That's not really how it works. L6+ is considered a "terminal" level. As long as you aren't underperforming it's perfectly fine to stay at that level indefinitely. It's not an "up or out" position like L5 and down.
> It's not an "up or out" position like L5 and down.
As an outsider to this all FAANG thing that feels wrong to me, it has always felt so.
What happens, or at least what I think happens because of this strategy, is that lots of institutional knowledge gets lots pretty fast and in an irremediable way, because many of those L4s and L5s that ended up not making it to L6, and so got the boot, knew of some parts of the "system" that no-one else did.
Unless a FAANG company only relies on L6s and higher to get a hold over that institutional knowledge over the long term, which I pretty much doubt it can happen.
As the median tenure at silly high wage places like Google is one year I am pretty sure most that quit are "managed out" with an implied threat of being fired.
L4 is terminal. There is no requirement to ever be promoted to L5 (though there is some language about continued expansion of skills at L4). Most engineers will never make L6 in their entire career at Google and nobody is concerned about people chilling at lower levels.
They keep raising it every time I hear about it…it used to be L4, now people say it’s L5/senior. And you’re saying it’s L6? I can’t keep up with this :/
I don't know where jedberg pulled that from, but I seriously doubt that the L6-equivalent is the terminal level at any FAANG. At Google it definitely used to be L5, but apparently was dropped to L4 a few years ago