7 ms·

Yep, for my first programming job out of college a recruiter arranged an onsite interview for a Java role, when I was under every impression it was for Ruby/Rai

Yep, for my first programming job out of college a recruiter arranged an onsite interview for a Java role, when I was under every impression it was for Ruby/Rails. I don't know Java. The first interviewer laughed and walked out. I explained things to the recruiter, he cursed, said he would "visit the Ruby team upstairs". He actually managed to setup an impromptu on-site interview with the Ruby team on that same day. I got the job.

goodlinks 6y ago
This makes me chuckle, and its a nice story cos you got a job :).. All the controls in the world mean bugger all when ultimately the deciding factor is a human. No one ever wants to admit that the world runs on trust and respect :).
dempseye 6y ago
The recruiter did good work here. I suspect this was a screw up in internal HR. The external recruiter has absolutely no incentive to send you for an interview you will bomb out of.
- viraptor 6y ago
  I'm not sure. Recruiters can spray and pray with candidates the way candidates can spray and pray with applications. They're not going to be great quality, but if you're paid commission on a hire and the recruitment channel can handle the load... what's to stop the recruiter?
  - pc86 6y ago
    Aside from it destroying future business (we've had recruiters change candidates' resumes on us and that recruiter is blacklisted - by name - forever, to anyone who will listen), most contracts will have a 30-day clause where if the employee leaves for any reason within 30 days the fee is returned. Some even have if employee is fired within 30 days that the next placement fee is discounted.
    - thrwyoilarticle 6y ago
      When I connect with recruiters on Linkedin, I often notice they've spent a short time at their current position. Their tactics might not be sustainable. That said, it's a bit absurd there aren't separate classes of users on Linkedin. Do I need to know a recruiter's work history?
  - notahacker 6y ago
    Spray and pay works for sending people a little underqualified for a job. Sending people who don't know why they've been put forward for a job under false pretences just means the client won't interview any more candidates you send, especially if that candidate is plenty employable enough not to bother bluffing their way through. And unlike candidates, recruiters can potentially get paid to fill a lot of a company's vacancies, provided they don't get blacklisted by them...
    - sitkack 6y ago
      The good recruiter matches the right candidate to the right company. The dysfunction is a property of the system and is borne by everyone.
    - wott 6y ago
      > Sending people who don't know why they've been put forward for a job under false pretences [...] Isn't this called 'consulting'?
  - jschwartzi 6y ago
    And that's probably how I got an interview with AWS once upon a time.
- eternalban 6y ago
  Nonsense told to me repeatedly by recruiters over the years: - (your point) no incentive to send you for an interview if not a good fit. - "I make more money if you make your money" often said to spin the "what is your salary requirement" question Most recruiters work for an agency. Agencies have accounts with businesses. The account is central. You are in no position whatsoever to make determination as to what incentives drive the recruiter's business. Recruiters also routinely b.s. young developers by "I get more if you get more money" when pressuring them into agreeing to a "salary expectation" right at the beginning of the employment negotiation.
  - indeed30 6y ago
    Yes, recruiters have accounts with companies, but in my experience the recruitment fee is a percentage of salary, and the individual recruiter compensation is on a commission model. In short, I personally have no problems in believing that the higher the salary, the higher the payment to both the recruitment company and individual recruiter. However, I think we all know that closing the deal is far more important to the recruiter than negotiating small changes to the salary, so your point stands.
