> I think the unfortunate reality is that lots of companies in our industry have suspiciously inflated employee counts in the first place. Even when removing AI and the pandemic over-hiring, I wouldn't have been surprised to see corrections sooner or later.

It's funny to me that everyone talks about pandemic over-hiring, as if this hadn't been a thing for a decade before that. Like, when I started at FB in 2013, they probably had about 75% of the engineers they needed (and about 10% of the sales people). But they grew engineering much faster than sales for some reason (engineering in the broad sense including data and product).

That being said, it's easy for people to look at other parts of a company and think they are over-staffed, because we don't see all the work necessary to keep the balls in the air.

▲

WarmWash an hour ago | parent | next [-]

AI aside, if we just look at other engineering disciplines in mature sectors, the future is not bright(er).

No fully paid golden cadillac benefits packages (for your dog too!), no twice daily uber eats comps, no $150k entry level, no unlimited PTO, no 6 months leave.

If you go to your uncles engineering department at the boiler company, these guy's engineering roles are about as pampered as the warehouse managers.

The upside is that it will cull those in it just for the money/lifestyle, and concentrate it down to those in it for the love of the craft.

▲

yojo an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Two things:

1) Unlimited PTO is a scam. Ask anyone who ever got paid out six weeks salary when they changed jobs.

2) “the craft” is doing some heavy lifting here. I happen to enjoy AI-assisted dev, but it is nothing like the work that drew me to the industry.

Otherwise agreed on all counts.

▲

re-thc 17 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> Unlimited PTO is a scam

Well, no. It's just the target beneficiary is not you (the employees) but the employer.

Unlimited PTO resolves the employer from paying out PTO when they make you "redundant".

▲

Forgeties79 an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

Unlimited PTO works great for someone like me who regularly takes half day and full day PTO every quarter for various commitments/life stuff. But I’m also a guy and I have no problem asserting myself/spending my benefits. People who are a little less comfortable with that end up just parking on it and would do a lot better if they were given a set number of PTO days. The ambiguity hurts them in the same way not having set raise schedules and discussions hurts them.

Edit: folks, I can assure you I take a lot more than 10 days of PTO. I didn’t even say how many half/full days I take, you’re assuming a lot though I get my language could’ve been more clear there. I probably take between 20-30 days total annually. I am saying that because of unlimited PTO, it is very easy to just grab half days and full days as needed routinely and not worry about my overall count.

▲

yojo 42 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Before unlimited PTO took off, standard in FAANG-like (US) industry was ~12 corp holidays + 15-25 days annual PTO, depending on seniority.

I don’t know anyone who takes the high end of that anymore, especially senior/staff folks.

Unlimited PTO takes a liability off the company’s books, and makes every time off request a negotiation.

▲

steveBK123 29 minutes ago | parent [-]

> Unlimited PTO takes a liability off the company’s books, and makes every time off request a negotiation.

This is 100% it.

	▲	Forgeties79 19 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Yeah exactly. For some of us that is not a problem but for most people it seems to create issues. Company culture also plays a huge factor in that. Grey areas tend to hurt employees the most!

▲

spamizbad an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You have it backwards. You’d benefit tremendously from fixed PTO that pays out because you’re taking fewer than 10 days a year. Its biggest benefactors are low-seniority employees who take 20-30 days annually.

▲

blktiger 20 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

At my current job I get 25 days of PTO a year, with a cap of 30 days, plus company holidays (12 or so?), plus 5 days the entire company shuts down. I have to be careful not to hit my cap even taking 4 weeks of vacation because it’s still less than I earn. You have “unlimited” pto and take half of the vacation I do. If you ever change jobs you’ll get $0, while I’ll get a bonus.

▲

testing22321 40 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> someone like me who regularly half day and full day PTO every quarter

So you take something less than 10 days off a year?

In all developed countries bar one that is against the law for being so few days off.

You are being abused.

▲

ulfw 25 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

You take 1.5x4 = 6 days of vacation per YEAR and use this as an argument for... wait... what exactly?

Huh?

▲

titanomachy an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> The upside is that it will cull those in it just for the money/lifestyle, and concentrate it down to those in it for the love of the craft.

Is that what you see at your uncle's boiler company? People who are truly in it "for the love of the craft"?

	▲	gruez an hour ago \| parent [-]
		Yeah wtf? If programming becomes a generic white collar job, it's not really accurate to characterize the people as "those in it for the love of the craft". After all, do you think the average accountant or analyst is doing it "for the love of the craft"?

▲

pjmlp 34 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That is a SV thing, in many places it is a regular office job.

You are already in a treat if having free coffee and fruit.

▲

verve_rat 42 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You don't need to look at other engineering jobs, just look at software engineers out side the US. We make decent money compared to the local market, but we've never had the royal treatment that US devs seem to get.

▲

aerodexis 40 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

▲

TeriyakiBomb an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Exactly this - the late 00s and 10s we were riding the wave of the internet and smartphone adoption. Those markets have matured now and this is ultimately just the response. Covid was like some weird last hurrah for irrational spending. LLMs are just where all of that silly energy is going.

▲

Curosinono 38 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

FB is the weirdest company though. For a lot of companies like gitlab you know they have sales for customers, roadmap for their core product etc.

FB has what?

Intel has around the same number of people and they make chips, laptops, different types of chips. Hardware, software, supply chain etc.

FB does what? And what do they do with all these very well paid people?!

	▲	fendy3002 22 minutes ago \| parent \| next [-]
		algorithm, tracking, bypassing adblocker, reports, moderation and backoffice tools I think
	▲	boredatoms 31 minutes ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		They do A/B tests all day
	▲	kakacik 20 minutes ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Well they keep breaking main FB page with additions or redesigns nobody asked for. I am in Europe but I must be some test bunny that made some personal enemy there somehow, since beginning (cca 2008) FB was by far the buggiest site ever. Uploads of images didn't work, sometimes it uploaded twice. Uploading album of 30-50 pics took on average maybe 10 attempts in the past. Comments didn't work, or twice again. many similar behaviors. Ie since cca 2 weeks now if I click on some picture to have it full screen, clicking close after 1-2 mins ends up in FB error page instead of returning to main feed. I keep seeing FB error page a LOT considering infrequent use. Horrible, terrible engineering.

▲

Someone an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

> when I started at FB in 2013, they probably had […] about 10% of the sales people [they needed]

I find that hard to believe. Looking at https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/META/meta-platform..., they had a good revenue growth in the early ‘10s.

What did they leave on the table by not having more ten times as many sales people as they did? Revenues? Profits?

	▲	disgruntledphd2 42 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> I find that hard to believe. Looking at https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/META/meta-platform..., they had a good revenue growth in the early ‘10s. So, how they hired salespeople was based on revenue per head. If there wasn't enough revenue in a particular part of the business, no new hires for you. Obviously, that's gonna be a lagging indicator. And they were honestly leaving a lot of money on the table there, but honestly not as much as they were leaving on the table by having a really, really, really bad and buggy self-serve interface that made it hard for small advertisers to spend money. When they fixed that, the small businesses all got good results (e.g. hairdressers etc) and those people then convinced all the agency people to put more money into the platform. Up till 2015 or so, it was a real struggle to convince people to even try FB ads, but after that it was like shooting fish in a barrel. > I find that hard to believe. Looking at https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/META/meta-platform..., they had a good revenue growth in the early ‘10s. Also, up to 2013 or so (when feed ads became a thing), most of that money was coming from payments for f2p games, so they had lots of partner managers there, but not enough ads sales people.