,
6 tweets,
1 min read
Read on Twitter
A phrasing I use a lot: "early career professionals."
Why I use it: Because (without loss of generality) an engineer is, on the first day they work in industry and for every day after, in a position of responsibility earned by substantial efforts and should be respected as such.
Why I use it: Because (without loss of generality) an engineer is, on the first day they work in industry and for every day after, in a position of responsibility earned by substantial efforts and should be respected as such.
There are other ways to phrase this, but many of them seem stigmatizing of early career professionals. It's an employer's/industry's responsibility to have systems which can appropriately metabolize their labor and accelerate their skills development over the coming years.
If you need to discourage early career professionals from doing material engineering work because that could break things at your shop, a) your not-early career professionals need to do some systems work and b) you need to rethink your hiring strategy, urgently.
For related reasons I am glad that I work with systems which make it possible but an extra click for me to locate employee tenure, because "Will X remember the (fake) May 2016 incident?" is work-relevant but "Are they senior enough to listen to?" should be discouraged.
(Clarification: I think that "Our company is immature and, accordingly, we only hire senior engineers because their seniority/experience is a substantial percentage of our controls against things going off the rails." is a legitimate business decision.)
(The capitalist in me says "You realize that it is basically inevitable that your blended cost for engineers then exceeds that of every firm which has invested in onboarding early career professionals, which set includes all of AppAmaGooBookSoft, right.")
