10 ms·

> But New London police interviewed only candidates who scored 20 to 27, on the theory that those who scored too high could get bored with police work and leave

> But New London police interviewed only candidates who scored 20 to 27, on the theory that those who scored too high could get bored with police work and leave soon after undergoing costly training. It's easy to think this is some weird quirk of police recruiting, but the concept of "overqualified" candidates is common across many job roles. I've heard plenty of hiring managers talk about candidates that they've rejected because they thought they'd get bored quickly and move on. It sucks for people who have had an impressive career trajectory (or in this case high test scores) but want to shift gears a little to focus on other things like family, hobbies, or just want to avoid burnout. There's an implicit assumption on the part of these hiring managers that everyone should be working at 100% of their capacity, and that flexibility shouldn't be given to those who want a different balance in life.

JoeAltmaier 6y ago
Its also not even inefficient. Jet pilot courses reject people for arbitrary reasons. Because they have a limited number of jets, and a surfeit of applicants. At some point you 'weed out' even good applicants, if you have more than enough of them.
- epylar 6y ago
  Surely you could use a random number generator to do this?
  - pasquinelli 6y ago
    That would be nice, because it wouldn't leave rejected candidates thinking they did something wrong. The whims of a panel of interviewers isn't necessarily different from an rng anyway.
  - thatfunkymunki 6y ago
    I generally support this- as a FAANG employee I sometimes think an RNG would be a much better signal than a lot of our interview voodoo. At least then we wouldn't be hiring unlucky people!
dbspin 6y ago
The issue here is that the stated motivation, 'overqualification' is likely a justification to obscure the real motivation: ensuring obedience and conformity within the force, especially when it comes to the day to day reality of ignoring or colluding with corruption, participating in unnecessary and biased use of violence, and facilitating enforcement of systematic oppression (e.g.: destroying homeless encampments).
- onemoresoop 6y ago
  This is an excellent point. People with high IQ can become a liability as they understand better the situation and may refuse to obey orders that are counter to their values. Or they could raise in rank and interfere with how the whole force is being operated: they could change things from the inside
- tialaramex 6y ago
  If you want people to do what the rules say you're not looking for more or less intelligence, you're looking for Compliance. For example British mainline railways require Compliance as a (psychologically tested) trait of train drivers and the lack of such a requirement was cited as a contributing factor to a death on a light rail system in a report I read years ago. Why? Because Compliance says: This speed restriction says 45mph, I personally think 60mph should be safe but there's a speed restriction so I shall limit to 45mph even though I don't understand why. Whereas without that some drivers will say "In my judgement 60mph seems fine here so I'll disregard the 45mph limit" and when they kill somebody and investigators ask "Why were you going too fast to stop?" their answer is that they didn't realise that would happen. Compliance is probably a completely reasonable thing to want from regular cops, maybe even all your cops. On a TV show breaking the rules is often portrayed as admirable, but those rules are usually there for a good reason. In particular rule-obedience is very important for a community's perception of police as members of that community subject to its rules, rather than as oppressors.
  - kyshoc 6y ago
    OTOH, optimizing for a highly-compliant police force could set you up for trouble if they end up executing orders that a less compliant force would refuse to follow on moral grounds.
mcrad 6y ago
Writing qualified candidates off as "overqualified" is a form of corruption and is very common in tech. It's far easier to cover up with the boredom-mitigation argument, than to admit low IQ/experience is easier to "manage".
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  I don't think anyone is trying to cover that up. Many teams are responsible for boring and low-impact work, so they need to hire people who are easy to manage or the work won't get done.
  - throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
    What is that work? Why can't it be automated?
    - bargle0 6y ago
      Probably because it’s still cheaper to throw people at it.
    - anewdirection 6y ago
      Some things need a human touch. Interacting with other humans is one of those things. See any automated customer service bot ever to see how absolutely terrible an idea that would be.
    - adrianN 6y ago
      Good luck automating fixing bugs and implementing weird customer requests in an old legacy application.
    - joejerryronnie 6y ago
      Probably because these are not rote tasks being performed but rather new dev projects driven by new demands, priorities, and business requirements. You can’t automate that type of work.
miga 6y ago
I also came upon this form of corruption before. Often in situation when the boss is insecure. It also shows misunderstanding of boredom as a process that is not subjective, and does not depend on persons' personal interests.
brenden2 6y ago
I've been turned down on several occasions for being "overqualified" or "too experienced". While I don't know the real reasons, I think in most cases there was a) the concern (from the employer) that I'd be too expensive and b) an unwillingness on my part to put up with BS (which is true).
Abishek_Muthian 6y ago
True, I studied in a fairly reputed institution and the first company(famous IT services & consulting company) which comes to the placement hire in bulk, but the best among the lot get hired in 2-3 other companies and goes on to the one which pays the highest; So we were advised not to answer correctly for all questions in the placement test of this company as they filtered out over-performers. But guess what? Recession struck(2008) and they selected ~10% of they usually do & that too at random. Only couple of other companies came for placements that year & only few of them respected their offers. PSA: I assume this is going to repeat this year, so any student reading this shouldn't be choosy when it comes to placements, getting a job should be the utmost priority if you/family are dependent on it.
- dehrmann 6y ago
  > PSA: I assume this is going to repeat this year, so any student reading this shouldn't be choosy when it comes to placements, getting a job should be the utmost priority if you/family are dependent on it. You can even skip that last part. The first job really is the hardest, so if you find something that's in a location you want and there's a internal or external path to a role you'd rather have, that job's a winner. There's also a lot of value in trying different things in the space, even if you think something isn't for you.
deanCommie 6y ago
Police work: * Pays really well * Requires you to solve many complex ambiguous challenges * Requires careful nuanced interpretation of situation * Requires a high EQ to deal with the entire spectrum of citizens, de-escalate situations, and resolve disputes * Is civic service adding additional social-proof incentive And we haven't even gotten to actual detective work and the complexity of solving crimes. On paper, all of this should be CATNIP for a wide variety of high-IQ/EQ individuals to join, and raise the bar on the quality of the force. Yes, there is obviously a danger/risk element, and physical requirements, both which would lose some viable applicants. But by and large it SHOULD be a job that attracts interest from highly intelligent members of our society. It doesn't because of the system problems, because of the rotten nature of the system to its core. Because of the meathead and the existing low-IQ population dominating the forces. It can be fixed, but it's probably a generational project.
- jeffbee 6y ago
  I don't think it needs to take all that long. The Camden, NJ police were disbanded and reorganized less than a decade ago and are now recognized as a model force. All that's necessary is the political will to use the tactics that can destroy toxic police officers' unions: establish a new law enforcement bureau under all-new leadership and slowly reassign duties away from the old police force. There's no need for armed police to enforce parking meters and bus fares, so start there. Do not permit, as a rule, lateral transfers from the old police department to the new one. Make everyone come in through the front door like any candidate. Require public disclosure of disciplinary record as a condition of hiring. Require local residency for the first ten years of service. Have a written and enforced use-of-force policy. Don't patrol city centers in cars. These aren't deep mysteries; police reform advocates have written volumes on these topics for decades.
  - 8ytecoder 6y ago
    In my state in my home country, the police force is divided into traffic, patrol, crime, detective work and so on. Different roles require different qualifications and as such attract different people. Bribery is common. Detective work is the least lucrative and is a form of punishment for upstanding officers. The consequence of that is it’s the least corrupt of all the branches, it’s genuinely interesting work and the morale is high. Traffic is the most corrupt but it has the least consequence anyway.

