4 ms·
The last big interview I had was with a four letter company in Canary Wharf. The interview 'day' was me alone in a catered meeting room with a File->New assignm
by qxmat 12y ago
The last big interview I had was with a four letter company in Canary Wharf. The interview 'day' was me alone in a catered meeting room with a File->New assignment.
Despite end of the day praise and the acknowledgement that I'd be recommended for the next phase, not to mention a genuine rapport with the devs that sporadically popped in, the four letter firm acquired a software house and froze recruitment a week later.
I spent a day revealing tricks and patterns - something I charge a substantial daily rate - for nothing. But this is ridiculously common: the more effort required to interview the less likely I am to get the job.
Nowadays I'm happy to walk out of bullshit interviews where they ask open ended questions where only their answer is correct.
You get to a certain age/experience where it becomes apparent that a good interview is an informal session where you have a meeting of the minds not an adversarial grilling.
- robmcm 12y agoI have been on the other side when consulting at a 4 letter company in that location. Most of the time you know nothing about the interview until someone asks you to give them a technical screening an hour before. There is also no formal process or seeming involvement from HR, it's just a, "is this person any good". From my experience it often comes down to, in order of importance: - Are they willing to be perm - Do they know what they are talking about - Will they fit in the team The first one seems to be a trump card, even though most perms end up leaving before the contractors. This brings me onto another point in which the best interview process is hiring someone as a consultant, and then converting them after a year or so if you are both happy to.
- skore 12y ago> the best interview process is hiring someone as a consultant, and then converting them after a year or so Unfortunately, this is also a "great" way to keep temp employees in constant limbo with the perm job as the carrot and stick. Usually, the temp job also leaves you with a lot less money (particularly because all the perks - insurance etc. - are reserved for proper employees) and, depending on the company, that's just all too attractive: A temp worker turning in work like a perm worker, always trying to "get there".
- robmcm 12y agoIronically it's the opposite in the UK, temp employees in the tech industry typically earn a lot more. In context to the interview I was talking about the perm rate was half of the contract rates they were paying people on the same team.
- hackerboos 12y agoI concur. As a contractor in the UK, you are likely not paying National Insurance contributions, are able to write off mileage and other expenses, can reduce your tax liability with dividends. Plus you'd still get access to the NHS. I'm perm at the moment, but if I was a contractor I'd be saving a significant amount of money.
- shubb 12y agoThe main thing is that if you are earning decent money, you want to be a contractor because it is tax efficient.
- collyw 12y agoYou ought to be paying National Insurance.
- hackerboos 12y agoIf you own your own limited company and received income via dividends, it's not subject to NI.
- gaius 12y agoThere are a lot of people like this in the UK, not just in IT, the BBC, the media, even the government are full of them. They look like employees, quack like employees, but dodge PAYE. They are the problem, not a couple of billionaires with Swiss bank accounts.
- madeofpalk 12y agoIn AU, once you factor in tax and benefits, contractors typically earn 50% more than full time employees. For a $100k full time role, the same might go to a contractor for $800+/day ($180k/year).