10 ms·

An acquaintance of mine applied for a product management job, did two interviews in NY that went fine, then was flown out to MTV for a series of interviews. Wh

An acquaintance of mine applied for a product management job, did two interviews in NY that went fine, then was flown out to MTV for a series of interviews. When this person got there, two of the people they were supposed to meet with were traveling on business and hadn't notified the recruiter. A third was out sick. The supposed-to-be fourth, now first interview walked into the room and said, "Look, I don't have any idea how to interview product managers, so I'm going to ask you calculus questions", and proceeded to start to write equations on the board. The fifth interview was the first and only that happened AND dealt with product management. When they got back to NY, this person was notified that they'd been rejected, then notified this was a mistake and they'd have to come back to MTV to redo all of the interviews, including the two that had happened. Obviously, at this point they told Google to go scratch and went on to do really good work elsewhere. I've interviewed at and worked for a number very very large companies before, and none of them have been as disrespectful at interviewing and hiring as Google sounds from these stories.

throwaway86 13y ago
It's not any better if you get hired. Google recruiters will tell you whatever you want to hear, including things that are not necessarily true. I was assured that a minor issue in my background would not be an issue multiple times (I have email proving this), then Google hired me and let me work for more than two months. I got comfortable, I moved to Mountain View, began real honest work and set about making an impact. One Monday, I had just finished a feature for an internal monitoring tool and was discussing it with a teammate. HR scheduled a meeting 30 minutes in the future on my calendar, then informed me that my employment had been terminated because of the issue in my background. You remember, the one I disclosed and discussed repeatedly during the hiring process, before I even signed the offer. Two people in upper management at Google who had never met me fired me because of something seven years in my background, two months after hiring me with the assurance that it wouldn't be a problem. I bet my teammate wonders where I went. I didn't get a chance to explain because they threatened me if I told anybody on my team what happened while I was collecting my things. The same woman had a hearty laugh earlier in the firing meeting after joking, "I bet you didn't expect your afternoon to go like this, huh?" Felt like I was back in grade school. Two weeks after firing me, a Google recruiting coordinator attempted to connect with me on LinkedIn. Read into a company's competence what you will based on that. I can never, ever recommend that anybody subject themselves to working at Google based on my experience. And that's even before discovering the absolutely clueless direction that company is taking. You think G+ is annoying now? Just wait. The real victim in this is my family. I've never subjected them to no insurance coverage in my career. Thanks, Google.
- nitid_name 13y ago
  What sort of background thing are you talking about? Criminal? Civil?
  - throwaway86 13y ago
    Criminal, and that is the extent that I will follow up. I will also reiterate "minor".
    - WalterBright 13y ago
      I'm sad that that's the way things are. I think that once someone has paid their debt to society through the justice system, that this should be acceptable to society.
      - pasbesoin 13y ago
        Another incident demonstrating that "the system" (more than just the criminal justice system, as it extends to subsequent civil and commercial life) is neither about justice nor about rehabilitation. A further corruption: I've read that, even when there is a will to "take a chance" (aka employ and treat as a member of society) people with a criminal record, businesses can face obstacles -- sometimes insurmountable, for a smaller business -- to do so. One particular one: Insurance companies audit for such employees, and either cancel insurance or raise it to unaffordable rates. America: Land of hypocrisy.
        paganel 13y ago
        > One particular one: Insurance companies audit for such employees, and either cancel insurance or raise it to unaffordable rates. Never been to the States, but shouldn't there be a law against this?
        throwaway86 13y ago
        No, there isn't. Convicts are one of the last remaining class of people not protected by law. Every time any effort begins to make convicted folks a protected class, it makes politicians appear weak on crime and is quickly silenced.
csbrooks 13y ago
This made more sense after I figured out MTV was Mountain View, not Music Television. O_o
- furconit 13y ago
  lol
thetrb 13y ago
And they can do all of that just because everybody still wants to work at Google. Let's say the have 100 applicants for a position, out of which 10 are qualified for it. Then they can still screw 9 of them and hire the one person that for one reason or the other had the luck of interviewing with the right people and talking to the right recruiters.
- throwaway86 13y ago
  Ding! Google hires more people every week than were employed in total at the Series D startup I worked at before them.
- corresation 13y ago
  Many people don't want to work at Google. Yes, they can fill their spots, but the reality is that hiring bullshit means that over time their candidate pool progressively filters to "the people who will put up with bullshit", and while it takes years to filter through, in the end you up becoming Microsoft. There was a time when Microsoft was the bee's knees and was the elusive dream employer. Then they started various HR initiatives and it became a place that only a certain type of person wanted to work, and the result is the malaise and technology lack of leadership that Microsoft now evidences. HR as a profession is often a scourge, and the more influence HR has at a company, the more inertia pushes towards decline.
