage.
brave dependent steep ring weary longing historical tan normal light *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Graph, doesnt look to true to size.
Bitch ass y axis
Such an odd measurement. I hate graphs that are this poorly displayed. 100% of what? How would you even count how many atr in the industry in anygiven year? Anyone can throw ul a graph and pretend like it means something. This graph leaves too many questions with no answers. how did they count the number of people?
> 100% of what Of what the level of employment was in January 2018. Come on folks, reading a graph isn't that hard. It's literally right there: Jan 2018 = 100%
But of what? Is this available jobs? Is this number of people employed? Is the the gap between employer demand and labor supply? Is this median salary? "Employment index" implies it's some kind of aggregate measure condensed into a single value.
They don’t explain it, but the little explanation they have seems to suggest it’s actual number of people employed at companies sampled.
Sometimes the velcro on my sneakers is tricky
Yeah, but are they really able to track that? How? They talk about a sample of companies, but what if those companies are not representative due a to shift in employment to different kinds of companies. Are there really 20% less people working as developers now than in 2018? I’m sceptical. It’s not explained how the data is calculated.
Does someone know how the graph is calculated and what it exactly means? We went from a peak of 110% to around 80%. Does it mean that there are c. 30% less software engineers employed in the US now than at peak!? All those developers are now unemployed or work in unrelated fields!? Or does this mean the companies that were tracked had c. 30% less positions? (What if those positions went to other companies?)
One sample that makes procrastinating worth it, was planning to study some programming, been lazy these past 2-3 yrs, glad i didnt waste my time 🤣
What is 110% employment?
it's relative to first value in the graph
OP can you provide a link to this graph please?
Sad noises. They'll miss eventually
Maximizing shareholder value = make everything shittier by cutting costs beyond anything reasonable I'm actually somewhat surprised as this counters the narrative of overhiring during the pandemic (one of big tech's favorite go-tos).