Thank you for that statistic from 50 years ago. I'm talking about today. Companies like Blue Origin, SpaceX, etc. are basically a rotating pool. I have personally wound up working alongside several coworkers from previous jobs, and none of us were referrals. It's such a common experience that it's become something of a running joke.
It's only a rotating pool because people want to stay in aerospace. Many of those engineers can transfer to other fields if they really had the desire. They could work in automotive, energy, oil and gas, etc. I assume they either like aerospace or don't feel comfortable enough to branch out to other domains.
Aerospace is one of those fields where many people feel like they are moving backwards if they leave because of the status/prestige attached to it.
If our job-field selection process has to include "field where most companies in it aren't toxic" as a major factor, that's... not a good sign. I don't think it'd be a good result if people had to leave their field and move to another one because the culture at most companies in their field is toxic.
I was mainly addressing the comment about the lack of prospects, not really making any claims about the aerospace culture as a whole. However, it would be interesting to see if toxic culture may correlate with specific industries, like those who are constantly competing for low-bid government contracts or high-risk projects. It seems like it could add some added pressure.
Some fields definitely have that reputation more than others. I don't know anything about BO specifically, but I wouldn't advise anyone to go into aerospace if they wanted a low-key hipster culture.
>if people had to leave their field and move to another one because the culture at most companies in their field is toxic.
Some people do exactly this. Oil and manufacturing are examples engineers will sometimes avoid because of the culture associated with them.
I don't know that I agree, unless you equate "more pay" to the same thing as "more desirable". Typically, I see the opposite where the desirable conditions (fulfillment, status, general low-stress working conditions) with what most people correlate with the more desirable fields. It seems less desirable fields have to make up for that with higher pay.
The issue isn't that people are trapped at their current job (though some people may also feel that way, who knows), it's that if they stand up against poor treatment at their current job, the other companies in the field won't hire them.
Sure, another option is to not say anything at all, and just quietly quit and go to another company, but that doesn't really solve the problem; it just makes it someone else's problem.
And if the pool of companies is small enough, you also run the risk of these bad behaviors cropping up everywhere, with nowhere else to go.
If you don't like the conditions at work, adult up and try to fix it. Or find another job. Or start your own outfit. (Didn't some Google auto-drive engineers do just that?)
Writing an anonymous letter because you willingly signed a statement that you wouldn't is - well how can I put this - not something I can respect.
Walter, respectfully, I can see that you aren't interested in trying to actually understand what I'm saying, or acknowledging that things might have changed since you graduated, or respecting that someone who has worked for multiple launch providers might actually know something about them. That being the case, I'm going to end our discussion here.