  - RougeFemme 13y ago
    I agree that HR is often a scourge. . .however, in my previous job I was elated with the way HR improved the hiring process in my department. First, they looked at the incredibly high - and quick - turnover in our department. They actually paid attention to the exit interviews/surveys. They told the management that people were leaving in droves because the jobs/roles/responsibilities/autonomy described during the interviews were radically different from what employees actually experienced - and employees were not happy about that. HR forced more "truth-in-advertising" and "truth-in-recruiting". HR forced them to include more SMEs in the process and to require that all of the interviewers - especially the non-SMEs and managers - to know best - or at least better - practices for interviewing. . .
washedup 13y ago
I feel for your friend. I went through two phone interviews, flown to Mountain View for all day interviews, and was told by the team that they wanted to hire me, but first my candidate packet had to be reviewed by three different hiring committees. I made it through the first two, but in the third hiring committee I was turned down because my GPA was not at the new 3.7+ hiring guideline. I was heartbroken, and I am sure other people have experienced the same thing.
- nilkn 13y ago
  I thought the GPA requirements were done away with a while ago?
- VladRussian2 13y ago
  > three different hiring committees. Hiring by committee :)
- api 13y ago
  Same exact thing here. Overall the experience was okay, but I ended up getting mixed signals at the end. Yes? No? Huh? Was never asked about GPA. I have no idea why the "no" in committee, but I get the impression that they approve more people than they hire. Moral of the story is probably that the initial approval is not a yes but it just means you passed the technical test. I have mixed feelings. Would have been a cool place to work, but there are lots of alternatives.
  - washedup 13y ago
    Yea, I agree with you. "Yes" to "you are able to work here" but no "you're hired!" I don't care about it anymore, but 5 years ago when this was my first job prospect out of school, I was really excited.
jrockway 13y ago
I've interviewed at and worked for a number very very large companies before, and none of them have been as disrespectful at interviewing and hiring as Google sounds from these stories. I'm not defending this practice at all, but I think I can understand it. It sounds like the typical problems involved in scheduling 10 people to all perform together at once. Nobody can prevent people from getting sick. Going out of town and missing an interview is pretty flaky, but it happens. You can look it as "Google is evil and wants to torture candidates" or "people are flaky". It's certainly human nature to be bitter about someone fucking up an important day for you, but ultimately, bitterness gets you nothing. It's no problem if you want to complain to your friends or on HN, but why not come back for the second try? Your friend could have had another free trip to Mountain View to actually be interviewed properly, and maybe get the job he wanted. (They do pay pretty well at Google, after all; the interviews aren't for some volunteer position.) (As for the calculus interview, that sounds like fair game. PMs are supposed to have some PM interviews and some SWE interviews, and math is a perfectly acceptable area to ask SWE candidates. It's not where I would spend my time, but that's part of the process that people hate; different interviewers have different preferred questions. I would probably have asked "how do you test that", which would probably raise a few eyebrows in a story like this too. But ultimately, having that understanding is something I value in future coworkers, so it's what I'd ask about in interviews.) Finally, if you have any questions about the hiring process at all, feel free to send me an email, jrockway AT google.com. I'm not a recruiter, I'm a programmer who cares about making the process work, but I'll try to help you out!
- x0x0 13y ago
  you say flaky, I say assholes who don't respect others' time. And way to move the goalposts re: your friend would be happy comment. I think what would have made his friend happy is to be treated with respect. Similarly with your bitterness comment; it's not bitter, it's letting the world know you and your colleagues believe it's right to treat people this way (because if you all didn't think this was ok, then you wouldn't do it).
  - jrockway 13y ago
    I'm not defending the hiring practices at all; on some level, we lose out on a lot of qualified candidates who would do great work and would be great to work with. I'm not a recruiter, but I try to help out however I can; people on HN regularly email me asking for advice, or to ping their recruiter, and so on, and I'm happy to do this. I want to work with you, and I don't want the intrinsic flakiness of people to adversely affect your experience. But ultimately, I can't control other people, I can only control myself. All my other comment is saying is how to think about the problem from another perspective. You have a lot to offer Google, but Google is not exactly coming up empty on its end. Therefore, I think it makes sense to cut Google some slack. But if you don't, that's your prerogative. I personally don't aim for 100% perfection 100% of the time, but some people do, and that is respectable. (Oh, and I don't think complaining about the interview on your blog is bad at all. What's "bitter" is refusing to come back for a second try, even though you still are kind of interested in working at Google.)

