[oblio]

Is it, really? Aren't US tech interview notoriously difficult? Many rounds of interviews, background checks, etc.?

Most purely European companies don't do that. Actually, unfortunately, some of them do, because of American influence. But for sure they didn't use to.

[scarface_74]

There are 2.8 million developers in the US. Most of them don’t work for “tech” companies. Most of them work for boring enterprise companies without multiple rounds of enterprise companies and many let you just do behavioral questions and techno trivia on the stack they care about.

I personally have interviewed for 7 enterprise dev jobs and I have had 2 coding interviews and those were simple.

[Tainnor]

IME, this was true four years ago. Few rounds, assessments were mostly take homes or in-person "implement a feature" style, interview questions didn't seem to be built to trip you up.

Now, every job I apply for has 4-5 rounds, leetcode is more common, they do behavioural and system design rounds that you have to prepare for, etc. One job I applied to even asked me two behavioural questions via email before I even talked to someone. Something's truly off.

[Kaethar]

Wait till you get a self recorded behavioral interview. I truly wonder if there is that much value to be extracted out of 10 minutes of people awkwardly responding to questions while trying their best to fill in the silence.

[Tainnor]

I think I'm not yet desperate to the point that I would agree to that.

[selimthegrim]

I had to do one of those for some local government lobbyists association in DC. They ended up hiring some undergrad instead.

[selimthegrim]

And just got asked to do another one for an internship

[Tainnor]

Sorry to hear that. I feel that tech hiring has become full of weird gatekeepers that probably wouldn't even be able to pass their own weird challenges.

[constantcrying]

Of course. Companies who fire more also hire more.

European companies have very little staff turnover, so new jobs are fewer. Another aspect is that salaries are very even across much of the industry, as it is often negotiated by unions and unless you are also switching roles (e.g. into management) salaries at different companies will be very similar. That is why working for the same company for a long time is much more common in Europe.

[disgruntledphd2]

> Another aspect is that salaries are very even across much of the industry, as it is often negotiated by unions

Can you specify what country you're drawing these facts from? Europe does not have standard employment law, and I definitely haven't experienced salaries being set by unions or being common across the industry.

[constantcrying]

Germany in this case. The high tax rates at progressive rates mean that salary increases mean that income after taxes is quite flat.

There are also union negotiated rates for pay across much of the industry. Even if you switch employer your pay might remain exactly the same, unless you also get promoted and into a higher level or a different industry. "Flächentarifvertrag" it is called.

Obviously this drastically disincentivizes hoping employers.

[disgruntledphd2]

> Germany in this case. The high tax rates at progressive rates mean that salary increases mean that income after taxes is quite flat.

OK, good to know. I definitely haven't experienced flat income after taxes post salary bump, even though I pay 52% marginal on my income (in Ireland).

> Obviously this drastically disincentivizes hoping employers.

I can totally see that. Is it really that common in tech jobs though? I'd have expected this to be much more common in larger, older companies (like the automotive industry).

[constantcrying]

>I can totally see that. Is it really that common in tech jobs

What is a "tech job"? Wouldn't a job where you are designing the electrical/mechanical/software parts of a car be a "tech job"?

Of course this is much more common in older, well established industries. But that is where most of the "tech jobs" are. Germany, especially labor laws, are hostile to start-ups so it is natural that people get employed at these older companies with union negotiated salaries.

[bluedino]

> Aren't US tech interview notoriously difficult? Many rounds of interviews, background checks, etc.?

Not really, people get hired all the time that can't do a fizzbuzz.

[femiagbabiaka]

As a counterpoint, I don't think I've worked at a company in 10 years that didn't at least require fizzbuzz.

[icemelt8]

What he meant is that the whole capitalist culture, less regulations, creates a more thriving economy which creates more jobs and hence more options to go to.

[hnlmorg]

I've heard this type of comment a lot but in my experience there isn't any shortage of tech companies in the EU.

What EU regulations hamper isn't job creation, it's employee and customer exploitation. The distinction between "job creation" and "employee exploitation" is important.

What the former means in practice is that there is a massive contractor market in the UK and EU. So if companies need temporary staff, they'll hire a contractor. If they need permanent staff then they'll hire an employee. And contractors in the UK & EU are paid significantly more than their employee peers. In fact their pay is much more equivalent to US employees. So companies will make constant tradeoffs between more expensive labor for short-lived projects vs cheaper staff and knowledge retention but stricter employment laws. It's a fair trade most of the time.

So a more accurate way of comparing US vs EU businesses in terms of employees would be US employees vs EU contractors. Things then begin to look a lot more equivalent.

[scarface_74]

I doubt the tech workers making three to four times EU wages in the US feel “exploited”.

My job is purely transactional. I’ve worked for 10 companies in almost 30 years. I gave them labor and they gave me money. Whenever one side decided the arrangement wasn’t working, I moved on to another job.

[Spooky23]

Tech is always boom/bust. We’re lucky to have had a long boom.

