DEV Community: Aleksandra Rajkowska

The Better Your Company Is Doing, the Sooner You Might Get Laid Off

Aleksandra Rajkowska — Wed, 15 Jul 2026 13:01:38 +0000

A few weeks ago I watched another Microsoft layoff headline scroll past my feed, a few thousand roles gone, framed in the usual careful corporate language, and something clicked that had been bugging me for months.

I work in tech recruitment. For years, a layoff headline told me almost everything I needed to know about a company before I even opened the article: budgets were tightening, growth had stalled, hiring was about to freeze. It was a clean signal. Bad news in, bad news out.

That signal is broken now. And I don't think enough people in this industry have clocked it yet 🤷‍♀️

The old rulebook doesn't apply anymore

Here's what's strange about 2026. Oracle cut its workforce by 21,000 people over the past year (a 13% reduction) and disclosed it in the same filing where it reported quarterly net income up 27% year-over-year, with remaining performance obligations climbing 325% to $553 billion. That's not a company in trouble. That's a company that just had one of its best years ever, and still walked thousands of people out the door.

Meta's Q1 2026 revenue hit $56.3 billion, up a third from the year before, with $26.8 billion in net income. It still cut jobs three separate times this year. Microsoft is on pace to spend more than $100 billion on AI and cloud infrastructure in a single fiscal year, while also laying off thousands of employees across gaming and other divisions. GitLab let go of 14% of its staff specifically to fund what its CEO called a "generational rebuild" of infrastructure for AI-scale workloads.

None of these are distress signals. They're reallocation signals. And that's a completely different thing to read.

Two companies can announce nearly identical headcount cuts this year for opposite reasons. One because it's genuinely struggling, one because it's redirecting a few billion dollars from payroll into GPUs. From the outside, the press release looks the same. The reality underneath it doesn't.

That's what's making the job market so hard to read right now. The question I used to ask about a company, "are they hiring?", isn't the useful question anymore. The useful question is: what are they choosing to fund instead of headcount? 💁‍♀️

This same gravitational pull is already showing up outside tech, too. Honda built a battery plant in Ohio with LG Energy Solution, originally meant to supply electric vehicles. When EV demand slumped, Honda didn't shut the line down. It started producing batteries for AI data center energy storage instead, just to keep the factory running until EV demand comes back. That plant was built to make car batteries. Right now, it's making batteries for server rooms. It's not a layoff story, but it's the same underlying pull: capital quietly rotating toward AI infrastructure, showing up in places as far from Silicon Valley as a battery plant in Ohio.

AI isn't taking the jobs

This is the part I keep coming back to. Companies love to say "AI" when they announce cuts, and sometimes that's honest, and sometimes it's convenient cover for cuts they'd have made anyway. Analysts have started calling the second kind "AI-washing": using automation as the polite explanation for what is really just cost discipline or a pandemic-era hiring correction finally catching up.

But even where the AI explanation is genuine, it's rarely as simple as "the software does the job now." Look at where the money actually goes. Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet, and Meta have collectively committed something like $700 billion in capital spending this year, nearly double what they spent in 2025, almost entirely aimed at AI compute, data centers, and networking. TD Cowen estimated that Oracle's cuts alone could free up $8-10 billion in cash flow, money that flows more or less directly into infrastructure buildout, not into a model that quietly replaced a department.

That's the mechanism. It's not always "AI does your job now." It's often "the company decided your team's budget line is worth less to leadership than the next data center." AI is the justification. The GPU order is the actual destination 💸

There's a wrinkle worth naming honestly, though: it's not evenly distributed. Stanford's 2026 AI Index found that employment for software developers aged 22 to 25 has fallen nearly 20% since 2024, concentrated in the kind of boilerplate coding, scripted testing, and routine bug-fixing work that AI tools now handle reasonably well. Developers over 30 at the same companies actually saw their headcount grow.

Meanwhile, roles in ML infrastructure, model evaluation, and AI safety remain hard to fill. So "AI is taking the budget, not the job" is true at the macro level. But at the individual level, if your role sits squarely in the part of the budget AI tooling has made cheaper to replace, it can feel exactly like AI took your job. Both things are happening at once, to different people, inside the same company.

