4 ms·

After seeing the flood of resumes for application, I do think a small cost to apply wouldn't be a bad thing for either applicants or companies. I also realize t

After seeing the flood of resumes for application, I do think a small cost to apply wouldn't be a bad thing for either applicants or companies. I also realize that if someone is unemployed, getting them to pay money they don't have to find a new job is counterproductive. However, when we wanted to hire a new Ops person at work, the flood of obviously not qualified at all applicants we got was insane.

PolygonSheep 9mo ago
I'd gladly pay the 78 cents for a stamp if it meant my application was opened and read by an actual human.
- ryandrake 9mo ago
  If I were a job applicant, I don't know how much I'd pay for an ironclad guarantee that the human hiring manager for the role would open and read my resume. $100? Multiple hundreds? Sad that things have gotten to this point.
  - htrp 9mo ago
    Thats when you work with the a 3P recruiter that has a vested interest in putting you in front of the hiring manager
vulcan01 9mo ago
> the flood of obviously not qualified at all applicants we got was insane From speaking to folks looking for jobs in tech over the past few years, this is a natural result. 1. Companies write requirements on the job posting that are a little beyond reasonable for the role and salary. 2. Applicants learn over time, and start applying to jobs for which they only meet most of the qualifications. 3. Companies adjust and write even more ridiculous requirements. 4. Applicants start applying to jobs for which they only meet some requirements. 5. Repeat. As evidence that the applicants are, at every stage, correctly reacting to the situation: I have received positive responses (and, later, job offers) by applying to roles for which I am only mostly qualified, and I know many people for whom this is true of jobs they are only barely qualified for.
- x0x0 9mo ago
  The last req I opened I closed around 500 applicants. I opened it Thursday afternoon and closed it Tuesday morning. Over 40% were totally nonqualified. The job was for a rails engineer. In the current market, I wanted exactly what I asked for: a senior rails eng. But as long as the applicant had shipped a web app in a dynamic language -- node, react, vue, svelte, django, flask, phoenix, whatever the php folks use, etc -- it's not unreasonable to apply. That 40% had never shipped a webapp. Another 10% or more completely ignored the senior: many had < 1 year of experience. I ended up using AI to filter because even 1 minute per is an entire 9 hour day. Engaging for 3 minutes per application is 3x that. And I can't be in a position where I spend effort while the applicant spent none: I assume the bulk of these were just mass applications.
  - Denkel 9mo ago
    >And I can't be in a position where I spend effort while the applicant spent none But isn't that literally what you are paid for? Your job is to do the steps needed to hire someone and that includes reading through applicants. Why would the applicants -that are dojng this for free, for a promise of a posibility- need to put more effort than you?
  - BobbyTables2 9mo ago
    Reminds me of the joke: A hiring manager throws away half the applications without looking at them. They don’t want to hire “unlucky” people.
    - rapidaneurism 9mo ago
      I think it is an anecdote about a trading firm. Something about throwing the CVs to their desk from a few feet away. Only the ones who made it to the desk were considered. After all who wants to hire unlucky traders?
  - avmich 9mo ago
    > And I can't be in a position where I spend effort while the applicant spent none Looks like the root point of the arms race.
chipgap98 9mo ago
I do think this is going to be part of the solution to a lot of AI slop is adding small fees to do a thing
multjoy 9mo ago
In many jurisdictions (the UK, in particular) charging people to apply for work is specifically illegal.
nitwit005 9mo ago
There are a ton of fake jobs openings out there, or which sort of exist, but they aren't exactly eager to hire and haven't filled the role in nine months. You'd have to pay with no guarantee anyone will even read it, which even at a fairly low cost rapidly becomes an issue when you might have to apply to a lot of jobs. Making the employer also pay might help, but I suspect then the employers will just wander over to another jobs site that promises free listings.

PolygonSheep 9mo ago

I'd gladly pay the 78 cents for a stamp if it meant my application was opened and read by an actual human.

ryandrake 9mo ago
If I were a job applicant, I don't know how much I'd pay for an ironclad guarantee that the human hiring manager for the role would open and read my resume. $100? Multiple hundreds? Sad that things have gotten to this point.
- htrp 9mo ago
  Thats when you work with the a 3P recruiter that has a vested interest in putting you in front of the hiring manager

vulcan01 9mo ago

> the flood of obviously not qualified at all applicants we got was insane From speaking to folks looking for jobs in tech over the past few years, this is a natural result. 1. Companies write requirements on the job posting that are a little beyond reasonable for the role and salary. 2. Applicants learn over time, and start applying to jobs for which they only meet most of the qualifications. 3. Companies adjust and write even more ridiculous requirements. 4. Applicants start applying to jobs for which they only meet some requirements. 5. Repeat. As evidence that the applicants are, at every stage, correctly reacting to the situation: I have received positive responses (and, later, job offers) by applying to roles for which I am only mostly qualified, and I know many people for whom this is true of jobs they are only barely qualified for.

x0x0 9mo ago
The last req I opened I closed around 500 applicants. I opened it Thursday afternoon and closed it Tuesday morning. Over 40% were totally nonqualified. The job was for a rails engineer. In the current market, I wanted exactly what I asked for: a senior rails eng. But as long as the applicant had shipped a web app in a dynamic language -- node, react, vue, svelte, django, flask, phoenix, whatever the php folks use, etc -- it's not unreasonable to apply. That 40% had never shipped a webapp. Another 10% or more completely ignored the senior: many had < 1 year of experience. I ended up using AI to filter because even 1 minute per is an entire 9 hour day. Engaging for 3 minutes per application is 3x that. And I can't be in a position where I spend effort while the applicant spent none: I assume the bulk of these were just mass applications.
- Denkel 9mo ago
  >And I can't be in a position where I spend effort while the applicant spent none But isn't that literally what you are paid for? Your job is to do the steps needed to hire someone and that includes reading through applicants. Why would the applicants -that are dojng this for free, for a promise of a posibility- need to put more effort than you?
- BobbyTables2 9mo ago
  Reminds me of the joke: A hiring manager throws away half the applications without looking at them. They don’t want to hire “unlucky” people.
  - rapidaneurism 9mo ago
    I think it is an anecdote about a trading firm. Something about throwing the CVs to their desk from a few feet away. Only the ones who made it to the desk were considered. After all who wants to hire unlucky traders?
- avmich 9mo ago
  > And I can't be in a position where I spend effort while the applicant spent none Looks like the root point of the arms race.

chipgap98 9mo ago

I do think this is going to be part of the solution to a lot of AI slop is adding small fees to do a thing

multjoy 9mo ago

In many jurisdictions (the UK, in particular) charging people to apply for work is specifically illegal.

nitwit005 9mo ago

There are a ton of fake jobs openings out there, or which sort of exist, but they aren't exactly eager to hire and haven't filled the role in nine months. You'd have to pay with no guarantee anyone will even read it, which even at a fairly low cost rapidly becomes an issue when you might have to apply to a lot of jobs. Making the employer also pay might help, but I suspect then the employers will just wander over to another jobs site that promises free listings.