Hiring software developers is difficult

[BobsLawnService]

Ah, I only saw the ad on their website. R15-R20k is a graduate/very junior position.

Also, upthread someone mentioned renting a three bedroom house with pool and garden in a good area for R8,000 a month. I'm going to go ahead and assume that isn't in Cape Town.

 

[zippy]

R300,000 for an intermediate developer with two or three years of experience sounds about par for the course. As for the age thing - I do believe that employees have the right to hire people who they think will fit into the corporate culture of the company. I'd say that is one of the most important factors. You can teach most people new skills but finding a bunch of people who fit in and work well together is hard.

My advice to the OP is to keep plugging away at it. Hiring new developers is difficult because the pool of talented developers is small.

Ageism is discrimination. This fitting in with "Corporate culture" is BS and excuse used by bigots. So when they reach 30, what do you do, fire them for being too old? Small wonder there is a shortage of skilled workers in SA and companies are forced to hire people with almost no experience.

 

[_kabal_]

Classic. Build that strawman and then use it to "prove" some point.

You do know the people aren't immortal? "corporate culture" evolves

 

[BobsLawnService]

Whoa, nobody said the OP wanted to fire everyone over 30.

Also, I hate the way "discrimination"gets thrown around willy-nilly these days. A company should be free to hire whoever they think is the best person for the job based on their oiwn criteria.

 

[[)roi(]]

Whoa, nobody said the OP wanted to fire everyone over 30.

Also, I hate the way "discrimination"gets thrown around willy-nilly these days. A company should be free to hire whoever they think is the best person for the job based on their oiwn criteria.

...back to reality. Not in South Africa. The only acceptable discrimination by law is based on EE (i.e. to address the imbalances caused by apartheid).

If any company openly practises discrimination then it should prepare itself for a potential legal **** storm. You need only one interested candidate, who can legally be proven capable for the advertised position, and this company will end up with not only a negative reputation, but also incur some substantial financial penalties.

The OP best seek legal advice before taking this strong line.

 

[cguy]

Also, I hate the way "discrimination"gets thrown around willy-nilly these days. A company should be free to hire whoever they think is the best person for the job based on their oiwn criteria.

If things were left like this, we would be stuck with corporations whose best jobs are filled with white males, and levels of authority are neatly pocketed by age. This isn't the 50s. Companies aren't free to hire, fire or pay as they will. Discrimination isn't being thrown around "willy-nilly" here - if you think that ageism is not a real form of discrimination, you are the one with the problem.

 

[BobsLawnService]

Wow, you certainly have a low regard for humanity and a misunderstanding of how capitalism works.

The aim of a company is to make money - therefore you hire the people most likely to make you money. This means you hire the best people for the job. This is the great thing about it. If you are a bigot and hire people who are not the best you and your company will be overtaken by the best.

It is simple really.

 

[Ejeckt]

Wow, you certainly have a low regard for humanity and a misunderstanding of how capitalism works.

The aim of a company is to make money - therefore you hire the people most likely to make you money. This means you hire the best people for the job. This is the great thing about it. If you are a bigot and hire people who are not the best you and your company will be overtaken by the best.

It is simple really.

Nowhere in the capitalism manual does it say that those with more EE points win bids and tenders.

Anyway...

Legislation makes provision for discrimination for two circumstances: EE requirements and job requirements (hiring a female cleaner to clean ladies' restrooms).

Discriminating age, for example, is ok if your job requires someone to drive strategy or run a project for the next 5 years, but the applicant is almost at retirement age.

It is never ok to advertise age like this, though. Very very bad practice. Interview all candidates. Young and old. If the young buy proves to be best because of current remuneration & potential to fit in, great. But at least you didn't discriminate.

@OP sharpen up your recruitment policy, man. You're going to get your company in hot water.

 

[Chevron]

Wow, you certainly have a low regard for humanity and a misunderstanding of how capitalism works.

The aim of a company is to make money - therefore you hire the people most likely to make you money. This means you hire the best people for the job. This is the great thing about it. If you are a bigot and hire people who are not the best you and your company will be overtaken by the best.

