3 ms·

The existing "employees choose which companies to respond to" approach is probably most in line with the realities of the tech labor market, and it gives compan

by glimcat 12y ago

The existing "employees choose which companies to respond to" approach is probably most in line with the realities of the tech labor market, and it gives companies a smaller pool of respondents to look at which have (nominally) read and been interested by their most recent job post. And for applicants, you get more leverage if you judge which positions are potentially relevant, then tailor a response for each company. The thread was fairly popular - but I don't think it really improves on the status quo, for either player. But, I can see it helping for people who are less experienced or confident or whatever and likely to take job posts at face value instead of as a signal of the problems the company is trying to solve through hiring. It would be better to get past that obstacle, but pragmatically it may have its uses.

jader201 12y ago
I agree with you for the most part. However, I don't think any of the companies that reached out to me ever post on the "Who is hiring" thread. Maybe my situation was an edge case -- I'm a C# developer, and I think my post stayed within the top 5 most of the time. So others may not have had the same experience, which is why I wanted to gather more feedback. If many others had a similar experience, then I think the "Who is hiring" thread may not be enough, or may need some tweaking.
- glimcat 12y ago
  Yeah, I think that's most of how it could generate benefit, i.e. companies often don't want to post in much the same way that applicants often don't want to pitch. It's easy to find plausible excuses. Highly-sorted posts are almost certainly an edge case, but convolved against other factors (e.g. relative popularity of C#, how well post resonated with the subset of hiring viewers who ended up seeing it). Whoever ended up with post #70 likely got far fewer views relative to post quality & desirability factors, and thus fewer responses. But at the same time, "uncommon yet high-demand" keywords probably got a Ctrl+F bonus. It's an SEO problem as much as a pitching problem, and more so if you're not favored by HN's comment sorting.

by glimcat 12y ago

jader201 12y ago

I agree with you for the most part. However, I don't think any of the companies that reached out to me ever post on the "Who is hiring" thread. Maybe my situation was an edge case -- I'm a C# developer, and I think my post stayed within the top 5 most of the time. So others may not have had the same experience, which is why I wanted to gather more feedback. If many others had a similar experience, then I think the "Who is hiring" thread may not be enough, or may need some tweaking.

glimcat 12y ago
Yeah, I think that's most of how it could generate benefit, i.e. companies often don't want to post in much the same way that applicants often don't want to pitch. It's easy to find plausible excuses. Highly-sorted posts are almost certainly an edge case, but convolved against other factors (e.g. relative popularity of C#, how well post resonated with the subset of hiring viewers who ended up seeing it). Whoever ended up with post #70 likely got far fewer views relative to post quality & desirability factors, and thus fewer responses. But at the same time, "uncommon yet high-demand" keywords probably got a Ctrl+F bonus. It's an SEO problem as much as a pitching problem, and more so if you're not favored by HN's comment sorting.