Top
Best
New

Posted by enraged_camel 11 hours ago

Tech employment now significantly worse than the 2008 or 2020 recessions(twitter.com)
https://xcancel.com/JosephPolitano/status/202991636466461124...

https://bsky.app/profile/josephpolitano.bsky.social/post/3mg...

782 points | 526 commentspage 2
Ancalagon 10 hours ago|
Hm what about the Citadel rebuttal that showed growth?

https://www.citadelsecurities.com/news-and-insights/2026-glo...

jatins 9 hours ago||
Yeah, I was thinking the same. It seems like you can get data for whatever argument you want to support
Rexxar 8 hours ago|||
Doesn't seem necessarily a contradiction. Job posting growth logically happens before effective job growth.
candiddevmike 8 hours ago|||
Biggest thing hurting folks is RTO. Unless you live in a large metro, tech jobs are slim/none.
stanleykm 7 hours ago||
That’s how it was before the pandemic.. Is it unusual that the jobs are where the people are?
andai 9 hours ago|||
I've heard other people say, situation has greatly improved over the past year, esp. 6 months.
uncivilized 6 hours ago||
How many of those are real jobs?
heymgr 5 hours ago||
I have PayPal, Amazon, LinkedIn, <<mid size company>>, <<mid size company2>>, <<startup>> as a manager on my resume. I didn't get a call back after applying for two weeks.

I got 4 or 5 standard rejections.

I have non-English name so that definitely hurts. I have AP EAD which is a stage between H1B and Green Card and I still require sponsorship. It's complicated but I can't just switch to EAD right away.

It's not just engineers. It's managers and experienced people as well. Don't believe top comment that it is bimodal. Unless you are supertar (99.99%) it becoming hard to get noticed. I thought of going back to IC role but it is hard to pick up and do leetcode all over again. It is extremely hard with a special needs kids at home.

Any suggestions or recommendations for me?

mancerayder 5 hours ago|
I understand this a lot.

I had managerial* position I ghosted because they had Leetcode literally written on the agenda.

* - managerial is replaced with Lead. Lead is expected to be hands-on as well as have serious managerial experience. Since it's easier to lie about managerial experience, you have people lying into these roles and becoming terrible managers.

ppeetteerr 10 hours ago||
Those are raw numbers. I would look instead at the job changes over total employment numbers. I don't have the numbers but I would wager we have many more people working in tech today (overall) than we did in 2008.

Also, that spike in 21/22 really did a number on people's expectations. The one constant in this industry is its cyclical nature.

mrweasel 10 hours ago||
Maybe I'm reading the graph wrong, but the decrease comes after years on continuous growth, so total employment numbers in tech should still be absolutely massive, compared to 18 years ago?

If it continues, then yes it could be bad, but so far it seems like a correction for over-hiring in 2021 - 2023. Seems a little weird to be focusing on a decline in 2024 - 2026, without addressing the large increase right in the years before.

SpicyLemonZest 10 hours ago||
There's a lot of dynamics where it's the short-term numbers that matter. If you're a developer who needs a new job after your spouse got transferred to LA or something, it does you no good that the absolute numbers are massive, nor that a different person looking for a job 3 years ago would have found it uncommonly easy.
oblio 10 hours ago||
Asked Gemini quickly for 2000 and 2025 numbers (US).

Tech employees: 5.5m vs 9.9.

Software developers: 0.68m vs 3.2m.

Different ball game.

nabbed 7 hours ago|||
>Software developers: 0.68m vs 3.2m.

I had no idea I was in such an exclusive group back in 2000. Everyone I knew was a software engineer or in tech one way or another so I suppose I got a warped sense that I belonged to a larger group.

ua709 6 hours ago||
I'm not sure the nation wide raw statistics are that reliable in the field of software engineering without interpretation.

In the 90s tons of people who were de facto software engineers were listed as "Information Technology Workers". I suspect a lot of that still hasn't been shaken out of the system.

According to the BLS in the year 2000 there were 3.4 million information technology workers.

shagie 5 hours ago||
BLS had some classification changes over the years. I think it's interesting in the "this is how people thought about the role over the decades."

Today there are computer programmers (15-1251), and software developers (15-1252), and web developers (15-1254).

