5 ms·

EDIT: I thought that sillysaurus3 was talking about a work trial period (days or a week), but it seems they are talking about asking question during that interv

by ammon 11y ago

EDIT: I thought that sillysaurus3 was talking about a work trial period (days or a week), but it seems they are talking about asking question during that interview that are similar to actual work. I retract me objection :) If only it were that easy. I am not at all opposed to work-trial tests. They are almost certainly more accurate. But a high percentage of programmer will never apply to a company that requires one. Read any HN comment thread about the topic. It's very controversial. Lots of programmers are against it. Work-trials require MORE time upfront from the candidate, and of course still often lead to rejections (by design a hiring filter rejects most people). A failed work trial burns an entire week of vacation. An unemployed programmer (who is being paid the work-trial) may like it, but someone working another job may not.

Swizec 11y ago
If you're getting paid for a week of work, you can take a week of unpaid vacation from your day job. No vacation days burned. No money lost.
- thaumasiotes 11y ago
  Huh? You can't just take unpaid vacation because you feel like it.
  - Swizec 11y ago
    Can't you? Your only obligation to the company is the time they pay you for. The time they don't pay you for is yours.
    - thaumasiotes 11y ago
      We're not longshoremen. Virtually nobody has a contract saying "just show up when and if you feel like it, and we'll pay you for that".
      - Retra 11y ago
        I don't think Swizec was implying that this time couldn't be coordinated in advance with your employer.
        s73v3r 11y ago
        I think the point is that most employers would say "no."
- bjt 11y ago
  I suspect that the flexible "unpaid vacation" scenario you're describing is much more rare than you think. If your team is pushing for a major release and you decide just not to show up, your days are numbered. If you spend the week working for another company, you are quite likely to be fired from the old one. Ammon mentioned Weebly, above. They are one company that I've seen require an on-site week as a contractor. I know of a Weebly candidate who lost her current job because the employer considered the leave to be job abandonment. Thankfully, she got the job at Weebly. Perhaps Weebly's weeklong trial is effective for them at weeding out bad hires. But I suspect most good programmers would never consider giving up a week of their lives to an extended job interview.
  - Swizec 11y ago
    Thing is, most companies will fire you as soon as they notice you're actively looking for other jobs. And I wasn't suggesting job abandonment. Asking for a week of unpaid vacation is a different conversation than asking for a week of paid vacation.
    - eropple 11y ago
      > Thing is, most companies will fire you as soon as they notice you're actively looking for other jobs. Only if they don't need you and think you are not being productive. So be needed and be productive.
- s73v3r 11y ago
  You're assuming the rates are the same, and that your current company will allow you to take an unpaid week off.
FLUX-YOU 11y ago
Why don't we let the interviewee choose between a few interview methods? Or bypass it if they think their public code proves their ability?
- ammon 11y ago
  I think this is the best solution. It does raise issues of how you keep a consistent bar between the various options, but I think it's better than the alternatives. Currently we let people do a project track where they do a project on their own time, or an interview track where they answer interview questions. We also give them a choice of interview questions in a number of areas, to try to increase the probability that we see a strength.
karmacondon 11y ago
It seems like you're being forced into a false dichotomy of being either completely for work trials or completely against them, and that's unfair. But if your biggest objection is that it will take additional time, that depends entirely on the nature of the trial. I was given a work trial at my first job and it took about 40 minutes. It didn't go as smoothly as I'd hoped, but I would much much rather have done that than spent 40 minutes answering brain teasers in front of a white board. If I'm already taking a day off, I don't care if the interview lasts three hours or five. I'd rather work on a collaborative task with my potential teammates to see if it's going to be worth radically altering my life to take a new job. I understand that there are many programmers who are opposed to work trials, and they can say "I'm opposed to work trials and would rather demonstrate my abilities in another way." It seems like your research so far has been very comprehensive, why dismiss an effective technique because some people are opposed to it?
sanderjd 11y ago
It's really frustrating when people are clearly talking around each other, and either failing to notice or willfully continuing to do it. sillysaurus3: "Spend a couple hours remotely fixing some bugs and adding a feature on a fake iOS app" ammon: "A failed work trial burns an entire week of vacation." You're not talking about the same thing! sillysaurus3 is talking about doing a small amount of work that is similar to what the company does, under conditions similar to those you would have as an employee. You seem to be talking about short trial period contract-to-hire. Yes, the thing you're talking about sucks and is a huge turnoff to candidates, but (mostly speaking for myself here) what sillysaurus3 is suggesting is massively appealing.