I’m personally well acquainted with many people in tech, especially big tech. Many of them are doing little or nothing, certainly not justifying $300k+ salaries.

What you do has risk but is fundamentally more honest - your skills are around technology and output, not navigating corporate bureaucracy.

[trelane]

I am always skeptical of claims that some workers are just lazy bums skimming money.

I don't think most folks graduate college and think, "You know what sounds amazing? Sitting at a desk doing nothing five days a week!"

I expect most of the time they have good reason to be "unproductive," and would respond positively to those reasons getting addressed, or you're not capturing their contributions accurately with whatever metrics you're using to find "slackers."

[Spooky23]

It’s not the people, it’s the process. In a big organization you need to be actively managing your career to be in the right places.

And people are doing things, I’m not saying they’re sitting making paper airplanes — just things with no value or that drain their value. I had a high school friend who was brilliant, but his career got nerfed when he stuck with a bad tech/business unit.

If you’re the world’s premier expert in some peculiar process that only exists in one place, that’s no mas. Companies have been rolling in dough for a long time and some have way more people than they used to. One big company I deal with went from an account team of 6 to almost 50.

[dmoy]

I haven't seen it on any team I've been on. But also I don't think the implication is people doing literally nothing. Just people doing things that are not worthwhile at all, wasting other people's time, and kinda just puttering around.

Some of it boils down to ineffective management and lack of mentoring, for sure, and could be addressed in a better way. Some of it is people getting in way over their heads.

[scarface_74]

During the first “bust” in 2000 I had four years of experience and living and working in Atlanta - far away from a tech hub. Boring old enterprise dev jobs at banks, insurance companies, etc weren’t affected and I was easily able to get offers.

I worked at a company where utility companies sent us data files and we created, printed and mailed bills.

In 2008 during the financial crisis the next time I looked for a job (my third), I had two offers relatively quickly - one programming point of sales systems and the other that I accepted programming ruggedized Windows CE devices for field service workers.

Fast forward to 2020 at the height of COVID, I got my one and only BigTech job working at AWS (my 8th job).

Unlike the author of the submitted article, when I got Amazoned 3.5 years later, I shrugged, my $40K severance was deposited in my account and I reached out to my network and targeted outreach to some recruiters in my niche and had four interviews and 3 offers within 3 weeks. Why would I waste time getting emotional about a company knowing that the CEO is 6-7 positions up on the career ladder and I’m just a random number to most of the organization?

A year later in 2024 around 9:00 PM I had a “1-1” with my manager invite for the next morning. I already had my suspicions and told my wife that I am probably going to be laid off in the morning. She said let her know how it goes and we went to sleep.

I woke up the next morning, was notified about my layoff asked when I would get my severance and responded to a recruiter that reached out to me about a week prior.

I started the interview process and three weeks later I had a job making the same as I was making at AWS.

I don’t need to “justify” what I’m making. I have a skillset and experience that are in demand and companies are willing to pay me for it because by employing me they get a positive ROI.

[deepakarora3]

What skillset and expereince do you have which is in demand? Just curious to know.

[margorczynski]

Your post somehow suggests that when a bust comes European companies won't start laying off people. And in the same boom period the US dev will make much more money (and have a biggger safety pillow) than the European one.

[Ancalagon]

Until the US dev has a medical expense, that is.

[hnlmorg]

You're focusing on one word and missing the meat of my comment. The EU equivalent to US employment in terms of employee rights and pay is contracting.

People in IT who take the employment route rather than contracting, do so because they want job security. eg they might have families. And much as you might be happy with your arrangement, there are plenty in the UK and Europe who do prefer longer-term job security over a few extra £££ in their pocket.

[varispeed]

In the UK you have worst of both worlds now - insecurity of contracting and employee level wages, thanks to amended IR35 lobbied by big consultancies.

[hnlmorg]

I think the bust of the job market played a bigger part here. When IR35 originally came in, some companies would bump pay inside IR35 to compensate elsewhere risk getting poorer pol of talent. Since the job market crashed there have been fewer jobs all round, which has pushed the contractor market down too.

But you’re right that IR35 really hasn’t helped situations either.

Some of my friends have commented that the last few years has been the worst time in their 20+ years as a contractor.

[JustExAWS]

I also have a family. I’ve managed to support my family across those 10 jobs. I need a job to support my family. But my duty is stay *employable”.

[hnlmorg]

You misunderstand me. My comment wasn't suggesting that people who contract don't have families. Plenty of them do. It's that people who choose employment over contracting do so because they want the additional stability, for example if they have families.

Lots of people, when evaluating the risks of contracting vs employment, find the reward far outweighs the risk. It sounds like you'd be one of them if you were presented with the same choice. And that's a fine decision for you to come to. But that's not going to be the same conclusion for everyone.

[apwell23]

this doesn't make sense. so why do usa companies hire contractors then? I worked as a contractor for decades and made 150% what perm employees made.

