[adamnemecek]

> Nobody wants to hire only the mediocre.

Employee education is such an undervalued idea. Like you can get workers on the cheap and then setup incentives for education/self-education. I'm yet to see a company that sets up some sort of education pipeline for it's employees. I know that startups don't have time and or money but education doesn't need to be as long as the school system made you believe.

[linkregister]

A few notable organizations offer paid continuing education (Masters degrees) and have extensive in-house training, with career progression mapped out.

Here are some:

- Accenture

- Booz Allen Hamilton

- Deloitte

- Department of Defense

- Lockheed Martin

- Northrop Grumman

- Raytheon

It’s not just consulting companies and the defense industrial complex, these are just the only companies I have exposure to that offer managed career paths.

A drawback is that in those organizations, the pay is often low. Except the consulting companies, which just expect lots of hours. Either way, there are trade-offs involved.

I haven’t seen a serious investment in education from Bay Area companies, probably because attrition is higher and it’s not seen as a safe investment.

[rhexs]

Defense has career progressions? Is this for management? From what I've seen engineers are treated like cattle and hired and fired for the whims of every project.

[JimboOmega]

Having spent the first 5 or so years at defense companies, I agree. There was no career progression,especially without switching companies.

They want you to have a degree so they can charge more, but that's about it. You can easily work on the same project doing the same things for 20 years; I worked with people who did.

[linkregister]

Which ones?

[JimboOmega]

I'd rather not denigrate a specific employer.

The reality is that they bill your time to the government a certain way based on your qualifications, and the contract specifies what qualifications you're expected to have. If you grow or change in some way the contract doesn't capture, they can't give you a raise without losing money (since the contract pays them the same).

So classically you have to switch to another job - within the same company, or at another, to advance.

Compounding this is the nature of classified work (which most DoD contracts are). You're in a windowless lab, and you can't really say what you do, or even, often, who you do it for. You get 0 visibility outside your immediate team.

There are exceptions and some ways to get around these realities, but you're really fighting against a system that strongly prefers things remain static.

[linkregister]

So were you employed by one of the companies on the list I gave or were you just sharing your experience with defense contracting in general?

[linkregister]

Of those organizations, which ones match your description?

[morgante]

> I haven’t seen a serious investment in education from Bay Area companies, probably because attrition is higher and it’s not seen as a safe investment.

Google provides partial tuition reimbursement: https://www.quora.com/Does-Google-provide-100-tuition-reimbu...

[bonzini]

Red Hat hires a lot of fresh college graduates rather than aiming at existing "open source stars". Many then grow to become the maintainers of the projects they work on, and choose to stay in the company that let them grow. This is different from many other companies which hire current maintainers for public work and have the younger ones work more behind closed doors.

(I work at RH, but actually I heard the above observation first here on HN from someone that is at Google).