nick at ccl4.org
Fri May 4 14:28:35 BST 2007
On Fri, May 04, 2007 at 01:43:35PM +0100, Dirk Koopman wrote:
> Nicholas Clark wrote:
> >There must be some intersection between those companies seeking to recruit,
> >and some people on this list. Yet no-one at any of these companies says:
> > "Yes, I know no job is perfect, and this one does have its warts. But on
> > average it's fun, and you should at least interview here"
> >Why not? Is everyone at these dozen firms all sufficiently dissatisfied
> >they too want to move on?
> I could never be accused of lurking however, I believe that there is a
> very simple explanation:-
> Not enough money is being offered.
> It is really as simple as that, although many people will add other
> reasons. When it comes down to it: who is going to expose themselves to
> the stress of getting another job, with all its uncertainties, unless
> there is sufficient incentive?
Er, I don't feel that that actually answers the question in the text of mine
that you quoted. It explains why no-one is filling these vacancies, but:
Why aren't the people on this list who work for firms making any effort
to mention that they have vacancies? After all, there is a london.pm
jobs list for that very purpose...
> The pimps are having kittens because they believe that perl is some low
> skill, low pay job for morons whom are happy to do boring, repetitive
> web jobs, with the result that these "consultants" are recommending pay
> way below what your average .pm-er thinks is reasonable. The employers
> expectations are managed by them accordingly. This is now coming home to
> roost (and about time too).
> However, the flip side of this is that they will move away from perl
> (too expensive, no workers) and go and find some other language which is
> more popular which has lots of cheap, young and enthusiastic workers.
If the employers can get the job done in this way for the same or less cost,
then they are not making a mistake by making this transition.
More information about the london.pm