6 ms·

It's funny you mention that. My hiring success (in terms of impact the new hires made) went way up when we stopped wording job postings using traditional enter

by eitally 11y ago

It's funny you mention that. My hiring success (in terms of impact the new hires made) went way up when we stopped wording job postings using traditional enterprisy language & bullets and instead posted much simpler "hackers wanted" at the local universities. Note: this was in Mexico, not the US, though a handful of the folks I recruited there have gone on to work for SV startups. I feel obligated to note one special case because I still feel a little hurt by it and consider it poaching. (Gbox) http://www.gbox.com http://www.gbox.com has 5 of my former employees (3 devs, 1 SQA lead, 1 UI/UX) out of their total staff of about 20-25.

fmsf 11y ago
That is not poaching, that is you either not rewarding properly or having a sub par work environment
umanwizard 11y ago
What's wrong with poaching? You don't own your employees; this isn't 1850.
- brightball 11y ago
  When you lose 5 people to the same place that's usually from insider recruiting. A lot of companies use No Raid clauses in both employee and client contracts specifically to prevent that type of thing. If you want to go work somewhere else, that is totally up to you but I'm more than allowed to have a policy stating that you're not allowed to recruit away my entire staff because that destabilizes the entire business, makes the business unable to meet it's contractual obligations and in a multitude of cases can jeopardize the jobs of everybody who is still there.
  - umanwizard 11y ago
    I still don't understand why that policy's fair. I recently left one company and joined another, and am trying to convince all my former coworkers to apply here as well because I genuinely think it's a way better place to work. If you can't compete on the labor market fairly, you deserve to lose employees. Policies like the one you describe are just a market inefficiency that doesn't have a real justification for existing (outside of your own interests).
    - brightball 11y ago
      If a company employs 20 people and 5 of them are programmers without which the company can't function, one leaves and recruits away the other 4 to go work at the same place that means the remaining 15 people are out of work. Business owners have a lot of people's livelihoods at stake. It's about a lot more than just how much more another company is willing to offer you. That might not matter to you, but that's also why you get to see the policy before agreeing to work at the company. If coming to work at my office and having the flexibility to recruit away all my staff is important to you...then you don't really have to sign the contract. If you do sign the contract then you're agreeing to the terms. It's not rocket science. Fair policy is that you get to decide whether or not to abide by it before I start paying you. You have the right to decide that policy isn't okay with you and not take the job. Nobody forced you to sign the contract and take the job. If it's a market problem, then I will eventually lose all of those employees because they will have plenty of other choices if they aren't happy working there anymore. Or to spin this around into the language that you used, policies like the one I describe exist because a lot of people only have their own self-interest in mind and part of my job is to have the interests of all of my employees in mind.
      - logicfiction 11y ago
        Anti-raiding policies seem to stand on dubious legal grounds (that is there is no consensus with some places in the US prohibiting) and most often only include the solicitation from direct competitors to the business, not just other companies in general.
  - s73v3r 11y ago
    I'm guessing there was a reason they all up and left. And quite frankly, it's not my fault that you have a bunch of people who want to leave. The stability of your business is not my problem.
    - brightball 11y ago
      I'm fully aware that this isn't a popular answer, but it is reality. This is anecdotal, but I've had an employee leave when she was paid 3 times what I made and given almost full autonomy. She hired away all of the staff at a branch office except a woman dying of cancer and another who was about to move out of state, then took the entire set of clients with her. This was an actual non-compete situation that nearly cost 13 other people their jobs and nearly bankrupted us 6 times over the next 2 years. We took on more debt while trying not to go under to avoid having to fire people who didn't deserve to lose their jobs over a crappy situation. There are some people who will be unhappy regardless of what you do for them. In that particular situation, I cannot imagine anything else that we could have done for her. Some people are just self-centered and oblivious to the reality that their actions have consequences. Yes, you better believe the stability of the business isn't your problem but it is mine and No Raid clauses exist primarily to prevent the actions of a few people from affecting the lively hoods of everybody else who works for the company. If a bunch of people are unhappy and want to leave, then they are welcome to seek out other opportunities. Nobody's holding them hostage. What we are doing is making sure that before they start working at our company, they understand that if they aren't happy they are free to go work somewhere else but they are not free to actively jeopardize everybody else. If that is a problem, they don't have to come work here. Pretty simple. You are put off by not being able to recruit away my staff...don't work here. Nobody's holding a gun to your head.
      - s73v3r 11y ago
        The reality is that you are not entitled to employees. If you don't want a flood of them to leave at once, you need to keep them happy. End of story.
        brightball 11y ago

by eitally 11y ago

fmsf 11y ago

That is not poaching, that is you either not rewarding properly or having a sub par work environment

umanwizard 11y ago

What's wrong with poaching? You don't own your employees; this isn't 1850.

