Live data from Hacker News

200k people applied for jobs at Amazon in a single week

cbsnews.com

161–170 of 207 posts

Re: 200k people applied for jobs at Amazon in a single week

#163
People are listening to too much government propaganda. The percentage of Americans employed is actually EXTREMELY low! The gov press releases EXCLUDE all those unemployed pesky minorities with a category called "discouraged"(= non white) workers! Excluding this recovery, employment is at a 35-year low!

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/EMRATIO

Re: 200k people applied for jobs at Amazon in a single week

#164
post #112
post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to work for a place where, during the 60 or 90 day check-in with HR after you got hired, HR would put a hard sell on you to write a Glassdoor review. It had the effect of flooding it with 4 and 5 star reviews from people who hasn't been around long enough to see any downsides to their job. Meanwhile, as the company began imploding, the folks jumping ship mostly didn't bother to write a 1 star review on the way…

I experienced this too. In fact it was within the first couple weeks of being hired that you were encouraged to post to Glassdoor (and a Linkedin post that they curated). Definitely rubbed me the wrong way, but besides that they were really great people. I don't know if they realize what bad taste this is, just don't care, or if it's really just one person with too much influence creating policy. This was a while ago…

I've also definitely sorted by date on Glassdoor and ignored any reviews that looked like they were posted all at once.

On more than one occasion I've seen a blistering one star review, followed by a bunch of positive reviews that all came in within days. It was clearly a situation where someone at the company saw the low score, had an "uh-oh moment," and called in the cavalry to write positive reviews.

Re: 200k people applied for jobs at Amazon in a single week

#165
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s worth mentioning that sometimes there are legitimate reasons for removing reviews. Our company had a slew of negative reviews suddenly. Upon closer look, the reviewers were working in positions we had never employed anyone for. They were posting about an office they worked at in Israel (we are in the USA). Turns out there was another startup in Israel who had a very similar name to ours. That company closed a bi…

>Our company had a slew of negative reviews suddenly. Upon closer look Did you scrutinized positive reviews the same way or just glanced them over and went "yeah, five stars, this is good"?

The commenter sounds reasonable. I'm sure you would be concerned if your company suffered the same problem.

Re: 200k people applied for jobs at Amazon in a single week

#166
post #105

My friend’s wife took almost 8 months to find a production support job. Why are jobs so hard to get these days? Is it because competition is so high and for a single job there are 20 applicants?

I don't get it either. I found myself involuntarily out of work a couple years ago (company shut down), and it took a month before I finally found something after > 20 applications. Out of at least 20 applications, I only ended up interviewing with two - and I'm qualified as hell for software development. One thing I wonder, though - there's some anecdata that certain qualifications can actually work against you. For example, this lady (http://blog.alinelerner.com/how-different-is-a-b-s-in-comput...) suggests that you consider rejecting anybody with an MS in CS. I've seen many people on here and on Slashdot suggest that they would never consider hiring anybody with an MS certification, for example (and some even saying they'd never hire somebody who went to college!). You never know what weird filter somebody is applying to your resume.

Re: 200k people applied for jobs at Amazon in a single week

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

qualified* (*and will accept what we're paying)

Are you claiming that there are a large number of qualified applicants that are currently unemployed because there are no openings paying as much as they believe they are worth? Or are you saying that if they paid more, already employed applicants would jump from another company, leaving a job opening at their current company? If this is the case, it still means that there are fewer qualified candidates then openings…

I suspect the imbalance is greatly over-egged by companies whose problems lie their business model, but who yearn for a quick fix of lower wages rather than (gasp) actual innovation.

Re: 200k people applied for jobs at Amazon in a single week

#168
post #156

Great clickbait. The first sentence provides crucial context - Amazon wants to hire 30K. So they had, on average, about 7 applications for every job. That actually doesn't seem so great. It's even less impressive when it's incredibly easy to get a ton of low-quality matches when recruiting. So if Amazon execs wanted to tout a big number of applications they could just advertise these positions in a wildly aggressive…

They were hiring in 6 cities, so that's an average of 30k applicants per location. That's a heck of a lot for a single community, even in a large city. How many businesses get tens of thousands of job applicants at a single location? One of the locations is Arlington Virginia, the future location of HQ2, but they're only hiring 400 there now. In future they expect that will go up to 24k, which is about 10% of the pop…

Sure 10% of that city, but there's quite a bit more population in under 30 minutes of driving.