What this actually means if you work in tech

I don't think this is a reason to panic every time a layoff headline shows up with your employer's name on it. But I do think it's a reason to update the question you're asking 👇🏼

"Is my company doing well?" is no longer a question a layoff can answer for you. Profitable, growing, well-funded companies are cutting teams constantly now, not because they're in trouble, but because they're rebalancing where they believe value gets created next. The layoff isn't the crisis. The reallocation is the strategy.

Which means the question that actually matters for your career isn't "will AI take my job." It's closer to: which budget line is my role sitting inside of, and is that budget line growing or shrinking relative to the one next to it? Are you in the part of the organization the company is investing around, or the part it's investing away from? 💡

That's a harder question to answer than "check if there were layoffs this quarter." But it's the one that's actually predictive now. And once I started asking it instead, a lot of announcements that used to look like chaos started to look a lot more like a pattern.

Curious whether others in tech are seeing the same thing. Has a layoff at your company (or one you were watching) ever coincided with the business doing genuinely well? I'd love to hear examples 👇🏼

You Don't Need a Full-Time Dev. You Need the Right Dev, Part of the Time

Aleksandra Rajkowska — Thu, 02 Jul 2026 21:20:29 +0000

There's a quiet shift happening in how companies build software. It doesn't involve another JS framework, a new cloud provider, or an AI agent pretending to be a senior engineer.

It's about how technical talent is being hired. Or rather, when, for how long, and in what capacity.

Welcome to the age of the fractional developer 💁‍♀️

Wait, "Fractional"? Is That Just "Freelancer" With a Suit On?

Sort of. But not quite.

A freelancer takes a project, delivers it, and moves on. A fractional professional embeds themselves into a company - attending standups, shaping architecture decisions, mentoring junior devs - but only a few days a week or a few hours a day. They're not contractors. They're not consultants in the McKinsey sense. They're more like a senior team member who also happens to work with three other companies simultaneously.

Think fractional CTO, fractional lead engineer, fractional architect. The model has been popular in marketing and finance for a while (fractional CMOs, fractional CFOs), but it's now making serious inroads in tech.

The numbers tell the story pretty clearly.

The Data That Made Me Sit Up Straight

The fractional workforce as a whole has doubled in just two years - from 60,000 professionals in 2022 to 120,000 in 2024, according to the Frak Conference's State of Fractional Industry Report. And demand for fractional CMOs, CFOs, and CTOs grew 68% year-over-year between 2023 and 2024. LinkedIn profiles mentioning fractional roles? Up from 2,000 in 2022 to 110,000 by early 2024 - a 5,400% increase.

That's not a trend. That's a tectonic shift.

And it's not junior talent doing this on the side. The same research shows that 72.8% of fractional professionals have 15+ years of experience. These aren't people who couldn't get a full-time job. These are people who chose not to.

For companies, the math works out nicely too. Fractional CTOs typically charge 60-70% less than full-time executive hires while delivering comparable strategic impact. Companies using fractional tech leadership report 18% higher revenue growth and 15% greater profitability compared to those that don't. One startup reportedly cut their product development cycle by 50% after bringing in a fractional CTO.

You get senior judgment without the senior price tag. No equity dilution, no 6-month onboarding, no awkward exit conversations when priorities shift.

What companies are really buying here has a name: expertise-as-a-service. Not headcount. Not hours. Outcomes.

Enter AI - the Plot Twist Nobody Fully Predicted

Here's where it gets interesting. And a little uncomfortable.

Upwork's In-Demand Skills 2026 report (published February 2026, based on actual marketplace earnings data) found that demand for AI-related freelance skills grew 109% year-over-year. AI video generation and editing: +329%. AI integration: +178%. AI chatbot development: +71%. These aren't niche categories anymore - they're becoming table stakes.

Meanwhile, 84% of freelancers now regularly use AI-powered tools in their work (up from just 41% in 2023, per the Freelancer Kompass 2026 report). The productivity gains are real: deliverables that used to take 6 hours now take roughly 2.5. Early adopters have nearly tripled their profit per hour 🤯

So far, sounds great for everyone, right?

Well. Here's the uncomfortable part.

When a developer can ship 2-3x faster using AI tools, clients start asking: "If this took you 3 hours instead of 10, why am I still paying the same rate?" And that's a fair question - one the industry hasn't fully figured out how to answer yet.

