SpaceX and Tesla have no 'resume cachet'. They are widely known in engineering circles as hiring huge numbers of entry level or just barely above entry level engineers, exploiting their interest in technology to work them like rented mules until they burn out, and then discarding them. It's not a negative having worked at one of these places necessarily but unless the next employer is looking for an engineer with soul burned out of them it's not a positive either.
I work in embedded/systems software and worked in aerospace, have been in hiring committees in the Bay Area for years. While what you say about how Tesla churns Jr. engineers, SpaceX is not much like that. Also they both carry significant 'resume cachet', and I hired both in projects ran by "ex Tesla" and also ran by "Tesla haters" and making a career in SpaceX and in Tesla do signal that you are pretty serious about your performance as an engineer.
I don't like Musk, I don't like Tesla, I don't like (most of) what SpaceX does. But as a professional I can't agree with your Reddit-AntiWork-MuskIsEvil portrayal of those companies. It's just not true.
As a hiring manager I can say that SpaceX has very little cachet, but Telsa has some. At least not in the SW space. Maybe in areas more related to their domains they have more.
Hiring manager at big company: no cachet. One of the people in a team adjacent to mine got a job offer from SpaceX and rejected over perceptions of chaotic management.
That's not what is meant. The folks working at SpaceX work hard. The question is, when they look to slow down and go to another company, does having SpaceX on resume for 2-3 years vs widget maker X make it more or less likely to be hired.
The idea that spacex engineers are lazy / don't work hard etc is fanciful thinking. SpaceX being badly managed? Maybe true. But engineers at spacex? If you look at competitors like an engineer on the SLS project (which has taken 10-20 years to get to one 20B rocket launch) - no question who you'll want to hire if you are in "new space". I think for old space companies - probably still worth hiring SLS type folks just given that they will know how to deal with the paperwork of those jobs.
I would NEVER work for Tesla or SpaceX (work life balance way off). But neither would I claim they are lazy or poor engineers.
Is this a real statement? At least in SV the last few years, ex-tesla and ex-spacex in terms of getting funding for projects was a big win. Some went to apple et al as well for pretty good money.
I know of a few folks from what I would call older line engineering (thinking boeing / SLS type places) actively looking to get onto a musk company (younger folks generally pretty eager to do work).
It's pretty visable when you see NASA administrators doing presentations and then SpaceX folks (who all seem like they are in their 20's to me). Pretty clear you are getting a lot more experience at SpaceX then in the big SLS subcontractor stack for example. I'm adjacent to this space a bit and I think most of the senior folks leaving tesla / spacex (plenty of them) have all landed pretty well despite your claims.