It is simple really.

So that means women won't ever get hired as they take 6months off work whenever they pregnant.

 

[BobsLawnService]

And men are more likely to suffer certain medical conditions like strokes and heart attacks. Younger males are more likely to get in car accidents.

It's life.

 

[cguy]

Wow, you certainly have a low regard for humanity and a misunderstanding of how capitalism works.

The aim of a company is to make money - therefore you hire the people most likely to make you money. This means you hire the best people for the job. This is the great thing about it. If you are a bigot and hire people who are not the best you and your company will be overtaken by the best.

It is simple really.

I'm not sure which planet you've been living on, but the Employment Equity Act and constitution were written for good reason, not because some people had too much time on their hands - rights aren't just handed out - they're fought for, for a reason. There is more than enough history to show that a free market economy is no solution to the discrimination problem.

 

[noxibox]

Except it's not.

Obviously making job ads with any sort of "ism" is stupid, but lets not kid ourselves, EVERYONE eliminates people as being potential hires after interviews show they might not fit in, regardless of ability. Is choosing someone equally or slightly less skilled, but with more potential, and hunger with them being 26 vs 56 worse than not hiring someone because they seem to be a bit of a douche? Ageism vs personalitism.

this does not mean I personally am closed to hiring people over a certain age. If there is a candidate, who is amazing for the position, and happens to be 60, then joy to us all. Unfortunately, I have probably been poisoned with my experience with oracle consulting, where everyone I dealt with with 20-30+ years experience were rubbish

None of this backs up your claim that "Most of the time, people that fit into this environment at also of a similar age." or "A 50 is also less likey to take on being told by a 30 year old that his work is "****"".

 

[noxibox]

BTW, assuming that all older developers have less "hunger" and "potential" is absurd - this is effectively what an age based policy does.

Well hunger is generally another codeword for wanting to underpay and overwork. In that case you'd need a desperate 50 year old. Hell you'd need a desperate 30 year old. Otherwise only someone with money lying around or very young would be willing to kill themselves for an employer unless they're taking in adequate compensation.

 

[noxibox]

Not sure. I get a large 3 bedroom house, with a huuuuge garden and a big pool in an upmarket neighbourhood for R8000 a month. Under 800 pounds. How much would that cost in the UK?

For £800 maybe a reasonable 2 bedroom flat. Small houses can cost £200,000 or more to buy.

 

[cguy]

Well hunger is generally another codeword for wanting to underpay and overwork. In that case you'd need a desperate 50 year old. Hell you'd need a desperate 30 year old. Otherwise only someone with money lying around or very young would be willing to kill themselves for an employer unless they're taking in adequate compensation.

I interpreted "hunger" as ambition, and drive to excel.

 

[cguy]

Well hunger is generally another codeword for wanting to underpay and overwork. In that case you'd need a desperate 50 year old. Hell you'd need a desperate 30 year old. Otherwise only someone with money lying around or very young would be willing to kill themselves for an employer unless they're taking in adequate compensation.

I interpreted "hunger" as ambition, and drive to excel.

 

[Chevron]

I interpreted "hunger" as ambition, and drive to excel.

Noxibox is right. The only time people use "hunger" in an ad is when they want someone to work for peanuts.

 

[cguy]

Noxibox is right. The only time people use "hunger" in an ad is when they want someone to work for peanuts.

I suppose it makes sense - if someone is hungry enough, they'd spend the money on peanuts anyway...

 

[Chevron]

I suppose it makes sense - if someone is hungry enough, they'd spend the money on peanuts anyway...

It's just the language they use. You need to know what it means. Like on a dating site "mature" just means "old".

 

[cguy]

It's just the language they use. You need to know what it means. Like on a dating site "mature" just means "old".

Or buying a house: "Cozy" => cramped, "Quaint" => needs renovation, "Great deal" => fubar. In the case of this job ad, though, I would have thought they would have just let the salary do the talking (also results in a lot less foot in mouth).