[hnlmorg]

That I don't know. But the contractor market in the US is very different to the contractor market in the UK and EU. And from hiring in both US and UK, my experiences have been that US employees are more comparable to UK contractors in terms of rights and pay.

[apwell23]

> US employees are more comparable to UK contractors in terms of rights and pay

did you account for rsu value too or just basepay/hours . now that i am a perm employee a big share of my comp comes from rsu.

[isbvhodnvemrwvn]

I think they suggested that in the US employees are paid better than contractors, but have low job security.

[amalcon]

There are more regulations around employees than contractors here also, which often makes it not worthwhile for short term workers. Those regulations just mostly aren't around when you may terminate employment.

E.g. the entire I-9 thing and other IRS paperwork, who (if anyone) is responsible for various insurances (unemployment insurance, workers comp, liability insurance, etc), minimum wage and overtime for hourly employees, etc. Many things depend on this distinction.

I can't speak to differences from Europe as I am not familiar with that side of the Atlantic.

[homefree]

Yeah I’d argue this is so clearly the case and it’s one reason among many why the US has an enormous amount of successful tech companies and Europe has some amount that basically rounds to zero in comparison.

The ability to hire and fire easily is critical if you want to build successful companies.

There’s a reason ambitious founders move from Europe to the US and why most billion dollar tech companies are American. Europe has made really bad policy decisions around this for decades and their economy reflects it. Europe is poor and to an extent I don’t think Europeans really understand.

[disgruntledphd2]

> There’s a reason ambitious founders move from Europe to the US and why most billion dollar tech companies are American.

Yes, and it's because of larger, more liquid capital markets make it much easier to obtain VC funding.

> Europe is poor and to an extent I don’t think Europeans really understand.

Europe is definitely not poor in terms of either wealth or income (particularly Western Europe, which is the appropriate comparator for the US).

[tempfile]

Indeed, but that is just ideology, not based on any facts.

[apwell23]

low eu salaries implies finding job is hard. fact.

[Scandiravian]

There's a higher monthly salary in the US, sure. However, you're expected to work very long hours (60-80 hours per week) and get basically no time off

In my current position I'm hired for an expected 37 hours per week. This can be more if I'm asked to work overtime, but my weekly hours cannot exceed 45 hours per week on average in a 3 month window without additional compensation

Additionally I have six weeks of paid time off every year plus public holidays

If I calculate my hourly salary it's better than what I was paid by US companies

That's not to mention the security of having a legally mandated termination period of minimum 3 months (in which you're, in most cases, not expected to work)

[cloverich]

I worked 80 hours a week in medical school, depending on the rotation. From that experience I can tell you, the majority of people that say they work 80 hours a week, don't even know what that looks like.

[geodel]

This 60-80 hrs/week maybe a startup myth. Since Europe in general has far fewer startups than US people hear these wild numbers in Europe far less. For normal big tech worker, or enterprise workers 40 hrs is really the norm. Now many people specially in contracting, consulting can stretch hours for billing purpose or impressing upon clients thats a different matter.

[scarface_74]

I have never in 28 years across 10 jobs including one in BigTech been “expected” to work more than 40 hours a week.

It’s a bunch of copium thinking that American tech workers are working 60-80 hour weeks.

And I know it’s not the norm, but right now I have “unlimited PTO” and most people take at least 5 weeks a year.

If the average American tech worker is making 2x - 4x the average EU worker, they should be able to save more than enough to have a three month cushion.

And we are talking about Google. They have a very generous severance package. Even Amazon where I use to work gave me three months severance.

[int_19h]

"Unlimited PTO" is discretionary in practice, and there are studies showing that it translates to less PTO on average, which is exactly why companies do it.

[mcv]

This is not what we usually hear about employment in the US. The reason many Europeans think American tech workers are working 60-80 hours per week is not copium, but simply because that's what many Americans tell us.

[apwell23]

never worked more than 40hr/week (including hellhole amazon). i get 28 days pto now and unlimited sick days.

> If I calculate my hourly salary it's better than what I was paid by US companies

prbly not.

[tempfile]

What a waste of a comment. Low salaries typically imply finding a job is easier, because more potential employers can afford to pay you. Can you add any kind of evidence, argument, anything? Saying "fact" after an armchair guess does not make it one.

[apwell23]

> Low salaries typically imply finding a job is easier, because more potential employers can afford to pay you. Can you add any kind of evidence, argument, anything?

sorry i forgot to add "typically" which apparently is a license to spout any BS .

[tempfile]

You started the argument!

[perching_aix]

> low eu salaries implies finding job is hard. fact.

Does it? Sounds more like an opinion than a fact to me.

[zorked]

If there was demand the salaries would rise. It's capitalism.

[oblio]

Umm... output. Outside of hyperscalers and probably the tier below them, most EU tech companies aren't making the kind of money per headcount to justify huge salaries.

There is demand for tech workers, but the output of EU tech companies can't afford huge salaries. Lower margins.