6 ms·

> Emailed a candidate at 3:00 scheduling an interview for 9:00 that morning because "the perfect candidate is always available. I feel so bad for some of these

> Emailed a candidate at 3:00 scheduling an interview for 9:00 that morning because "the perfect candidate is always available. I feel so bad for some of these candidates. Hiring is broken, but some of these are unreal. Can’t imagine how the manager justifies this kind of thing internally.

willcipriano 5y ago
The best restaurants always have a table available.
- daniel-cussen 5y ago
  They do? In China the best restaurant had one table.
  - willcipriano 5y ago
    A bit of scarcasm there, people who are any good are going to be currently employed by and large.
  - rk06 5y ago
    Of course not. the best restaurants would usually be full and require reservations in advance
- tremon 5y ago
  Which is the restaurant in that analogy? The employer or the job candidate?
dahart 5y ago
> some of these are unreal. Can’t imagine how the manager justifies this It seems pretty clear to me that the manager in that story does not want to hire someone. One reason is even given - they believe they get a half day of free time with every candidate. As soon as they hire someone they lose their half days. It’d be plausible if the manager has a budget for another person that they’re redirecting as well, or that the manager’s manager is going to start getting rough when the lower manager is operating near their budget ceiling. I can imagine a bunch of reasons this kind of thing happens that the employee might be unable to see. > Hiring is broken This phrase gets repeated a lot, and for a long time before the recent COVID related labor shortages, but I’m not sure what it means. I’ve only ever seen it in the context of frustrated newbie candidates complaining that they have to put in some non-coding effort in order to get hired. Is hiring broken from the actual job/business perspective? Have many/most companies on the whole been unable to hire people when talent is available? What statistics are there that shed light on how hiring is broken? I’m curious and asking honestly, because it’s been a long time since I was fresh out of college, and I don’t know how hiring has changed, and I don’t know what it’s like for fresh graduates. But I also have changed jobs several times, and been a manager and participated in hiring and interviews for many years, and I haven’t seen any large scale indicators that hiring is broken.
- mistrial9 5y ago
  people for whom the system is working, affirm that the system is working.. check
  - dahart 5y ago
    I asked an honest question about how the system isn’t working, and admitted right up front that I might be ignorant of real systemic problems. Maybe you could elaborate and/or provide evidence that the system isn’t working? Who is it not working for, and how is it not working?
  - filoleg 5y ago
    This is just disingenuous, because it can also be easily stated as “people for whom the system isn’t working, affirm that the system isn’t working.” Except it is much easier to state that the system is not working, because one can easily attribute personal failures to the failures of the system. I am yet to meet a clearly skilled software engineer who took a bit of time to study for interviews who couldn’t pass the interviews. And we aren’t talking some insane prep, we are talking either a couple of weekends or an hour a day for a month at the very most. To add, it is mostly upfront work, and you dont need that much time to study later on. With every interview, I need less and less time to study in the future. Back in college, i used to study intensely for those. But many years later, I find it sufficient to refresh by grinding leetcode for just one weekend being enough to pass your typical FAANG interview. Paper credentials don’t mean much, and relying on those is setting yourself up for some poor experiences. I’ve seen candidates with 15+ years of experience and impressive resumes not being able to code their way out of a wet paperbag. We are talking not being able to solve actual FizzBuzz in a language of their choice, which is mindboggling, as it is literally just a for-loop and 3 if-conditionals (or 2, if you want to be fancy and use string concatenation).
    - mistrial9 5y ago
      disingenuous -> "stated with an intention to be deceptive" "I am yet to meet a clearly skilled software engineer who" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraposition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraposition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_fallacy "Paper credentials don’t mean much" other employers here disagree on that particular point
goodpoint 5y ago
> Emailed a candidate at 3:00 scheduling an interview for 9:00 that morning because "the perfect candidate is always available" Essentially he's selecting for unemployed and even "desperate" candidates. This might seem absurd at first but some bosses do it on purpose. They know they cannot attract good employees (for whatever reason) and they select those who will work out of dire necessity and are not going to quit and be hired elsewhere easily.
- geoduck14 5y ago
  >Essentially he's selecting for unemployed and even "desperate" candidates. I once hired someone who was a little "outside the bounds" of qualified. In the interview, I sensed his "brain was bored" - I assumed from underemployment. He came to my team with a refreshing "hunger". I only managed him for a couple of months, but I hope he went somewhere that properly fit his skills.
llamataboot 5y ago
I mean for me, I would much prefer red flags like this come up as part of the interview process than when I'm already there so I can politely bow out, but yeah, these are all powertripping BS
rk06 5y ago
I would certainly not wake up early enough to do the interview, let alone read the interview. FWIW, the candidate dodged a bullet

willcipriano 5y ago

The best restaurants always have a table available.

