10 ms·

I would like to assume that I am a good candidate I usually get calls back from even LinkedIn posts or even indeed, but after well applying to more than two hun

I would like to assume that I am a good candidate I usually get calls back from even LinkedIn posts or even indeed, but after well applying to more than two hundred offerings on the who is hiring posts in this place, and only having had been called twice. I can assure you that the ones here usually are not hiring and at best just want a rooster of possible replacements for their current employees. Most notable offender is mixrank, I know more than twenty people that have applied to no avail, even people with more than 22 years of experience and very fancy titles.

aimazon 2y ago
Some companies are just very selective, i.e: they're hiring the right people not the best candidate. Most of us get jobs because companies need to fill a role and we're the best candidate of a bad bunch... most of us (whether we have 22 years and a fancy title or not) would not get a job at a company that hires carefully because we're probably not a good fit for their very niche view of what a good hire is.
- ninininino 2y ago
  I agree and there's nothing that disincentivizes companies from "over-soliciting applications". Having 100000 applicants vs 100 has no downside other than: 1) you need to literally post your application URL more places. 2) you might not get through skimming or auto-screening / OCR-ing all the resumes/apps. From an incentives POV, the job application space does not properly incentivize saving the mental energy and time of either recruiters or applicants. Automation and reduced friction has made the situation a kind of arm's race and mess.
- LittleTimothy 2y ago
  It makes total sense for a startup to be highly selective. But being overly selective at the CV/application stage is dumb. If they really do have some really highly specialized requirement that should be on the advert. If they don't then being having a high rejection rate at the CV screen stage is going to be easy - it's easy to reject people, but you're overwhelmingly likely to screen out the few candidates that are actually a good fit. So sure, expect a low success rate but a low reply rate is an indicator the company isn't serious about hiring.
  - scarface_74 2y ago
    If you are getting thousands of applications, you have to be selective at the application stage.
    - LittleTimothy 2y ago
      If you're getting so many applications that you have to apply such a harsh screen that you're likely losing most of your good candidates via false negatives then you shouldn't be soliciting more applicants to apply. This is what this thread is about - if you're saying these guys are getting so many applications they have to start just brutally cutting CVs almost arbitrarily then they definitely shouldn't be posting on HN about their vacancies. Not least because they're poisoning the well. This is a real issue - I once got approached by a recruiter for a company, it was a good fit, I think I would've walked the interview and been a great hire - I'd heard of them before. The founder had acted like a dick head to one of my friends, I just immediately turned it down. There is a cost to very publicly treating people poorly. People don't seem to understand that these things that big companies might get away with due to scale, smaller companies cannot. People talk.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
serial_dev 2y ago
These are two separate categories. Firstly, there are the monthly "Who is hiring" posts. There, basically anyone can post their company and their positions. They don't need to be YC companies. And secondly, there are the promoted "Company ABC hiring a Software Engineer (YC '23)" (or similar). There, commenting is not allowed, and the listing will stay on HN for a set amount of time. I believe the question in this post talks about the latter. But it's certainly interesting to see in this thread, that basically both of these groups of companies don't reach out to candidates...
heurist 2y ago
Not a YC startup, but jobs I've posted recently had over a thousand applicants in the first few weeks. I post multiple places, including HN. There's a huge culling process to find the 20-30 most applicable candidates, then to narrow down from there to the 1-2 that fit best. The best way to stand out (for me) is a real application not written with AI. Everyone uses AI now and it all sounds the same. Express your honest enthusiasm for joining the company/mission in the cover letter (maybe 20% of applicants submit a cover letter, and a smaller fraction of that was written by real people, and smaller fraction of that gives authentic enthusiastic vibes). Use your real voice in your writing. I give the AI applicants a chance if their resume makes sense, but it's a minefield.
- themanmaran 2y ago
  Agreed on the "no AI messaging". And keep it incredibly short. Like 140 characters short. The messages that stand out look a lot more like tweets than they do cover letters. AI messages are always 500 words of rehashing the JD, so your goal is to not look like that.
- jagged-chisel 2y ago
  > Express your honest enthusiasm for joining the company/mission in the cover letter… I just can’t muster honest enthusiasm for all the companies/missions to which I must apply to get even a call from their internal recruiter. I have enthusiasm for creating viable, efficient, maintainable software. I can adapt those skills to the mission du jour. But apparently, that’s not sufficient - if it were, my 30yrs of experience would get me hired. If, by chance, a company or mission are reprehensible to me, I just won’t apply. If I’ve applied, I’m certainly willing to apply my skills to your project.
  - XCSme 2y ago
    When we do our job, we very rarely interact directly with the "mission". We are coders, if we like the project/technology and the team is fun, of course we will be happy to do our job well. On the other hand, what does the mission matter if you are unqualified and can't solve the problems at hand. Yes, a good mission is always a plus, but most capable coders code because the problem/implementation is interesting. They won't magically code better if the code is intended to be used for some Earth-saving purpose.
tennisflyi 2y ago
Same experience - people are getting hired, just not me

aimazon 2y ago

Some companies are just very selective, i.e: they're hiring the right people not the best candidate. Most of us get jobs because companies need to fill a role and we're the best candidate of a bad bunch... most of us (whether we have 22 years and a fancy title or not) would not get a job at a company that hires carefully because we're probably not a good fit for their very niche view of what a good hire is.

