As someone who over the past couple of years was responsible for some of these hiring decisions, it absolutely is a part of it ... lol.
I've worked with absolutely fantastic developers in Argentina, Poland, Romania and Ukraine. You're right, talented workers get talented pay, but talented pay in Romania is a lot less than talented pay in San Francisco. Teams are used to working entirely remotely now, videoconferencing software is great, and teams mostly align to US timezones (not entirely, but for example Eastern European workers shifted their day a few hours later so we get at least 4-5 hours overlap every day).
I think companies are a lot smarter about outsourcing now than they were 15-20 years ago and focus more on developer quality, but I've absolutely seen that a company will be much happier to hire 2 excellent senior devs from Poland for what you could get for 1 junior college hire in a high cost of living area in the US.
I think you're contradicting yourself or getting some wires crossed.
>You're right, talented workers get talented pay, but talented pay in Romania is a lot less than talented pay in San Francisco.
But this is due to again, vastly different standards of living in different economies. Geo-based pay ranges have always been a thing, but I think it's a bit reasonable to draw the line here.
So it's not:
>it absolutely is a part of it ... lol.
Because you're not hiring people from elsewhere because of "well I don't need people HERE anymore." The calculus is the same it ever was, even before COVID.
Companies were already out-sourcing before great video conferencing software or an understanding of how to work with remote teams.
It's an exploitation of different economies, at the expense of the American working class.
It's the same thing, just under a shiny new label designed to absolve the managerial class from said exploitation.
I don’t think anyone is arguing that the basic idea of offshoring was invented after the COVID pandemic… But rather that workplaces and workforces geared towards remote working has made it more feasible and accelerated the process
Is it really hard to understand that the infrastructure for remote work, which I think everyone would agree got a major upgrade during the pandemic, would also make it much easier for companies to outsource software dev work?
Pre-2015 or so, yes, of course there was outsourcing, but it was honestly a major PITA in most cases. Most communication was done in conference calls, very little group video communication, lots of async chats, etc.. Any type of work where you needed a fairly frequent black-and-forth with various team members was rarely outsourced - the type of work that was outsourced was the type that was more likely to have static requirements.
But now, though, there is basically no difference working with a colleague who's working from home in the same city vs. working from home thousands of miles away (as long as there is good timezones overlap). And that is a change that only happened around the beginning of the pandemic, and I've personally seen companies much more willing to outsource because of it, and they're outsourcing a much wider type of work (e.g. brand new dev work that is frequently updated based on usage metrics) than they would in the past.
>Is it really hard to understand that the infrastructure for remote work, which I think everyone would agree got a major upgrade during the pandemic, would also make it much easier for companies to outsource software dev work?
No, because it wasn't actually upgraded.
Like be honest, the shift into remote work wasn't surrounded by massive tech advances or upgrades. All the tools that existed for remote work had been there, largely in the same fashion and capability, for decades.
So when you say the infra. and tooling has improved, you need to be specific because it's very hard to point to anything that was fundamentally or notably improved in the pandemic around remote work.
It all existed before. It was all used before. If you weren't using it before the pandemic that was by choice, not because it didn't exist.
Everything from our communication software, to developer collaboration tools, to how org's track and manage their employees all existed well, well before the pandemic.
It was a cultural change -- not a technological one.
> And that is a change that only happened around the beginning of the pandemic
I'm not sure what you're basing this on. Especially someone's that's had to work with peers across the globe for 4+ decades -- the tools have always been there.
> All the tools that existed for remote work had been there, largely in the same fashion and capability, for decades.
Trying to be charitable, but that is just complete nonsense. I managed an offshore team in 2007, and I managed offshore devs in 2022, and the experiences were world and away different. You're either totally full of shit or just managed teams on some other planet or something.
Detail what changed? Because I can't point to anything. And I've been doing this for 4+ decades. A lot of that remote.
So you're claiming things radically changed, and if such changes caused a huge shift in the workforce it should be pretty easy to give some examples, yeah?
Instead of going "you're full of shit", just answer the question at hand and the one that was given to you multiple times.
The fact that it's so easy to do and you just spent way more effort not doing it is a pretty clear indication you are following a narrative, and not facts.
This is just laughably ridiculous. OK, I'll bite though, even though I can't believe anyone is actually this willfully blind:
1. As the other commenter stated, gigabit Ethernet is now standard, and tons of people, throughout the world, have bandwidth to their home that can easily support high quality video conferencing. That just didn't exist 15+ years ago.
2. Group video chats on consumer grade devices simply didn't exist. Sure, in the mid 00s we had some group video conferencing, but they nearly always required dedicated facilities - people weren't having zoom meetings with 10 individuals from their laptops.
3. But perhaps most importantly, since the world is now used to doing everything remote, offshore teams are rarely "the odd man out". Right up until around the pandemic, most companies were culturally based around the office, and structures were set up to support in-office collaboration. Now, though, everyone is used to being remote anyway, like my favorite cartoon showing the difference between in-office, remote, and hybrid software devs - except there is no difference, because they're all on Zoom all the time anyway.
I just honestly can't believe that someone who managed remote teams in 2005 thinks it's the same as managing in 2025, and the plethora of advancements in networking and remote conferencing tech easily supports that.