throwaway86 13y ago

It's not any better if you get hired. Google recruiters will tell you whatever you want to hear, including things that are not necessarily true. I was assured that a minor issue in my background would not be an issue multiple times (I have email proving this), then Google hired me and let me work for more than two months. I got comfortable, I moved to Mountain View, began real honest work and set about making an impact. One Monday, I had just finished a feature for an internal monitoring tool and was discussing it with a teammate. HR scheduled a meeting 30 minutes in the future on my calendar, then informed me that my employment had been terminated because of the issue in my background. You remember, the one I disclosed and discussed repeatedly during the hiring process, before I even signed the offer. Two people in upper management at Google who had never met me fired me because of something seven years in my background, two months after hiring me with the assurance that it wouldn't be a problem. I bet my teammate wonders where I went. I didn't get a chance to explain because they threatened me if I told anybody on my team what happened while I was collecting my things. The same woman had a hearty laugh earlier in the firing meeting after joking, "I bet you didn't expect your afternoon to go like this, huh?" Felt like I was back in grade school. Two weeks after firing me, a Google recruiting coordinator attempted to connect with me on LinkedIn. Read into a company's competence what you will based on that. I can never, ever recommend that anybody subject themselves to working at Google based on my experience. And that's even before discovering the absolutely clueless direction that company is taking. You think G+ is annoying now? Just wait. The real victim in this is my family. I've never subjected them to no insurance coverage in my career. Thanks, Google.

nitid_name 13y ago
What sort of background thing are you talking about? Criminal? Civil?
- throwaway86 13y ago
  Criminal, and that is the extent that I will follow up. I will also reiterate "minor".
  - WalterBright 13y ago
    I'm sad that that's the way things are. I think that once someone has paid their debt to society through the justice system, that this should be acceptable to society.
    - pasbesoin 13y ago
      Another incident demonstrating that "the system" (more than just the criminal justice system, as it extends to subsequent civil and commercial life) is neither about justice nor about rehabilitation. A further corruption: I've read that, even when there is a will to "take a chance" (aka employ and treat as a member of society) people with a criminal record, businesses can face obstacles -- sometimes insurmountable, for a smaller business -- to do so. One particular one: Insurance companies audit for such employees, and either cancel insurance or raise it to unaffordable rates. America: Land of hypocrisy.
      - paganel 13y ago
        > One particular one: Insurance companies audit for such employees, and either cancel insurance or raise it to unaffordable rates. Never been to the States, but shouldn't there be a law against this?
        throwaway86 13y ago
        No, there isn't. Convicts are one of the last remaining class of people not protected by law. Every time any effort begins to make convicted folks a protected class, it makes politicians appear weak on crime and is quickly silenced.

csbrooks 13y ago

This made more sense after I figured out MTV was Mountain View, not Music Television. O_o

furconit 13y ago
lol

thetrb 13y ago

And they can do all of that just because everybody still wants to work at Google. Let's say the have 100 applicants for a position, out of which 10 are qualified for it. Then they can still screw 9 of them and hire the one person that for one reason or the other had the luck of interviewing with the right people and talking to the right recruiters.

throwaway86 13y ago
Ding! Google hires more people every week than were employed in total at the Series D startup I worked at before them.
corresation 13y ago
Many people don't want to work at Google. Yes, they can fill their spots, but the reality is that hiring bullshit means that over time their candidate pool progressively filters to "the people who will put up with bullshit", and while it takes years to filter through, in the end you up becoming Microsoft. There was a time when Microsoft was the bee's knees and was the elusive dream employer. Then they started various HR initiatives and it became a place that only a certain type of person wanted to work, and the result is the malaise and technology lack of leadership that Microsoft now evidences. HR as a profession is often a scourge, and the more influence HR has at a company, the more inertia pushes towards decline.
- RougeFemme 13y ago
  I agree that HR is often a scourge. . .however, in my previous job I was elated with the way HR improved the hiring process in my department. First, they looked at the incredibly high - and quick - turnover in our department. They actually paid attention to the exit interviews/surveys. They told the management that people were leaving in droves because the jobs/roles/responsibilities/autonomy described during the interviews were radically different from what employees actually experienced - and employees were not happy about that. HR forced more "truth-in-advertising" and "truth-in-recruiting". HR forced them to include more SMEs in the process and to require that all of the interviewers - especially the non-SMEs and managers - to know best - or at least better - practices for interviewing. . .

