I think so. It's my belief that they often times leadership sees software engineers as cogs that can easily be replaced by another. They don't appreciate the years of institutional knowledge that experienced engineers have, vast productivity differences between workers, etc.
If certain members become known as being super important or valuable, management's response will more often be "fix this risk" not "great, let's reward that person". In the short term it will bring that person some degree of job security, but in the long term they are viewed as a threat to the org.
It's the assembly line mindset -- if there's only one person who can operate the machine or build a part, remove the part.
Yeah. The other day, I asked a clarifying question that led to a long email chain among non-technical employees. Of course, the various VPs refer to each other by name, but when the resulting email chain got forwarded to me, I see that I was referred to merely as "the dev." It really hammered home for me that these people will never see me as their equal. I am just a nameless, fungible "resource" despite my decade+ of experience.
As an aside, unless you have a specific reason not to, refer to others in those situations in the way they refer to each other. If you’re chatting with Jane and Bob, and they’re calling each other Jane and Bob, so should you. Your default attitude should be that you’re their peer, even if you’re working in different fields. They’re good at managing organizations. You’re good at technical stuff. You’re all there to work together to get stuff done.
Get them used to calling you by name as an equal, not as “the dev”.