Not OP but a couple major changes that didn't exist in most companies 20 years ago that reduced friction from an organizational perspective.
1. Gigabit internet - video call quality is significantly better than it was 10-15 years ago.
2. Zoom/Google Meets - the attention Zoom gave to UX just wasn't matched by any other precursor. Google Meets is a close second.
3. GSuite/O365 - sharing documents across organizations and being able to search for them successfully org wide has gotten much better now due to tools like Glean
4. Slack - most traditional companies didn't adopt Slack until the pandemic. Before that they were primarily leveraging email
There has been a whole decade of evolution in productivity and DevTooling throughout the 2010s, and the COVID WFH period forced most orgs (especially traditional orgs) to adopt a lot of that tooling.
On top of that, a large number of mid-level managers, engineers, PMs, and even VPs are in naturalization limbo, so it's become easy to find people to end up leading offices back in their home country while enforcing the same standards as back in the US. MS did this in Israel back in the 2010s, and most companies began doing something similar across Eastern Europe and India during the early years of COVID because most companies legitimately were worried it would become a Great Recession level event.
>Gigabit internet - video call quality is significantly better than it was 10-15 years ago.
You don't need gigabit internet for good video quality. We solved this with the MPEG-4, specifically H.264.
Most video streaming software still uses H.264 to this day, or some "mimic" of it. This was 15+ years ago btw.
You only need like, maybe 100 Mbps. Most definitely less for normal conferences.
> Zoom/Google Meets - the attention Zoom gave to UX just wasn't matched by any other precursor. Google Meets is a close second.
Opinion based, and you're welcome to have it. But not sure what qualifies as any sort of good evidence or reason for companies moving to other countries for their labor force.
>GSuite/O365 - sharing documents across organizations and being able to search for them successfully org wide has gotten much better now due to tools like Glean
Again, you're welcome to your opinions. Sharing documents in organizations across cities, states, and countries has been pretty mainstay for 30+ years.
And if you want my honest opinion, the tooling has gotten worse.
> Slack - most traditional companies didn't adopt Slack until the pandemic. Before that they were primarily leveraging email
At this point I'm just having trouble understanding why you think these things are fundamentally game changers.
>and DevTooling throughout the 2010s
Like what?
Again, if that's the best examples you could come up with they're not really enough and even worse (in the cases of GSuite/365) they are counter to your point about tooling improvement.
> Companies were already out-sourcing before great video conferencing software or an understanding of how to work with remote teams.
And those experiments failed in the 2000s.
But in the 2020s with an extended pandemic lockdown over 2-3 years, async work was proven to succeed.
I am one of those decisionmakers and the pandemic effect did convince the last stragglers that offshoring by directly managing a subsidiary in Poland, India, Czechia, Israel, etc with ex-American leadership is good enough.
I warned about this during COVID on HN and was downvoted constantly.
Pretending that the 2000s-era experience can inform decisions we make in the 2020s is completely flawed.
Being in denial of the "brave new world" is only going to do you harm as an IC.
But some of these comments are just like from another planet. Like a comment I responded to saying "All the tools that existed for remote work had been there, largely in the same fashion and capability, for decades", and then when I responded with disbelief about how anyone could think that remote working tools have been static for decades I was chastised for not giving specific examples.
The level of cluelessness on display here is just baffling to me. There used to be tangible benefits for being located in the same city. If I'm just Zooming with my colleagues anyway, it makes zero difference if they are in the same city or thousands of miles away, as long as there is good timezones overlap.
What you now get on your laptop, home internet, and Zoom was only available with $25k a room cisco gear 10 years ago. I don't think remote communication is anywhere near as good as in-person, but it's night and day different from 2015.
>static for decades I was chastised for not giving specific examples.
Any examples, really.
>The level of cluelessness on display here is just baffling to me.
I encourage you to give this thread an honest, deep think about why you feel this way. It's certainly not lack of insight from the other side. The word accountability is relevant here.
There are literally tons of examples lots of people, myself included, have given in this thread. At this point, arguing with you is like arguing with a dining room table. Have fun in your universe.
All the comments here on this thread feel almost exactly like the same things I heard about Chinese manufacturing or Korean cars back in the 2000s.
At an individual level, it's difficult to make any changes, but at the very least one can start thinking of how to live in this new world.
Just having enough EQ as an Engineer to give an actual business justification about your initiatives or teams (NARR attach rate, developer velocity, actual tangible examples of generating pipeline) along with actually trying to train and mentor new grads and consistently upskilling would in most cases be enough to protect your job, but people here want to stick their head in the sand.
I've worked with absolutely fantastic developers in Argentina, Poland, Romania and Ukraine. You're right, talented workers get talented pay, but talented pay in Romania is a lot less than talented pay in San Francisco. Teams are used to working entirely remotely now, videoconferencing software is great, and teams mostly align to US timezones (not entirely, but for example Eastern European workers shifted their day a few hours later so we get at least 4-5 hours overlap every day).
I think companies are a lot smarter about outsourcing now than they were 15-20 years ago and focus more on developer quality, but I've absolutely seen that a company will be much happier to hire 2 excellent senior devs from Poland for what you could get for 1 junior college hire in a high cost of living area in the US.