5 ms·

Standard practice at my company: interviewees pair with a developer for a week before being offered a job. Preferably, over the week, you'd switch pairs at leas

Standard practice at my company: interviewees pair with a developer for a week before being offered a job. Preferably, over the week, you'd switch pairs at least once or twice. If we don't hire you, we pay you as a contractor for your time. If we do hire you, we pay you either as an employee or contractor for your time (depending on what our accountant says). We'll bend the rules depending on circumstances, but basically you're not getting in unless you spend 30 hours pairing with our devs. Anything else, I propose, can be hazardous to the culture and effectiveness of your company.

deleted 16y ago
[deleted]
imack 16y ago
Doesn't that limit you to potential employees who aren't currently employed? And what percentage of people do you "drop"? I imagine once you spend a week with someone you might get attached to them enough that it would be hard to let them go for something subjective unless they were a pretty big asshole.
- listrophy 16y ago
  We're pretty young, so we haven't had too many candidates get to the interview phase... we've "dropped" one out of 5 candidates. You have to impress us to get to the point of spending a week with us. As far as the "unemployed" part goes, things aren't usually as cut-and-dried as that. Of those five, one was on the verge of being laid off, and one was a student. The other three were gainfully employed. Being open to working weekends with candidates makes this much more possible, though more lengthy. We're pretty proud of who we are. If your desire to work with us is strong enough, you'll find a way. And if you do find a way under difficult circumstances, it says volumes about your personal drive.
  - tomjen3 16y ago
    The problem with your approach is that it only works if you can communicate that you are a company worth doing a lot extra work to get hired at. The approach may work for you, but most companies seem to have the idea that they are special, when they really aren't - and frankly most people wouldn't accept your requirements unless they where truly desperate so you will likely have to change your approach as you grow.
    - khafra 16y ago
      Speaking as an employee of $bigcorp, I like the idea of a short period of fairly-compensated work before committing for the long-term. Like going on a vacation with a romantic interest before moving in together, or something. If you go to work for the USG, your probationary period is the first year, which seems unnecessarily long; a week seems just right.
      - jeffreymcmanus 16y ago
        The notion of a probationary period is largely mythological for places where employment is at-will (which is most jobs in technology in the U.S.). Since at-will employment means you can mostly be terminated for any reason at any time, every day you go to work is really part of your probationary period. There's no concept of a "long-term commitment" and your status as an employee doesn't materially change after whatever "probationary period" the employer might extend to you.
- dgouldin 16y ago
  Doesn't that limit you to potential employees who aren't currently employed? Hiring should be at least as important to the team as to any manager. (After all, they're the ones who have to "live with" the new hire.) I can see this working if the team is flexible enough to accomodate the potential employee's current work schedule, assuming the potential is also flexible enough to take on the extra load for a bit.
bartonfink 16y ago
Interesting, and I'm not saying this doesn't work, but doesn't that basically imply you only hire those who are already unemployed?
- Mc_Big_G 16y ago
  Employed people would probably take a week of vacation unless they have FU money.
  - ktsmith 16y ago
    It'd have to be a dream job for me to take a week of vacation time to do a trial run with another company but then I'm married and have a kid so time off is very important to me. The other issue for the employed in that scenario is that their employment contracts may prohibit moonlighting/contracting or have a non compete that would interfere with the trail/interview process.
ktsmith 16y ago
> If we don't hire you, we pay you as a contractor for your time. If we do hire you, we pay you either as an employee or contractor for your time (depending on what our accountant says). If you are in the U.S. I hope you've had this hiring process reviewed by your legal counsel. Given the brief description above you are quite possibly violating several federal employment laws in addition to IRS rules on what constitutes a contractor vs an employee.
- listrophy 16y ago
  Unless you're a lawyer providing counsel, I'm quite certain we're solid. That's not to say I'm right... I'm just fairly confident. We send out the necessary W-9s and everything. Effectively, our candidates are freelancers until we hire them... and we pay our freelancers according to IRS rules.
  - ktsmith 16y ago
    I said up front that I hoped you've reviewed your hiring process with your legal counsel. That should have been pretty clear to you that I'm not providing you any legal advice. I also noted that I was commenting on your brief description of the process. You now update to say you pay your "freelancers" however in your first post you say you take your accountants advice on paying as an employee or a contractor. Those are two extremely different things and back dating employment (via pay as an employee during the trial period) would have the end result of your company incurring liability for failing to complete employment paperwork in a timely manner among other things. You could also open yourself to liability for discrimination and other issues if you tried to pay someone as an employee, started the hiring paperwork and then found out the individual did not have valid work authorization. Just to say it one more time so there's no confusion. This is not legal advice. Anyone considering anything in the content of this message or implementing the parent posters hiring process should speak to legal counsel before doing so.
  - listrophy 16y ago
    @ktsmith: I wasn't trying to imply that you were providing legal counsel. In addition, we don't change our policy on the whim of our accountant/lawyer... I just don't recall the proper protocol. With a moment of clarity, I do recall our employees having to go through the W-9 process. In addition, not all work was "under the company umbrella." For example, if a candidate paired with an employee during a users group hack night, that was taken into consideration. Like I said, rules are made to be bent.

