A layoff fundamentally changed how I perceive work

> There are a few reasons for this, but the most concrete is that your behavior in this job has an impact on getting the next one

This is completely false. I literally haven't seen someone do a reference check once in the last 10 years. Early 2010s it was more common but this practice is dead. Now every company is a new slate. In fact, I've seen people repeatedly rewarded for jumping ship and build there career on that. Companies have stopped investing in devs, so why should devs not reciprocate?

And there are so many startups. More than you can count. There are more new ones every day than you could ever have time to apply to. They don't all have time to talk to each other.

Not saying it's not good to have pride in your work, but within reason, and within a framework of fairness and quid pro quo. Don't let people exploit you any more than you exploit them. Employment is 100% transactional and the moment you forget that is the moment you get taken advantage of.

Their point wasn't reference checks it was the power of a network of people who want to work with you again because they know your work is more than just transactional.

The effect’s source is much more direct than that.

It’s not a reference check to see “is sam0x17 a good dev?” at the end of a hiring pipeline, but rather “I’ve got an open role and remember that sam0x17 is one of the best devs I’ve ever worked with; let’s get them into the company!”

Can confirm 17 years in, past performance has never impacted future job prospects.

> This is completely false.

It's not completely false at all - but it does depend greatly depends on which country you're based in.

Where I am, in Spain, your network, and your reputation within it, are _everything_. Good jobs will sometimes not even be advertised, as the first thing a hirer will do is ask around their network for recommendations, and those recommendations count for _a lot_. On the other side, when you are looking for work, the first thing you do is ask your network for an intro - and again, that intro counts for a lot.

That's not to say that the traditional interview process will be skipped, but candidates coming from recommendations will have a massive head-start over others.

It's not about references. It's about building a network of colleagues who respect you and your work. Many years ago, when I started doing consulting/contracting work, literally all my of my jobs came through people I had previously worked for or with across a variety of companies. And if you play your cards right, as the years roll on, you won't even have to apply for jobs other than as a formality. Instead, people who's respect you've gained will try to bring you into where they work.

They're talking about referrals, not reference checks. Getting good referrals is hugely important, especially at smaller companies that don't the capacity to do a rigorous hiring process.

In 17 years you never had a past co-worker contact you about a job? That's confirmation that your past performance is affecting your future job prospects. And if you have had that kind of contact, then your statement above is a lie.

I spent the last few months interviewing at various bay area startups for senior SE roles. About half of them wanted references. This was my experience so YMMV

reference checks are pointless if employee gives you a list of favorable references

> This is completely false. I literally haven't seen someone do a reference check once in the last 10 years.

I understand this might not be your experience, but it's far from being "completely false".

I have had background checks/reference checks done on me (thankfully my would-be boss told me they were a formality and nobody cared about the results. I say "thankfully" not because I had anything to hide, but because the contractors doing the background checks asked for the dumbest things). I was also contacted by US-based consulting firms and asked to provide references on a former boss of mine, who was now applying for an engineering position... and to my surprise, the reference check involved getting on a call with me!

More recently, a relative was applying to a fintech and was asked for references for all her pasts jobs since she started working in the relevant field.

I know lots of companies don't care, but many others do.

Besides, like other commenters said, it's not only about formal references checking. It's also about the networks you build with coworkers whom you can potentially meet again in other jobs, and whom you want to speak favorably of you. I know I've informally vetoed coworkers whom I knew were terrible at their jobs and I heard recruiting was thinking of making an offer to. Likewise, I've enthusiastically recommended past coworkers who I would enjoy working with again.

> It's about building a network of colleagues who respect you and your work.

The network is actually holding you back. You don't need a network to get a new job AND if that person in another company has enough pull to get you in it's actually likely a sign they've been there too long themselves if they're not directly in control of the hiring budget.

Just job hop. This ain't your daddy's profession.

Well... That doesn't bode well for me. I'm in Spain but I've always worked for companies in other countries (including my current remote job).

Or you can drop a line to someone who you've worked with in some manner and ask to meet. That's how I got my last 14-year job.

A lot of companies tend to ask for them. No idea how many actually follow through and contact them.

It happens all the time as you get higher and higher on the org tree, I had jobs not only call my references by ask if they could also speak to my former bosses.

When the money is seriously on the line people care.

I'm not sure which market you're in, but companies here absolutely do reference checks. They will even reach out people you didn't list if they're a shared connection.

My standing recommendation to everyone is to do good work and get better at advocating for yourself to make sure you're either getting the experience or the comp you need to achieve your goals. If you're not getting that, switch jobs. It's much much better to switch jobs every few years if that's what you need to stay motivated than to stay, do the minimum and collect a paycheck.

People are vastly overestimating network effects when you and your peers have similar experience and backgrounds. You'd likely get the job anyways, and the job probably isn't that great (in terms of upward momentum) to begin with.

As someone who's done hiring look at the people who have a list of good references. It's basically just the same position/level for _years_ because that's all your network can give or feels comfortable giving you (why would they give you a better job than they have).

It's a socioeconomic trap.

Just job hop. I promise you nothing else matters.