In 2018, there was a reclassification - https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/ETA/oflc/Presentation... where 15-1132, Software Developers, Applications and 15-1133, Software Developers, Systems Software where reclassified into the software developers (15-1252) group.

The other thing that confuses this is that a lot of positions were classified as Computer systems analysts because that's a position that a TN visa can be hired for (there is no software engineer in there... and it wasn't until relatively recently that one could be a "software engineer" in Canada without being an Engineer.

Back in 2010 ... https://www.bls.gov/cps/cenocc2010.htm

    Computer programmers    1010 15-1131
    Software developers, applications and systems software    1020 15-1132, 15-1133
Where the "Computer programmer" was the more junior classification and Software developers working on a word processor were classified differently than a software developer working on the operating system... and they were the more senior positions.

This division still shows up in the definitions.

https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/15-1252.00

    Software Developers
    Research, design, and develop computer and network software or specialized utility programs. Analyze user needs and develop software solutions, applying principles and techniques of computer science, engineering, and mathematical analysis. Update software or enhance existing software capabilities. May work with computer hardware engineers to integrate hardware and software systems, and develop specifications and performance requirements. May maintain databases within an application area, working individually or coordinating database development as part of a team.
https://www.onetonline.org/link/summary/15-1251.00

    Computer Programmer
    Create, modify, and test the code and scripts that allow computer applications to run. Work from specifications drawn up by software and web developers or other individuals. May develop and write computer programs to store, locate, and retrieve specific documents, data, and information.
game_the0ry 9 hours ago|||
> Software developers: 0.68m vs 3.2m.

Wow. Just wow.

blobbers 8 hours ago||
If anyone saw that LinkedIn post about someone at Block resigning guilt of being offered a raise and retention after the layoffs, I'd say that is a signal that tech is heading down.

Most people would be thankful to have a secure well paying job in the post AI blow off; increasingly it's going to harder to differentiate yourself against anyone else using AI. That we have people still in the thick of AI that don't understand that is a strong signal that AI boom is still going to come take some jobs.

If you're in a software related role and AI isn't making you more productive, it's on YOU as a dev to figure things out quickly.

AI is coming for your job so you can either be an AI manager, or you can get managed out for AI.

caveat: This is my take as someone who used to do a lot of hand coding, and now regularly has a small team of AI doing anything that would have normally required mostly brute coding strength but not too much thought; that's facet'ed plots, refactoring libraries, improving pipeline efficiency, adding parallelization where possible, building presentations, adding test coverage.

ares623 7 hours ago|
mmhmm. That's a lot of me me me. Are you reviewing others' work who produce the same output as you?
RivieraKid 11 hours ago||
Interesting, this shows growth in open positions: https://www.trueup.io/job-trend
ICantFeelMyToes 11 hours ago|
True but there is also a massive proliferation of ghost jobs. Dirty secret for a bunch of Series A places
10xDev 11 hours ago|||
Something needs to be done about these bots, it is getting eerie. Yesterday a bot created an account named 100xLLM the moment I responded to it to respond back with.
mamcx 10 hours ago||||
I'm looking for job (in Rust) now and is absurd how many positions are for training LLMS -in Rust!- (yeah, lets help the people that wanna put everyone out of jobs)
raw_anon_1111 9 hours ago|||
Well looking for a “programming job in $x” is going to be a problem going forward. Programming itself is going to be a commodity between AI and its harder to stand out in a saturated market. I sell myself as someone who can get stuff done using technology and can lead larger initiatives
nxm 10 hours ago||||
If you don’t then someone else will… genie is out of the bottle
tayo42 10 hours ago|||
What companies are hiring people to use rust?
OJFord 10 hours ago||
Loads, I come across it frequently and I'm not actively looking for them.
fred_is_fred 10 hours ago|||
I see everyone say this but what is the point of making a fake job opening? Are companies just doing that to see if a unicorn applies?
salawat 10 hours ago||||
As a hiring manager, I have to write the job description. HR is responsible for posting the damn thing where people can see it, then into the ATS you go. We also know recruiting posts can be a source of competitive intelligence and signal for investors. We don't want it used that way, but we're aware of it. Bit of a dirty secret. That means, alas, the only people hurt are the applicants looking for work. I'll work through the queue when I have a billet to fill, but otherwise... You're shouting into the void. Not sure who is responsible for reporting headcount increases to BLS, but I've actively looked and never found the person. So... I honestly have no idea how they get their numbers unless there is a pipeline from the major payroll processors; which feels kinda ick if you think about it.
schlauerfox 10 hours ago||
https://www.bls.gov/k12/teachers/posters/pdf/how-bls-collect... This says statistics, i've seen unsourced articles saying that they pull Unemployment Insurance numbers as part of it which are part of the payroll process, but BLS seems to say sampling and surveys.
rexpop 10 hours ago||||
I had an AI-agenerates answer for you, but then I realized something deeper: moral hazard.

