3 ms·

A few days ago I got the usual call from the Google recruiter, after being rejected a year ago with feedback of 2 sure hire, one lean, two no hire. A strange c

A few days ago I got the usual call from the Google recruiter, after being rejected a year ago with feedback of 2 sure hire, one lean, two no hire. A strange collection, isn't it? Well, I would have “fired" two of them plus the recruiter, one who wasn't paying attention to my interview and one who turned off the video and whose accent and questions were basically incomprehensible (I am non-US myself, btw). Maybe the two no-hire? I make 75% of what a Google would make for the (high) position they would hire me for, but I work 1/5 of what I would work at Google and with little overhead such as performance review, promotion packages, and excuse my French, other assorted bs I have zero interest for at my age and with my experience. If the hiring process were more reasonable, i.e., not dependent on the mood, accent, question of the day of interviewers whom I will (probably) never meet again after they nonchalantly determine my future employment, I might agree to interview again and then evaluate their proposal, but otherwise I think Google will continue to bleed talent and hire little uninteresting robots (mine is a salty-fish generalization of course) who have the patience for nonsense that I, and people like me, do not have.

digianarchist 5y ago
Why did you pursue the position? You seem content where you are?
- borroka 5y ago
  There are definitely some advantages in working for Google, like 25% more money and Google on the resume (I already had another FAANG), which can open other lucrative doors down the road. I am not a hardcore tech guy, in the sense that I could switch tomorrow to selling bicycles (for the same money, of course), and not miss tech one bit, so my north stars are money conditional on time spent working and stress (assuming the job itself if not terrible). I would guess that my current position, given zero stress, little time at work, and good salary, is on par with the Google position I was interviewing for. But I am not willing to go through those ridiculous interviews again, then waiting for weeks for a the committee decision, then the recruiter cannot say what happened, are you kidding me.
lolpython 5y ago
> salty-fish generalization What does this mean?
- borroka 5y ago
  Salty-ish (autocorrection got it wrong). I am a bit salty because I was rejected and my tone may reflect that, although it is true that people at Google are in my experience (that is, the one I met professionally or outside work, or saw at events, giving lectures etc.) not very interesting (on average!), in part because that's what the interview process, maybe inadvertently, screens for.

digianarchist 5y ago

Why did you pursue the position? You seem content where you are?

borroka 5y ago
There are definitely some advantages in working for Google, like 25% more money and Google on the resume (I already had another FAANG), which can open other lucrative doors down the road. I am not a hardcore tech guy, in the sense that I could switch tomorrow to selling bicycles (for the same money, of course), and not miss tech one bit, so my north stars are money conditional on time spent working and stress (assuming the job itself if not terrible). I would guess that my current position, given zero stress, little time at work, and good salary, is on par with the Google position I was interviewing for. But I am not willing to go through those ridiculous interviews again, then waiting for weeks for a the committee decision, then the recruiter cannot say what happened, are you kidding me.

lolpython 5y ago

> salty-fish generalization What does this mean?

borroka 5y ago
Salty-ish (autocorrection got it wrong). I am a bit salty because I was rejected and my tone may reflect that, although it is true that people at Google are in my experience (that is, the one I met professionally or outside work, or saw at events, giving lectures etc.) not very interesting (on average!), in part because that's what the interview process, maybe inadvertently, screens for.