daniel-cussen 5y ago
They do? In China the best restaurant had one table.
- willcipriano 5y ago
  A bit of scarcasm there, people who are any good are going to be currently employed by and large.
- rk06 5y ago
  Of course not. the best restaurants would usually be full and require reservations in advance
tremon 5y ago
Which is the restaurant in that analogy? The employer or the job candidate?

dahart 5y ago

> some of these are unreal. Can’t imagine how the manager justifies this It seems pretty clear to me that the manager in that story does not want to hire someone. One reason is even given - they believe they get a half day of free time with every candidate. As soon as they hire someone they lose their half days. It’d be plausible if the manager has a budget for another person that they’re redirecting as well, or that the manager’s manager is going to start getting rough when the lower manager is operating near their budget ceiling. I can imagine a bunch of reasons this kind of thing happens that the employee might be unable to see. > Hiring is broken This phrase gets repeated a lot, and for a long time before the recent COVID related labor shortages, but I’m not sure what it means. I’ve only ever seen it in the context of frustrated newbie candidates complaining that they have to put in some non-coding effort in order to get hired. Is hiring broken from the actual job/business perspective? Have many/most companies on the whole been unable to hire people when talent is available? What statistics are there that shed light on how hiring is broken? I’m curious and asking honestly, because it’s been a long time since I was fresh out of college, and I don’t know how hiring has changed, and I don’t know what it’s like for fresh graduates. But I also have changed jobs several times, and been a manager and participated in hiring and interviews for many years, and I haven’t seen any large scale indicators that hiring is broken.

mistrial9 5y ago
people for whom the system is working, affirm that the system is working.. check
- dahart 5y ago
  I asked an honest question about how the system isn’t working, and admitted right up front that I might be ignorant of real systemic problems. Maybe you could elaborate and/or provide evidence that the system isn’t working? Who is it not working for, and how is it not working?
- filoleg 5y ago
  This is just disingenuous, because it can also be easily stated as “people for whom the system isn’t working, affirm that the system isn’t working.” Except it is much easier to state that the system is not working, because one can easily attribute personal failures to the failures of the system. I am yet to meet a clearly skilled software engineer who took a bit of time to study for interviews who couldn’t pass the interviews. And we aren’t talking some insane prep, we are talking either a couple of weekends or an hour a day for a month at the very most. To add, it is mostly upfront work, and you dont need that much time to study later on. With every interview, I need less and less time to study in the future. Back in college, i used to study intensely for those. But many years later, I find it sufficient to refresh by grinding leetcode for just one weekend being enough to pass your typical FAANG interview. Paper credentials don’t mean much, and relying on those is setting yourself up for some poor experiences. I’ve seen candidates with 15+ years of experience and impressive resumes not being able to code their way out of a wet paperbag. We are talking not being able to solve actual FizzBuzz in a language of their choice, which is mindboggling, as it is literally just a for-loop and 3 if-conditionals (or 2, if you want to be fancy and use string concatenation).
  - mistrial9 5y ago
    disingenuous -> "stated with an intention to be deceptive" "I am yet to meet a clearly skilled software engineer who" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraposition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraposition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formal_fallacy "Paper credentials don’t mean much" other employers here disagree on that particular point

goodpoint 5y ago

> Emailed a candidate at 3:00 scheduling an interview for 9:00 that morning because "the perfect candidate is always available" Essentially he's selecting for unemployed and even "desperate" candidates. This might seem absurd at first but some bosses do it on purpose. They know they cannot attract good employees (for whatever reason) and they select those who will work out of dire necessity and are not going to quit and be hired elsewhere easily.

geoduck14 5y ago
>Essentially he's selecting for unemployed and even "desperate" candidates. I once hired someone who was a little "outside the bounds" of qualified. In the interview, I sensed his "brain was bored" - I assumed from underemployment. He came to my team with a refreshing "hunger". I only managed him for a couple of months, but I hope he went somewhere that properly fit his skills.

llamataboot 5y ago

I mean for me, I would much prefer red flags like this come up as part of the interview process than when I'm already there so I can politely bow out, but yeah, these are all powertripping BS

rk06 5y ago

I would certainly not wake up early enough to do the interview, let alone read the interview. FWIW, the candidate dodged a bullet