4 ms·

I find it interesting that the candidate is expected to interview the company as much as the company is interviewing the applicant. It implies a significant de

I find it interesting that the candidate is expected to interview the company as much as the company is interviewing the applicant. It implies a significant degree of balance in power between employers and potential employees (ie, there's a shortage of software engineers in general, not only the wizard like ones, so there's pressure on the hiring side) which I'm not sure exists in many industries ( unless they're looking for specifically strong people who are usually in demand and not available ). In other words, for some jobs/in some other industries you probably just can't ask these questions without either meaning 'I'm going to be annoying to manage' or 'I don't understand that I should be grateful to just have a job'. Does it make sense, or am I completely wrong?

void_mint 5y ago
You're totally right. For software it's kind of a totally different ballgame, where the demand is way higher than the supply, so companies are willing to do things they normally wouldn't. > 'I'm going to be annoying to manage' or 'I don't understand that I should be grateful to just have a job'. In this market, lots of devs feel empowered to not just be grateful they have a job, but to find employers they actively want to work for. If an employer got frustrated that you were asking questions, you'd just bail on them.
analyst74 5y ago
There is always a balance of power between employers and potential employees who have leverage, regardless of industry. If you have the skill to deliver a lot of value, then your service will be in demand, which gives you leverage. Good construction workers and waitresses will get a lot of leeway from their employer once they've demonstrated their value.
nsgi 5y ago
I don't think it necessarily implies a balance of power. Even without that, it makes sense for a company to allow the candidate to ask lots of questions to make sure it would be the right job for them and they're likely to be happy and stick around
Brian_K_White 5y ago
All the owners in the world would just love everyone to just roll over and be grateful for whatever they are given. The only power you have is the power to walk. So it's simply that you have to excersize that one power if you want any input or influence at all over what 90% of the waking hours of your life will be like. It's simply claiming, not requesting or hoping for a scrap of, but claiming, your personhood and basic dignity that you yourself would (one would hope) accord anyone else. There is no valid reason to be grateful for a shit job even if the shittiness is office politics instead of black lung. And there is no valid reason not to evaluate any potential job to find out if it will be shitty. If asking illuminating questions turns off the interviewer, you didn't want that job. If you're desperate and willing to be treated like shit and say you're grateful, then go ahead, we all have to sometimes, but that is not some ideal way to operate all the time. That is something you do under duress. You should seek to get out from under that duress and live like a human being.

void_mint 5y ago

You're totally right. For software it's kind of a totally different ballgame, where the demand is way higher than the supply, so companies are willing to do things they normally wouldn't. > 'I'm going to be annoying to manage' or 'I don't understand that I should be grateful to just have a job'. In this market, lots of devs feel empowered to not just be grateful they have a job, but to find employers they actively want to work for. If an employer got frustrated that you were asking questions, you'd just bail on them.

analyst74 5y ago

There is always a balance of power between employers and potential employees who have leverage, regardless of industry. If you have the skill to deliver a lot of value, then your service will be in demand, which gives you leverage. Good construction workers and waitresses will get a lot of leeway from their employer once they've demonstrated their value.

nsgi 5y ago

I don't think it necessarily implies a balance of power. Even without that, it makes sense for a company to allow the candidate to ask lots of questions to make sure it would be the right job for them and they're likely to be happy and stick around

Brian_K_White 5y ago

All the owners in the world would just love everyone to just roll over and be grateful for whatever they are given. The only power you have is the power to walk. So it's simply that you have to excersize that one power if you want any input or influence at all over what 90% of the waking hours of your life will be like. It's simply claiming, not requesting or hoping for a scrap of, but claiming, your personhood and basic dignity that you yourself would (one would hope) accord anyone else. There is no valid reason to be grateful for a shit job even if the shittiness is office politics instead of black lung. And there is no valid reason not to evaluate any potential job to find out if it will be shitty. If asking illuminating questions turns off the interviewer, you didn't want that job. If you're desperate and willing to be treated like shit and say you're grateful, then go ahead, we all have to sometimes, but that is not some ideal way to operate all the time. That is something you do under duress. You should seek to get out from under that duress and live like a human being.