A budget hack – companies hire Juniors instead of Seniors. Junior’s salary is $1,500–2,000 per month. A Senior costs $5,000-6,000. The difference looks huge. Some Managers might think that hiring two Juniors for the price of one Senior saves money. However, it is the opposite.
1. Training costs and loyalty
Myth: Junior education is cheap. Loyalty pays back the investment.
Why a myth?
A Junior cannot be an independent performer. They are looking for guidance. Seniors spend 15 hours on mentoring Juniors every week. There are code reviews and personal meetings. If you multiply the mentoring time by the Senior’s hourly rate, you get a loss of $1,000 to $1,500 per month.
Loyalty can be faulty. Statistics provide us with the straight 18-24 months lead time before Juniors switch companies. The company invests in training, but it loses an educated specialist before the investment returns.
The inference:
Savings disappear. The low salary overcomes training costs.
2. Short-Term Productivity
Myth: Juniors can deliver as much as Mediors or Seniors because of higher productivity
Why a myth?
Seniors need 20 hours to complete a task. A Junior needs twice as much time. Also, a Junior borrows 20 extra hours from a senior for mentoring. Thus, we get 20 hours for the standard employee in comparison with the trainee’s 60 hours.
Juniors can only complete simple tasks independently. Even in six months, the gap remains. Juniors grow, but they don’t close it quickly. For projects with strict deadlines, the risk is obvious: missed milestones, penalties, and dissatisfied clients.
The inference:
Success is an obvious illusion in that case. It slows down the business when you count on immediate results from juniors
3. Errors That Cost
Myth: Junior specialists working on simple tasks are less likely to be responsible for the errors.
Why a myth?
Every bug has a price in IT. A production error has a significant cost. Lost transactions and downtime. Security faults can cost even more. Seniors make such mistakes not really often. But even small mistakes can lead to considerable damage. Juniors are expected to make such errors due to the learning path.
Clients do not bother themselves about a code owner. They just see failures. Rework always takes longer than the first attempt. “Cheap” developers create expensive risks.
The inference:
Reduced labor costs often relate to multiple losses and a poor reputation.
4. Hidden Costs for the Team
Myth: One Junior does not affect the whole team’s result.
Why a myth?
Every Junior needs a supervisor. Review adds around 2 hours for each piece of code. For example, documentation, updates, and bug fixes. Seniors might spend up to 30% of their time supporting young specialists. If there are three Juniors, then it cuts out one senior specialist.
Stress is a hidden effect. Missed deadlines, managers push harder, and extra time after work. Team burnout is the next step. There is a potential risk of losing experienced staff.
The inference:
The cost of slowing down the entire production is hidden in savings through salary.
5. When Juniors Become an Investment
Myth: Juniors are always a bad choice.
Why a myth?
Juniors can be the best long-term investment with the right approach. There is a fair potential.
An experienced person can be overpriced, while a motivated beginner can be a hidden gem. A Junior is less expensive to hire. Senior starts by giving easy and simple tasks. It develops an expert within the company boundaries. A Senior saves time and earns more money for the company when the junior relieves him of his work. Mentoring can be an excellent motivator for the Seniors. Juniors receive a great chance for their career. Staff turnover decreases. The company keeps knowledge. Culture becomes stronger. Hidden costs transform into dividends.
The inference:
Juniors are profitable when addressed as strategic assets, but not cheap labor.
Conclusion
Juniors become strong specialists if the company has time and a growth strategy. The key is to count real numbers. These are the hours seniors spend mentoring. The cost of bugs and the timing to reach productivity. After all, illusion disappears. Strategy will prevail over wrong hiring decisions.
Headquarter: