[YetAnotherMatt]

While the times are definitely changing, a lot of people are still very averse to finding a new workplace.

This means that even at a 1% raise per year, some people will stick around for decades. One of the best developers at one of the companies I worked for was exactly that kind of person.

For the company this means a large amount of extra profit year in year out.

The odds of you saying "Nevermind, I'm out" when they don't budge from a 2% raise are from the employers side pretty low. The odds of a new hire saying "Nevermind, I'm out" when unwilling to budge on salary negotiation is a lot higher.

Hence it becomes easier to give some additional leeway in that situation. Also if companies already have a large workforce, giving a raise to all current employees is a whole lot more expensive than giving more money to all new hires.

Lastly, there has been plenty of research that has shown that salary is not that big of a predictor of whether people stick around or leave in any given year. Whether that research is also true for software developers is up for debate, but it is what most companies rely on.

Lastly an anecdote, I was told by a manager once that if I wanted to get a significant raise, I could quit and come back as a contractor or "Senior Developer" after 6 months. At that time I was considered a junior, and promotion to senior was only possible after 10 years experience internally.

[vmception]

> While the times are definitely changing, a lot of people are still very averse to finding a new workplace.

This is one thing I've coached career-focused and executive aspiring women on.

If they are worried about being assertive and being called a "bitch" at their current organization then they are already playing at a disadvantage.

The competition is full of men that got called "cocky" and self absorbed at many organizations, before landing in one at a senior level in a different place that needed someone new to shake things up or "make the hard decisions".

I don't really see that factored in to the outcomes.

Whether this idea results in a bunch of women finding that no organization wants their assertive attitude? Time will tell. A level playing field definitely involves normalizing behavior.

[oarabbus_]

>This means that even at a 1% raise per year, some people will stick around for decades. One of the best developers at one of the companies I worked for was exactly that kind of person.

As someone in their 30s who has spent in-person time at about a dozen companies (a stint in consulting will do that) ranging from start-ups to large enterprise, this is exceedingly rare from what I've seen. Hardly anyone makes it to a single decade, much less multiple. Maybe at a law firm, but not in a development role.

I don't doubt these people exist but I'm a bit skeptical they are that significant in number to the point of defining the equilibrium as mentioned in the OP post.

[YetAnotherMatt]

I forgot to mention, my experiences are all based on EU countries. When we worked with US companies, we would occasionally joke that a 2 year tenure is considered long at the US companies we worked with. There would be people joining / leaving their teams every single month.

In the teams I've been part of, average tenure at the company was over 5 years in every single case. In one case over 15 years.

These are all development positions. Management positions and marketing positions did tend to move around a bit more often.

[goatinaboat]

Hardly anyone makes it to a single decade, much less multiple. Maybe at a law firm, but not in a development role.

I’m guessing you’re a webdev and this is normal for that industry but in more “traditional” fields programmers behave much more like other white-collar workers. I’ve met plenty with 20-30 year stunts at the same company.

[oarabbus_]

I used to work in medical devices, where I saw more along the lines of what you're referring to. But while you'd occasionally see 10+ year stints, "multiple decades" was still rare.

Regardless, the number of developers at these companies is much fewer than in tech; therefore, they cannot be setting the equilibrium referred to by OP.

[john366366]

I don't know how to put it less bluntly here it goes, in my experience at non-faang orgs the software developers who stay over 5 years are not competent and likely won't pass the interview.

[JamesBarney]

My experience has been the opposite. I've worked for large hospitals and oil and gas companies, and on any given team 50% of our senior engineers had been there over a decade.

[oarabbus_]

I used to work in medical devices and hospitals, and while it's _more_ true in those industries, the numbers of developers employed is less than in Tech. In other words, it isn't the Energy or Medical industries defining the equilibrium for developers. Jumping around in medical device/hospitals also results in smaller raises than in the Tech industry. Can't speak for Oil & Gas on that part.

[greedo]

At my company, there are developers who have been there 30+ years. They have seen a lot...

Insurance companies change slowly. We still have COBOL, mainframes, etc. Applications that cost $10k/minute if they're down.

