I stayed at my last employer five years longer than I should have. In early 2025, I was laid off. The raises were real. The RSU grants were real. And I believe both of them put a target on my back.

That’s not something I understood until I was already on the other side of it.

Every year I stayed, my comp went up. I even got raises after internal equity surveys flagged that I was underpaid relative to my peers. Every review cycle added another layer of seniority. On paper it looked like success. Inside the company it probably looked different, a long-tenure employee at the top of their pay band, holding a role a junior hire could do for a fraction of the cost. All of my peers who had been there for more than 8 or 9 years were let go too.

When headcount reductions come to a large tech company, they don’t always cut the lowest performers. They run spreadsheets. High earners who can be replaced cheaper are often the first names on the list.

I see the same pattern now in the enterprise software professionals I talk to every week. Twelve years in the industry. Consistently strong reviews. Multiple rounds of RSU grants. And they’re nine months into a search they didn’t see coming.

The lesson I took from my own experience: staying too long at a high comp level in a large tech company isn’t a reward. It’s a risk you’re not always pricing in.

I’m from the generation stuck between “stay at a company for life” and “move every two years for a raise.” I landed in the middle and played by the old rules.

Now the market rewards mobility more than loyalty. That’s not cynical. It’s just how the math works. I wish I’d known that a few years earlier.