
What Hacker News readers want in a job - lynnetye
https://medium.com/@lynnetye/what-does-hacker-news-care-about-e364fb87431c
======
expertentipp
Well there are more things which, given the experience, I don't want:
corporate bollocks, high discipline competitive working environment, being
underpaid/overworked, working in low cost/outsourcing center, insufficient
hardware, strict development environment fixated on validation, windows
machine with antivirus eating most resources, bloated backend running locally
and eating up the remaining resources, pushing and manipulation understood as
"teamwork", managers worrying about their cozy position and not seeing or not
wanting to see through this "teamwork", begging or even asking for holidays,
with the time diluting number of experts and increasing number of those lazy
and incurious. Otherwise I'm open minded like a 18 years old virgin.

~~~
drdaeman
> strict development environment fixated on validation

I've spent some time working with ill-defined scenarios/flows so having
validation doesn't look to be something bad to me. Although I had never worked
in an environment that could be said to be _fixated_ on it, so I guess I'm
missing something.

So I wonder... what's bad about this? (Or I misunderstood what this is about?)

~~~
expertentipp
I meant mostly which activities trigger running the tests of the project
locally and on the CI server. Local build, git hooks, push to remote? Does CI
validate all remote branches, is it possible to disable running tests on a
particular branch? Given an overzealous quality evangelist in the team, there
are too many ways to paralyze the workflow of those preferring to have space
to move and air to breathe. Configuration of tools like JSHint can easily go
too far as well.

~~~
closeparen
Hmm. We use Phabricator, and while you're free to skip unit tests and linters
locally (on by default, but can be skipped) or ignore Jenkins build failures
as you iterate over a diff, the expectation is that you get all the tests and
linters to pass before landing to master (and usually before soliciting
reviewers).

------
jaclaz
Maybe it is just me (and being not a programmer or software engineer it is
perfectly OK to ignore this note), but it is not like there is a "wide"
representation of more "practical values".

I mean (just examples of less "idealistic" values):

1) Job is paid an awful amount of money

2) Relocation is fully reimbursed

3) Full health assistance provided

or even:

4) No open space, you will have a real office

might be - I believe - more selected than "Has good beer".

~~~
nulagrithom
Agreed. I found myself ticking just two boxes: Remote Work and Continuous
Integration.

I'd almost exclude a company for mentioning some of these values.

"Ideal for Parents"? I'm a parent and I have no idea what that's supposed to
mean. Generous vacation time and flexible hours are generally appreciated by
everyone. Seems weird to sort of single out people with children as if we're
"special needs" or something.

"Supports physical wellness" can end up really pushy. I've seen this in
companies that self-insure especially. Maybe I just want to eat a cheeseburger
for lunch and _not_ take the company sponsored cholesterol test, ya know? No,
I don't care that you're "hoping for 100% participation".

Eats lunch together, friends outside of work, has good beer... Eh... Mixing
friends/coworkers hasn't turned out well for me in the past. I prefer work to
stay work. I've got nothing against having a beer while talking about work,
but I really like to keep my personal life _out_ of the office.

Psychological safety, active inclusion, safe to fail... I'm scared to comment
on why I would avoid these "features", which I suppose says enough about it
anyway.

Don't get me wrong -- It's an awesome website and a fantastic idea. It's just
not at all for me. I guess I'm much more of a "mercenary" than a "missionary".
:)

~~~
pvaldes
> "Ideal for Parents"?

Hum, like in the sense of: "I want to pass more time with my kids" or like in
"I want to hide from my kids as many time as humanely possible"?

------
jondubois
For the last 10 years it was all about learning and sometimes the company
mission.

Now I'm turning 30 so it's mostly about money. Present money or future money.

~~~
tasuki
Interesting. I don't think you being 30 makes it mostly about money. There
probably is some other factor than your age.