    - buu700 6y ago
      I haven't worked with a recruiter, so this is pure speculation, but it seems to me that a recruiter's greatest incentive would be to close any deal at all as quickly as possible, because they're competing against the alternative of you finding a position on your own first (or otherwise no longer requiring their services). Getting you a high salary is just gravy.
      - kamarg 6y ago
        > they're competing against the alternative of you finding a position on your own first (or otherwise no longer requiring their services) Almost every recruiter will constantly ask you if you're interviewing anywhere else or working with any other recruiters. They do this so they can be sure nobody else has the right to represent you to a client but also to gauge how much effort to put into presenting you to any of their clients. If you're not working with a a single recruiter exclusively, you'll often find that the amount of work they put in to get you in front of their clients drops dramatically to the point they no longer return your calls/emails.
jarcane 6y ago
My second ever job was at a startup that put me through three rounds of interviews, all of them in Python. The homework task, the questions, literally nothing else was mentioned through the entire process. After I got hired, I showed up the first day and one of the managers asks me, "So I heard you know functional programming, right?" I said "yes" and was immediately whisked off to the backend division that worked entirely in Scala, a language I had literally never spent more than 5 minutes on before dismissing because the online tutorial I was using broke about two chapters in.
- seg_lol 6y ago
  That is absolutely phenomenal. I assume your Python code had functional stylings that would translate well into how the team used Scala? What was the rest of your experience like there? Sounds like a place that thinks at a deeper level than most.
  - meheleventyone 6y ago
    Is it unusual? I’ve changed jobs three times now going into places with different languages than ones I had much experience of. IME it takes about as much time to learn the codebase as it does to learn a new language and both go hand in glove.
    - ajford 6y ago
      IME it depends on the shop and it's own skill level. If you've got a bunch of devs with only experience in the tech stack the company is using, they'll be heavily selective for a match to their stack. If they've got a broad set of internal tools in a bunch of languages, they're likely selecting more broadly based on overall skill or the ability to get up to speed. And I'm 100% with you there, learning a new place's codebase can often take as much or more time than learning a new language (at least if you've got experience with a couple of languages already). There's at least tutorials and guides for a new language, and there's rarely good docs and resources for the codebase.
e-clinton 6y ago
That’s either the best or worst recruiter ever
- arethuza 6y ago
  "worst recruiter ever" Quite a lot of competition for that particular prize! Edit: There should be a Razzies for Recruiters! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Raspberry_Awards https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Raspberry_Awards
- corobo 6y ago
  A recruiter actually managing to get someone a job is firmly in the best category
ant6n 6y ago
I once applied for an internship at EA and thought I was invited for an interview on C. They gave me some C++ code to fix, which I didn't know, it wasn't on my CV. They just said "well this code is basically C", although I was pretty confused about those extra "&" the whole time, and it was a pretty rough experience. In the end I didn't get the job, but their response said I didn't get it because the found that my experience didn`t match my CV. Go figure.
- sitkack 6y ago
  That is a very meta occurrence of a flaw in C++. They could have unchecked wrapping addition or they indexed off the end of their array.
  - rightbyte 6y ago
    The extra "&" probably refers to different references.
- panzagl 6y ago
  In C++ '&'s are like garlic, just add them until the code tastes good. See also Java and the 'static' keyword.