Part of the equation is job security. You eat enough shit, put up with enough mgmt BS, but you get a steady paycheck, decent benefits, and little threat of downsizing.

[scarface74]

I just spoke to my former coworker for the first time since around 2008. When he left the company we both worked for, he went to an insurance company. He’s been there for a decade. They actually have a pension.

I’ll be on my sixth job since then starting in July.

I have another friend who graduated in 1995. A year ahead of me. He was hired as Cobol programmer. 25 years later, he’s still writing COBOL.

[_57jb]

Isn't it crazy this is what it all boils down to...looking over our 30 some odd years grinding away and we are looking to stay safe.

You can live your dream or help someone else build theirs.

[pmiller2]

Or, we could have an actual social safety net where if you lose your job and can't find one for a few months, you don't lose your health insurance, your home, and your ability to eat. Most people do not have sufficient savings to cover an extended job search, UI simply doesn't cut it, COBRA is prohibitively expensive, and Medicaid only kicks in at absurdly low income levels.

[_57jb]

Yeah...I mean I think money is genuinely this necessary evil we've built a society around and I am constantly questioning it.

How interesting that we can build a system that can fluctuate enough to upend lives both good and bad. You become so focused on it, it is seen as this brass ring. Once you have it, you question everything.

I realize this is a bit philosophical and idealistic. You appear to have a similar viewpoint as mine in terms of a society that supports the whole, I just wonder if you can do that effectively when you have a source of power so specific like money.

There are some very revolutionary thinkers/philosophers/minds that were somewhat detached from money (in that they came from such wealth they didn't have to care or they chose a life detached from it) Plato, Aristotle, Wittgenstein...many more. I'm curious if there is a connection or merely just a representation of the population.

This is something I've rolled in my head for a while but first time I've said it out loud so a lot of people are now coming to my mind now that were not wealthy.

I cannot necessarily see it going away but perhaps more of a direct representation of what it means...our time/energy.

[scarface74]

What makes you think some people’s dream might not be to work from 9-5 go home to their spouse, 2.5 kids, their house in the burbs and get money to put into their account every two weeks?

Save consistently and retire?

[_57jb]

I think you are using satire to make a point although you may be serious.

To play devils advocate to my own point:

There are some jobs that between those hours of 9-5 it is a dream come true. I ran an R&D team, we could buy any technology, kick off any project, success wasn't "Making a unicorn" but merely understanding something and providing guidance/insight to our executives.

It went well for several years...the party ended after leadership changed and they had new opinions on what R&D meant.

It was my dream and theirs for a period of time...then it was no longer my dream, just theirs.

I left to find my dream....I now make 5x as much doing something I love.

[scarface74]

I’m very serious. It has never been my desire to start my own business. I go home and sleep well at night not worrying about customers, investors, funding.

It went well for several years...the party ended after leadership changed and they had new opinions on what R&D meant. It was my dream and theirs for a period of time...then it was no longer my dream, just theirs.

And when that happens, I email recruiters and get another job usually paying more within a few weeks. The shortest time from looking for a job to having an offer is 4 days. The longest is about 7 weeks. But I only applied for one job. The process just takes a while for $BigTech.

Which brings up an even better example. The company I work for announced an across the board pay cut because our customers were losing money because of Covid. The company is having to cut prices, come up with payment arrangements, get money from the government, etc. I bet the owners aren’t sleeping well at night.

The next day after they announced the pay cut, a recruiter from $BigTech reached out to me about a remote role. I applied for the job, got it, with a 50% pay bump and I still sleep well.

I left to find my dream....I now make 5x as much doing something I love.

Survivorship bias. Statistically how will most software developers make more money over a lifetime - starting their own company or in the immortal words of r/cscareerquestions, “learn leetCode and work for a FAANG”?[1] Or depending on where you are living, just bring your run of the mill “Enterprise Developer” in any major city in the US that’s not on the west coast.

[1] Not that I went down that road to “work for a FAANG”. I took another route that pays as well to get into $BigTech.