6 ms·
In July 2008, I had recently been laid off and it was the midst of the Worst Recession Ever. I applied to Fog Creek. I didn't get to the in-office interview. N
by pw0ncakes 17y ago
In July 2008, I had recently been laid off and it was the midst of the Worst Recession Ever.
I applied to Fog Creek. I didn't get to the in-office interview. Now, I'd totally understand if they chose not to hire me after an interview. I'm pretty particular about what kind of work I want to be doing, and that makes me a poor fit for most jobs. Also, knowing more about the company, I wouldn't have been a great fit (no fan of Microsoft, and they use Wasabi, which I understand to be a VB dialect). So I hold no grudge that I didn't get hired-- just business, and very likely the right decision-- but I was pretty damn surprised not to get an office interview. I'm reasonably smart (top 100 Putnam) and I made it to the final round of DE Shaw's process shortly out of school, and had plenty of opportunities (even then, in 2008) to move back into finance. So it's pretty shocking that they didn't at least bring me into the office. Ok, but that's their decision and within their rights; they haven't done anything wrong, unprofessional, or embarrassing. Not yet, anyway...
Here's where Fog Creek begins to look bad: remember what I said about being laid off in the midst of the worst recession ever? After getting turned down for the interview, I called Fog Creek to ask why I didn't get it, wanting to make future applications, to other companies, more successful. No explanation. No tips or advice. Nothing. "We'll call you if we can release that information." No call. I tried again, 2 weeks later. Nothing. I'm sorry, but if you can't take 5 minutes out of your day to explain to someone who is down on his luck why he didn't get an interview, then you've checked your humanity at the door and crossed the line into sleazy corporate "neither confirm nor deny" territory.
To make it worse, I know that Joel is friends with my ex-boss. So Fog Creek's decision not to explain the rationale to me casts aspersion onto him. Not very professional. (Of course, I have no idea if Joel had anything whatsoever to do with this matter. Still, it makes the company look bad.)
Anyway, I rebounded, I've moved on and I'm doing well. In 10 years when I have a bit of success to my name and I'm hiring, I won't hold it against someone to have worked there. Even if that person worked in their HR department in the summer of 2008. But this is why I think Fog Creek is overrated. I'm sure they're a great company, and they have some impressive people, but they still have a touch of the old regime in them... or at least in one subsection of the HR department as of two years ago.
(TL;DR version: The "cool company" image of Fog Creek is overstated, as my experience attests. Still, their programmers are impressive.)
- ewanmcteagle 17y agoMany companies are reluctant to say anything about why they didn't choose you because there is no upside and potential legal downside for them. I don't know what top 100 Putnam is or DE Shaw or how picky you are but I'm sure you are great.
- pw0ncakes 17y agoI am not going to sue them. Why would I waste a year of my life chasing a lawsuit that I can't win, having no legal leg to stand on, over a decision they have every right to make? However, the "black box" behavior of companies is pretty unprofessional. It makes the job search process a lot more difficult than it needs to be.
- brandon272 17y agoJust because you don't like a specific policy doesn't make it unprofessional. Employers have no duty to job applicants to help them through the qualification process.
- pw0ncakes 17y ago"Employers have no duty to [X]" does not imply "[X] is not unprofessional". No one has any legal duty to be professional.
- WalterBright 17y agoJoel doesn't know you're not going to sue him. Lots of people file frivolous lawsuits against companies, in the hope of a settlement even if the lawsuit has no merit (it takes a lot of time and money to defend against frivolous suits). It makes no sense for him to expose himself to that sort of risk.
- lyudmil 17y agoAll of your replies here suffer from the same logical flaw and many people have pointed it out. Fog Creek has a policy of not divulging their reasons for denying an applicant a certain position. Joel has given his arguments about why that is sound, so I will not bother to repeat them. You keep assuming that Fog Creek should know that it would be safe to make an exception in your case and getting offended that they choose not to. The fact is you should not be an exception. To make this as clear as possible, suppose you were trying to get pain killers without a prescription. No matter how obvious it is you're not a junkie and are in pain, it would not be appropriate for the pharmacy to sell you the medicine based on their subjective judgment. It may not matter in this instance, but it would undermine the whole system. The reason why I respond is because it has been frustrating for me to read your replies on this thread because this gap in reasoning has made all of your comments sound very personal. Anybody can sympathize with the frustration around being denied a job, but your story says nothing about Joel's management approach.