> Moral hazard is when one party takes actions that impose costs on others because they don’t fully bear those costs themselves. With ghost jobs, employers get benefits (brand signaling, resume mining, internal optics) while job seekers eat the time, emotional, and sometimes financial cost of chasing something that never really existed.

johnnyanmac 10 hours ago||||
There's a dozen different angles all coming out at once. I'll try to summarize some.

- really wants to hire H1B, but needs to pretend to interview first for compliance. These usually have absurd requirements to make it viable to reject anyone.

- really wants to do an internal or referral hire or promotion, but needs to interview for HR compliance. These usually have such specific requirements that only the person they want qualifies.

- posts jobs because a company wants to look like its growing, even when it's not.

- posts jobs to either signal to an employee that they are replaceable, or to try and relieve a stressed employee that more help is coming. Either way, it's a bluff

- yes, sometimes you want to hold out for the perfect unicorn and are not in any way in a rush to find them. There's no distinction for this, but job posts are cheap so why not?

- outdated posts that still stay up because There's no rush to take it down.

- a technique used to lower compensation. They post a job, see how many applications it gets. If it's more than enough, they take it down (with no interviews) then put it up once more at a lower rate. Repeat until not enough people apply. This may or may not lead to interviews because the actual goal is market probing.

-purely to advertise the company instead of actually hire. Usually done at career fairs where you talk and realize there's no actual open positions.

SoftTalker 8 hours ago|||
> outdated posts that still stay up because There's no rush to take it down.

Can also happen when it takes 3 months to get a job posting approved, so once you get one you just leave it up.

fred_is_fred 9 hours ago|||
Thanks for that. I have seen internal hire before or even "we know who we want but legal makes us post it for 7 days".

The comp technique you mentioned though seems like a lot of work for price discovery, surely there are data sets out there?

johnnyanmac 7 hours ago||
It's probably not the most efficient means, no. Probably one of the cheapest methods, though. It's definitely not something you can get away with in a good job market.
FireBeyond 10 hours ago||||
AI training?

There's a IT careers site that was sold, I believe, went through a re-branding. And now they also offer AI and "personal" resume reviews _and_ writing, cover letters, and they even have members do a 10-15 minute AI virtual interview that ostensibly could be shown to a hiring manager.

I was unemployed as a PM for about three month. I applied to in the order of 100 roles at this site, as well as applications on the other sites you'd expect, from LI to more niche.

I felt that this site was "underperforming". Jobs I'd applied to that I'd only really seen on there I'd never heard from. I saw jobs that were advertised in other places on there too.

What sealed it for me was that towards the end of the three months, I got an email from the site. "Your profile has been viewed". I open it, "An employer is looking at your profile". I'd never seen this type of email from them before, and sure enough: "Your profile has been viewed 1 time in the last 90 days". That was it. No contacts, and only one employer has even looked at my profile on the site (and this is the kind of site where that'd be the only place they could look at your application). And that employer didn't even have positions open.

But the site does ask you questions to "submit to the employer" about "why you want to work here" "why you'd make a good fit", etc.

And I'm entirely convinced that the jobs they're advertising are only (a very small) fractionally "real" and ever reviewed by anyone at all (maybe the "promoted" jobs?), and they're harvesting positions and jobs from other sites or employers (there's no positions that don't actually seem to exist, or at least not ads)...

