5 ms·

Why such a low rate? This seems like it would automatically disqualify any but the most desperate job seekers.

by learc83 11y ago

tyingq 11y ago
$25/hour as a straight invoice (subject to self-employment tax), is roughly equivalent to a $40k/year salary at a company that gives -0- benefits, at all. I have no idea if this has any correlation to the salary they ultimately offer. You're right though...it would seem to narrow the field down to those willing to severely undervalue their work for at least 30 days.
- startlaunch 11y ago
  Nope. There's no correlation with the actual salary.
- FireBeyond 11y ago
  Yeah - say you're working already and making, say $90K as a developer already. You're going to be taxed 25-28% of this $25/hr at the federal level alone. Money is money, but I could think of more things I could be doing than work for a highly profitable company for what might about to $15-20/hr take home pay.
  - nickpsecurity 11y ago
    "Yeah - say you're working already and making, say $90K as a developer already. You're going to be taxed 25-28% of this $25/hr at the federal level alone." That's a good point. Never even occurred to me.
jamesroseman 11y ago
It should be noted that per the article, this is for a single project for which the candidate has up to a month to complete. It's not a whole truth to describe the $25/hr as compensation for a "full month's work". This is also, per the article again, undertaken while one has a job. Not playing sides, just adding context -- I have no affiliation with the company.
- tyingq 11y ago
  $25 an hour is paltry for this type of work, no matter the duration. The duration of one month is from the article.
- jon-wood 11y ago
  I can see why companies want to do this sort of thing, since it gives them a decent look at how people really do their job, but it almost entirely rules out people with a life outside of work. I'm already working a more than full time job, and Saturdays are entirely spent looking after our son so that my wife can get some work done. That leaves one full day off, and a few hours each evening, by which I've likely been up since 5am, done a full day's work, got our son off to bed, and cooked a meal. Even if I thought I was likely to produce anything worth submitting, there's no way I want to give up the few hours of time my wife and I get together as a couple for the sake of a glorified job interview. I guess I could take some time off work and treat it as my day job for a week, but then I've given up a decent chunk of my leave allowance in return for a job interview, and the addition of some tax paperwork to my life because I've been doing freelance work.
  - jcadam 11y ago
    Yea, I recently turned down an interview with a company that included a similar 'trial' period as part of their hiring process. From now on, any long, drawn-out interview process gets a 'pass' from me. I've had my time wasted too many times (employer suddenly goes dark after the final interview, no communication, no responses to any attempt at contact, etc). In fact, I've given up on my most recent job search after experiencing two of those in a row (need to save my vacation days for an actual vacation at some point). On second thought, I suppose if I were unemployed and desperate I might be willing to put up with an onerous hiring process.
    - lazaroclapp 11y ago
      Or, conversely, if you had very little commitments outside of work, time to regularly hack on side and sufficient interest in the job to say "ok, this month, my side project is going to be for someone else". But the point remains that this puts an uncommon expectation on applicants, one that maybe Automattic can afford to select for, but that would potentially cause untold problems if all employers hired this way.
jglovier 11y ago
Not saying your conclusion is necessarily accurate (though I don't disagree), but anecdotally my own experience was similar. I interviewed for a design position with Automattic 3 or 4 years ago and made it to the contract stage, and ultimately had to decline because the $25 contract gig was just so off-putting. Not to mention the super-intimidating terms and intellectual property agreement that came with the trial gig.
walshemj 11y ago
Id want a lot more than that for such a short contract say $500 a day.
kemayo 11y ago
The reason they give (I applied, but wound up taking a different job before completing that month's trial) is that the $25/hour is a flat rate they give to anyone applying for any position they have, not just the comparatively well-paid development positions. So a CSR, a web developer, a deployment engineer, whoever -- all $25/hour. They further elaborated that they wanted a flat rate like this because they wanted to avoid what would effectively be salary negotiations before they even knew if they wanted to hire someone. I can sympathize with that position, though I think it might be more reasonable to do something like paying trials the lowest hourly rate given to anyone in the company doing that job. That'd provide context, while still being a vaguely appropriate payment for the work done.
Candlebra 11y ago
It sets an important precedent. Also, that you accepted it tells a lot.
VLM 11y ago
As a contrary opinion, that its really not so bad, I'm old enough to remember job interviews where they use the interview as an excuse to take the whole team out to their favorite expensive restaurant for lunch, and I'm stressed and frankly not going to enjoy it because its an interview full of people I don't know well, whereas a day or two's pay at $25/hr works out very well to "date night with my wife at our favorite steakhouse". For people who don't like steakhouses, or wives, they can find a similar enough way to entertain themselves in compensation for time spent. It feels like a relatively tasteful way to say "thanks for your time, now go out and have a nice evening to celebrate its all over".
- learc83 11y ago
  I'm not sure how much time it takes, just that they said it's a month long contract. But let's assume it's 30 hours total. I often turn down contract work because I'm booked full, so I could have worked those 30 hours at $100 per hour. This "interview" will cost me $2250--in addition to the time spend doing the actual asynchronous interviews. I'm not willing to spend 2 grand for the chance at a job with this company. I might be willing to lose $500 or so in lost income to spend half a day interviewing. Do companies really want to limit their potential applicant pools like this?
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

Why such a low rate? This seems like it would automatically disqualify any but the most desperate job seekers.

by learc83 11y ago

Why such a low rate? This seems like it would automatically disqualify any but the most desperate job seekers.

