The latest trend for tech interviews: Days of unpaid homework

Post by Clubber » Thu, Apr 19, 2018, 6:07 PM UTC

monksy wrote: post #339

speby wrote: post #218

Our industry's hiring practices are absolutely obnoxious. In an ideal world, you could trust someone's resume. e.g. "I've written large production programs in C." Ok, great, so then clearly this person knows C so there should be no need to dissect code or run them thru some linked list algorithm and see if they know how to use pointers correctly. Yet, we do. Ok, then what about open source contributions (if they have…

I'm not sure its just the recruiting side. We're seeing some concerning positions in the market: 1. Expectation of long work hours (Frequent and short deadlines due to agile) 2. Micromanagment being the standard (agile) 3. Terrible environments (open desk/office) 4. Removal of vacation time (unlimited PTO means you have no vacation days)

Post by aje403 » Thu, Apr 19, 2018, 6:10 PM UTC

newnewpdro wrote: post #415

aje403 wrote: post #348

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you've been coding for 30 years and you get too nervous to write fizzbuzz when talking to people, that doesn't mean they should hire you, that means you either have personal life problems going on or you need to see a psychologist

Historically, and if we're talking about someone with 30 years programming experience, this history is very relevant - programming has been a popular field for smart but antisocial/unsocialized nerds who had very few if any friends growing up and have spent much of their life alone at a computer. For a person with that background, simply sharing a relatively small private room with a total stranger can be overwhelmin…

Post by woolvalley » Thu, Apr 19, 2018, 6:13 PM UTC

speby wrote: post #218

Our industry's hiring practices are absolutely obnoxious. In an ideal world, you could trust someone's resume. e.g. "I've written large production programs in C." Ok, great, so then clearly this person knows C so there should be no need to dissect code or run them thru some linked list algorithm and see if they know how to use pointers correctly. Yet, we do. Ok, then what about open source contributions (if they have…

Post by woolvalley » Thu, Apr 19, 2018, 6:14 PM UTC

pwthornton wrote: post #98

If you're going to expect people to do real work, you need to pay them. This is common in a field like journalism. Want to do a one or two day trial of a reporter? Pay them to write for you! Have them work in a real environment and do real work for publication. If you're not willing to pay people for their time, and it's not an executive position, asking for days of a person's time is asinine. Also, if the homework i…

Post by poulsbohemian » Thu, Apr 19, 2018, 6:17 PM UTC

frenchie14 wrote: post #281

ams6110 wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> we don't really have a way to de-facto verify that the person can do what they say they can do We do, it's called the probationary period. 30 or 60 days, or even a bit more. If the person isn't working out, or is not a good "fit" you can say goodbye. And it goes both ways. Candidates might find that the actual work or work environment is not what was portrayed in the recruitment process. If they don't like your com…

Scenario: you have two offers on hand. One offer is for a full time position. The other is for "let's see how the next one to two months goes and then we'll decide if you still have a job or not." Which do you pick? All things being equal, the first offer carries significantly less risk as an employee and is clearly the better choice. If you're an employer who really wants to hire engineers, why would you give an off…