3 ms·

So its entitlement to expect an employer to not exploit their position of power? Sure, I'll take that label. >If you want the job, you'll find four hours. But

So its entitlement to expect an employer to not exploit their position of power? Sure, I'll take that label. >If you want the job, you'll find four hours. But what happens when everyone starts having these 4 hour screens? Now its a 40 hour process to apply for 10 jobs in a week (and this is before any commitment on the part of the employer). It's not sustainable or fair. And yet, there's no incentive for employers not to do it. So we as job seekers just need to suck it up and be thankful for the opportunity, right?

aisofteng 10y ago
And what's wrong with having a position of power? You say it like it's a dirty phrase. Can you, personally, pay me a salary? If you can and I want to work with you, I absolutely think it's fair to ask four hours of my own time to demonstrate I'm worth consideration for it. If not, then why does your opinion matter?
- hackinthebochs 10y ago
  You sound like a Libertarian. I'm assuming all the advances in worker's rights we've had over the last hundred years are also "entitlement"? If not, then I don't see what's different about expecting an employer to not exploit prospective applicants by offloading most of the cost to them.
LoSboccacc 10y ago
I work at a small company in a remote part of an openly backward state when it comes to startups, and yet got two hundreds applicants to file a javascrip developer position. After interviewing 10 (say two three hours spent on each between contacting, scheduling up etc) it was clear every unemployed with 'can use word' as skill boosted their resume and applied. I'm sorry for the real developers looking for a job but a company can't dump 20 days work on chasing and weeding liers. I'm not a fan of homeworks myself but this is what it has come to. I'd be payng but that puts the company and the prospect in a very difficult position them towards tax laws and towards their current employer non competes, the company toward again tax laws and then there's the absurd of paying for contract work delivered that's 99% of times not up to spec. Beside, the unwillingness to compromise smells itself and given the choice I'd never get a potential troublemaker in that only thinks time=money and screw everything else. That little empathy for both sided of the problems sure is a red flag. Edit: well unless it's a contracting job then it's fine.
- hackinthebochs 10y ago
  This seems like something a 5 minute FizzBuzz-esque programming assignment as a pre-filter could easily fix. The goal seems to be a barrier that only serious applicants will even bother to attempt, and that's fair. But when that barrier then becomes a 4+ hour time sink for the serious applicants it becomes a problem. There are plenty of hackerrank style sites where someone can show a bare minimum of competency without costing either side much time.
  - LoSboccacc 10y ago
    yeah I think 4 hours is a bit too much, in the end you only need competency as a screening. we used to give out this http://play.elevatorsaga.com/#challenge=3 http://play.elevatorsaga.com/#challenge=3 and asking for solution to level 3 which can be done in a short time + is the first non trivial challenge. of course solutions can be find in internet etc, but it's pretty easy to look them up if they smell fishy and it'd all come down crashing at the face-to-face anyway it's also a very good exercise in real world problem solving and a source of endless technical discussion since there's no single good approach, especially with two elevators to schedule.
hinkley 10y ago
What power do you think they're exploiting? Most of the places I've been at were desperate for 'good' people and they couldn't seem to find them. It's still a seller's market out there.
- hackinthebochs 10y ago
  It's the power to get 30+ people to jump through hoops that only one person has a chance at being chosen. Even worse, a good 50-60% of those people have no chance out of the gate, they just don't know it. Encouraging people with little to no shot at the job to do significant work so make your job of filtering them out easier just reeks of exploitation. Come up with a filter that's minimal cost for those applying, fizzbuzz style problems seem suitable.
- gspetr 10y ago
  In my experience most of the places that tried to pull the "no good people" card were also the places that refused to pay even 20% above the market. If this were true people would be poached a lot more frequently than what we can observe now.

aisofteng 10y ago

And what's wrong with having a position of power? You say it like it's a dirty phrase. Can you, personally, pay me a salary? If you can and I want to work with you, I absolutely think it's fair to ask four hours of my own time to demonstrate I'm worth consideration for it. If not, then why does your opinion matter?

hackinthebochs 10y ago
You sound like a Libertarian. I'm assuming all the advances in worker's rights we've had over the last hundred years are also "entitlement"? If not, then I don't see what's different about expecting an employer to not exploit prospective applicants by offloading most of the cost to them.

LoSboccacc 10y ago

I work at a small company in a remote part of an openly backward state when it comes to startups, and yet got two hundreds applicants to file a javascrip developer position. After interviewing 10 (say two three hours spent on each between contacting, scheduling up etc) it was clear every unemployed with 'can use word' as skill boosted their resume and applied. I'm sorry for the real developers looking for a job but a company can't dump 20 days work on chasing and weeding liers. I'm not a fan of homeworks myself but this is what it has come to. I'd be payng but that puts the company and the prospect in a very difficult position them towards tax laws and towards their current employer non competes, the company toward again tax laws and then there's the absurd of paying for contract work delivered that's 99% of times not up to spec. Beside, the unwillingness to compromise smells itself and given the choice I'd never get a potential troublemaker in that only thinks time=money and screw everything else. That little empathy for both sided of the problems sure is a red flag. Edit: well unless it's a contracting job then it's fine.

hackinthebochs 10y ago
This seems like something a 5 minute FizzBuzz-esque programming assignment as a pre-filter could easily fix. The goal seems to be a barrier that only serious applicants will even bother to attempt, and that's fair. But when that barrier then becomes a 4+ hour time sink for the serious applicants it becomes a problem. There are plenty of hackerrank style sites where someone can show a bare minimum of competency without costing either side much time.
- LoSboccacc 10y ago
  yeah I think 4 hours is a bit too much, in the end you only need competency as a screening. we used to give out this http://play.elevatorsaga.com/#challenge=3 http://play.elevatorsaga.com/#challenge=3 and asking for solution to level 3 which can be done in a short time + is the first non trivial challenge. of course solutions can be find in internet etc, but it's pretty easy to look them up if they smell fishy and it'd all come down crashing at the face-to-face anyway it's also a very good exercise in real world problem solving and a source of endless technical discussion since there's no single good approach, especially with two elevators to schedule.

hinkley 10y ago

What power do you think they're exploiting? Most of the places I've been at were desperate for 'good' people and they couldn't seem to find them. It's still a seller's market out there.

hackinthebochs 10y ago
It's the power to get 30+ people to jump through hoops that only one person has a chance at being chosen. Even worse, a good 50-60% of those people have no chance out of the gate, they just don't know it. Encouraging people with little to no shot at the job to do significant work so make your job of filtering them out easier just reeks of exploitation. Come up with a filter that's minimal cost for those applying, fizzbuzz style problems seem suitable.
gspetr 10y ago
In my experience most of the places that tried to pull the "no good people" card were also the places that refused to pay even 20% above the market. If this were true people would be poached a lot more frequently than what we can observe now.