5 ms·

Business-oriented publications and companies that are hiring always seem to carefully avoid the easy way to fix long hiring times: Increase wages.

by airza 11y ago

pjc50 11y ago
The long hiring times seem not to be due to lack of applicants, but due to internal hiring politics and process. Rising conservativism about making a "bad hire", perhaps.
- airza 11y ago
  You can't discount the role of applicant volume in that, though; if you have a 20 day hiring process with one person going through it at a time, the odds of it taking 40-60 days are a lot better than if you have 2-3 going through at once.
  - pjc50 11y ago
    Those are unrealistically low applicant volume numbers, surely? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/10949825/Employers-receive-39-applications-for-every-graduate-job.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/10949825/Employers-r...
    - airza 11y ago
      It's not clear to me how many of those applicants would actually be valid for the job, so i'm not sure. The companies that i've worked at which had stagnant wages had barely 1 candidate per position most of the time, so i've seen it somewhere at least.
    - madcaptenor 11y ago
      They get 39 applicants per job, but how many of those are actually going through the hiring process? In my experience most resumes end up getting looked at and not considered as a candidate.
- frandroid 11y ago
  To add to airza's point above, if the team hiring is currently working on a timely deliverable, they can't dedicate as much time as they would like to the hiring process, even if it's counter-productive in the long term.
atwebb 11y ago
The point of the article was less on the supply side and more that the process itself has become more rigorous. That people put up with it might imply they could lower wages. EDIT: Can someone explain the negative votes? OP was right if the issue was: we can't find people, rather than: we're going to make the process even more rigorous and time consuming. Maybe increasing wages will draw more qualified applicants which will qualify for the tests faster?

Business-oriented publications and companies that are hiring always seem to carefully avoid the easy way to fix long hiring times: Increase wages.

by airza 11y ago

Business-oriented publications and companies that are hiring always seem to carefully avoid the easy way to fix long hiring times: Increase wages.

pjc50 11y ago

The long hiring times seem not to be due to lack of applicants, but due to internal hiring politics and process. Rising conservativism about making a "bad hire", perhaps.

airza 11y ago
You can't discount the role of applicant volume in that, though; if you have a 20 day hiring process with one person going through it at a time, the odds of it taking 40-60 days are a lot better than if you have 2-3 going through at once.
- pjc50 11y ago
  Those are unrealistically low applicant volume numbers, surely? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/10949825/Employers-receive-39-applications-for-every-graduate-job.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/jobs/10949825/Employers-r...
  - airza 11y ago
    It's not clear to me how many of those applicants would actually be valid for the job, so i'm not sure. The companies that i've worked at which had stagnant wages had barely 1 candidate per position most of the time, so i've seen it somewhere at least.
  - madcaptenor 11y ago
    They get 39 applicants per job, but how many of those are actually going through the hiring process? In my experience most resumes end up getting looked at and not considered as a candidate.
frandroid 11y ago
To add to airza's point above, if the team hiring is currently working on a timely deliverable, they can't dedicate as much time as they would like to the hiring process, even if it's counter-productive in the long term.

atwebb 11y ago

The point of the article was less on the supply side and more that the process itself has become more rigorous. That people put up with it might imply they could lower wages. EDIT: Can someone explain the negative votes? OP was right if the issue was: we can't find people, rather than: we're going to make the process even more rigorous and time consuming. Maybe increasing wages will draw more qualified applicants which will qualify for the tests faster?