Relevant username

Reference checks aren't what matters, it's referrals and getting a job that wasn't ever advertised, because someone knows you're good and offers you the position directly.

Reference checks happen a lot. You just don't see them.

Most companies stopped asking for references because everyone just games the system. Managers are afraid of giving anything but glowing references because they want to keep their own network opportunities strong. Giving positive references is basically a networking game these days.

So that's not how people reference check. Now, they go on LinkedIn and look for mutual connections they trust. They check for people they know whose work history overlapped with the candidate's time at a different company. They go ask that person without the candidate ever knowing.

I get probably 10X as many backchannel reference requests as I do formal reference check requests.

By all means, feel free to demonstrate where your network has gotten you. I'm sure we'll all be envious!

When I was a hiring manager, I found that reference checks were _more_ predictive of eventual performance than the interview cycle was.

After the first time I got burned hiring someone I couldn't get a strong reference for, I got over my laziness and did my job.

That advice is valid for dime-a-dozen coders working dime-a-dozen jobs, which, granted, is the majority of developers, but we're on Hacker News. The more specialized and deeply technical a role is, the smaller the pool of qualified people is and the really senior folks tend to know each other. Networking matters much much more in these smaller tight-knit communities.

Is all you care about in a job the money? And are you looking at your total comp, or your hourly rate?

In my experiences, the places that pay the most _have_ to pay that much because the job sucks. By the time you divide their salary by hours actually worked, people at FAANG end up making significantly less than I do. I value all my time, not just my bank account.

What does my reputation buy me? In the worst job market in the last 20 years, I had two offers in hands within three weeks. I can bring top performers willing to work for regular salaries into wherever I land. All of that is because a lot of people who worked with me in the past would like to work with me again, and the companies we build software for benefit.

I've built my career on jobs with _actual_ advancement, not just a bigger number. And it has been plenty lucrative.

Startups don't succeed because the code is good, but they sure can fail because it is bad. When a company needs to save itself after the underqualified mercantile engineers have left a spaghetti mess of lambdas scattered all over the org or a spaghetti mess of a monolith with every model in one folder, they are very happy to pay for actual expertise.

We also get paid a lot more than the dime-a-dozen coders.

As is so often the case, optimizing for the short term comes at the cost of the long-term.

It's the opposite? You don't need someone to vouch for you if you have a highly specialized skill set. I certainly haven't.

You might rely more on your network when you don't have any notable skill sets that set you apart from other developers.

Your claim isn't rational or practical?

This is what I mean, your attributing certain outcomes to an action that's effectively just a placebo effect. It doesn't actually matter.

I care about my well-being and being able to float for extended periods of time if necessary. I can go many, many years without a job at this point and suffer absolutely zero quality of life issues.

>the places that pay the most _have_ to pay that much because the job sucks.

I mean don't overwork for an employer who doesn't care about you (none of them do)? Just go switch jobs.

>I've built my career on jobs with _actual_ advancement

This just reads like a no true scotsman fallacy. What does "actual" advancement mean here? Again, I have plenty of security (not job security) right now.

>I can bring top performers willing to work for regular salaries into wherever I land.

So you're fine with exploiting people? What? Just because someone is willing to be a fool doesn't mean you should stand by and let them be one.

And also, I question the "top performers" part of this, given your other qualifiers throughout the post. Especially the comment about big tech. The numbers don't add up in your favor.

How so? I’m never going to give you a reference of someone who isn’t going to say glowing things about me

My go to reference is a CTO of a startup I worked for. He is now semi retired and a “fractional CTO”.

But honestly, I’ve leveled up so much in the past five years, anything that any of my previous coworkers could say about me would be outdated

> In my experiences, the places that pay the most _have_ to pay that much because the job sucks. By the time you divide their salary by hours actually worked, people at FAANG end up making significantly less than I do. I value all my time, not just my bank account.

This is the type of copium that you usually hear from people who have never worked in BigTech…

BigTech could afford to pay me 50% more as a mid level employee than working a lot harder at a 60 person startup and that company was paying about average for a local enterprise dev in a major metropolitan area.

I’m no longer there. But I had to get a job as a “staff” level employee to even get in the range when I left of my job as a mid level employee at BigTech. Comparing the leveling guidelines, it’s about the same as a “senior” at the equivalent job at BigTech.

I had to look for a job both in 2023 and last year. For me it was both a network and specialized skills.

Specialized skills for me was cloud + app dev consulting and working at AWS (ProServe) and even more specialized was that I was a major contributor on a popular official open source “AWS Solution” in it niche and I had my own published open source solutions on AWS’s official GitHub site.

That led to two interviews and one offer within three weeks.

My network led to offers where a former manager submitted me to a position at the company that had acquired the company we worked for as a “staff architect” over the technical direction of all of their acquisitions. They gave me an offer.

My network also got me an offer from a former coworker who was a director of a F500 non tech company. He was going to make a position for me to be over the cloud architecture and migration strategies. He trusted me and he had just started working there.

Last year, my current job just fell in my lap, the internal recruiter reached out to out to me and that led to an offer.

I also had another former CTO throw a short term contract my way to tide me over.