washedup 13y ago

I feel for your friend. I went through two phone interviews, flown to Mountain View for all day interviews, and was told by the team that they wanted to hire me, but first my candidate packet had to be reviewed by three different hiring committees. I made it through the first two, but in the third hiring committee I was turned down because my GPA was not at the new 3.7+ hiring guideline. I was heartbroken, and I am sure other people have experienced the same thing.

nilkn 13y ago
I thought the GPA requirements were done away with a while ago?
VladRussian2 13y ago
> three different hiring committees. Hiring by committee :)
api 13y ago
Same exact thing here. Overall the experience was okay, but I ended up getting mixed signals at the end. Yes? No? Huh? Was never asked about GPA. I have no idea why the "no" in committee, but I get the impression that they approve more people than they hire. Moral of the story is probably that the initial approval is not a yes but it just means you passed the technical test. I have mixed feelings. Would have been a cool place to work, but there are lots of alternatives.
- washedup 13y ago
  Yea, I agree with you. "Yes" to "you are able to work here" but no "you're hired!" I don't care about it anymore, but 5 years ago when this was my first job prospect out of school, I was really excited.

jrockway 13y ago

I've interviewed at and worked for a number very very large companies before, and none of them have been as disrespectful at interviewing and hiring as Google sounds from these stories. I'm not defending this practice at all, but I think I can understand it. It sounds like the typical problems involved in scheduling 10 people to all perform together at once. Nobody can prevent people from getting sick. Going out of town and missing an interview is pretty flaky, but it happens. You can look it as "Google is evil and wants to torture candidates" or "people are flaky". It's certainly human nature to be bitter about someone fucking up an important day for you, but ultimately, bitterness gets you nothing. It's no problem if you want to complain to your friends or on HN, but why not come back for the second try? Your friend could have had another free trip to Mountain View to actually be interviewed properly, and maybe get the job he wanted. (They do pay pretty well at Google, after all; the interviews aren't for some volunteer position.) (As for the calculus interview, that sounds like fair game. PMs are supposed to have some PM interviews and some SWE interviews, and math is a perfectly acceptable area to ask SWE candidates. It's not where I would spend my time, but that's part of the process that people hate; different interviewers have different preferred questions. I would probably have asked "how do you test that", which would probably raise a few eyebrows in a story like this too. But ultimately, having that understanding is something I value in future coworkers, so it's what I'd ask about in interviews.) Finally, if you have any questions about the hiring process at all, feel free to send me an email, jrockway AT google.com. I'm not a recruiter, I'm a programmer who cares about making the process work, but I'll try to help you out!

x0x0 13y ago
you say flaky, I say assholes who don't respect others' time. And way to move the goalposts re: your friend would be happy comment. I think what would have made his friend happy is to be treated with respect. Similarly with your bitterness comment; it's not bitter, it's letting the world know you and your colleagues believe it's right to treat people this way (because if you all didn't think this was ok, then you wouldn't do it).
- jrockway 13y ago
  I'm not defending the hiring practices at all; on some level, we lose out on a lot of qualified candidates who would do great work and would be great to work with. I'm not a recruiter, but I try to help out however I can; people on HN regularly email me asking for advice, or to ping their recruiter, and so on, and I'm happy to do this. I want to work with you, and I don't want the intrinsic flakiness of people to adversely affect your experience. But ultimately, I can't control other people, I can only control myself. All my other comment is saying is how to think about the problem from another perspective. You have a lot to offer Google, but Google is not exactly coming up empty on its end. Therefore, I think it makes sense to cut Google some slack. But if you don't, that's your prerogative. I personally don't aim for 100% perfection 100% of the time, but some people do, and that is respectable. (Oh, and I don't think complaining about the interview on your blog is bad at all. What's "bitter" is refusing to come back for a second try, even though you still are kind of interested in working at Google.)