4 ms·

> The author of this piece made the classic, and often unavoidable mistake of being between a rock and a hard place and not vetting the company she interviewed

> The author of this piece made the classic, and often unavoidable mistake of being between a rock and a hard place and not vetting the company she interviewed at and ultimately worked for for a day. Vetting a place for a hostile work environment, esp. when the company is small and has had few employees, is really difficult. > First, I didn't find Ajay's interview to be that weird, saying why you came up with the idea for your company and your qualifications should be expected, not interpreted as a way for the founder to diminish the potential future employee. If you don't believe in your leaders, and don't trust them, you are in a lot of trouble. His attitude isn't troubling except in hindsight after we learn that sexism and sexual harassment are A-OK in the office and that service providers shoulder a ton of blame for little reward. > 12 hour days is insane, and wrong. Having to provide your own device is not really that insane for small teams. Obviously it's great if a company provides it, and probably larger companies should always provide a workstation, but this doesn't come across as totally abnormal. For the low pay those customer service people received, it is abhorrent that they must also pay for supplies to do their basic job. It's a safe bet to say that the programmers there didn't have to buy their own desktops for development. > The constant "want to hear a joke" and racist/sexist tone at the company is also not acceptable, but clearly was supported by the people working there at the time, if the anecdote is taken at face value. Uh, the author clearly related that several people seemed uncomfortable by the sexual harassment in the office. Did you even read the anecdote about 'Josh' being harassed in plain view of the office?! > There appear to be a lot of growing pains at Handy, which isn't a surprise, but hopefully they can move fast and get their support/service wing to be as tight and focused as the rest of their team. A hostile workplace, sexual harassment, demeaning low wage service providers, and being general assholes isn't growing pains, it's a sign that the company is horrible and no one should do business with them.

codezero 12y ago
> Vetting a place for a hostile work environment, esp. when the company is small and has had few employees, is really difficult. From the anecdote, it doesn't sound like she interviewed with anyone from the support team, that is a big problem and something she could have asked about. You're right, it's easy to hide, but since she only worked there one day and ran into this, it seems likely it would have been a red flag in the interview process. > His attitude isn't troubling except in hindsight after we learn that sexism and sexual harassment are A-OK I agree, which is why I said "but clearly was supported by the people working there at the time" so I'm not sure why you said: > Uh, the author clearly related that several people seemed uncomfortable by the sexual harassment in the office. Being uncomfortable with it doesn't mean that it isn't pervasive and effectively sanctioned by the company. So I think we actually agree here, maybe I've phrased something poorly, sorry about that. > For the low pay those customer service people received, it is abhorrent that they must also pay for supplies I agree, they should provide equipment at this company, given the context, and the salary of the service employees. My reaction is that I've done this kind of work and this seems to be a common situation at many companies, again this is why I said engineers may not relate well to the story. You should check with your less prestigious teams and make sure they are getting the same care and attention that your engineers are, you may be surprised at how poorly non technical people are treated even at your own companies.
- maximilianburke 12y ago
  > From the anecdote, it doesn't sound like she interviewed with anyone from the support team, that is a big problem and something she could have asked about. You're right, it's easy to hide, but since she only worked there one day and ran into this, it seems likely it would have been a red flag in the interview process. Nobody should ever have to vet a workplace to see if it has a hostile work environment! And how would you vet for that anyways? If the candidate were to ask "do you tolerate/encourage racist/sexist/homophobic jokes?", would the interviewer ever respond in the affirmative?
  - codezero 12y ago
    I agree, nobody should have to, and I don't think I ever suggested that people should! Hostile work environments exist, and there are things an interviewee can do to try to pick up on them. First step is to actually interview with people from the team that will be your peers, not just your superior. It sounds like the author didn't do that, which is a huge red flag, again, this all seems to boil down to the author being desperately in need of work and not responding to the red flags that were already present.

codezero 12y ago

> Vetting a place for a hostile work environment, esp. when the company is small and has had few employees, is really difficult. From the anecdote, it doesn't sound like she interviewed with anyone from the support team, that is a big problem and something she could have asked about. You're right, it's easy to hide, but since she only worked there one day and ran into this, it seems likely it would have been a red flag in the interview process. > His attitude isn't troubling except in hindsight after we learn that sexism and sexual harassment are A-OK I agree, which is why I said "but clearly was supported by the people working there at the time" so I'm not sure why you said: > Uh, the author clearly related that several people seemed uncomfortable by the sexual harassment in the office. Being uncomfortable with it doesn't mean that it isn't pervasive and effectively sanctioned by the company. So I think we actually agree here, maybe I've phrased something poorly, sorry about that. > For the low pay those customer service people received, it is abhorrent that they must also pay for supplies I agree, they should provide equipment at this company, given the context, and the salary of the service employees. My reaction is that I've done this kind of work and this seems to be a common situation at many companies, again this is why I said engineers may not relate well to the story. You should check with your less prestigious teams and make sure they are getting the same care and attention that your engineers are, you may be surprised at how poorly non technical people are treated even at your own companies.

maximilianburke 12y ago
> From the anecdote, it doesn't sound like she interviewed with anyone from the support team, that is a big problem and something she could have asked about. You're right, it's easy to hide, but since she only worked there one day and ran into this, it seems likely it would have been a red flag in the interview process. Nobody should ever have to vet a workplace to see if it has a hostile work environment! And how would you vet for that anyways? If the candidate were to ask "do you tolerate/encourage racist/sexist/homophobic jokes?", would the interviewer ever respond in the affirmative?
- codezero 12y ago
  I agree, nobody should have to, and I don't think I ever suggested that people should! Hostile work environments exist, and there are things an interviewee can do to try to pick up on them. First step is to actually interview with people from the team that will be your peers, not just your superior. It sounds like the author didn't do that, which is a huge red flag, again, this all seems to boil down to the author being desperately in need of work and not responding to the red flags that were already present.