I did a 15 miles radius arround Arlington on that tool [1] and it say 2,787,933 people, thus closer to 1% of the population.

[1] https://www.freemaptools.com/find-population.htm

Re: 200k people applied for jobs at Amazon in a single week

#169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but were all 30k jobs listed? I'm assuming the positions listed were nowhere near close to the positions they need to hire for. As in, they probably havent even listed for a lot of the roles. That said, I really didn't read the article :o

You can assume if they wanted to hire 30k people they probably have a listing that applies to more than one position.

sure, but what i'm saying, is were all the actual unique positions listed, not were each individual position for each job listed .... make sense?

Re: 200k people applied for jobs at Amazon in a single week

#170
post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>what are these displaced american workers doing for more than $80k? Being unemployed and making 0k. Avoiding hiring US employees for over $80k doesn't mean they're hiring those who accept below $80k. They're not being considered for those jobs at all in the first place. I assure you there are legions of very smart lawyers who work very hard on the process for employers - I would know, I've prepared the petitions, an…

The lack of perspective and basic reasoning on this is staggering. > shitty wages, hours, and work environment. A "shitty" wage is better than being unemployed and making 0k. Perhaps not if we were talking about at or near minimum wage. But we're not. We're talking nearly double the median income of the location in question and well beyond the poverty line. If there were really this untapped market of native talent t…

I'm staggered that you accuse me of lack of perspective and basic reasoning, then posted this. Why pretend as if I wasn't talking about a shitty wage relative to the market rate of the skills in question?

Most tech workers wouldn't take a $40k job because they realize that's a gross undervaluing of their skillsets. It's a much smarter decision to continue applying and hope somebody recognizes your ability and pays you what your labor is worth, rather than tie up your schedule and possibly relocate to work the low-paying job. You can ask these bad-faith questions all you want, and they might be helpful for confusing and misleading people online, but I assure you, employers have thought about them more than you, and have long since found their answer.

It seems to me that you're in outright denial about companies getting cheaper labor through the H-1B system. Instead of asking these "if companies really want to save money, why don't they just x" questions, I'd ask you why Disney DID lay off hundreds of IT workers at a time and had them train their H-1B replacements who often lacked the same skill level as their predecessors if it wasn't a significant cost savings? These aren't allegations, they're reality. What was found in court wasn't that Disney isn't guilty of replacing workers, it's that they did do it and it's perfectly legal! Wages have dropped, many Americans have switched to other professions they wouldn't have otherwise, and profits for IT firms have gone through the roof due to the H-1B program. Try reading rather than theorizing all by yourself. https://www.nber.org/chapters/c13842.pdf And go tell the Disney workers they didn't really lose their jobs.

I don't normally post opinion pieces, but this is very devastating and well-researched: https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2014/07/27/bill-gates...

Business executives and politicians endlessly complain that there is a "shortage" of qualified Americans and that the U.S. must admit more high-skilled guest workers to fill jobs in STEM fields: science, technology, engineering and math. This claim is echoed by everyone from President Obama and Rupert Murdoch to Mark Zuckerberg and Bill Gates.

Yet within the past month, two odd things occurred: Census reported that only one in four STEM degree holders is in a STEM job, and Microsoft announced plans to downsize its workforce by 18,000 jobs. Even so, the House is considering legislation that, like the Senate immigration bill before it, would increase to unprecedented levels the supply of high-skill guest workers and automatic green cards to foreign STEM students.

As longtime researchers of the STEM workforce and immigration who have separately done in-depth analyses on these issues, and having no self-interest in the outcomes of the legislative debate, we feel compelled to report that none of us has been able to find any credible evidence to support the IT industry's assertions of labor shortages.

...

If a shortage did exist, wages would be rising as companies tried to attract scarce workers. Instead, legislation that expanded visas for IT personnel during the 1990s has kept average wages flat over the past 16 years. Indeed, guest workers have become the predominant source of new hires in these fields.

Post reply on HN