[michaelochurch]

Well, there is a shortage of competent software engineers willing to sacrifice as much as corporate executives think they should, for what corporate executives think such people should be paid.

In the same vein, there's a shortage of supermodels who want to fuck obese, unemployed men with halitosis and general poor hygiene.

[jshen]

I think you're wrong. I have the hardest time finding good engineers, we pay very well, we don't expect anyone to work crazy overtime, etc.

Can we make this more concrete? What sacrifices do you think is being asked of competent developers? What pay do you think they are offered?

[mehrdada]

> we pay very well

How do you know, objectively? Have you tried paying twice (or more) the current market rate, for instance, and binary search for a point where you have enough happy hires and failed? Perhaps the market rate is artificially lowered.

[jshen]

The problem isn't that good engineers turn done our offers, it's that very few good engineers come in the door. The ones that have were very happy with their offers.

Edit: Didn't realize you weren't the person I originally replied to. Let's reverse your question. What is the objective basis for the claim that engineers are asked to sacrifice to much for too little pay?

[mehrdada]

> it's that very few good engineers come in the door

I have one possible answer for this issue: Well, no one in the Valley (to best of my knowledge) really advertises that they are going to pay a meaningful multiple of what's considered the market rate to potential employees. So from the potential employee side, it is reasonable to assume that they are going to get paid around the "market rate".

The Valley seems to be at a point where "starting/not starting a startup" is becoming an IQ test (compared to "market rate") financially if you think you are reasonably good at doing stuff, so it is natural that good engineers wouldn't go and apply for a job, because the expectation for compensation is unlikely to be satisfactory anyway (or at least that's what they believe and prevents them from trying).

>And you dodged my questions.

Oh, I am not the OP and I'm not pretending to have the answers. I was genuinely interested in knowing how you measured that you are paying very well, except for the fact that they were competitive with what's considered the "market rate" which is the questionable piece of data here.

[jshen]

I think we pay very well because when we do find a good person, we offer them enough to get them unless there is some non monetary reason they went with another company. We do not have a problem with people turning down offers, we have a problem with finding enough good people.

Another interesting wrinkle to this is the fact that hiring someone at a high salary is a big gamble. How confident can you really be after interviewing someone?

[PhantomGremlin]

> we have a problem with finding enough good people

I'd love to see one of your job postings. I'd bet at least one of the following is happening:

1) unreasonable academic requirements

2) unreasonably broad list of required previous experience

3) unqualified HR people pre-screening and discarding resumes

You need to be willing to "kiss a lot of frogs", i.e. do phone screens and onsite interviews, of people who might generally be suitable. Then be willing to hire not-quite-perfect candidates who are willing to learn and are willing to work hard.

> How confident can you really be after interviewing someone?

I've seen an increase in contract employment postings. That might be a way to go. Start someone on a six-month contract. You might find some takers. Not everyone is ready to "get married" after a single days worth of job interviews.

[jacalata]

So you're asking people to apply for a job without telling them how much you will pay, and you think that this lack of information shouldn't affect whether they apply? Salary sensitive potential hires might be ruling themselves out at the application stage: for instance my assumption (as a software engineer) would be that if I have no idea what your salary offer will be, then it will be shit - if it's going to be decent then you'd advertise that publicly. Therefore people that actually apply to your company is the subset that either find out your salary beforehand (eg by knowing someone else there) or don't care what salary you offer or I guess there might exist people who think it makes sense to keep good wages secret.

[droithomme]

Please state the salary you offer, the location of your company, whether or not you pay full relocation, and the skill set you are looking for.

[firstOrder]

ExxonMobil brought in $469 billion in revenue last year, on which they made $44 billion in profit. It's not a big gamble for them at all if some programmer who gets $100k, $150k or whatever does not work out.

Of course, some bootstrapped company, or some company which had minimal angel funding or the like is taking more of a gamble, but everything is a gamble when you have no product/market fit and only 18 months or less worth of cash in the bank.

[firstOrder]

The objective basis that you are offering engineers too little pay is that they are not taking your offers. Unless you don't believe in one of the first things they teach in modern economics - that at a certain value (price), supply will always meet demand.

[FLUX-YOU]

Could just be a run of bad luck or not enough advertising on their part. Supply can't meet demand if supply doesn't know demand exists.

[firstOrder]

I agree about making an effort looking for people. I know nothing about the company being discussed here. But for other companies, I know some that contact a (crappy) headhunter or two, or who post an ad on Craigslist, and then expect top tier candidates to roll in. For some CRUD job working in class C office space for relatively not much money etc. They're shocked when they don't have their pick from dozens of top tier candidates.

If your methods don't work - try going to a local programmer meetup. Chat up some of the programmers. Encourage them to apply. I go to programmer meetups as a programmer, and all the time I meet other programmers who are out of work, or who are unhappy at their job and looking to work elsewhere. Most are employed, but there's always a few who are looking.

What is happening is this - in 2008/2009 the economy was tighter, and employers could get by with a CL posting, or talking to a headhunter or two. Now that unemployment rate is less than 10%, you don't have dozens of good programmers checking CL for jobs every day. You have to do a little more work to find people. Just like THEY had to do a little more work when unemployment was double digit.

[jshen]

You fail at reading comprehension.

[geebee]

Here are some ways I think this could be more concrete:

"we pay well" What is the salary range for this position? If you have already hired into this role, what are you paying them? I'd say a specific number is important here, rather than "market rate" (if you say market rate, It's important to define it with a number).

"we don't expect anyone to work crazy overtime" How many hours, on average, does someone in this role work a week? If you offer vacation, how much time off do you offer? How many paid days off per year? If you don't do those things (many companies don't do vacation time anymore), what are the average number of days take off per week.

"good engineers", "competent developers" How do you define this? This is probably hardest of all, but if you already have someone in this role... what degrees do these workers typically hold? How many years of experience is typical? Could you share specific examples of interview questions, and what kind of response is required for an offer to be made? Could you share an example of a problem solved on the job that represents the kind of work someone like this does?

[jshen]

I asked theperson i was replying to if he could be concrete. If you agree with him why dont you tell me why in a concrete way? Or tell me what are you trying to prove and how, and I may give you concrete info.

[swang]

How quickly does your company reply back to good/bad resumes? As an engineer who was recently looking for a job, I found that companies just aren't very organized when it comes to looking for new hires.

[jshen]

great point, and we could do a lot better on this front. We do a lot of recruiting and typically find good people rather than waiting for them to apply to a posting. We're/I'm very active in the local dev community, meetups, conferences, etc.

[chrisbennet]

"Now, let's review some microeconomics. In a free market, it is almost axiomatic that the market always clears. That's a technical term that means that when somebody tries to sell something, if they are willing to accept the market price, they will be able to sell it, and when somebody wants to buy something, if they are willing to pay the market price, they will be able to buy it. It's just a matter of both sides accepting the market price." http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/fog0000000050.html

I haven't seen any evidence here in the Boston area that contract rates have risen since I was a contractor 4 years ago. (I still get calls and invariably the rate is always <= what I got before.) One can surmise that there isn't a shortage in economic terms or that companies are unwilling or unable to pay true market rates. It may be true that there is a shortage of engineers a company can afford but that doesn't mean that there is a shortage of engineers. I.e. just because I can't buy gold at $100oz doesn't mean there is a shortage of gold.

[mattm]

Do you hire remotely? If so, feel free to get in touch.