deleted 16y ago

[deleted]

imack 16y ago

Doesn't that limit you to potential employees who aren't currently employed? And what percentage of people do you "drop"? I imagine once you spend a week with someone you might get attached to them enough that it would be hard to let them go for something subjective unless they were a pretty big asshole.

listrophy 16y ago
We're pretty young, so we haven't had too many candidates get to the interview phase... we've "dropped" one out of 5 candidates. You have to impress us to get to the point of spending a week with us. As far as the "unemployed" part goes, things aren't usually as cut-and-dried as that. Of those five, one was on the verge of being laid off, and one was a student. The other three were gainfully employed. Being open to working weekends with candidates makes this much more possible, though more lengthy. We're pretty proud of who we are. If your desire to work with us is strong enough, you'll find a way. And if you do find a way under difficult circumstances, it says volumes about your personal drive.
- tomjen3 16y ago
  The problem with your approach is that it only works if you can communicate that you are a company worth doing a lot extra work to get hired at. The approach may work for you, but most companies seem to have the idea that they are special, when they really aren't - and frankly most people wouldn't accept your requirements unless they where truly desperate so you will likely have to change your approach as you grow.
  - khafra 16y ago
    Speaking as an employee of $bigcorp, I like the idea of a short period of fairly-compensated work before committing for the long-term. Like going on a vacation with a romantic interest before moving in together, or something. If you go to work for the USG, your probationary period is the first year, which seems unnecessarily long; a week seems just right.
    - jeffreymcmanus 16y ago
      The notion of a probationary period is largely mythological for places where employment is at-will (which is most jobs in technology in the U.S.). Since at-will employment means you can mostly be terminated for any reason at any time, every day you go to work is really part of your probationary period. There's no concept of a "long-term commitment" and your status as an employee doesn't materially change after whatever "probationary period" the employer might extend to you.
dgouldin 16y ago
Doesn't that limit you to potential employees who aren't currently employed? Hiring should be at least as important to the team as to any manager. (After all, they're the ones who have to "live with" the new hire.) I can see this working if the team is flexible enough to accomodate the potential employee's current work schedule, assuming the potential is also flexible enough to take on the extra load for a bit.

bartonfink 16y ago

Interesting, and I'm not saying this doesn't work, but doesn't that basically imply you only hire those who are already unemployed?

Mc_Big_G 16y ago
Employed people would probably take a week of vacation unless they have FU money.
- ktsmith 16y ago
  It'd have to be a dream job for me to take a week of vacation time to do a trial run with another company but then I'm married and have a kid so time off is very important to me. The other issue for the employed in that scenario is that their employment contracts may prohibit moonlighting/contracting or have a non compete that would interfere with the trail/interview process.

ktsmith 16y ago

> If we don't hire you, we pay you as a contractor for your time. If we do hire you, we pay you either as an employee or contractor for your time (depending on what our accountant says). If you are in the U.S. I hope you've had this hiring process reviewed by your legal counsel. Given the brief description above you are quite possibly violating several federal employment laws in addition to IRS rules on what constitutes a contractor vs an employee.

listrophy 16y ago
Unless you're a lawyer providing counsel, I'm quite certain we're solid. That's not to say I'm right... I'm just fairly confident. We send out the necessary W-9s and everything. Effectively, our candidates are freelancers until we hire them... and we pay our freelancers according to IRS rules.
- ktsmith 16y ago
  I said up front that I hoped you've reviewed your hiring process with your legal counsel. That should have been pretty clear to you that I'm not providing you any legal advice. I also noted that I was commenting on your brief description of the process. You now update to say you pay your "freelancers" however in your first post you say you take your accountants advice on paying as an employee or a contractor. Those are two extremely different things and back dating employment (via pay as an employee during the trial period) would have the end result of your company incurring liability for failing to complete employment paperwork in a timely manner among other things. You could also open yourself to liability for discrimination and other issues if you tried to pay someone as an employee, started the hiring paperwork and then found out the individual did not have valid work authorization. Just to say it one more time so there's no confusion. This is not legal advice. Anyone considering anything in the content of this message or implementing the parent posters hiring process should speak to legal counsel before doing so.
- listrophy 16y ago
  @ktsmith: I wasn't trying to imply that you were providing legal counsel. In addition, we don't change our policy on the whim of our accountant/lawyer... I just don't recall the proper protocol. With a moment of clarity, I do recall our employees having to go through the W-9 process. In addition, not all work was "under the company umbrella." For example, if a candidate paired with an employee during a users group hack night, that was taken into consideration. Like I said, rules are made to be bent.