3 ms·
Thus supporting my point, as I said. Edit: I'm "posting too fast", and this seems like a trivial point, so, in advance of being able to make a new comment: Th
by SilasX 5y ago
Thus supporting my point, as I said.
Edit: I'm "posting too fast", and this seems like a trivial point, so, in advance of being able to make a new comment:
The relevant "point" here is not about what is or isn't SOP at any company, which I was never disputing.
I was making a point about how they should convey employee status and whether Apple(etc)'s practice counts as "lying about your level".
To summarize:
1) It's fine to have a policy of "never disclosing employee titles".
2) If you go that route, then you should simply not comment when asked about an employee title, and give "n/a" for a field requesting it.
3) Saying, "Employee title: Associate" is not doing that, because it's falsely asserting their holding of a title -- and that title's (false) reality -- that they do not hold.
If you don't dispute any of that, great! If you do, I'd love to hear that commentary, on which it would be orthogonal to bring up what is or isn't SOP at any company.
- tptacek 5y agoIt doesn't support your point. It supports the original commenter's, who points out that not confirming internal titles is SOP at a bunch of companies.
- snowwrestler 5y agoBut Apple does supply job titles for current employees. It’s only after someone departs that they change the value to something confusing. We all know that different companies work differently. How rare is what Apple does, and what harm does it cause? The article includes a tangible example of such harm. Can you share any insight that is specific to this practice? I know you’ve worked in the hiring space.