... and that their chief motivation for this is getting all your answers to train their models for their actual revenue generator - AI resume writing, cover letter writing, etc. All pre-seeded with other people's real answers to such questions.

xrd 10 hours ago|||
Two reasons. One, they have already filled it internally but legally have to post the job. Two, they are gathering data on market trends and what salaries people will take, which is useful if they are considering firing people and rehiring with lower salaries.

I've applied for many jobs where I was perfectly qualified and got rejection notices immediately. I applied on a Sunday and got rejected on Sunday an hour later. No human reviewed that application I made, it was auto rejected, and if that's the case, what other explanation is there than "ghost jobs."

phil21 10 hours ago|||
> and if that's the case, what other explanation is there than "ghost jobs."

You didn't pass some arbitrary ruleset given to an AI or machine learning algorithm.

Companies can be very selective now, and usually implement this selectivity fairly stupidly. There also is the problem of being genuinely swamped with bullshit applicants for positions, so the false positive rate is likely quite high at the moment.

I've found it extremely difficult to sort the wheat from the chaff right now. Finding competent people is more difficult than ever, but the sheer number of applicants is at least an order of magnitude higher. Botting has made applying to jobs exceedingly low friction, so there is very little downside to someone entirely not qualified to apply to 600 jobs a day and hope they get lucky.

We have positions that have been open for months that go unfilled simply due to lack of time to sort through applicants, and the few we do have time to interview usually are obviously unqualified within the first 5 minutes of talking to them.

jghn 9 hours ago|||
I can't imagine applying to a job where I didn't already have some sort of personal connection. That was already true, and that's even more true now. Likewise, these days as a hiring manager I'd be unlikely to hire someone that came in via random application for the same reason
xrd 9 hours ago||||
This is undeniably happening as well. Totally agree.

I just have had lots rejections, and some where I did have a good fit, that I don't think "AI auto rejection" is the only story. I have good credentials, several F500 experiences, no big career gaps.

The only real success I have had in the last few years is targeted emails (from who is hiring on HN) or through my network.

It's very different than at any other time and I believe it is a combination of a terrible market, AI rejections, and ghost jobs. And I'm sure there are more than a few ghost jobs.

johnnyanmac 10 hours ago|||
If you don't have the time to sort them through, there's not much urgency to actually find someone, is there?

It also might point to a filtering mismatch of your get a high false positive rate.

phil21 8 hours ago||
Oh definitely. And our hiring practices are not exactly state of the art. I'll be the first to admit they need a giant amount of improvement.

Most of the good folks have come in via word of mouth and networks, as they typically do.

For those outstanding positions they are "very nice to haves" but obviously not critical. When the right candidate gets matched we'll jump on the opportunity, but it's not an existential problem for the moment.

caminante 9 hours ago|||
> Two reasons. One, they have already filled it internally but legally have to post the job.

This scenario isn't a "fake job," which are more akin to ghost/scam/non-existent openings.

zadikian 9 hours ago||
Remember it's the first derivative. The title and chart suggested at first that there are fewer tech jobs vs the start, but really it must be way more.

I still kinda want to see this going back to 2000. That must be the biggest tech crash by far. 2008 and 2020 were overall market crashes, but tech was booming.

spacebuffer 7 hours ago||
I am in my 20s. At the moment I've got a part time job, but I am preparing myself for the worse. In the next few years I am planning to volunteer at farms through workaway. Maybe one day I can become self sustainable,tech and nutrition wise

also getting into plumbing, curious to see what others are doing in this regard.

broknbottle 3 hours ago||
This is a culling and the fake it until you make it crowd that focused on surface level only knowledge are finding out why they should have went deeper. The ones that honed their craft and really focused on the foundational and core stuff are in demand.
givemeethekeys 9 hours ago||
A look at the number of replies to "Who's Hiring?" each month over the past year or so compared to prior years made it loud and clear. Traditional tech has been in a recession for a couple of years, at least!
rsanek 6 hours ago||
Indeed, things really changed in late 2022 / early 2023. https://www.hnhiringtrends.com/
mahatofu 7 hours ago||
It’s also worth noting that the economy and job market as a whole is in a recession.
999900000999 8 hours ago|
I've been lucky enough to stay employed, but eating a massive pay cut hurts. I have no realistic hope of getting back to my peak salary anytime soon .

Jobs are now significantly more demanding too, do more and make less.

More comments...