Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Saw this posted in the ADJ facebook group and figured it would be a fabulous time-suck of an article to have all of you debate, complain, and complain some more about their perspective. I thought it was pretty spot on and honestly, high expectations, lack of resources, and salary inequities abound in most fields, not just tech, in Austin.
Quote:
OPINION EDITORIALS Why tech talent is in the process of abandoning Austin
Many of these talented people said that the soaring housing prices in Austin had them eyeballing smaller towns in Texas, or worse, their hometowns outside of the state. There are only so many times you can try to buy a house, get rejected, or get outbid on 22 homes before you start looking at other places. Only so many people will accept a billion percent rent increase at renewal time before thinking that going back home to Louisiana’s lookin’ pretty good.
....
Because of the global pandemic, remote work has become a staple in the tech industry, teams adjusted and realized the office is more of a luxury than a requirement, and many large brands swear that they’ll never require their employees to come into the office again.
For that reason, tech workers’ expectations have been forever changed. Fully remote options will drive the market for years to come, and hybrid options or flex work hours will also be how large tech firms attract and retain talent – ping pong tables and chill vibes will be less of an appealing sales pitch.
The pandemic has also shifted the talent pool to include everyone in America – if all workers are remote, employers no longer have to look just to the local workforce. This talent pool expansion is a double-edged sword – if an Austin tech company can look to Nebraska for workers, then remote workers can look outside of Austin to other budding tech hubs, potentially shifting the entire environment. That’s the main driver for Austin brands continuing to hire in Austin, lest the entire ecosystem fail.
...
A theme we continue to hear from high quality candidates is that employers have increasingly unrealistic expectations. You already know the stereotype of job listings that say they’re entry level but require a decade of work experience. But as budgets tightened in the face of uncertainty, Austin tech companies are becoming phenomenally great at hiring someone to do three jobs that pay less than one.
...
If you think this is an exaggeration, just this week a job seeker let me know that a recruiter sent them a job description that required the “ability to code in any language.” WTF. The recruiter was serious. Try telling me this isn’t out of control and I will laugh right in your face, friend.
...
Many believe the salary levels are a decade old and simply can’t keep up with the market conditions in Austin and while we’ll leave the “you are a remote worker, you shouldn’t earn as much since you moved to a less expensive locale” debate to another day, we will firmly assert that this problem will hold back the tech innovation and the overall economy in Austin.
...
That same shift has also lowered tolerance levels for burnout. One member in the Group pointed out that after the market crash in 2008, resource levels were depleted – and here we are in 2021, they haven’t been restored. People were burned out before the pandemic, and now they’re moving to the country to work remotely and begin healing this burnout that is coming to a head.
...
The process has become lengthy and demanding with endless personality tests, whiteboard tests, Zoom calls, questionnaires, more phone and video calls, aptitude tests, and so forth. Most people have come to accept these as hoops to jump through, but the practice of having job seekers do extensive unpaid projects as part of their job application is creating deep resentment and a growing resistance. No one expects to shake a hand and get a job today, but doing a 12 hour assignment that is due in 24 hours is unreasonable, especially unpaid and with no promise of their intellectual property being protected.
...
The final nail in the coffin is that candidates and employers are blaming each other for a power imbalance, and thinking that their situation is unique. A feeling of isolation is growing due to peoples’ inability to openly discuss this process – both hiring folks and job seekers.
While there is accuracy to this, I am sure, most of the tech companies are still growing, so I am not sure abandoning is the right word. And a few anecdotes doesn't really make a super strong case.
Edit: As another anecdote, my wife works for a major tech company and they have had two candidates hired that already live here. Both were very good fits for their job. I am not sure what the pay was, but mid to upper 100s most likely with excellent health benefits and vacation/time off. One quit after a couple of weeks, stating that they 'did not want to work that hard'. I paraphrase, but only slightly, it was something very close to that. The other was a no show who, when followed up with by the company, simply stated that they decided that it was going to be too stressful. Both these people were in my wife's dept and she was flabbergasted. I know how good she has it - yes, they have some 'intense' periods of work with problems to solve and deadlines, but NOTHING like what I have to deal with in consulting. It is a plum of a company to work for, at least in the area they were hired. I am not sure exactly what they are looking for.
Last edited by Trainwreck20; 01-05-2022 at 10:18 AM..
While there is accuracy to this, I am sure, most of the tech companies are still growing, so I am not sure abandoning is the right word. And a few anecdotes doesn't really make a super strong case.
Edit: As another anecdote, my wife works for a major tech company and they have had two candidates hired that already live here. Both were very good fits for their job. I am not sure what the pay was, but mid to upper 100s most likely with excellent health benefits and vacation/time off. One quit after a couple of weeks, stating that they 'did not want to work that hard'. I paraphrase, but only slightly, it was something very close to that. The other was a no show who, when followed up with by the company, simply stated that they decided that it was going to be too stressful. Both these people were in my wife's dept and she was flabbergasted. I know how good she has it - yes, they have some 'intense' periods of work with problems to solve and deadlines, but NOTHING like what I have to deal with in consulting. It is a plum of a company to work for, at least in the area they were hired. I am not sure exactly what they are looking for.
Companies are lowballing employees. There is a low-simmering stalemate at our company right now. They are asking for more production from employees, while not giving raises that meet inflation. People are leaving, and there is no one to replace them. The employees are refusing to work over 40 hours, and our company is missing deadlines.
