Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

We created a fake language to root out resume liars

facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 771 posts

Re: We created a fake language to root out resume liars

#601

Post by dliff »

DoubleGlazing wrote: post #385
noneeeed wrote: post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a recruiter say "XML and UML are basically the same, right?". There's almost a dangerous level of knowledge among some recruiters where they think they know enough to do crap like this.

That's something I've noticed over the last 10 years or so as job descriptions get longer. All those new terms like React, Vue, SaaS, Azure, AWS etc. They don't really know what they mean. I was asked if I could code in Azure. This led to a weird conversation where I was trying to explain what Azure was, whilst he wouldn't listen to me and was adamant that it was a programming language.

Not a recruiter but a co-worker who asked me "Do you know what an algorithm is? We might need one."

Re: We created a fake language to root out resume liars

#602

Post by Nebasuke »

benibela wrote: post #187
MaxBarraclough wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the spirit of Hacker News I'd like to respond to this decidedly human problem with a technical question: which file format did you use for your CV? Was it an easily-edited .docx file, or a PDF? The PDF format is somewhat awkward to edit. I've never put much stock in the idea that this is one of its virtues, but for this specific kind of manipulation I can see it might be effective.

When I used a latex-made PDF, the only places that responded to my application were universities for PhD positions

I've gotten my last four jobs with a LaTeX made PDF and plenty of other offers.

I had a couple of recruiters ask for a doc/docx. I think I only made one conversion where it was the actual HR from the company using it for keyword matching and I refused to do it for the other recruiters. Still got invited to interviews of companies for those other recruiters.

Re: We created a fake language to root out resume liars

#603

Post by WaitWaitWha »

This is a misguided project with some moral failings (some have pointed out already).

It is always easy to beat up the candidate at the bottom. They are persona non-grata. Not so with recruiters; let's be honest, most early in their career are afraid the recruiter might blackball you.

That said, there is a huge difference between contingency and retained recruiters.

In a very simplified explanation, contingency recruiters search for jobs, blanket potential candidates with the jobs, then try to sell the responding candidates to the company. The company pays a finder's fee to the recruiter. There is no agreement between the contingency recruiter and the company until the candidate is presented to the company.

Retained recruiters are retained by the company to find the right candidate, and often get paid a baseline or retainer and a finder's fee. These openings are mostly for very senior roles.

I have worked with contingency recruiters early in my career. They tend to use a quantity based or shotgun method, blanketing both companies and job seekers. They do not seek relationship with you or the company. It is a numbers game, and the candidate is just a number (sort of like spam).

The retained recruiter wold is very different. Most are specialized by industry and are familiar with the top candidates. At this stage the candidates have leverage to demand a certain amount of respect, and proper treatment.

And, that is where my contention lies. There is no reason candidates at any stage of their careers could not treated humanely. The notion that we should delight in trapping someone with a lie, is also ethically questionable.

Re: We created a fake language to root out resume liars

#604

Post by KSS42 »

klingon78 wrote: post #266
brigandish wrote: post #77

> That way, when candidates were pitched to us with "X years of MOVA experience", we knew that somebody was full of it. I'd put my money on the recruiter. I once had an excruciatingly awkward interview at a company on an industrial estate in the middle of nowhereland with no train station nearby that took me bloody ages to get to… which was actually going well until they asked me about my long experience with Exchang…

MOVA stands for “multiple object versionless architecture”, which is something I’d imagine any experienced full-stack developer should be able to handle- if it were real.

Someone should develop this as a standard. There must some initiative that can be renamed to MOVA.

Re: We created a fake language to root out resume liars

#605

Post by delecti »

aidenn0 wrote: post #563
ncallaway wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> No one should bother to apply since they don't qualify instantly. I never assume the "requirements" are actually hard requirements to an application, and I encourage others in the job market to do the same. Sure, if you miss 3 out of the 5 requirements listed you might pass on that application. But if you've got 4 out of the 5 requirements, and think you could accomplish the job as described, you should still stron…

Be aware when you do this that there are a minority of companies for whom the requirements are actually requirements, and you may get yelled at by an interviewer for "wasting everybody's time." Yes, this has happened to me. On the up side I now have a list of a few companies I know I won't work for unless I'm desperate. The advice is still good; the requirements are really more of "strong desire" than actual requirem…

As long as you didn't list those requirements on your resume, then I don't see how it's your fault that the recruiting manager didn't filter you out.

Re: We created a fake language to root out resume liars

#607

Post by pasc1878 »

lmilcin wrote: post #593
brigandish wrote: post #77

> That way, when candidates were pitched to us with "X years of MOVA experience", we knew that somebody was full of it. I'd put my money on the recruiter. I once had an excruciatingly awkward interview at a company on an industrial estate in the middle of nowhereland with no train station nearby that took me bloody ages to get to… which was actually going well until they asked me about my long experience with Exchang…

I meet couple of recruiters who insist on me sending them CV as DOC. I tell them that I have carefully typeset my CV in LaTeX in PDF and I am not willing to rewrite it to Word. Usually this is the end of it and they just take my PDF. I have once been on an interview and interviewer pulled out my CV, obviously horribly mangled in Word. I told him that no, this isn't my CV and that I take too much pride in whatever I m…

Re word documents do go in document systems in the hiring firm so they might be the one asking for that.

As for the latter. You don't have one CV you have a separate CV for each application and tune it to the ad. The ad is what the hiring firm is interested in and if you fit their needs and not does the firm fit your needs, that is for you to discover from the ad or from the interview process

Re: We created a fake language to root out resume liars

#608

Post by shadowwolf007 »

yreg wrote: post #440
rjmill wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's common practice for recruiters to replace your personal contact info with their agency's header/contact info. I don't mind that. It makes sense. I generate my resume as a PDF from HTML/CSS. It's fun to see how recruiters handle that. I think most use image manipulation to insert their header. One recruiter sent me some image assets and let me add the header/footer myself. I'm sure some recruiters go too far with…

What are these recruiters you all talk about? Are these some middlemen you contract to get you a job? Like an athlete's/actor's agent? I only had experience with recruiters who work for the organisation I'm interviewing for. None of this contact info / skills tampering makes sense in that context.

I've worked with several recruiters who are trying to shop around as an outsourced recruiter. Basically, they take your resume and slap their name on it in an effort to show companies "You should use me because I provide well-qualified talent."

If you're not going through internal recruitment then this is a great way to go about it. The recruiter isn't just trying to get their 20%, so they spend a lot more time getting to know you and also getting to know where you're going.

The biggest down side is that you'll never hear a negative word about anything, so you gotta be good at asking some pointed questions.

Re: We created a fake language to root out resume liars

#610

Post by squeakynick »

Years ago, when recruiting for a tech support position, I had an agency send a bunch of 'pre-screened and qualified' candidates through. Most were fine, and we could start straight away with conversations about debugging AUTOEXEC.BAT and CONFIG.SYS (this probably dates the time period!) One candidate, however, looked like a deer-in-headlights, and was clearly out of his depth. In the end, I asked "There is a computer in this room, can you point to it?", and he sheepishly pointed to the fridge!

I felt really bad for the poor guy; it was not his fault. We finished the interview early, had a friendly chat, and I sent him on his way with some bus fares.

I then got on the phone and tore the agency a new one. They had wasted his time, and my time, by 'doctoring' the qualifications. I never used them again.

Post reply on HN