3 ms·

I am fairly certain it wasn't the recruiter who put in the experience requirement. My dis-interest wasn't due to the recruiter but to do with whichever manager

by jarym 6y ago

I am fairly certain it wasn't the recruiter who put in the experience requirement. My dis-interest wasn't due to the recruiter but to do with whichever manager thought they needed needed more experience than the age of a product - either they are careless or don't care about a persons skillset. Could I have been wrong? Of course. All I said was I was dis-interested, I had better opportunities with people who I understood and who understood me.

vmception 6y ago
> I had better opportunities with people who I understood and who understood me. That's really lucky. There are a lot of people who don't value my skillset who I thought should, and it isn't clear if people reach out to me because they like something I brought to the world that has caught on now, or if it is a totally random recruitment bot sending transactional messages. All while the things I was working on over the last decade were not respected at the time I was working on them. For employment, seems better for me to use variations of my name and more generic experience. Otherwise people just seem to want to have me in the room but not really interested in hiring me, or like they expect a more mythical and profound experience.
koheripbal 6y ago
> I am fairly certain it wasn't the recruiter who put in the experience requirement. Really? Because I've seen them copy/paste job requirements and just spitball the "years exp" number. They're just trying to fill as many roles as possible, and getting IT folks to put together job requirements is time consuming, so they often re-use old requirement and only update the language/tech on it.
swiftcoder 6y ago
> I am fairly certain it wasn't the recruiter who put in the experience requirement. I've seen multiple job postings for my teams where somewhere in the HR->recruiting pipeline the (correct) job requirements were replaced with "standard" requirements.

by jarym 6y ago

vmception 6y ago

> I had better opportunities with people who I understood and who understood me. That's really lucky. There are a lot of people who don't value my skillset who I thought should, and it isn't clear if people reach out to me because they like something I brought to the world that has caught on now, or if it is a totally random recruitment bot sending transactional messages. All while the things I was working on over the last decade were not respected at the time I was working on them. For employment, seems better for me to use variations of my name and more generic experience. Otherwise people just seem to want to have me in the room but not really interested in hiring me, or like they expect a more mythical and profound experience.

koheripbal 6y ago

> I am fairly certain it wasn't the recruiter who put in the experience requirement. Really? Because I've seen them copy/paste job requirements and just spitball the "years exp" number. They're just trying to fill as many roles as possible, and getting IT folks to put together job requirements is time consuming, so they often re-use old requirement and only update the language/tech on it.

swiftcoder 6y ago

> I am fairly certain it wasn't the recruiter who put in the experience requirement. I've seen multiple job postings for my teams where somewhere in the HR->recruiting pipeline the (correct) job requirements were replaced with "standard" requirements.