Official policy sounds like the Soviet Union was the only employer and they were deciding to pay peanuts unilaterally.
Is this the case with modern hardware engineers? No one is forcing them to accept low pay, or learn how to write software and earn more.
Sounds like they are getting paid market price, and it has been decades since it is known that pay for hardware engineers is low, indicating that people should stay away unless they want relatively low pay.
There is no such thing as a 'free market' really. Once people have been pulled into a specific academic program without 'true knowledge of market forces', the switching costs are high. They take an entry level job because, well, it's a job. 4 years later they find out there are only 3 employers who want their ultra niche skill, and so the employers use their power to leverage to shit wages.
This shortsighted action causes the opportunities in high wage areas to fail as devs do 'other things', while the jobs move to places where there are even more rigid systems and the 'work hierarchy' is integrated right into culture. Like Korea.
It's also why even very talented software developers outside the US are paid so little - it's hard to justify high pay in most companies, as it's not clear how to discriminate between the 'true talent' and 'regular devs' - so talent gets anchored very low. Devs languish or move or find solace in working on something interesting and intellectual, which is common.
It's why there is no real 'hardware' industry in the USA, all of the jobs are niche even if they are very hard, industry can hold them to the wall for low salary, it's more effective for them to be carpenters, while the jobs go to Asia.
All of that plus the fact that software can move much quicker and can be more profitable, the 'windfall' economic part of software makes the VC math work out better to justify more investment.
If we were to reorganize that around net value creation instead of just local barter between trades and enterprises, it'd be a different situation. Very hard to do. Government is stepping in with a big starting point, will industry follow suit? Maybe, I doubt it.
There’s no compulsion, but people tend to nerd out in the specialty and lose their way. It’s hard to be the respected engineer in <pick a topic> and start over as a newb. Many of the folks in these fields get caught in a visa trap as well that makes the friction that much stronger.
One of my classmates in high school was a well regarded engineer that specialized in some sort of critical manufacturing process. Published papers, had patents, etc. Unfortunately, a new tech replaced that process, and he found himself laid off and kinda screwed.
He had a good network, crammed for a PMP and got into the project management racket and went back to school. Now he does cyber analysis stuff.
> Official policy sounds like the Soviet Union was the only employer and they were deciding to pay peanuts unilaterally.
The official doctrine was that it was a Laborer's Republic, and so physical labor very often paid more than mental one. It was all about making the common man feel as if the state is really organized for the benefit of people like him, and not some narrow elites. Of course, it was BS.
Is this the case with modern hardware engineers? No one is forcing them to accept low pay, or learn how to write software and earn more.
Sounds like they are getting paid market price, and it has been decades since it is known that pay for hardware engineers is low, indicating that people should stay away unless they want relatively low pay.