ninininino 2y ago
I agree and there's nothing that disincentivizes companies from "over-soliciting applications". Having 100000 applicants vs 100 has no downside other than: 1) you need to literally post your application URL more places. 2) you might not get through skimming or auto-screening / OCR-ing all the resumes/apps. From an incentives POV, the job application space does not properly incentivize saving the mental energy and time of either recruiters or applicants. Automation and reduced friction has made the situation a kind of arm's race and mess.
LittleTimothy 2y ago
It makes total sense for a startup to be highly selective. But being overly selective at the CV/application stage is dumb. If they really do have some really highly specialized requirement that should be on the advert. If they don't then being having a high rejection rate at the CV screen stage is going to be easy - it's easy to reject people, but you're overwhelmingly likely to screen out the few candidates that are actually a good fit. So sure, expect a low success rate but a low reply rate is an indicator the company isn't serious about hiring.
- scarface_74 2y ago
  If you are getting thousands of applications, you have to be selective at the application stage.
  - LittleTimothy 2y ago
    If you're getting so many applications that you have to apply such a harsh screen that you're likely losing most of your good candidates via false negatives then you shouldn't be soliciting more applicants to apply. This is what this thread is about - if you're saying these guys are getting so many applications they have to start just brutally cutting CVs almost arbitrarily then they definitely shouldn't be posting on HN about their vacancies. Not least because they're poisoning the well. This is a real issue - I once got approached by a recruiter for a company, it was a good fit, I think I would've walked the interview and been a great hire - I'd heard of them before. The founder had acted like a dick head to one of my friends, I just immediately turned it down. There is a cost to very publicly treating people poorly. People don't seem to understand that these things that big companies might get away with due to scale, smaller companies cannot. People talk.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

serial_dev 2y ago

These are two separate categories. Firstly, there are the monthly "Who is hiring" posts. There, basically anyone can post their company and their positions. They don't need to be YC companies. And secondly, there are the promoted "Company ABC hiring a Software Engineer (YC '23)" (or similar). There, commenting is not allowed, and the listing will stay on HN for a set amount of time. I believe the question in this post talks about the latter. But it's certainly interesting to see in this thread, that basically both of these groups of companies don't reach out to candidates...

heurist 2y ago

Not a YC startup, but jobs I've posted recently had over a thousand applicants in the first few weeks. I post multiple places, including HN. There's a huge culling process to find the 20-30 most applicable candidates, then to narrow down from there to the 1-2 that fit best. The best way to stand out (for me) is a real application not written with AI. Everyone uses AI now and it all sounds the same. Express your honest enthusiasm for joining the company/mission in the cover letter (maybe 20% of applicants submit a cover letter, and a smaller fraction of that was written by real people, and smaller fraction of that gives authentic enthusiastic vibes). Use your real voice in your writing. I give the AI applicants a chance if their resume makes sense, but it's a minefield.

themanmaran 2y ago
Agreed on the "no AI messaging". And keep it incredibly short. Like 140 characters short. The messages that stand out look a lot more like tweets than they do cover letters. AI messages are always 500 words of rehashing the JD, so your goal is to not look like that.
jagged-chisel 2y ago
> Express your honest enthusiasm for joining the company/mission in the cover letter… I just can’t muster honest enthusiasm for all the companies/missions to which I must apply to get even a call from their internal recruiter. I have enthusiasm for creating viable, efficient, maintainable software. I can adapt those skills to the mission du jour. But apparently, that’s not sufficient - if it were, my 30yrs of experience would get me hired. If, by chance, a company or mission are reprehensible to me, I just won’t apply. If I’ve applied, I’m certainly willing to apply my skills to your project.
- XCSme 2y ago
  When we do our job, we very rarely interact directly with the "mission". We are coders, if we like the project/technology and the team is fun, of course we will be happy to do our job well. On the other hand, what does the mission matter if you are unqualified and can't solve the problems at hand. Yes, a good mission is always a plus, but most capable coders code because the problem/implementation is interesting. They won't magically code better if the code is intended to be used for some Earth-saving purpose.

tennisflyi 2y ago

Same experience - people are getting hired, just not me