$25/hour as a straight invoice (subject to self-employment tax), is roughly equivalent to a $40k/year salary at a company that gives -0- benefits, at all. I have no idea if this has any correlation to the salary they ultimately offer. You're right though...it would seem to narrow the field down to those willing to severely undervalue their work for at least 30 days.

startlaunch 11y ago
Nope. There's no correlation with the actual salary.
FireBeyond 11y ago
Yeah - say you're working already and making, say $90K as a developer already. You're going to be taxed 25-28% of this $25/hr at the federal level alone. Money is money, but I could think of more things I could be doing than work for a highly profitable company for what might about to $15-20/hr take home pay.
- nickpsecurity 11y ago
  "Yeah - say you're working already and making, say $90K as a developer already. You're going to be taxed 25-28% of this $25/hr at the federal level alone." That's a good point. Never even occurred to me.

jamesroseman 11y ago

It should be noted that per the article, this is for a single project for which the candidate has up to a month to complete. It's not a whole truth to describe the $25/hr as compensation for a "full month's work". This is also, per the article again, undertaken while one has a job. Not playing sides, just adding context -- I have no affiliation with the company.

tyingq 11y ago
$25 an hour is paltry for this type of work, no matter the duration. The duration of one month is from the article.
jon-wood 11y ago
I can see why companies want to do this sort of thing, since it gives them a decent look at how people really do their job, but it almost entirely rules out people with a life outside of work. I'm already working a more than full time job, and Saturdays are entirely spent looking after our son so that my wife can get some work done. That leaves one full day off, and a few hours each evening, by which I've likely been up since 5am, done a full day's work, got our son off to bed, and cooked a meal. Even if I thought I was likely to produce anything worth submitting, there's no way I want to give up the few hours of time my wife and I get together as a couple for the sake of a glorified job interview. I guess I could take some time off work and treat it as my day job for a week, but then I've given up a decent chunk of my leave allowance in return for a job interview, and the addition of some tax paperwork to my life because I've been doing freelance work.
- jcadam 11y ago
  Yea, I recently turned down an interview with a company that included a similar 'trial' period as part of their hiring process. From now on, any long, drawn-out interview process gets a 'pass' from me. I've had my time wasted too many times (employer suddenly goes dark after the final interview, no communication, no responses to any attempt at contact, etc). In fact, I've given up on my most recent job search after experiencing two of those in a row (need to save my vacation days for an actual vacation at some point). On second thought, I suppose if I were unemployed and desperate I might be willing to put up with an onerous hiring process.
  - lazaroclapp 11y ago
    Or, conversely, if you had very little commitments outside of work, time to regularly hack on side and sufficient interest in the job to say "ok, this month, my side project is going to be for someone else". But the point remains that this puts an uncommon expectation on applicants, one that maybe Automattic can afford to select for, but that would potentially cause untold problems if all employers hired this way.

jglovier 11y ago

Not saying your conclusion is necessarily accurate (though I don't disagree), but anecdotally my own experience was similar. I interviewed for a design position with Automattic 3 or 4 years ago and made it to the contract stage, and ultimately had to decline because the $25 contract gig was just so off-putting. Not to mention the super-intimidating terms and intellectual property agreement that came with the trial gig.

walshemj 11y ago

Id want a lot more than that for such a short contract say $500 a day.

kemayo 11y ago

The reason they give (I applied, but wound up taking a different job before completing that month's trial) is that the $25/hour is a flat rate they give to anyone applying for any position they have, not just the comparatively well-paid development positions. So a CSR, a web developer, a deployment engineer, whoever -- all $25/hour. They further elaborated that they wanted a flat rate like this because they wanted to avoid what would effectively be salary negotiations before they even knew if they wanted to hire someone. I can sympathize with that position, though I think it might be more reasonable to do something like paying trials the lowest hourly rate given to anyone in the company doing that job. That'd provide context, while still being a vaguely appropriate payment for the work done.

Candlebra 11y ago

It sets an important precedent. Also, that you accepted it tells a lot.

VLM 11y ago

As a contrary opinion, that its really not so bad, I'm old enough to remember job interviews where they use the interview as an excuse to take the whole team out to their favorite expensive restaurant for lunch, and I'm stressed and frankly not going to enjoy it because its an interview full of people I don't know well, whereas a day or two's pay at $25/hr works out very well to "date night with my wife at our favorite steakhouse". For people who don't like steakhouses, or wives, they can find a similar enough way to entertain themselves in compensation for time spent. It feels like a relatively tasteful way to say "thanks for your time, now go out and have a nice evening to celebrate its all over".

learc83 11y ago
I'm not sure how much time it takes, just that they said it's a month long contract. But let's assume it's 30 hours total. I often turn down contract work because I'm booked full, so I could have worked those 30 hours at $100 per hour. This "interview" will cost me $2250--in addition to the time spend doing the actual asynchronous interviews. I'm not willing to spend 2 grand for the chance at a job with this company. I might be willing to lose $500 or so in lost income to spend half a day interviewing. Do companies really want to limit their potential applicant pools like this?

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]