goodlinks 6y ago

This makes me chuckle, and its a nice story cos you got a job :).. All the controls in the world mean bugger all when ultimately the deciding factor is a human. No one ever wants to admit that the world runs on trust and respect :).

dempseye 6y ago

The recruiter did good work here. I suspect this was a screw up in internal HR. The external recruiter has absolutely no incentive to send you for an interview you will bomb out of.

viraptor 6y ago
I'm not sure. Recruiters can spray and pray with candidates the way candidates can spray and pray with applications. They're not going to be great quality, but if you're paid commission on a hire and the recruitment channel can handle the load... what's to stop the recruiter?
- pc86 6y ago
  Aside from it destroying future business (we've had recruiters change candidates' resumes on us and that recruiter is blacklisted - by name - forever, to anyone who will listen), most contracts will have a 30-day clause where if the employee leaves for any reason within 30 days the fee is returned. Some even have if employee is fired within 30 days that the next placement fee is discounted.
  - thrwyoilarticle 6y ago
    When I connect with recruiters on Linkedin, I often notice they've spent a short time at their current position. Their tactics might not be sustainable. That said, it's a bit absurd there aren't separate classes of users on Linkedin. Do I need to know a recruiter's work history?
- notahacker 6y ago
  Spray and pay works for sending people a little underqualified for a job. Sending people who don't know why they've been put forward for a job under false pretences just means the client won't interview any more candidates you send, especially if that candidate is plenty employable enough not to bother bluffing their way through. And unlike candidates, recruiters can potentially get paid to fill a lot of a company's vacancies, provided they don't get blacklisted by them...
  - sitkack 6y ago
    The good recruiter matches the right candidate to the right company. The dysfunction is a property of the system and is borne by everyone.
  - wott 6y ago
    > Sending people who don't know why they've been put forward for a job under false pretences [...] Isn't this called 'consulting'?
- jschwartzi 6y ago
  And that's probably how I got an interview with AWS once upon a time.
eternalban 6y ago
Nonsense told to me repeatedly by recruiters over the years: - (your point) no incentive to send you for an interview if not a good fit. - "I make more money if you make your money" often said to spin the "what is your salary requirement" question Most recruiters work for an agency. Agencies have accounts with businesses. The account is central. You are in no position whatsoever to make determination as to what incentives drive the recruiter's business. Recruiters also routinely b.s. young developers by "I get more if you get more money" when pressuring them into agreeing to a "salary expectation" right at the beginning of the employment negotiation.
- indeed30 6y ago
  Yes, recruiters have accounts with companies, but in my experience the recruitment fee is a percentage of salary, and the individual recruiter compensation is on a commission model. In short, I personally have no problems in believing that the higher the salary, the higher the payment to both the recruitment company and individual recruiter. However, I think we all know that closing the deal is far more important to the recruiter than negotiating small changes to the salary, so your point stands.
  - buu700 6y ago
    I haven't worked with a recruiter, so this is pure speculation, but it seems to me that a recruiter's greatest incentive would be to close any deal at all as quickly as possible, because they're competing against the alternative of you finding a position on your own first (or otherwise no longer requiring their services). Getting you a high salary is just gravy.
    - kamarg 6y ago
      > they're competing against the alternative of you finding a position on your own first (or otherwise no longer requiring their services) Almost every recruiter will constantly ask you if you're interviewing anywhere else or working with any other recruiters. They do this so they can be sure nobody else has the right to represent you to a client but also to gauge how much effort to put into presenting you to any of their clients. If you're not working with a a single recruiter exclusively, you'll often find that the amount of work they put in to get you in front of their clients drops dramatically to the point they no longer return your calls/emails.

jarcane 6y ago

My second ever job was at a startup that put me through three rounds of interviews, all of them in Python. The homework task, the questions, literally nothing else was mentioned through the entire process. After I got hired, I showed up the first day and one of the managers asks me, "So I heard you know functional programming, right?" I said "yes" and was immediately whisked off to the backend division that worked entirely in Scala, a language I had literally never spent more than 5 minutes on before dismissing because the online tutorial I was using broke about two chapters in.

seg_lol 6y ago
That is absolutely phenomenal. I assume your Python code had functional stylings that would translate well into how the team used Scala? What was the rest of your experience like there? Sounds like a place that thinks at a deeper level than most.
- meheleventyone 6y ago
  Is it unusual? I’ve changed jobs three times now going into places with different languages than ones I had much experience of. IME it takes about as much time to learn the codebase as it does to learn a new language and both go hand in glove.
  - ajford 6y ago
    IME it depends on the shop and it's own skill level. If you've got a bunch of devs with only experience in the tech stack the company is using, they'll be heavily selective for a match to their stack. If they've got a broad set of internal tools in a bunch of languages, they're likely selecting more broadly based on overall skill or the ability to get up to speed. And I'm 100% with you there, learning a new place's codebase can often take as much or more time than learning a new language (at least if you've got experience with a couple of languages already). There's at least tutorials and guides for a new language, and there's rarely good docs and resources for the codebase.

e-clinton 6y ago

That’s either the best or worst recruiter ever

arethuza 6y ago
"worst recruiter ever" Quite a lot of competition for that particular prize! Edit: There should be a Razzies for Recruiters! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Raspberry_Awards https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Raspberry_Awards
corobo 6y ago
A recruiter actually managing to get someone a job is firmly in the best category

ant6n 6y ago

I once applied for an internship at EA and thought I was invited for an interview on C. They gave me some C++ code to fix, which I didn't know, it wasn't on my CV. They just said "well this code is basically C", although I was pretty confused about those extra "&" the whole time, and it was a pretty rough experience. In the end I didn't get the job, but their response said I didn't get it because the found that my experience didn`t match my CV. Go figure.

sitkack 6y ago
That is a very meta occurrence of a flaw in C++. They could have unchecked wrapping addition or they indexed off the end of their array.
- rightbyte 6y ago
  The extra "&" probably refers to different references.
panzagl 6y ago
In C++ '&'s are like garlic, just add them until the code tastes good. See also Java and the 'static' keyword.