The Upwork data actually surfaces this tension elegantly. Demand for foundational human skills - full-stack development, data analytics, graphic design - has remained consistently strong. Clients aren't replacing developers with AI. But they're also increasingly asking developers to use AI as part of the workflow. The expectation is that you're faster. That you're more capable. That you're essentially two people in one.

AI made developers faster. It didn't automatically make them better.

And that's where the economics get interesting. Companies don't hire senior specialists because they need more hours. They hire them because they need better decisions, deeper expertise, and faster outcomes. The market is slowly shifting from asking "how many hours can you work?" to "what problems can you solve?"

What this means for fractional developers specifically: the model becomes even more attractive on the client side (more output per dollar, more flexibility), but the pressure on commodity work is real. If you're churning out boilerplate, basic CRUD work, or templated pages - you're going to feel it. The fractional developers who thrive will be the ones who offer something AI can't: strategic judgment, architectural thinking, context accumulated over years, and the ability to say "that's technically possible but here's why it's a terrible idea."

The value is in the senior brain, not just the keyboard hours.

The New Shape of a Tech Career

For years, many developers felt like they had two options: keep writing code forever, or become a manager. Neither path fits everyone.

Some of the best engineers have absolutely no interest in managing people. They want to stay close to hard technical problems. They like building things. At the same time, they want more flexibility and variety than a traditional role can offer.

Fractional work is increasingly looking like a third option.

What's emerging is a model where experienced developers don't just switch employers - they diversify their portfolio. Two or three fractional engagements, maybe a small retained client, some async advisory work. You're not an employee. You're not a typical freelancer. You're more like a micro-consultancy of one, with actual skin in the outcomes of multiple products simultaneously.

In many ways, it's the closest thing engineering has to becoming an independent specialist - like a physician who consults across several hospitals instead of working for one. Your reputation becomes your moat. Your expertise becomes your product.

This isn't for everyone. It requires comfort with uncertainty, business development instincts, and the organizational discipline to work across four different codebases without losing your mind (block scheduling by client day is a lifesaver, apparently). But for senior engineers who want to stay close to real product problems without committing to one company's politics, culture, and five-year roadmap - it's increasingly the move.

Gartner predicts that by 2027, over 30% of midsize enterprises will have at least one fractional executive on retainer. The model is going mainstream.

What We're Trying to Figure Out

We've been seeing this shift firsthand. More companies are approaching us looking for highly specialized experts who can jump into projects quickly and create impact without lengthy hiring cycles. More experienced engineers who aren't looking for another traditional job - they want flexibility, interesting challenges, and the ability to work on their own terms.

That's partly why we built Bejamas Freelance Hub - our own platform for connecting with skilled freelancers and fractional contributors. It's not an Upwork clone. It's built around the kind of work we do and the kind of talent we know how to evaluate: web performance, modern frontend stacks, Jamstack, headless architecture. If you're a senior dev thinking about the fractional path and want to work on projects where your architectural opinions actually matter, it's worth a look.

We're figuring this out alongside everyone else, honestly. But we think the fractional model is one of the more interesting talent experiments happening in tech right now - and we'd rather be building the infrastructure for it than watching from the sidelines 🤞🏽

So, Is "Fractional Developer" the Future?

Probably not for everyone. Full-time jobs aren't going anywhere. Junior developers still need deep context, mentorship, and stability that fractional engagements don't really provide.

But for senior, specialized talent? The fractional model is a genuinely compelling alternative - and the market is moving in that direction faster than most companies have caught up to.

The question for developers is no longer just "should I go full-time or freelance?" There's a third option now: go fractional, pick your clients like a portfolio, bring your whole senior brain to multiple tables at once.

And for companies: you don't always need to hire a senior engineer full-time. Sometimes you need one for 15 hours a week. The good news is, increasingly, you can get exactly that.

OK, questions 👇🏼

If you had to pick one: full-time, freelance, or fractional, what would you choose today, and why? 💁‍♀️
Are you a fractional developer, or thinking about making the switch? What's been (or would be) the biggest barrier for you: finding clients, managing your schedule, or something else entirely?
Has AI already changed the way you price your work as a developer?

PS. If you're exploring the fractional path - or just curious what it looks like in practice in the frontend/web world - say hi via Bejamas Freelance Hub. We're building something in this space, and we like talking to people who are thinking about it seriously.