Tech is more affected than the rest which is over-represented in discussions. Also people who can’t find a job tend to be more vocal than the rest.

▲

johnnyanmac 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Based on the numbers we had before the BLS clammed up, all sectors except healthcare is going down. But yes, tech is one of the bigger slumps. If your job isn't to help take care of the aging boomer population, you're not having a good time.

I work in games and have the occasional slump. But this time is much different. all staffind agencies for temp work in my city pretty much said there's nothing out there. my local area is pretty much a bunch of fractional janitorial roles and that's it.

▲

fragmede 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Are they perhaps more vocal because they have a lot of time on their hands?

▲

t-writescode 8 hours ago | parent [-]

You mean spending all their time looking for a new job, applying for various benefits, doing side work as much as they can, at pay far lower than they're used to so it takes more hours of gig work to reach equilibrium?

▲

shagie 8 hours ago | parent [-]

> ... at pay far lower than they're used to ...

Is this saying something more about the relative expectation of compensation bands?

New grads are unlikely to have a comparable benchmark.

People who've worked in Big Tech and finding themselves applying to regular companies where the revenue per employee is in the $200k range are likely going to have difficulty adjusting to such.

I work in the public sector and make very low six digits. Others I know have compensation that is 3x or 4x what I make while working in technology industries.

If both I and the people I chat with were to find themselves suddenly out of a job, I suspect I'd find an acceptable job elsewhere more easily than they would because anything I did would be a pay raise while anything they took would be a pay cut. This in turn translates to that I would be the less risky candidate (that I wouldn't be looking for a new position that would pay more within the year)... and thus I believe not only would I be more likely to accept the job I would also be more likely to be extended the position.

Browsing reddit there are a lot of people on cscareerquestions (and similar) who have the mindset of FAANG or bust as a new grad. That they wouldn't even consider working at a company like Little Cesar's or Home Depot despite those companies having open positions.

---

Furthermore, this gets into a lemon market situation ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Market_for_Lemons ). Where it becomes harder to distinguish a good candidate for a poor one and that can only be found out after someone is hired, the companies that have people are more afraid of hiring a lemon than so don't hire anyone. This further depresses the market for the highly skilled candidates. Additionally, people who are skilled are less likely to look for a new job because the market is depressed and they're not as likely to get a good position afterwards.

▲

johnnyanmac 7 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Is this saying something more about the relative expectation of compensation bands?

I just want to survive and I can do barely that. If you want a reference: I'm a single male who went from 160k salary to nothing in the last half of 2023. My necessary expenses were 3k a month (70% of that being rent).

Since then I lived in 2024 off of 50/hr freelance @ 15 hours a week. or... 3000/month. You see the issue here. Savings got obliterated, credit built up. But I figured I'd pay it off quickly if I just got any job to supplement the freelance work. not a 160k job per se. I could have found some local 60k IT role and been just fine (if a bit overworked with two different jobs).

In 2025, after a year of circuses in the job market I settled on a 20/hr 20 hour role to supplement the freelance work. So things are "stable" now... as long as I don't get sick, or the car doesn't break down, or a variety of other life factors (spoilers: I did in fact get sick. Which lead to me finding the 2nd part time work).

Like I said, I just want to survive. As is, I'm working for a third or so of my old salary with zero benefits and much more stress.

	▲	shagie 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I understand how that goes. In 2009 I lost my job making $85k (it would now be $130k in 2025 dollars)... and I was unemployed for a little under a year. I got a job where I made $25 an hour (40h a week with time and a half overtime) as a software developer (in a city where the median per capita income was $36k/year - and yes, I verified that with the federal reserve stats - https://fred.stlouisfed.org/categories/3008 ). In 2015, with no meaningful raises and a bit of burnout I got a job in the public sector for $80k and have since been promoted and am making a little bit over $100k (different city, median per capita income is $75k/year). Salary-wise, I'm making less than I did when I lived in California in '09 (and that's salary - stocks were a nice bit more and public sector doesn't exactly have an ESPP). It may be necessary to move to get a job that pays $80k a year with 100% in the office expectations. Yes, it sucks. It's hard. Finding a job in '09 was not fun and I expect that similar conditions are to be found today. However, there are jobs out there when one considers what would be D tier companies and presents themself as someone isn't going to leave in a year for a higher salary somewhere else (before the implicit ROI of onboarding has been paid off). With the prevalence of job hopping and the "this resume does not match the applicant" issues, companies have become very risk adverse.

▲

t-writescode 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

This is the comment chain to which I was responding:

csomar: Also people who can’t find a job tend to be more vocal than the rest.

fragmede: Are they perhaps more vocal because they have *a lot of time on their hands?* (emphasis mine)

me: You mean spending all their time looking for a new job, applying for various benefits, doing side work as much as they can, at pay far lower than they're used to so it takes more hours of gig work to reach equilibrium?

So, what I was responding to was the implication that unemployed or under-employed means that you've got a whole lot of free time, which can absolutely, positively be the opposite of true.

If one had a job that previously made end's meet and now all they've got is gig work, they're probably filling ALL of their time just to survive, and are probably still coming up short. That's what I meant.