3 ms·

What do they contribute that no one else could for this „low“ amount?

rlanday 9y ago
It’s not that “no one else” could do their job, but there’s not an unlimited supply of people who can meet the hiring bar at Google/Facebook/Microsoft, and there are a number of employers with deep pockets trying to hire them. Google in particular is known to offer people with competing offers a lot of money to keep them from going to other companies.
- hennsen 9y ago
  If there are other people who are able to do the job, but not meet the hiring bar, what does that tell us about the bar?
  - rlanday 9y ago
    Did I say that? No interview process is perfect, but here's what would happen if e.g. Google attempted to use your strategy of "make the interviews easier and pay people less": Many candidates would interview at both Google and Facebook (as well as other companies). The smartest, hardest-working candidates are all able to figure out how to game the interview process and get really good at solving algorithms problems on a whiteboard. Many of them get offers from both Facebook and Google. They all choose to work at Facebook because Google's only offering half as much money. The candidates who are less smart and/or too lazy to study for their interviews get rejected from Facebook, but get an offer from Google since Google's decided that interviews are stupid anyway. They all take the Google offer since they got rejected from Facebook. Now Google ends up with a pool of employees selected on the basis of being not smart enough and/or too lazy to get a job at Facebook. Do you see the problem here?
    - hennsen 9y ago
      Haha. You question that you said „It’s not that “no one else” could do their job, but there’s not an unlimited supply of people who can meet the hiring bar“ Or what? I didn’t propose a concrete strategy. I just doubt the things have to be as they are and pose a lot of questions why they are as they are. Then you build exactly one fictional scenario that would make things maybe(not necessarily - there are options... maybe there is a number of smart people who don’t want to learn for artificial interview scenarios, maybe they don’t have some university degree) go bad for one employer and imply the conclusion everything has to be and stay as it is. Do you see the problem here?
      - rlanday 9y ago
        I don't understand your point of view. You work in tech, right? Do you want tech companies to pay their employees less?
        hennsen 9y ago
        We talk about the question if managers have to be that expensive. And I’m open to a yes if there are valid points and my questions about it answered. We don’t talk about what I want to get paid. You’re steering away from the topic, right after questioning something that you said just exactly as cited, and dont answer straight questions. Do you wanna take part in a discussion or just confuse abd avoid it?

It’s not that “no one else” could do their job, but there’s not an unlimited supply of people who can meet the hiring bar at Google/Facebook/Microsoft, and there are a number of employers with deep pockets trying to hire them. Google in particular is known to offer people with competing offers a lot of money to keep them from going to other companies.

hennsen 9y ago
If there are other people who are able to do the job, but not meet the hiring bar, what does that tell us about the bar?
- rlanday 9y ago
  Did I say that? No interview process is perfect, but here's what would happen if e.g. Google attempted to use your strategy of "make the interviews easier and pay people less": Many candidates would interview at both Google and Facebook (as well as other companies). The smartest, hardest-working candidates are all able to figure out how to game the interview process and get really good at solving algorithms problems on a whiteboard. Many of them get offers from both Facebook and Google. They all choose to work at Facebook because Google's only offering half as much money. The candidates who are less smart and/or too lazy to study for their interviews get rejected from Facebook, but get an offer from Google since Google's decided that interviews are stupid anyway. They all take the Google offer since they got rejected from Facebook. Now Google ends up with a pool of employees selected on the basis of being not smart enough and/or too lazy to get a job at Facebook. Do you see the problem here?
  - hennsen 9y ago
    Haha. You question that you said „It’s not that “no one else” could do their job, but there’s not an unlimited supply of people who can meet the hiring bar“ Or what? I didn’t propose a concrete strategy. I just doubt the things have to be as they are and pose a lot of questions why they are as they are. Then you build exactly one fictional scenario that would make things maybe(not necessarily - there are options... maybe there is a number of smart people who don’t want to learn for artificial interview scenarios, maybe they don’t have some university degree) go bad for one employer and imply the conclusion everything has to be and stay as it is. Do you see the problem here?
    - rlanday 9y ago
      I don't understand your point of view. You work in tech, right? Do you want tech companies to pay their employees less?
      - hennsen 9y ago
        We talk about the question if managers have to be that expensive. And I’m open to a yes if there are valid points and my questions about it answered. We don’t talk about what I want to get paid. You’re steering away from the topic, right after questioning something that you said just exactly as cited, and dont answer straight questions. Do you wanna take part in a discussion or just confuse abd avoid it?