"Alright, I've had enough: I'm going out on the market to test the waters."
This is what any sensible company should want to avoid right now.
And it's how our story starts. A long-tenured engineer at this small company got a better offer from outside and announces:
This is what any sensible company should want to avoid right now.
And it's how our story starts. A long-tenured engineer at this small company got a better offer from outside and announces:
"I quit. I have a better offer by almost 60%. However, I really like the team and know how much value I bring to this company. I'd be happy to stay on for a 35% increase."
Management is in panic. Should they give in and retain? Or would this be a bad move?
Management is in panic. Should they give in and retain? Or would this be a bad move?
The CEO consults external experts, and in the end decides to not match.
"We'll recruit off the market: it's a setback of maybe two months, but we'll be better off."
The engineer leaves. The job advert of "Sr Engineer at Company" is live.
But responses are disappointing.
"We'll recruit off the market: it's a setback of maybe two months, but we'll be better off."
The engineer leaves. The job advert of "Sr Engineer at Company" is live.
But responses are disappointing.
"We're not getting any local candidates" - HR shares. "Only people who need visa sponsorship that we don't provide."
"Alright, let's consider sponsoring visas." - the CEO agrees, after weeks of no local candidates.
Finally, an overseas candidate accepts. Success! Or is it?
"Alright, let's consider sponsoring visas." - the CEO agrees, after weeks of no local candidates.
Finally, an overseas candidate accepts. Success! Or is it?
"The new joiner just sent an email informing us they won't start, after all. They got a 30% higher offer from a company sponsoring their visa."
A similar story repeats again. Increasing the salary could be an option, but doing it *only* for tech?
The CEO has another idea:
A similar story repeats again. Increasing the salary could be an option, but doing it *only* for tech?
The CEO has another idea:
"An external agency. Let's hire one. This doesn't come out of the HR budget. With the right agency, we'll move faster. It's more expensive, but the increased output will make it worth it."
The search for an agency begins. But it's a painful search.
The search for an agency begins. But it's a painful search.
Two local agencies each quote double the rate the company budgeted for. "Sorry, it's the market" - they share.
Overseas agencies are cheaper, but how reliable are they? A friend of the CTO recommends one, and a deal is struck.
The agency starts next week. Finally, progress!
Overseas agencies are cheaper, but how reliable are they? A friend of the CTO recommends one, and a deal is struck.
The agency starts next week. Finally, progress!
The CEO gets carried away on the next company update, saying that with the agency onboard, development output will now double. The CEO also lets it slip how, with the agency hired, the sales team committed to new features to be built.
Existing devs grumble among each other.
Existing devs grumble among each other.
"What is the CEO talking about. Don't they see the tech debt? No agency will speed this up.
The CEO lives in some dream world. In the end, we will have to pick up the slack and put in more overtime, then get nothing but complaints on how slow we were, despite all the work."
The CEO lives in some dream world. In the end, we will have to pick up the slack and put in more overtime, then get nothing but complaints on how slow we were, despite all the work."
The new agency starts, and developers are asked to onboard them.
"If this goes well, we'll move over more of our work to the agency, the CEO shares in another message to the whole company."
Some of the most tenured developers are starting to update their LinkedIn profiles.
"If this goes well, we'll move over more of our work to the agency, the CEO shares in another message to the whole company."
Some of the most tenured developers are starting to update their LinkedIn profiles.
During the onboarding, the agency is strangely passive. Devs mention this to the CTO, who dismisses concerns. "Of course they don't ask many questions. They're pros. Perhaps you can learn from them as well."
A few engineers open up their availably to get hired on LinkedIn.
A few engineers open up their availably to get hired on LinkedIn.
After the first months payment, the agency disappears. Ghosted the company and ran with the money. There's disbelief: how did this happen?
(A real shocker when trying to score a bargain on a hot market, that).
More importantly, what now? The CEO drafts an email, then hits send:
(A real shocker when trying to score a bargain on a hot market, that).
More importantly, what now? The CEO drafts an email, then hits send:
"Unfortunately, we parted with {agency} for reasons we cannot disclose. However, the sales team committed shipping features to customers that we cannot walk back on.
We have a world-class team, and we do world-class work. So let's get our heads down, work hard and ship it 💪!"
We have a world-class team, and we do world-class work. So let's get our heads down, work hard and ship it 💪!"
A long-tenured engineer thinks: "Wow. I expected at the very least a raise, or to push back on building new stuff. Especially when I think about how my former colleague got a 60% raise after leaving and raves about the new place."
They continue thinking:
They continue thinking:
https://twitter.com/GergelyOrosz/status/1483060680894951430
The market has never been more heated for software engineers with experience. My advice if this is you: blog.pragmaticengineer.com/advice-for-tec…
If you're a hiring manager, here are insights on what's happening, and what you can do: newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/perfect-stor…
If you're a hiring manager, here are insights on what's happening, and what you can do: newsletter.pragmaticengineer.com/p/perfect-stor…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
