[do]

Listing any required years experience with a particular technology seems like a mistake.

A good engineer is a good engineer and shouldn't need N+ years experience with a language/framework/tool to make an impact on a good team that's willing to do a little training.

[waterlesscloud]

When I see something like "7+ years PHP experience", I wonder what it is they think they're using that as a proxy for and why they don't just mention it directly.

It's not like there's a standard progression in technologies where you learn certain things in years 5-7, etc.

I can see there's a difference between say 1 years and 3 years, but is there really a difference you can count on being true if someone used a tech for 5 years vs 3? 7 vs 3?

[wallflower]

> I wonder what it is they think they're using that as a proxy for and why they don't just mention it directly.

A very smart developer who I respect once said something like: when you are young, you have lots of energy and want to learn/use the latest technology. As you get older and gain more experience, you start to see the patterns. It's not about the technology, there are repeated themes and solutions. But when you start realizing this and have accumulated 7 years of experience, you may be transitioning out and wanting to begin starting a family. So the people who might be most qualified might be wanting to leave the intensity of coding for the relative stability of management.

As someone once said - the entire premise of capitalism is based on overpaying the first few years and underpaying you for the next 20 or 30 years.

So perhaps 7 years of experience is a cludgy filter for the relative graybeards who understand that technology is just a tool, not an end.

[endtime]

>As someone once said - the entire premise of capitalism is based on overpaying the first few years and underpaying you for the next 20 or 30 years.

Someone with no understanding of the term "captialism", apparently.

[derefr]

That, though, would be simply stated as seven years in the field—not "seven years of X, five years of Y, eleven years of Z."

[acgourley]

That's an interesting point, perhaps its a proxy for "older hacker, perhaps with kids, less likely to hop jobs".

[bartonfink]

I'm not convinced most job postings are that clever.

[larrik]

Very well could be, and in which case it'd be in their interest NOT to say that outright (discrimination and whatnot)

[illumen]

Karate expert wanted, 7 years experience (not 3).

More than 2 * more libraries used, 2 times more projects, seen the language evolve, worked with 2 * more people, etc. Domain knowledge is a massive help for people doing things. The 7 year person has likely used far more things than the 3 year person. However if the 3 year person knows how to use a gun, and the 7 year person only knows how to use a knife - then the 3 year person wins[1]. Of course, many times the gun turns out to be a water pistol - or the 7 year ninja can fart in their general direction[2], wait for a flinch... and then throw the knife!

1 - don't bring a knife to a gun fight.

2 - monty python reference.

[eli]

Sure, but sometimes you may not have the time, inclination or ability to train someone on a technology.

Anyway, I view it more as "this is what experience we imagine the ideal candidate has" rather than "you literally need 4 full years of platform X experience to get hired"

[drivingmenuts]

Right, but you realize that the moment an outsourcing firm gets hold of that listing, those turn into requirements?

I almost didn't get called for a bog-standard programming contract because I lack a BS in Computer Science. You'd think 10 years as both front-end and back-end developer would trigger a light-bulb, but nope, not even a matchhead.

[acgourley]

I totally agree, just make sure you list what technologies they will be using. Then indicate that the applicant must be really good at them or be willing to learn them fast.