JoeAltmaier 6y ago

Its also not even inefficient. Jet pilot courses reject people for arbitrary reasons. Because they have a limited number of jets, and a surfeit of applicants. At some point you 'weed out' even good applicants, if you have more than enough of them.

epylar 6y ago
Surely you could use a random number generator to do this?
- pasquinelli 6y ago
  That would be nice, because it wouldn't leave rejected candidates thinking they did something wrong. The whims of a panel of interviewers isn't necessarily different from an rng anyway.
- thatfunkymunki 6y ago
  I generally support this- as a FAANG employee I sometimes think an RNG would be a much better signal than a lot of our interview voodoo. At least then we wouldn't be hiring unlucky people!

dbspin 6y ago

The issue here is that the stated motivation, 'overqualification' is likely a justification to obscure the real motivation: ensuring obedience and conformity within the force, especially when it comes to the day to day reality of ignoring or colluding with corruption, participating in unnecessary and biased use of violence, and facilitating enforcement of systematic oppression (e.g.: destroying homeless encampments).

onemoresoop 6y ago
This is an excellent point. People with high IQ can become a liability as they understand better the situation and may refuse to obey orders that are counter to their values. Or they could raise in rank and interfere with how the whole force is being operated: they could change things from the inside
tialaramex 6y ago
If you want people to do what the rules say you're not looking for more or less intelligence, you're looking for Compliance. For example British mainline railways require Compliance as a (psychologically tested) trait of train drivers and the lack of such a requirement was cited as a contributing factor to a death on a light rail system in a report I read years ago. Why? Because Compliance says: This speed restriction says 45mph, I personally think 60mph should be safe but there's a speed restriction so I shall limit to 45mph even though I don't understand why. Whereas without that some drivers will say "In my judgement 60mph seems fine here so I'll disregard the 45mph limit" and when they kill somebody and investigators ask "Why were you going too fast to stop?" their answer is that they didn't realise that would happen. Compliance is probably a completely reasonable thing to want from regular cops, maybe even all your cops. On a TV show breaking the rules is often portrayed as admirable, but those rules are usually there for a good reason. In particular rule-obedience is very important for a community's perception of police as members of that community subject to its rules, rather than as oppressors.
- kyshoc 6y ago
  OTOH, optimizing for a highly-compliant police force could set you up for trouble if they end up executing orders that a less compliant force would refuse to follow on moral grounds.

mcrad 6y ago

Writing qualified candidates off as "overqualified" is a form of corruption and is very common in tech. It's far easier to cover up with the boredom-mitigation argument, than to admit low IQ/experience is easier to "manage".