I'm 32 and for me it's about work-life balance and high quality codebase -
apparently that makes me very average.

~~~
expertentipp
I guess it depends on where the OP is from? People from US and developed EU
countries already have at least decent salary so they focus on things higher
up in the hierarchy of needs, people from countries where outsourcing/low cost
centers dominate say "it's all about money" but they simply mean "at least a
decent salary":)

------
ACow_Adonis
"United States choose 'Promotes from Within' more than readers from anywhere
else."

Can only speak for myself as an Australian, but i initially took this as some
kind of "Anthony Robbins" type bullshit motivational phrase or american
corporate marketing nonsense statement.

Now that i pause and ask myself to reframe it, presumably in its intended
form, my second natural response is "well, where else would they promote
from?", thus making it a truism.

Only when i pause even longer would I consider it as asking about the
phenomenon of needing to job-hop to get ahead.

But in short, i don't think the phrase captures a universal intended meaning
very well :)

------
edw519
The longer I work, the more "High Quality Code Base" matters to me.

Maybe after you've had enough of working on so much others' shit, not much
else matters.

~~~
mywittyname
I've spent too many hours of my life improving code. Then come to find out my
improvements were worthless because of some insane externality that I would
have never considered.

For example, I just spent a week improving the loading speed of this data
processing engine from like 1.5MB/s to over a GB/s (using an artificial
benchmark that I wrote). I put things into certification and saw the loading
speeds were only like 2.0MB/s. After some investigating, I discovered I was
hitting the limit of the system that was serving the data.

I would have never thought that, in 2017, there would be systems in place that
couldn't serve a single file faster than 2.0MB/s.

------
paul7986
\- Zero egos & cut throat B.S.

\- Camaraderie

\- Kindness

\- Respect

\- Fair market salary with raises that match what recruiters offer daily

~~~
notyourday
In other words: "Our incredible journey"

------
coreygarvey
Interesting that High Employee Retention is so high for the US (#4) but the
only country with it in the top 10 is India (#10). As an engineer who has
recently moved from the US to the UK, I'm just getting used to these cultural
differences and I think mature tech locations (US) are able to understand the
importance of employee retention toward an individuals fulfillment in the job.
A deeper dive into the statistics would be insightful for comparing countries.
Specifically, looking at the values that are uniquely high or low for a
location.

~~~
lynnetye
I look forward to collecting more data and will definitely share them once I
do.

The US, despite being more "tech mature" than other countries, still fails to
provide work/life balance or maintain quality code. I was honestly surprised
to see these two things at the top of _every_ list. It seems obvious that
companies would prioritize these two things, yet... they aren't the standard.

Just reading the other popular posts on HN today (ie.
[https://medium.com/@deusexmachina667/you-fired-your-top-
tale...](https://medium.com/@deusexmachina667/you-fired-your-top-talent-i-
hope-youre-happy-cf57c41183dd)), it sounds like these are common stories. You
can be well-respected, be incredibly experienced/knowledgable, and still be
overworked and pushed to push code we're not proud of. These things lead to
turnover. I wonder if the startup culture in the US ("grow as fast as you can,
do whatever it takes!") is especially bad, and contributes to low retention.
Probably.

~~~
majormajor
That's where the fuzziness of the terms comes in, I think.

For instance, I've seen in-house codebases that drive US devs to anger about
their low quality that are regular paragons of excellence compared to stuff
that's come back as part of outsourced projects (and not solely offshores
outsourcing), so it's all relative.

------
watwut
I am surprised over "eats lunch together" being so high. I dont get why would
anyone care about that at all.

~~~
lynnetye
It's funny, even though "Eats Lunch Together" is really important to me, I'm
also surprised to see it so high on the list.

Lunch time is an opportunity to socialize with your colleagues. It's also a
great time for spontaneous collaboration to take place. I've worked at a
startup where great ideas were born out of engineers, operations managers, and
customer service reps eating sandwiches together. It's cross-pollination that
does good for everyone.

A lot of companies also combine lunch with talks, presentations, or team
building activities. In general, I care deeply about working with people that
I look forward to chatting with during the day.

