4 ms·

I am very constrained in terms of compensation. I work for a large company and the salary bands are defined by the HR, so we don’t much “wiggle room.” I persona

I am very constrained in terms of compensation. I work for a large company and the salary bands are defined by the HR, so we don’t much “wiggle room.” I personally don’t have any issue with hiring folks who are overqualified. But when I say overqualified I mean I’m seeing guys with phd in computer science and guys with experience leading large engineering teams that apply for jr roles. These people deserve much more compensation than HR will let us give them. And most of the time comp isn’t given on the job posts (I’m trying to change that) so they don’t find out until they go to the first screen.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
amitport 6y ago
You have two signals: - The applicant has relevant experience - He/She is interested in moving forward (they did apply for this job, and not some other higher-paying job) The rest is just human bias and lazy HR.
- theshadowknows 6y ago
  Oh I agree 100% on the lazy HR point. My leadership and I battle with HR constantly on this. And again personally I don't even put much stock in resumes - especially when they come from a recruiter because the recruiter will beef up the resume so much. But the reality is that when you hire someone who's got a lot of specialist knowledge that more often than not they are just filling a gap until something better comes along. I don't expect my hires to be devoted to my enterprise for life, but I need to know upfront that they'll stick around long enough to justify the hire. And when you've got a guy that did 3 years at Google trying to get a job as an email developer...well...that guy may want to break into the email game but most likely he's just waiting until bigger fish come along.
  - amitport 6y ago
    That is the bias I'm talking about. No, the guy who did 3 years at Google is not more likely to be less committed to this position that he applied to. You don't know anything about him or his circumstances. You assume. I'm not against taking a statistically-based decision, but you don't even have the statistics. Juniors often enough job-hop while the guy with experience may actually know what he is getting into and have a reason to do so (I also don't have the statistics, and that's why I won't filter fresh grads...).
  - cableshaft 6y ago
    I've kind of been pushed to specialize in Telecommunications at my current job, but I really don't enjoy it much. I'm hoping I can get a job doing something unrelated with my next position. Those people could be in that situation as well. Although I probably wouldn't apply for a junior position. I'd at least apply for a senior role.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

amitport 6y ago

You have two signals: - The applicant has relevant experience - He/She is interested in moving forward (they did apply for this job, and not some other higher-paying job) The rest is just human bias and lazy HR.

theshadowknows 6y ago
Oh I agree 100% on the lazy HR point. My leadership and I battle with HR constantly on this. And again personally I don't even put much stock in resumes - especially when they come from a recruiter because the recruiter will beef up the resume so much. But the reality is that when you hire someone who's got a lot of specialist knowledge that more often than not they are just filling a gap until something better comes along. I don't expect my hires to be devoted to my enterprise for life, but I need to know upfront that they'll stick around long enough to justify the hire. And when you've got a guy that did 3 years at Google trying to get a job as an email developer...well...that guy may want to break into the email game but most likely he's just waiting until bigger fish come along.
- amitport 6y ago
  That is the bias I'm talking about. No, the guy who did 3 years at Google is not more likely to be less committed to this position that he applied to. You don't know anything about him or his circumstances. You assume. I'm not against taking a statistically-based decision, but you don't even have the statistics. Juniors often enough job-hop while the guy with experience may actually know what he is getting into and have a reason to do so (I also don't have the statistics, and that's why I won't filter fresh grads...).
- cableshaft 6y ago
  I've kind of been pushed to specialize in Telecommunications at my current job, but I really don't enjoy it much. I'm hoping I can get a job doing something unrelated with my next position. Those people could be in that situation as well. Although I probably wouldn't apply for a junior position. I'd at least apply for a senior role.