9 ms·

The only thing silly about the bookkeeping example is that people who enjoy bookkeeping are rare, and a manager with that policy would have trouble finding anyo

The only thing silly about the bookkeeping example is that people who enjoy bookkeeping are rare, and a manager with that policy would have trouble finding anyone for the job. If I were hiring a bookkeeper, and I actually did find someone who enjoys bookkeeping in their free time (say, for a local chess club or a non-profit charity) I would consider that a plus. If nine out of ten resumes came from people who do free-time bookkeeping, I would be inclined to hire one of them over the one-in-ten minority that doesn't. If this is illegal, the law is wrong.

jacquesm 16y ago
As an employer you pay your employees for their time. What they do outside of that time is completely up to them and literally no business of the employer. So whether someone goes skydiving in their spare time or collects stamps or works on their hobby projects in the same field as their profession should have no bearing on their employment, or on their hiring. The law is in my opinion totally just and I'm saying that as a former employer.
- detst 16y ago
  > What they do outside of that time is completely up to them I completely agree but I think the argument is that, all things being equal, someone that will do things related to their job in their free time will be better at the job and more likely to get better and better. I can certainly see why someone would want to use it as a hiring factor but, like you said, once employed, it's none of their business.
- lsc 16y ago
  as far as I know, not only am I allowed to discriminate based on experience, it's common practice. If I've got two people of the same age, one who has been programming only at work, and didn't start until college, vs. another person, who started (hobby) programming at 15, and does open-source projects on the weekend, well, the second person clearly has a whole lot more experience. As an employer, the bonus is that usually salary is based on /paid/ experience... so even though the two people in the example above have a /huge/ difference in actual time spent programming, as an employer, their starting wage is going to be pretty similar. So, twice as much experience, for the same money? hell yes I'll choose the hobbyist. and as far as I can tell, there is no law against that. (though, I'm on pretty shaky ground if I require extra work after I hire you. See the semi-annual Electronic Arts lawsuits.)
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    > I'm on pretty shaky ground if I require extra work after I hire you. That was the exact question the OP posted, the title is 'No, I Wouldn't Hire a Programmer That Has No Interest in Programming Outside of Business Hours', and framed like that it is illegal. The way you frame it it is legal, relevant work experience, whether gathered inside or outside of work time before the employment commences is a good thing to pick up on that passion. But given two applicants, one that has 20 years of experience during work time and none that he cares to report about during the interview outside of work time and one that has 10, 5 years working in his spare time and 5 years during employment which one would you pick ? The latter has 'passion' according to the OP, the former is a clockwatcher.
    - lsc 16y ago
      >But given two applicants, one that has 20 years of experience during work time and none that he cares to report about during the interview outside of work time and one that has 10, 5 years working in his spare time and 5 years during employment which one would you pick ? The one that has completed projects on his own. If neither one of them could demonstrate such a thing, the one that seemed more intelligent. Also, the difference between 10 years and 20 years of experience, I think, is less than the difference between, say, 5 years and 10 years... I think the wage curve would imply most people agree with me here. In the case of someone with 2.5 years of personal experience and 2.5 years of professional experience, vs. 5 years of professional experience, if all else were equal (which is to say, either neither has completed a project they can show me, or they both have, and they seem about as smart, and they are willing to work for the same wage) it's pretty much a toss-up in my mind. If the guy with 5 years work seems more professional, I might go with him, just 'cause I lack professionalism, and it can be really useful sometimes. But, the thing is, it's usually not equal. the guy with 2.5 years paid experience and 2.5 years hobby experience, in my experience, is likely to work for only slightly more than someone with only 2.5 years of professional experience. So, given the choice between hiring the person with 5 years paid experience at market rate for a person with 5 years paid experience, and the person with 2.5 years paid experience and 2.5 years hobby experience at the market rate for someone with 2.5 years of experience, I'll easily take the latter. (at least in my experience, pay goes up /fast/ in the early parts of your career.)
- yummyfajitas 16y ago
  I don't think you are correct in the US. In the US, you can make hiring decisions based on more or less anything you like except for race/sex/religion/national origin/military veteran [1]. So if I want to hire MMA fighters for a programming job (or give them bonus points, at least), I can do so. If someone doesn't want to hire me because I'm a former academic or because I stickfight, they also can. [1] You can also get into trouble if systematic hiring criteria have a "disparate impact" on a protected class. I.e., if you hire based on an intelligence test, and a non-asian minority group or sexual majority group statistically does less well on the test, you can also be sued.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
  - jacquesm 16y ago
    > So if I want to hire MMA fighters for a programming job (or give them bonus points, at least), I can do so. You'd be implicitly selecting against gender, which is illegal. There are girls active in MMA but it's not like it's 50/50.
    - paulgb 16y ago
      You're also implicitly selecting against gender when you require a CS degree, and that certainly isn't illegal.
      - jacquesm 16y ago
        It isn't illegal because it directly relates to the job. MMA does not when you hire a developer so in that case it would be illegal. And woe to you if you do not hire a female programmer that thinks she's more qualified for the job you posted than the guy you ended up hiring, especially if at first glance they're both equally qualified and the rest of your team is guys.
    - yummyfajitas 16y ago
      You could be right about that specific example - disparate impact is a minefield. But it isn't the non-job relatedness of MMA that's the problem, it's the fact that the criteria harms a politically favored group.

