3 ms·
Next: Employers should compensate interviewd candidates for their time at a rate equivalent to the position for which they are interviewing.
by ronilan 9y ago
Next:
Employers should compensate interviewd candidates for their time at a rate equivalent to the position for which they are interviewing.
- jpttsn 9y agoThat’s like a store charging you to try on the clothes you don’t buy. I wouldn’t like that.
- ronilan 9y agoEmployers don't buy employees. That's already the law. So... No. It is toatally not like that and hopefully such a law will help clarify the point to any who miss it. Such a law will also provide balances in an unbalanced power situation and enforce economic efficiencies on an inefficient process. I'm not a lawmaker nor an employer, though, so I'll leave the suggestion for someone else to pick up.
- jpttsn 9y agoEmployers do buy the labor of employees. Think of the employee as the store and the labor as the clothes.
- ronilan 9y agoI've taken economics in university. I understand this line of thinking. It's wrong. (twice, btw, once because the negative externalities of "the interview process" are not negligible, and second because the power dynamics of said process are just wrong)
- jpttsn 9y agoI like my analogy; why not convince me it's wrong? Are there no negative externalities of trying on clothes?
- usaar333 9y agoWhy? That would steer already perverse incentives to interviewing at companies for practice, for free trips, etc. even further toward the employee. Employers take huge hits interviewing candidates (namely the interviewer's time); I don't see this being a problem that needs to be solved.