If you can imagine a place where most people eat alone at their desks, what
else might this signal? Maybe people aren't friendly? Maybe everyone is
expected to work through lunch? Maybe people are very exclusive and leave the
office in group without inviting "outsiders"?

~~~
watwut
When I was younger, I used to often lunch with boyfriend who worked nearby.
These days, I go sometimes with small group of colleagues, not always the
same. I oftentimes go alone, because they prefer different place then me. I
also occasionally lunch with former colleagues or with people from different
departments. Some colleagues go exercises instead of lunch and then eat
sandwich fast at the table - their freedom to choose so. We have very good
working relationship, I respect them a lot and know they respect me and know
they would tell me directly if they would have some problem with my work or me
(same with long time ago). We do have personal conversations too and support
each other when someone has problem at home.

The worst teams I worked in expected a lot unofficially-mandatory
socialization where your status and work progress depended a lot on your
ability to be charming and fun. Did not prevented bad politics.

------
jackmott
High pay, interesting work that makes the world better, and flexible low hours
=)

------
anonnyj
Something with low hours (think: 2 days a week), no bullshit like open
offices, and mininal office politics.

Of course with that first requirement I'm unemployable, so, I'll stick to
teaching English and keep my dev skills for private projects.

------
ionised
> Eats lunch together

Is that really high up on the list when people are looking for a new job?

I'm perfectly fine working in teams and actively enjoy it for the most part,
but lunchtime is my time.

I spend it reading articles I've saved for later, studying something unrelated
to work, reading a book or even just going for a walk.

I like my co-workers a lot and I meet them outside work for nights out/leaving
drinks etc. but I still prefer to eat by myself and take a break from
everything.

------
marzell
I'd like to point out how some of the responses may be skewed. This is not a
criticism, but worth discussing.

I would suggest that in some cases, the priority of various values has a lot
to do with fears and insufficiency in recent experience, rather than the true
priority given to a particular value.

Example: In the US, Promotes From Within is rated higher than other values
when compared against other regions. Does this mean it really is a higher-
priority value, or is this a contrast to experience for US workers? Maybe they
are mentioning it more because they are experiencing it less, but that doesn't
mean other things they assume/always get are not more important. I may not
mention High Wages if I am used to getting paid well, but that doesn't mean I
would not recognize that as a priority if I faced a situation where I might
get paid a lot less.

~~~
lynnetye
Certainly worth discussing. I actually talk about this in my article and use
"Promotes from Within" being ranked highly in the US as an example.

It is very likely that the most popular values are a combination of what we
most value _and_ lack. It's hard to know for sure. Anecdotally, I've spoken
with many American developers who disagree with the way their company handles
promotions. It sounds like devs are often promoted into managerial roles as a
reward for technical ability, even though they don't have experience managing
people. Sometimes, they aren't even particularly interested in managing
people. I wonder how often this happens, and how many less-skilled developers
would succeed in those roles.

~~~
jonTucich
Hi,

I've been a developer for a few decades, mostly in large companies (>50k
employees). On the subject of promoting technical talent, I can offer some
insight into how it happens and why. I studied Organization Behavior and
Operations Management as I found the topics interesting. Hence, I've learned
how companies interact with their employees and how some companies adjust.

First, this "issue". A person is very good at their job and withing the
company - they should be promoted to recognize their continued contributions.
Most companies have a Human Resources department that is designed for
efficiency and 'legally provable fairness' _, so people are categorized into
titles, grades, and rankings. Most technical career paths have a limit to
their maximum grade - hence a maximum salary.

For example, some companies have grades GSR01 - GSR08 as non-managerial
employees. Manager roles have ranks from GRS09 - GRS15. Above that is
executive, ESR16 - ESR21. Each has a salary range which is determined by
competitive salary surveys of other companies in similar industries.

The situation described above - a talented person needs to be compensated more
- causes a conflict because these companies don't have a "career path" that
includes non-managerial positions with higher pay (or career management
requirements). A manager's work performance is determined by a number of tasks
that are related to the performance of their employees. But such a list isn't
available for a company without a "Technical Career Path". The result is that
in order for a good employee to get a promotion, they are forced into a
Managerial Career Path. A technical person is moved into a management role
because the company has no other way to promote them or increase their salary.

Allow me a specific example: A person worked as a mechanic at a local muffler
place. He was their best. They had 4 other guys and a front-office manager,
plus an owner. When the manager quit, the top mechanic wanted they job because
it paid more than the mechanic job. The owner was quite blunt: "You have years
of experience working on cars and no experience running a store. I can't lose
you as a mechanic and a I can't risk my only income source to a person with no
experience. So I can't promote you." (Later, they negotiated a different pay
scale to keep the mechanic working there. Most companies don't have that
flexibility - all salaries are limited by HR rules.)

If the above example is applied to a large company - they can afford to train
a manager 'on the job' \- so they accept the risk and cost of doing so. And in
most cases, the person is good enough at the job. However, everyone involved
knows it is not a best case scenario. It only happens that way because the
company doesn't have a better solution.

\---

I mentioned the better solution above - the Technical Career Path. This is a
structure within a company that allows the desired progression. Often it
requires the employee to meet requirements beyond their day-to-day work. Some
requirements may be; nationally published, provide support on other products
within the company, present technical information within a larger group within
the company, contribute regularly to external projects (open source), etc.

For this to happen, the company has to invest in an additional career path
within their HR department and train upper and mid-level management on
managing, mentoring, and guiding these employees. This is not a small
undertaking. Most small to medium companies cannot afford this type of
investment.

The alternative, and the result, is that technical people don't get promoted
to management very often. The company recruits from outside so they don't have
to bear the cost of training the new manager.

\---

So, are we, technical people, 'stuck'? Is this something that can only be
solved by the 'company'? No. It is something that can be addressed by each
person who ranked "Promotes from Within" as high on their list. Being bluntly;
for a person to get promoted, they have to be promotable. That is, they have
to develop the skills the company is needing. Take a couple of night courses
on Business Management, Leading Teams, and Public Speaking. Then ensure the
company management knows you have these skills and want to put them to use. We
technical people will happily spend a weekend building a network in our
basement or learning the latest javascript library. But in order to get beyond
that promotion boundary, a technical employee has to learn something other
than the technical.

As a technical person, I've resigned from management jobs in order to go back
to technical work. I love creating software more than I do leading people -
even for less pay. When I had access to the Technical Career Path, I took it
and I was happy.

thanks, jon

_'legally provable fairness' is a made-up term that is intended to relate how
an action by a person is driven by a company policy. Most company policy is
written with the intention of being used as a defense in a legal situation
relating to a complaint against the company. For example, an improper
termination lawsuit or an investigation by a government agency.

------
sergiotapia
It immediately jumps out at me that "Team is diverse" has such a high bar. Is
this the HN/San Fransisco bubble in action?

In all of the interviews I've done as both interviewer and interviewee, not
once has "diversity" been mentioned. In fact, it's so strange that it feels
oddly hostile to me. It's that weird. I can't fathom asking someone who's
interviewing me: "Do you have enough latinos in your team?"