by ammon 11y ago

Swizec 11y ago

If you're getting paid for a week of work, you can take a week of unpaid vacation from your day job. No vacation days burned. No money lost.

thaumasiotes 11y ago
Huh? You can't just take unpaid vacation because you feel like it.
- Swizec 11y ago
  Can't you? Your only obligation to the company is the time they pay you for. The time they don't pay you for is yours.
  - thaumasiotes 11y ago
    We're not longshoremen. Virtually nobody has a contract saying "just show up when and if you feel like it, and we'll pay you for that".
    - Retra 11y ago
      I don't think Swizec was implying that this time couldn't be coordinated in advance with your employer.
      - s73v3r 11y ago
        I think the point is that most employers would say "no."
bjt 11y ago
I suspect that the flexible "unpaid vacation" scenario you're describing is much more rare than you think. If your team is pushing for a major release and you decide just not to show up, your days are numbered. If you spend the week working for another company, you are quite likely to be fired from the old one. Ammon mentioned Weebly, above. They are one company that I've seen require an on-site week as a contractor. I know of a Weebly candidate who lost her current job because the employer considered the leave to be job abandonment. Thankfully, she got the job at Weebly. Perhaps Weebly's weeklong trial is effective for them at weeding out bad hires. But I suspect most good programmers would never consider giving up a week of their lives to an extended job interview.
- Swizec 11y ago
  Thing is, most companies will fire you as soon as they notice you're actively looking for other jobs. And I wasn't suggesting job abandonment. Asking for a week of unpaid vacation is a different conversation than asking for a week of paid vacation.
  - eropple 11y ago
    > Thing is, most companies will fire you as soon as they notice you're actively looking for other jobs. Only if they don't need you and think you are not being productive. So be needed and be productive.
s73v3r 11y ago
You're assuming the rates are the same, and that your current company will allow you to take an unpaid week off.

FLUX-YOU 11y ago

Why don't we let the interviewee choose between a few interview methods? Or bypass it if they think their public code proves their ability?

ammon 11y ago
I think this is the best solution. It does raise issues of how you keep a consistent bar between the various options, but I think it's better than the alternatives. Currently we let people do a project track where they do a project on their own time, or an interview track where they answer interview questions. We also give them a choice of interview questions in a number of areas, to try to increase the probability that we see a strength.

karmacondon 11y ago

It seems like you're being forced into a false dichotomy of being either completely for work trials or completely against them, and that's unfair. But if your biggest objection is that it will take additional time, that depends entirely on the nature of the trial. I was given a work trial at my first job and it took about 40 minutes. It didn't go as smoothly as I'd hoped, but I would much much rather have done that than spent 40 minutes answering brain teasers in front of a white board. If I'm already taking a day off, I don't care if the interview lasts three hours or five. I'd rather work on a collaborative task with my potential teammates to see if it's going to be worth radically altering my life to take a new job. I understand that there are many programmers who are opposed to work trials, and they can say "I'm opposed to work trials and would rather demonstrate my abilities in another way." It seems like your research so far has been very comprehensive, why dismiss an effective technique because some people are opposed to it?

sanderjd 11y ago

It's really frustrating when people are clearly talking around each other, and either failing to notice or willfully continuing to do it. sillysaurus3: "Spend a couple hours remotely fixing some bugs and adding a feature on a fake iOS app" ammon: "A failed work trial burns an entire week of vacation." You're not talking about the same thing! sillysaurus3 is talking about doing a small amount of work that is similar to what the company does, under conditions similar to those you would have as an employee. You seem to be talking about short trial period contract-to-hire. Yes, the thing you're talking about sucks and is a huge turnoff to candidates, but (mostly speaking for myself here) what sillysaurus3 is suggesting is massively appealing.