But on the other hand, my plan B applications as a standard enterprise CRUD developer working remotely led to nothing.

Seems a bit weird. Unless you're really bad, surely you can round up a few buds who who will say glowing things about you.

You can still cultivate all these people in random places in your network. Apparently you are in a line of work where other country corporations will do fine, and these people will still need you in their next ventures or posts.

And sometimes it's funny how little it takes. Some people called me simply because they knew of me (I barely had heard of them). They did that because that was soooo much more efficient that some automatic "job posting" circus and they valued their time and deadlines.

2 points:

I've had people not know why I'm reaching out; I've also gotten references selected by the candidate that did not have good things to say. eg "X is difficult to work with."

And most people aren't good impromptu liars. So pushing a bit with a reference on what did you work on together? Why is this person fantastic? Would you hire this person? can get you far. And if the reference has left their shared employment, the classic: why haven't you hired this person?

You’d be surprised by how many people don’t think that through. There are always a surprising number of people apparently just going through the motions.

> when you and your peers have similar experience and backgrounds.

Then you’ve done a shitty job building your network. No wonder you don’t see any value.

I got laid off a bit ago - after announcing I was looking, I had several C-level folks reach out with roles.

You’re hot shit on an island until the day you aren’t. shrug

It's not at all false IME, though I'm not in SV or the US. Most job want up-front references from at least 2 people, one of whom must be your current supervisor/boss (or someone else higher in the chain of command). You can occasionally get away without it, but it's difficult.

>Then you’ve done a shitty job building your network.

Even better! I've been in a position to see "network effects" over and over and over again at the highest levels.

I'm telling you an uncomfortable truth: Job hop.

>I had several C-level folks reach out with roles.

See, this is how I know we're speaking past each other. You're acting as if this means something. It doesn't. Until you can even being to accept this is just a placebo effect it's unlikely you'll accept the effort was wasted.

Something something can't convince a man he was fooled.

Job hop. Get more money. Retire.

Truly bad candidates can’t provide references at all, or are entirely oblivious to how poorly they are perceived.

True. In spite of my earlier comment, someone earlier in their career who didn't work out--especially at a smaller company--may have trouble providing a reference. It is also the case that I've seen people get fired who just had no clue that they were obviously unsuited for their job and were totally blindsided.

Why would I even have as a connection on LinkedIn with people who I don’t think I made a good impression on? They are useless to me.

“okay boomer” (context: I’m 50, I am being sarcastic/self deprecating).

That might have been feasible pre 2020. But once I started working remotely and looking for jobs outside of the metro area where I spent most of my career, the usefulness of my network dropped dramatically.

In my case, I also did a slight pivot and my old network of people who I worked with for the first 25 years of my career can’t speak to my current suitability for a job.

You would see the same from someone early career. Their skills would progress so fast it would be crazy to ask someone for a reference who worked with them when they were 22-24 and now they are 27-30.

I can guarantee you that no large tech company takes the time to find shared connections.

On the other hand, why would I have connections who I didn’t make a good impression on? they are useless to me.

I currently work at a 600 person company, I just invited everyone as reference that popped up as a suggestion - I did the same at AWS. Good luck trying to find the people who actually worked with.

No one is going to let you talk to your current manager and let them know you are looking for a job.

On the other hand, many companies don’t allow managers to give references.

> No one is going to let you talk to your current manager and let them know you are looking for a job.

What on earth do you mean? Who is going to stop me from talking to my manager?

Over my 20+ year career, in all-but one case my current manager has always been one of my referees and has known that I'm looking for other jobs.

Maybe this is a cultural thing. Here (Aus) references from colleagues are basically disregarded and all that prospective employers are interested in is referees from current and former managers.

Typo, I meant no one is going to let you talk to their current manager.

There is no way I’m going to let my current job know that I’m looking for a job. That would be completely illegal advised.

It's a job; not a cult. People come and go. If I were working somewhere that made me feel like I couldn't leave without being super secretive about it, that would be a huge red flag.

What do you think happens once a company knows you are looking for a job and then you don’t get the new job? Do you think they are going to give you the plumb assignments? Raises? Promotions?

If you think Australia is some utopia where the advice isn’t the same

https://www.seek.com.au/career-advice/article/should-you-tel...

https://www.sprintpeople.com.au/should-you-tell-your-boss-yo...

https://mane.com.au/news/how-your-boss-can-tell-you-are-look...

> What do you think happens once a company knows you are looking for a job and then you don’t get the new job?

Maybe it depends how useful you are. IME, they're grateful to have you say a while longer.

One of the guys I work with had accepted another job and was virtually out the door when the new job fell through. My company gladly welcomed him back, kept giving him challenging work and eventually promoting him.

A couple of months ago I told my boss and my boss's boss I was going to start looking for other jobs. They tried to see if there was something that'd make me stay, and when there wasn't, they were 100% supportive. If I said tomorrow "actually, I've had a change of heart, I'd like to stay" they'd be genuinely pleased. This has basically been the story my whole career.

Sure, if your boss is an arsehole they'll do arsehole things. My advice is not to work for arseholes.