This is one thing I've coached career-focused and executive aspiring women on.
If they are worried about being assertive and being called a "bitch" at their current organization then they are already playing at a disadvantage.
The competition is full of men that got called "cocky" and self absorbed at many organizations, before landing in one at a senior level in a different place that needed someone new to shake things up or "make the hard decisions".
I don't really see that factored in to the outcomes.
Whether this idea results in a bunch of women finding that no organization wants their assertive attitude? Time will tell. A level playing field definitely involves normalizing behavior.
As someone in their 30s who has spent in-person time at about a dozen companies (a stint in consulting will do that) ranging from start-ups to large enterprise, this is exceedingly rare from what I've seen. Hardly anyone makes it to a single decade, much less multiple. Maybe at a law firm, but not in a development role.
I don't doubt these people exist but I'm a bit skeptical they are that significant in number to the point of defining the equilibrium as mentioned in the OP post.
In the teams I've been part of, average tenure at the company was over 5 years in every single case. In one case over 15 years.
These are all development positions. Management positions and marketing positions did tend to move around a bit more often.
I’m guessing you’re a webdev and this is normal for that industry but in more “traditional” fields programmers behave much more like other white-collar workers. I’ve met plenty with 20-30 year stunts at the same company.
Regardless, the number of developers at these companies is much fewer than in tech; therefore, they cannot be setting the equilibrium referred to by OP.
Insurance companies change slowly. We still have COBOL, mainframes, etc. Applications that cost $10k/minute if they're down.
Part of the equation is job security. You eat enough shit, put up with enough mgmt BS, but you get a steady paycheck, decent benefits, and little threat of downsizing.
I’ll be on my sixth job since then starting in July.
I have another friend who graduated in 1995. A year ahead of me. He was hired as Cobol programmer. 25 years later, he’s still writing COBOL.
You can live your dream or help someone else build theirs.
How interesting that we can build a system that can fluctuate enough to upend lives both good and bad. You become so focused on it, it is seen as this brass ring. Once you have it, you question everything.
I realize this is a bit philosophical and idealistic. You appear to have a similar viewpoint as mine in terms of a society that supports the whole, I just wonder if you can do that effectively when you have a source of power so specific like money.
There are some very revolutionary thinkers/philosophers/minds that were somewhat detached from money (in that they came from such wealth they didn't have to care or they chose a life detached from it) Plato, Aristotle, Wittgenstein...many more. I'm curious if there is a connection or merely just a representation of the population.
This is something I've rolled in my head for a while but first time I've said it out loud so a lot of people are now coming to my mind now that were not wealthy.
I cannot necessarily see it going away but perhaps more of a direct representation of what it means...our time/energy.
Save consistently and retire?
To play devils advocate to my own point:
There are some jobs that between those hours of 9-5 it is a dream come true. I ran an R&D team, we could buy any technology, kick off any project, success wasn't "Making a unicorn" but merely understanding something and providing guidance/insight to our executives.
It went well for several years...the party ended after leadership changed and they had new opinions on what R&D meant.
It was my dream and theirs for a period of time...then it was no longer my dream, just theirs.
I left to find my dream....I now make 5x as much doing something I love.
It went well for several years...the party ended after leadership changed and they had new opinions on what R&D meant. It was my dream and theirs for a period of time...then it was no longer my dream, just theirs.
And when that happens, I email recruiters and get another job usually paying more within a few weeks. The shortest time from looking for a job to having an offer is 4 days. The longest is about 7 weeks. But I only applied for one job. The process just takes a while for $BigTech.
Which brings up an even better example. The company I work for announced an across the board pay cut because our customers were losing money because of Covid. The company is having to cut prices, come up with payment arrangements, get money from the government, etc. I bet the owners aren’t sleeping well at night.
The next day after they announced the pay cut, a recruiter from $BigTech reached out to me about a remote role. I applied for the job, got it, with a 50% pay bump and I still sleep well.
I left to find my dream....I now make 5x as much doing something I love.
Survivorship bias. Statistically how will most software developers make more money over a lifetime - starting their own company or in the immortal words of r/cscareerquestions, “learn leetCode and work for a FAANG”?[1] Or depending on where you are living, just bring your run of the mill “Enterprise Developer” in any major city in the US that’s not on the west coast.
[1] Not that I went down that road to “work for a FAANG”. I took another route that pays as well to get into $BigTech.
I got into generating passive income. I am now in a position where I can maintain a lifestyle I enjoy and homeschool my small children.
I could pay for the best schools and keep track but I love education...I love passing that on. If I built a company it would be around that. I would not like the money struggles that you talk about so I would probably aim for something non/not for profit assuming it would lessen that burden.
I don't know that I care so much about money but before when I struggled, it was my singular focus.
It may seem like a silly question but if you had all the money in the world would you show up to work? If the answer is yes I hope you have that job for a lifetime, if the answer is no I hope you have all the money you need for a lifetime.
Edit: As a side note...perhaps because of the R&D nature of my previous role I had an advantage in the low barrier to entry of this. I saw a lot of acquisitions. Companies that were startups, bought, cannibalized, and then repurposed as a product. Sometimes these products internally thought up by us or other LoB's. They were all rough, prototypical in nature... Realizing that millions was "exploratory money" whether internally developed or purchased to have a product that looks and feels like something became a realization that you can profit on ideas...not full blown products bulletproof and cemented into history.
There are many that are not in it to make a legacy, just to get the thing airborne and sell.
The first time I saw a group spin up ten webpages of fake products to market test a brainstorming session was a lightbulb on what is happening under the surface in many areas.
As it is now, why wouldn’t I enjoy my job? I get to work remotely in a relatively low cost of living area making $BigTech money.
Will I be where I am for the rest of my life? Statistically, probably not. I can’t see that far ahead for a change. But 3 of the 5 biggest technology companies offer similar roles and if the local economy ever recovers there will be local companies.
This means that even at a 1% raise per year, some people will stick around for decades. One of the best developers at one of the companies I worked for was exactly that kind of person.
For the company this means a large amount of extra profit year in year out.
The odds of you saying "Nevermind, I'm out" when they don't budge from a 2% raise are from the employers side pretty low. The odds of a new hire saying "Nevermind, I'm out" when unwilling to budge on salary negotiation is a lot higher.
Hence it becomes easier to give some additional leeway in that situation. Also if companies already have a large workforce, giving a raise to all current employees is a whole lot more expensive than giving more money to all new hires.
Lastly, there has been plenty of research that has shown that salary is not that big of a predictor of whether people stick around or leave in any given year. Whether that research is also true for software developers is up for debate, but it is what most companies rely on.
Lastly an anecdote, I was told by a manager once that if I wanted to get a significant raise, I could quit and come back as a contractor or "Senior Developer" after 6 months. At that time I was considered a junior, and promotion to senior was only possible after 10 years experience internally.