[irvingprime]

The longest period of unemployment I've ever experienced ended about 6 months ago. I was unemployed for 11 months. The company that finally hired me was intentionally targeting people with lots of experience. I have that. They also pay less than I used to make but I took it because I needed a job.

Previous to that period of unemployment, my resume tended to get noticed. I got interviews from 3 applications out of 5. But this time, it was 3 out of 150.

Read that last paragraph again. My resume has not gotten worse. I still have decades of experience, a master's degree and a bunch of patents. That used to count for something.

My conclusion is that the market has gotten much worse for people with experience who don't hide being white and male.

[Epa095]

Why do you think the white male part is relevant? This is meant as an honest question. I know DEI is a thing, but it kind of already seems a bit out of fashion, and do we have any reason to believe that the labour market is easier for a Muslim woman?

Idk, for me occams razor tells me that the labour market is just a bit shit for all genders and races at the moment..

[dhcpserver]

There is some truth to this. A friend of mine is a recruiting manager at one of the big tech companies here in the valley. They use a scoring system for candidates that ranges from (iirc) 1.0 (don't hire) to 5.0 (should hire).

If you're female, you earn a point. If you're a minority, you get another point. So, before considering all the other skills and qualifications, you already have a few points ahead of the typical white male applicant.

[bdangubic]

but white males are not used to this type of job market :)

hence now being white male is what must be a problem (though you offer them $10 million to change color of the skin and gender and there will not be a single taker … too funny …)

[w4ffl35]

It would be nice if people who are white males (and frankly everyone else) could include their demographic without someone complaining tha they had done so. That's one of the things I was hoping to gather with this post in the first place as I am doing research on this topic.

[vaseline]

What is the DEI thing?

35, West African Immigrant (US Citizen), 12 Years of experience. Currently at Yr 4 at Fortune 500 Tech Company (Prior at Consulting). Bachelor Non-Stem. Customer Success/Implementations, Technical.

I've been applying since Feb 2024. 47 External, 5 Internal, 6 HR Screens, 6 Phone Interviews, 6 (3+ Rounds) and 6 Rejections.

No AI just careful tweaks for each submission so its time intensive but I feel like its tough for everyone.

[throwaway284534]

If it’s any consolation, I haven’t gotten any favors as a trans woman, even with “passing privilege.” Both myself and the cis women in tech I know all hear the same thing: companies are tipping the scales to favor diversity hires. But in truth it seems to be a marketing tactic rather than a hiring strategy.

It’s quite bizarre at all levels — I often receive invitations from recruiters to apply to “women led startups”, but when I ask why I’m qualified there’s no real explanation other than I’m a woman who owns a computer. The same seems to be true of female founded startups. Doesn’t matter what the role is or what’s being built — Does she use a computer while in an office building? That’s women in tech! The purpose of most of these interviews is really about manufacturing consent: “It’s just too hard to hire women! Just look how hard we’ve tried!” I’m all for incentivizing under represented groups, but it wouldn’t be so bad if the phrase “women in tech” was short hand for “women who have written a lot code” and less about “brave women who uses their yonic powers to guide the brutish male code monkeys.” Attend a FAANG sponsored women centric event and you’ll see that I’m only exaggerating a little bit.

Ironically, my transition has been something like a rendition of Gift of the Magi: The more passable I became, the less experienced I was perceived by my peers. And worse, what was once thought of as confident display of technical ability is now seen as a lack of demure. Insecurity runs deep in this industry.

IMO the hiring problem isn’t about gender or race. It’s the fact that tech doesn’t have the luxury of an economic environment where all the money is imaginary. There’s really no era quite like the last two decades. Tech companies could burn through billions of dollars on intangible assets with no immediate need for deliverables. As the perception of innovation diminishes, companies feigned cutting edge leadership by leaning into the virtues, and as a byproduct, having the employees fight over who’s more oppressed.

I think everyone here has questioned if their skill set is actually worth their salary. “Sure, sometimes it’s a free ride, but those hard sprints are really why I’m paid six figures!” — It’s explanations like that which let software engineers hit the snooze bar on whether their employer’s solvency is transitive of their technical expertise, or rather just two decades of zero interest rate policies. It’s likely a little bit of the former and a lot more of the latter.

IMO most engineers are looking through the wrong end of the telescope, trying to find a job like the dating you do when you’re looking for a comfortable but uncommitted relationship. That time is over and our jobs are now akin to the blue collar trades who’s customers have a clear idea of what they’re paying you for, rather than a vague set of technical skills that might be worth exploring on their dime.

[jfil]

Thank you for sharing your experience.

To add to your ZIRP point: I find it bizarre that tech companies are still valued at 10x their revenue in the stockmarket. The multiple is a high-tech premium... because computer technology is new and therefore every business that involves computers is high-growth?

We don't pay crazy multiples for businesses that use electricity or telephones. Why should we pay them for tech? Soon all these high-tech companies are going to have valuation multiples like manufacturers, logistics companies and fast-food chains.

[kragen]

> The more passable I became, the less experienced I was perceived by my peers. And worse, what was once thought of as confident display of technical ability is now seen as a lack of demure.

This is very valuable information, thank you. Most of us only ever have the chance to experience the situation from the vantage point of one gender. Are you in the US, or what?

[intelVISA]

Taking your conclusion in good faith, would you really want to work in a shop that weighs immutable characteristics over actionable metrics like solving LC hards?

[vbi8iBEX]

yes, because I like food better than principles.

[iamdbtoo]

> My conclusion is that the market has gotten much worse for people with experience who don't hide being white and male.

Really? Mine is that companies value experience less.

[dhcpserver]

I've noticed this too. I assumed it’s because they see experience as leading to higher wage expectations.

Ageism is a significant issue in tech as well. I've had friends with decades of experience who were turned away with comments like the employer wanting someone to "grow with the company" or that they had "too much" experience. These phrases often serve as code for ageism, which is incredibly hard to prove.

Zuckerberg famously said something like "younger people are smarter," which was a mistake to say out loud, but many employers unfortunately believe it. Even millennials are starting to age out.

[BadCookie]

DEI peaked in 2020-21. Please stop blaming women and other races for the tech downturn. You are barking up the wrong tree.

[melbourne_mat]

Maybe it's a cultural thing but to me this comes across as racist