~~~
lettergram
Diverse doesn't even really mean diverse. It's just an excuse to make people
feel like they are inclusive, at least - that's the impression I have from
those I speak to in SF.

So yes, that's a mostly SF thing from my experince.

It's also interesting that I'm usually considered not diverse (white guy in
tech). However, what's interesting is that when we conduct surveys at work, in
conferences, school, etc. I usually stick out like a sore thumb. Because I'm
from a poor income bracket, in the midwest. Where most "diverse" people get
scholarships for school, because I'm white I received next to none (besides
for my research / grades). So what people mean isn't really "diverse" they
mean, woman and / or other skin color (not even other culture).

Diversity should include states IMO since the U.S. is easily diverse, perhaps
not as much as Europe, but enough to be unique. How many people on your office
have people from the Midwest or the south? It's actually rarer than I
anticipated looking at the figures.

~~~
mywittyname
> Where most "diverse" people get scholarships for school

Most "diverse" people don't get scholarships either. These scholarships are
either broad, but small (i.e., All Native American students get $500/semester)
or generous but targeted (Native American Women Studying Electrical
Engineering get $4000/semester). The latter can afford to be so generous
because of the complete lack of candidates.

But this attitude completely ignores the silent majority of these "diverse"
groups that get nothing (or are actively screwed) while being chastised by the
"I'm white so I get nothing crowd."

I had several Asian friends in college that paid $40k+ a year for tuition at a
shitty state school (which was $8k/yr for me). One was married to an American
since his freshman year and started working a job in the US at the end of his
sophomore year, yet, the university refused to give him the in-state tuition
rates until his very last semester. He also graduated with a 3.9 GPA.

His parents paid roughly $150,000 for the same education that I would have
paid $32k for. Had he been a white American, he would have been eligible for
an automatic academic scholarship (like I was).

~~~
beingmyself2
>Had he been a white American You mean "had he been an American citizen born
in your state"? Race has nothing to do with this example. All out-of-state
people regardless of color experience the same.

------
burnt1ce
No assholes. =)

~~~
mobilio
Unfortunately they're everywhere!

------
pklausler
Money.