brightball 11y ago
When you lose 5 people to the same place that's usually from insider recruiting. A lot of companies use No Raid clauses in both employee and client contracts specifically to prevent that type of thing. If you want to go work somewhere else, that is totally up to you but I'm more than allowed to have a policy stating that you're not allowed to recruit away my entire staff because that destabilizes the entire business, makes the business unable to meet it's contractual obligations and in a multitude of cases can jeopardize the jobs of everybody who is still there.
- umanwizard 11y ago
  I still don't understand why that policy's fair. I recently left one company and joined another, and am trying to convince all my former coworkers to apply here as well because I genuinely think it's a way better place to work. If you can't compete on the labor market fairly, you deserve to lose employees. Policies like the one you describe are just a market inefficiency that doesn't have a real justification for existing (outside of your own interests).
  - brightball 11y ago
    If a company employs 20 people and 5 of them are programmers without which the company can't function, one leaves and recruits away the other 4 to go work at the same place that means the remaining 15 people are out of work. Business owners have a lot of people's livelihoods at stake. It's about a lot more than just how much more another company is willing to offer you. That might not matter to you, but that's also why you get to see the policy before agreeing to work at the company. If coming to work at my office and having the flexibility to recruit away all my staff is important to you...then you don't really have to sign the contract. If you do sign the contract then you're agreeing to the terms. It's not rocket science. Fair policy is that you get to decide whether or not to abide by it before I start paying you. You have the right to decide that policy isn't okay with you and not take the job. Nobody forced you to sign the contract and take the job. If it's a market problem, then I will eventually lose all of those employees because they will have plenty of other choices if they aren't happy working there anymore. Or to spin this around into the language that you used, policies like the one I describe exist because a lot of people only have their own self-interest in mind and part of my job is to have the interests of all of my employees in mind.
    - logicfiction 11y ago
      Anti-raiding policies seem to stand on dubious legal grounds (that is there is no consensus with some places in the US prohibiting) and most often only include the solicitation from direct competitors to the business, not just other companies in general.
- s73v3r 11y ago
  I'm guessing there was a reason they all up and left. And quite frankly, it's not my fault that you have a bunch of people who want to leave. The stability of your business is not my problem.
  - brightball 11y ago
    I'm fully aware that this isn't a popular answer, but it is reality. This is anecdotal, but I've had an employee leave when she was paid 3 times what I made and given almost full autonomy. She hired away all of the staff at a branch office except a woman dying of cancer and another who was about to move out of state, then took the entire set of clients with her. This was an actual non-compete situation that nearly cost 13 other people their jobs and nearly bankrupted us 6 times over the next 2 years. We took on more debt while trying not to go under to avoid having to fire people who didn't deserve to lose their jobs over a crappy situation. There are some people who will be unhappy regardless of what you do for them. In that particular situation, I cannot imagine anything else that we could have done for her. Some people are just self-centered and oblivious to the reality that their actions have consequences. Yes, you better believe the stability of the business isn't your problem but it is mine and No Raid clauses exist primarily to prevent the actions of a few people from affecting the lively hoods of everybody else who works for the company. If a bunch of people are unhappy and want to leave, then they are welcome to seek out other opportunities. Nobody's holding them hostage. What we are doing is making sure that before they start working at our company, they understand that if they aren't happy they are free to go work somewhere else but they are not free to actively jeopardize everybody else. If that is a problem, they don't have to come work here. Pretty simple. You are put off by not being able to recruit away my staff...don't work here. Nobody's holding a gun to your head.
    - s73v3r 11y ago
      The reality is that you are not entitled to employees. If you don't want a flood of them to leave at once, you need to keep them happy. End of story.
      - brightball 11y ago