3 ms·

It is not illegal to fire someone who can't do what they were hired to do especially when they were told what was expected at the interview stage. My thinking

It is not illegal to fire someone who can't do what they were hired to do especially when they were told what was expected at the interview stage. My thinking is the first x days on the job is spent doing programming tests. This should generate enough paperwork to satisfy any HR department. You then have the time to test all aspects of the candidates skills, rather than the limited range you can test in an interview.

btilly 11y ago
That works. In a lot of the US not only is it not illegal to fire people for incompetence, but you don't even need a reason to fire them. But stupid people when offended sometimes launch silly lawsuits alleging all kinds of crap, and those lawsuits can be expensive to defend. A lot of what HR does is stuff to reduce the frequency of such lawsuits, and to make the ones that still happen go away more cheaply.
- danieltillett 11y ago
  My thinking is to move off the time and expense of testing candidates from the interview stage to as late in the process as possible. A really though test of a candidate is time consuming and to do it at the interview stage is not fair on the candidates and the company. You can provide any candidate with the full list of what they will be tested on in their first x days so they can decide if the job is for them or not (i.e. everyone is upfront with what is expected). The only problem I see with this approach is Dunning-Kruger effects. My experience in hiring is it is pretty easy to pick candidates suffering from DK by comparing what they say with what they can demonstrated via their work history. It is the more marginal candidates where they seem non-delusional, but where they don’t have a perfect CV. These people are often overlooked by other companies, but they often turn out to be fantastic employees. Taking a chance on them can be a great.

btilly 11y ago

That works. In a lot of the US not only is it not illegal to fire people for incompetence, but you don't even need a reason to fire them. But stupid people when offended sometimes launch silly lawsuits alleging all kinds of crap, and those lawsuits can be expensive to defend. A lot of what HR does is stuff to reduce the frequency of such lawsuits, and to make the ones that still happen go away more cheaply.

danieltillett 11y ago
My thinking is to move off the time and expense of testing candidates from the interview stage to as late in the process as possible. A really though test of a candidate is time consuming and to do it at the interview stage is not fair on the candidates and the company. You can provide any candidate with the full list of what they will be tested on in their first x days so they can decide if the job is for them or not (i.e. everyone is upfront with what is expected). The only problem I see with this approach is Dunning-Kruger effects. My experience in hiring is it is pretty easy to pick candidates suffering from DK by comparing what they say with what they can demonstrated via their work history. It is the more marginal candidates where they seem non-delusional, but where they don’t have a perfect CV. These people are often overlooked by other companies, but they often turn out to be fantastic employees. Taking a chance on them can be a great.