3 ms·

> IMO bite the bullet, over hire and then collect the cream based on evaluation That sounds at the least unethical and perhaps illegal in some countries. You'r

> IMO bite the bullet, over hire and then collect the cream based on evaluation That sounds at the least unethical and perhaps illegal in some countries. You're messing with people's lives, their ability to pay their mortgages, support their children, and other commitments they might have. While hiring mistakes sometimes happen, you should not be using firing as a tool to make your hiring more cost effective. And I also think word would get around pretty quickly not to apply to companies who did this. Per the article we are already making lists of who uses ineffective whiteboard tests. I very much doubt any company wants to be on the list of "hires you and then fires you instead of doing effective interviews".

usgroup 6y ago
Applicants should know what the process is; I'm not sure why you'd assume that would be kept from them? It's perfectly normal for hiring / firing sales, traders, and other performance oriented professions. Nothing forces people to apply ... mortgages, children etc. It really depends on whether as an employee you want a meritocracy or an easy time. Personally, I wouldn't be adverse to this sort of practice; and companies like Valve do something significantly more extreme.
- tchaffee 6y ago
  > I'm not sure why you'd assume that would be kept from them? Where did I assume that? > nothing forces people to apply Agreed. I already predicted that the reputation gained from this practice would have talented developers avoiding a company involved in such a shady way of hiring. I'm damn good at what I do and "we will fire the ones who don't work out to avoid doing interviews" is a huge red flag for me. You lose, not me. Companies are competing for developers; experienced developers don't need your company. > it really depends on whether as an employee you want a meritocracy A meritocracy is great. Your company just lost at it. There are far better companies I could work for where the interviewing process isn't based on laziness now and fire people later. Want to win in the meritocracy competition between companies? Learn how to interview. I know how. That's why I can hire great devs. Haven't had to fire anyone ever in my career. So that's who you are competing with in this meritocracy. Companies who get the hiring process right.

usgroup 6y ago

Applicants should know what the process is; I'm not sure why you'd assume that would be kept from them? It's perfectly normal for hiring / firing sales, traders, and other performance oriented professions. Nothing forces people to apply ... mortgages, children etc. It really depends on whether as an employee you want a meritocracy or an easy time. Personally, I wouldn't be adverse to this sort of practice; and companies like Valve do something significantly more extreme.

tchaffee 6y ago
> I'm not sure why you'd assume that would be kept from them? Where did I assume that? > nothing forces people to apply Agreed. I already predicted that the reputation gained from this practice would have talented developers avoiding a company involved in such a shady way of hiring. I'm damn good at what I do and "we will fire the ones who don't work out to avoid doing interviews" is a huge red flag for me. You lose, not me. Companies are competing for developers; experienced developers don't need your company. > it really depends on whether as an employee you want a meritocracy A meritocracy is great. Your company just lost at it. There are far better companies I could work for where the interviewing process isn't based on laziness now and fire people later. Want to win in the meritocracy competition between companies? Learn how to interview. I know how. That's why I can hire great devs. Haven't had to fire anyone ever in my career. So that's who you are competing with in this meritocracy. Companies who get the hiring process right.