jacquesm 16y ago

As an employer you pay your employees for their time. What they do outside of that time is completely up to them and literally no business of the employer. So whether someone goes skydiving in their spare time or collects stamps or works on their hobby projects in the same field as their profession should have no bearing on their employment, or on their hiring. The law is in my opinion totally just and I'm saying that as a former employer.

detst 16y ago
> What they do outside of that time is completely up to them I completely agree but I think the argument is that, all things being equal, someone that will do things related to their job in their free time will be better at the job and more likely to get better and better. I can certainly see why someone would want to use it as a hiring factor but, like you said, once employed, it's none of their business.
lsc 16y ago
as far as I know, not only am I allowed to discriminate based on experience, it's common practice. If I've got two people of the same age, one who has been programming only at work, and didn't start until college, vs. another person, who started (hobby) programming at 15, and does open-source projects on the weekend, well, the second person clearly has a whole lot more experience. As an employer, the bonus is that usually salary is based on /paid/ experience... so even though the two people in the example above have a /huge/ difference in actual time spent programming, as an employer, their starting wage is going to be pretty similar. So, twice as much experience, for the same money? hell yes I'll choose the hobbyist. and as far as I can tell, there is no law against that. (though, I'm on pretty shaky ground if I require extra work after I hire you. See the semi-annual Electronic Arts lawsuits.)
- jacquesm 16y ago
  > I'm on pretty shaky ground if I require extra work after I hire you. That was the exact question the OP posted, the title is 'No, I Wouldn't Hire a Programmer That Has No Interest in Programming Outside of Business Hours', and framed like that it is illegal. The way you frame it it is legal, relevant work experience, whether gathered inside or outside of work time before the employment commences is a good thing to pick up on that passion. But given two applicants, one that has 20 years of experience during work time and none that he cares to report about during the interview outside of work time and one that has 10, 5 years working in his spare time and 5 years during employment which one would you pick ? The latter has 'passion' according to the OP, the former is a clockwatcher.
  - lsc 16y ago
    >But given two applicants, one that has 20 years of experience during work time and none that he cares to report about during the interview outside of work time and one that has 10, 5 years working in his spare time and 5 years during employment which one would you pick ? The one that has completed projects on his own. If neither one of them could demonstrate such a thing, the one that seemed more intelligent. Also, the difference between 10 years and 20 years of experience, I think, is less than the difference between, say, 5 years and 10 years... I think the wage curve would imply most people agree with me here. In the case of someone with 2.5 years of personal experience and 2.5 years of professional experience, vs. 5 years of professional experience, if all else were equal (which is to say, either neither has completed a project they can show me, or they both have, and they seem about as smart, and they are willing to work for the same wage) it's pretty much a toss-up in my mind. If the guy with 5 years work seems more professional, I might go with him, just 'cause I lack professionalism, and it can be really useful sometimes. But, the thing is, it's usually not equal. the guy with 2.5 years paid experience and 2.5 years hobby experience, in my experience, is likely to work for only slightly more than someone with only 2.5 years of professional experience. So, given the choice between hiring the person with 5 years paid experience at market rate for a person with 5 years paid experience, and the person with 2.5 years paid experience and 2.5 years hobby experience at the market rate for someone with 2.5 years of experience, I'll easily take the latter. (at least in my experience, pay goes up /fast/ in the early parts of your career.)
yummyfajitas 16y ago
I don't think you are correct in the US. In the US, you can make hiring decisions based on more or less anything you like except for race/sex/religion/national origin/military veteran [1]. So if I want to hire MMA fighters for a programming job (or give them bonus points, at least), I can do so. If someone doesn't want to hire me because I'm a former academic or because I stickfight, they also can. [1] You can also get into trouble if systematic hiring criteria have a "disparate impact" on a protected class. I.e., if you hire based on an intelligence test, and a non-asian minority group or sexual majority group statistically does less well on the test, you can also be sued.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
- jacquesm 16y ago
  > So if I want to hire MMA fighters for a programming job (or give them bonus points, at least), I can do so. You'd be implicitly selecting against gender, which is illegal. There are girls active in MMA but it's not like it's 50/50.
  - paulgb 16y ago
    You're also implicitly selecting against gender when you require a CS degree, and that certainly isn't illegal.
    - jacquesm 16y ago
      It isn't illegal because it directly relates to the job. MMA does not when you hire a developer so in that case it would be illegal. And woe to you if you do not hire a female programmer that thinks she's more qualified for the job you posted than the guy you ended up hiring, especially if at first glance they're both equally qualified and the rest of your team is guys.
  - yummyfajitas 16y ago
    You could be right about that specific example - disparate impact is a minefield. But it isn't the non-job relatedness of MMA that's the problem, it's the fact that the criteria harms a politically favored group.