However, on many job postings you'll see words like "grit" or "passion" listed as requirements. These are codewords for "we'll work you hard" and "overtime expected", as far as I can tell.
Software Engineers in Silicon Valley or comparable large tech hubs:
* How many hours do you work per week?
* Do higher-salaried jobs require more hours?
Both individual examples and higher-level overviews of the market are appreciated.
Context:
I'm a software consultant working with software companies in tech hubs - but I work remotely. I occasionally check their job postings and am $urprised at the pay rates and wonder if I'm underpaid. But then I think: Are there long hours involved? Is 50+ hours/week the minimum?
The number tends to increase with the extent of one’s responsibilities (n.b. extent, not gravity).
As far as expectations go, I don’t think these are normally elaborated in terms of hours for salaried employees. You’re just expected to get your work done, regardless of whether or not it takes you more than 40. The expectation is probably that you put in ~40-50? This is purely speculation on my part, mind you.
But if it's left vaguely defined, "'til the work gets done" can mean weekend hackathons in a we-work-hard culture, no?
What does it mean exactly? there is always something new to do when you are done with what you had to do.
Since leaving financial services I’ve worked in social media where things are much more family friendly, hours are closer to 40, but salary is about a third less and bonus is closer to 25%.
I've worked for numerous financial service firms in NYC for the past 8 years and the most I've ever worked is maybe 45-50 hours when we are doing a production deployment. Also, most people I know either live in the city if they don't have a family or NJ if they do, oddly enough. This is for senior and Director-level positions, too.
But hey that's just my experience, purely anecdotal. Everyone's is different.
1. Life stage of the company (startup vs. mature) 2. Role (rank-and-file engineer vs. leadership) 3. Your management
Location has had less to do with the number of hours worked than the items above.
Startups tend to demand more of their staff because it's an existential problem they're trying to solve - become profitable/acquired/public before you run out of money or someone squashes you. Expectations there will be >40 hours pretty much across the board, and will favor single, probably white men.
Mature companies can also demand more of your time, but typically they are easier places to find roles that will not demand much more than 40 hours a week.
With those things said, you could be working for a SOB that simply demands your presence to prove you're doing the most work possible, and in those cases you should decide whether you value your paycheck or your health/sanity. I've been there and choose health/sanity 100% of the time. Burn out just once and you'll know what I'm talking about.
I was talking with some younger friends here in Seattle, and they expressed similar concerns. This was a total shock to me, because I've been involved in hiring at multiple firms and we use those terms not just in our postings but in our internal discussions for evaluation, etc, and we DON'T mean what the fears are.
In my experience, talking about "passion" is basically shorthand for "we won't have to train you and we'll have minimal mentorship - you'll learn and improve on your own". So..not really a _positive_ meaning, but a very different one from the fear. We don't expect people to put in long hours - the normal 40ish work-week, maybe with a crunch day or two each quarter, roughly speaking. But we do expect/want that people are coming in with the interests to improve and the existing skill to do so. Most places are severely shy of "senior" people (In part, IMNSHO, because they keep trying to hire "senior" people rather than committing to getting more "junior" devs) and as a result they don't have people with the time to spare for proper mentorship.
While this expectation has been consistent across the places I've worked, that doesn't mean it's a universal truth...but I've not seen anything that suggests "passion" and "grit" mean "will work stupid long/hard" outside of the game industry and startups. (Notably, most places rush to get to the point when they can recruit as "post-startup", meaning they no longer ask for those kinds of hours).
I'm in Seattle, and to address your questions:
* Roughly 40 hours/week, normally a bit less (8-4, with a work-provided lunch so I end up not working for only a short time). In the course of a year I expect to have maybe 5 days that I do crazy hours (12-15+ hours/day) and maybe 10 days that I do long (10ish hours). Probably work about 2 weekend days/year on average (excluding answering a text/message, or doing a small code review - anywhere from 5-15 of those on weekends/year, each measured in minutes, not hours)
* Higher paying jobs (I've done 90k - 180+k in Seattle) haven't required more hours, though being willing to put in hours when something real comes up is always taken as helpful and does a lot to help with promotions and bonuses. The trick has been finding places that defines something "real" in terms you agree with. Prod issues that really impacts a customer and comes up 1-2 times/year? Cool. Being "on-call" each month means you WILL get a call? Not cool.
* Certain positions DO expect more hours, particularly when a problem arises. Generally Ops people and those that have to resolve production-critical bugs. This should all be openly available info before and during interviews, though you may have to ask.
That said, I've also noticed a name cachet - My Amazonian friends, depending on their teams, have put in some hours I would consider stupid. They do this WITHOUT a pay bump relative to others in the area/field - getting the name on your resume is considered worth the extra effort. Then again those on other teams have done nothing outside of my norm.
To put this all in context - I moved here ~7 years ago, and have worked for 3 companies out here. I've more than doubled my salary in that time, but my workload hasn't changed too much. One place shifted from a good work/life balance to having "crunch-time" start to extend to being very frequent - I left, and so did most everyone else. One of the big benefits of a high-demand area is that you can be assured of being able to safely leave a company, so work-you-crazy certainly happens and in places, but cannot be the norm.
In comparison to LA where I recently moved back: I work 40 hours a week, barring any emergency that may come up. Though LA isn't really a tech hub so maybe it's not a fair comparison.
In both places expectations are unwritten, so to speak, as laws prevent abuse of labor. However in either case you are pretty well compensated for overtime.
Why do people say this like it's impossible (or even difficult) for your employer to demand output that realistically would take 50 (or 60, or 70...) hours a week? Unless you are literally God, they absolutely can, and if they are abusive, they absolutely will. Whether you get judged in output or in ass-hours has zero bearing whatsoever on their ability to be abusive!
I work 40 hours a week, no more, no less and I have good performance reviews. I think the trend for programmers is to work 40 hours a week and have a balanced life. There is tremendous pushback against working 50 or 50 hours a week lately, and I'm thankful for that.
You could literally work for a company (big or small) where teams or individuals work long hours. I personally don't think working longer hours should be awarded (unless the company is pushing for something) as it makes other people feel they need to work longer. I always felt it makes more sense to work smarter than longer.
Usually I'm in office or checking in on stuff from home for about 45hrs/wk. A lot of my office time is spent in conversation or explaining things to juniors, getting coffee, dealing with inter-team communication issues, that sort of thing. Some (like now) is spent browsing the web, which I think of as keeping up with industry trends:)
If I wanted to 'take the next step' in my career, I'd likely have to lose some of my flexibility and have a more butt-in-seat approach. I think most of the management and principal engineers here at AWS are in the 50+ hour club.
> Do higher-salaried jobs require more hours
No, but moving up the management ladder can require more responsibility and hours.
The only people who seem to work much longer hours are my American counterparts and the occasional person who I believe to have poor work-life balance. None of these people seem to be anywhere ahead or achieve anything more than their colleagues. They often hold the "first in, last out" of the office trope, and shame others for working regular hours as lazy.
I've got enough grey hairs as it is, thanks.
Moved to LA 3 years ago, work 40hr/week even though on 5x salary compared to UK. Never felt pressure to work more, but would when required (launches).