To be fair, I've found the best way to find that 'raise' is simply to increase skillset and change employers with a role that matches skillsets of higher value. When you find that role and your skills match up and the salary lines up to your expectations / needs, then become the loyal / humble employee, but not too loyal. I'm always in the job market 'just incase'. simply because its very hard to find employers that care about employees outside of a statistical level, and there is no merit in humbality of most employers. I've done it, made employee of the month, two weeks later I was laid off. It's very hard to move up within a company these days. I personally do not get easily attached to one particular employer because employee loyalty just does not merit very much in today's workforce.
I personally agree that salaries overall do not match the market values in Austin .. I personally make right at $100k at one of my jobs and if I were to try to enter the market right now, I would either have to rent / buy something very small in Austin proper or buy in the suburbs.. I do see the problem in that .. but the way I personally see it overall is this...
Employers base salaries based on supply of talent of the local workforce along side with demand of the product said workforce is constructing / selling / ect. Those are 'in-scope' cost analysis. They do 'not' base salaries on local housing market demand, they do whatever they can to work around this which is why remote work has become extremely popular in some areas of the country. Those are 'out of scope' costs. Our overall quality of life, outside of the employers campus, is 'not' their responsibility. Their only responsibility is paying us fairly for what the job entails, not what the local market demands. Anything outside of the work environment, is for us to make adjustments for accordingly if we desire a quality of life, that or.. ..change to a role/employer that more suites our financial obligations.
Now I'm not saying this system is perfect and that it doesn't cause local problems, it does.. ..employees with lower salaries will have to move further away from job hubs and contend with more difficult commutes, lower quality of life, ect ect.. ..but what I am stating is, it is a big misconception in believing that an employer in some way owes us that. They do not. I'm also not saying that employees are paid completely fairly... I would say most are not. Employers are about the company, not the employee, they will lowball to retain as much financial resources as possible, however; I do believe the margin of bargaining is slimmer than some think, even if it were maximized I do believe the lot of us would still be facing the same problems we are currently facing.
The second thing is.. ..even if employers were in some way to boost employer salaries to meet housing market demands (which would be impractical as to do this they would need to raise values of product to compensate which will weaken their customer base or cause their customer base to seek alternative thus weakening their competitive edge, reduce staffing to justify the higher expenses, or throw them out of business altogether or force them to relocate to a cheaper locality for operations - therefore no employer at all) .. .. it still would not solve the problem. Unless there is more housing inventory, if demand of housing remains the same (or even increases now that more people are capable of purchasing) Housing values would only raise along with the salary increases to meet and justify the new demand of capable buyers and now even greater lack of supply. Now in terms of minimum wage increases, yes.. ..I would agree it would be helpful - but that isn't going to buy anyone a house, at best today that would give someone an opportunity for a room-mate co-ownership... The statement I listed above would imply what would happen if the vast majority of employers (especially tech employers) increased salaries so the average employee could now foot a $500k house.. ..that $500k house would then increase to a $750k valued home as it creates more competition on the same home. Don't believe me? Look at the Bay Area and Seattle. Plenty of jobs paying well over the $100k mark.. ..and plenty of those folks live in trailer and RV's.
Last edited by Need4Camaro; 01-05-2022 at 11:17 AM..
Good points, N4C. I'm referring to the salaries tracking to inflation, not housing though. If inflation is running 7%, and we have a labor shortage, then a company that is offering people 3% raises is going to hemmorage employees.
I dunno about the details of these jobs, to be honest. But my wife rarely gets in 40 hours a week, much less more than 40 - at least based on a tracking system like I use for my work - and they encourage people to take vacation and not overwork. She does work for a very good organization within the company, I am sure some are worse. For some positions (essentially one level above my wife, but trickling down to her a bit) you are basically 'on call' to answer a question or deal with a problem pretty close to 24/7; however, they really doesn't happen that often and is more relegated to the higher pay jobs.
I *think* their pay is competitive, but don't really know as I am not in that field. For years now, they have been doling out bonuses measured in the 10s of thousands. Obviously not as permanent as a salary, but bonuses from 10-20% or whatever of salary make a huge impact. I don't know if these people found higher paying jobs for less work or not, but would be very impressed if they did. The people that are leaving their company are leaving for very high-paying jobs with horrible work demands (at least by reputation) and they aren't junior staff, mainly more experienced - maybe 45 years old+?
Not sure. TBH in tech I've found that the older 45 +yo workers seem to be more complacent even when things aren't going their way, especially if they have already been with the company for a long time. Younger folks seem to be more likely to job hop in tech, especially if they are chasing experience, although that rarely applies to a high paying low responsibility role.
Companies are lowballing employees. There is a low-simmering stalemate at our company right now. They are asking for more production from employees, while not giving raises that meet inflation. People are leaving, and there is no one to replace them. The employees are refusing to work over 40 hours, and our company is missing deadlines.
Yeah. Funny how that free market works when workers start realizing their value. If one day you realize your raging hypocrisy it’ll be a really funny day.
POV: There's very little said here that doesn't apply to every industry that can go remote.
COVID gave us all huge incentive to virtualize everything that can be virtualized. At first, folks flooded the Austin market from California and NYC. With the value proposition here in Austin being even less than it was four or five years ago (when we were all still here complaining about how expensive Austin was), of course there are going to be people who do the math and decide that it isn't worth the premium in cost of living to be able to sit in Mopac traffic at rush hour for the privilege of driving through the Trail of Lights -- or for whom Yet Another Hipster Taco/Coffee/Kolache joint long ago past the point of diminishing returns.
I'm not there yet. I don't think I'll retire here, and maybe I'll get out before that when my kid is grown. It's certainly easier (cheaper) for us to hire people outside of major cities, but it's also harder to find good talent outside of major cities.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