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
I don't think anyone is trying to cover that up. Many teams are responsible for boring and low-impact work, so they need to hire people who are easy to manage or the work won't get done.
- throwaway_pdp09 6y ago
  What is that work? Why can't it be automated?
  - bargle0 6y ago
    Probably because it’s still cheaper to throw people at it.
  - anewdirection 6y ago
    Some things need a human touch. Interacting with other humans is one of those things. See any automated customer service bot ever to see how absolutely terrible an idea that would be.
  - adrianN 6y ago
    Good luck automating fixing bugs and implementing weird customer requests in an old legacy application.
  - joejerryronnie 6y ago
    Probably because these are not rote tasks being performed but rather new dev projects driven by new demands, priorities, and business requirements. You can’t automate that type of work.

miga 6y ago

I also came upon this form of corruption before. Often in situation when the boss is insecure. It also shows misunderstanding of boredom as a process that is not subjective, and does not depend on persons' personal interests.

brenden2 6y ago

I've been turned down on several occasions for being "overqualified" or "too experienced". While I don't know the real reasons, I think in most cases there was a) the concern (from the employer) that I'd be too expensive and b) an unwillingness on my part to put up with BS (which is true).

Abishek_Muthian 6y ago

True, I studied in a fairly reputed institution and the first company(famous IT services & consulting company) which comes to the placement hire in bulk, but the best among the lot get hired in 2-3 other companies and goes on to the one which pays the highest; So we were advised not to answer correctly for all questions in the placement test of this company as they filtered out over-performers. But guess what? Recession struck(2008) and they selected ~10% of they usually do & that too at random. Only couple of other companies came for placements that year & only few of them respected their offers. PSA: I assume this is going to repeat this year, so any student reading this shouldn't be choosy when it comes to placements, getting a job should be the utmost priority if you/family are dependent on it.

dehrmann 6y ago
> PSA: I assume this is going to repeat this year, so any student reading this shouldn't be choosy when it comes to placements, getting a job should be the utmost priority if you/family are dependent on it. You can even skip that last part. The first job really is the hardest, so if you find something that's in a location you want and there's a internal or external path to a role you'd rather have, that job's a winner. There's also a lot of value in trying different things in the space, even if you think something isn't for you.

deanCommie 6y ago

Police work: * Pays really well * Requires you to solve many complex ambiguous challenges * Requires careful nuanced interpretation of situation * Requires a high EQ to deal with the entire spectrum of citizens, de-escalate situations, and resolve disputes * Is civic service adding additional social-proof incentive And we haven't even gotten to actual detective work and the complexity of solving crimes. On paper, all of this should be CATNIP for a wide variety of high-IQ/EQ individuals to join, and raise the bar on the quality of the force. Yes, there is obviously a danger/risk element, and physical requirements, both which would lose some viable applicants. But by and large it SHOULD be a job that attracts interest from highly intelligent members of our society. It doesn't because of the system problems, because of the rotten nature of the system to its core. Because of the meathead and the existing low-IQ population dominating the forces. It can be fixed, but it's probably a generational project.

jeffbee 6y ago
I don't think it needs to take all that long. The Camden, NJ police were disbanded and reorganized less than a decade ago and are now recognized as a model force. All that's necessary is the political will to use the tactics that can destroy toxic police officers' unions: establish a new law enforcement bureau under all-new leadership and slowly reassign duties away from the old police force. There's no need for armed police to enforce parking meters and bus fares, so start there. Do not permit, as a rule, lateral transfers from the old police department to the new one. Make everyone come in through the front door like any candidate. Require public disclosure of disciplinary record as a condition of hiring. Require local residency for the first ten years of service. Have a written and enforced use-of-force policy. Don't patrol city centers in cars. These aren't deep mysteries; police reform advocates have written volumes on these topics for decades.
- 8ytecoder 6y ago
  In my state in my home country, the police force is divided into traffic, patrol, crime, detective work and so on. Different roles require different qualifications and as such attract different people. Bribery is common. Detective work is the least lucrative and is a form of punishment for upstanding officers. The consequence of that is it’s the least corrupt of all the branches, it’s genuinely interesting work and the morale is high. Traffic is the most corrupt but it has the least consequence anyway.