tala @ so-phobic

Two tech jobs in high demand these days are .NET (dot net) developers and quality assurance analysts.

Developers who are expert users of Microsoft’s software programming language .NET can make between $75,000 and $85,000 a year in major cities. (See correction.) If they pursue a job at a company that seeks someone with a background in a given field (say, a firm looking for a .NET developer experienced in using software related to derivatives) they might snag a salary hike of 15 percent or more when they switch jobs.

Those who work in software quality management, meanwhile, might make $65,000 to $75,000 a year and be able to negotiate a 10 percent to 15 percent jump in pay if they switch jobs. - Source

Company A is relatively a start-up, barely 3 years old. It’s currently the only company in the country that is focused solely on software testing and quality assurance engineering. No in-house software development, purely testing and quality assurance.

Perks:

1. formal training in the software testing framework, best practices
2. possible future training and certification in the proprietary (and expensive) Mercury Tools

Pitfalls:

1. overlapping RSA (return service agreement) a.k.a bond
2. very toxic work schedule since trainings, appraisals and meetings happen on Saturdays, Sundays, and even some holidays
3. the pay is on the low end of the basic compensation spectrum
4. the Mercury training is not guaranteed

From what I discerned, the best candidates for (possible out of the country) Mercury training are employees who have been with the company for a year or so. The performance evaluation can also bolster or destroy one’s chances. It’s not part of the whole package, more of a 50/50 chance to partake.

Note: FYI, a bond is an additional contract with a company. In return for the “free” training a company gives an employee, the employee agrees to work for a specified amount of time for the company in order to “pay back” the resources spent on training. An employee who breaks the bond (leaves the company before the specified amount of time is up) may face some consequences such as paying for the “free” training.

Company B is known for its highly ranked software development process. Kind of contrasting with “insider information” that it is actually the software dev equivalent of a sweat shop/production line.
Perks:

1. the compensation is on the way high end of the spectrum (which some say really makes up for life as a code drone)
2. the attire is nerd-friendly: jeans, shirts, sneakers
3. training in the software testing framework for 4-6 months
4. no bond

Pitfalls:

1. weekend work and a _lot_ of overtime

This confuses the hell out of me. If the software development process is organized and mature (as proven by the high rank awarded to it), why is there a constant need for overtime? Programming is tedious work. I agree that some overtime will be inevitable. But to have it as a staple of the daily work routine screams bad project management to me. A lot of overtime gives me the impression that the company/project manager may be too aggressive in setting deadlines. Drones are forced to work outside of their work hours because of unrealistically optimistic deliverable schedules.

2. no proprietary, third party testing tools are used, only in-house ones

Of course, the person I asked was from HR, not any of the techies, nor any of the testers. I’m due for an interface with an actual tester, so I can probe into this. While it’s still considered as testing experience, I’d rather invest in learning the more universally accepted tools like Mercury’s.

Company C is a multinational, an established name in the IT world. They also own a proprietary testing suite. If I don’t get the chance to get Mercury training, and open-source testing tools aside, this is probably the second best thing.

Perks:

1. formal training on a proprietary software testing tool, which is integrated to a software engineering suite
2. no bond
3. possible certification on the tool, since it’s offered by the company itself (employee discount, or maybe even a freebie)
4. the name looks good on the resume

I don’t have a list of pitfalls yet, since I just jumped into the application process this week. Maybe I’ll come up with something next week.

Company D is another multinational. Big name, hugely popular among non-IT graduates who want to shift gears and pursue a career in IT. Known for its rigorous training program, including sending its employees to client sites abroad for training. Probably the company where all the bond thing started.

Perks:

1. the name is a resume padder
2. the training is so effective that employees often get pirated (with very attractive compensation offers) because of their skills
3. ample compensation and benefits package

Pitfalls:

1. job description-wise, it fits my major, but not my long-term career plan

It’s geared towards the whole software engineering package, which is great, experience-wise. However, since my long term goal is a career in SQE, I’d rather start with a full-time SQA job. I want to acquire the SQE skills this early on, and add them to my SE skills. Testing is a huge part of SE, so it’s not as if I’ll be doing something out of context. I just want to focus on this area more now.

2. also lots of overtime, weekend, and holiday work

Same reasoning as Company B. Though I understand the holiday and weekend work part, since most, if not all, of the clients are foreign and in different timezones.

3. a 2-year bond

This can be hell if the Project Manager/Team Lead is incompetent/bitchy/impossible to work with.

Choices, choices. Decisions, decisions.

read comments (1)