61–70 of 1001 posts
I suspect that these companies have structural problems that inhibit their decision making. Possibly also personal problems.
I also suspect that if they can't say yes after a third interview then the candidate is non-judgmentally not a good fit, by demonstration. Both parties should consider that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Companies don't want to do job training anymore. Instead of a general background and attitude check, they need to know if the candidate has all of the individual skills that will be used on the job.
This a hundred times over. I still remember in 2020 multiple places asking me "I see you've used .NET core, what *version* have you used?". I had a kind of career crisis/breakdown, where I realised no one gave a shit about anything except my utility as a walking set of tech keywords. Accepting that it wasn't working for me was one of the best things I've done for my career.
I am genuinely asking. Why is this objectionable?
Why do people find it so horrible that their labour is a commodity? To me that just tells me I should treat my labour like a merchant treats his goods. Always be checking the market to ensure you have something worth selling and while you might sign long term deals, periodically check for the best price to ensure you are getting it.
Why is it important to you that your employer view you as a person?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Job training is not as much worth it for companies when employees can switch jobs at the drop of a hat.
Then give them a reason to stay (note: it's also not all about money)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Companies don't want to do job training anymore. Instead of a general background and attitude check, they need to know if the candidate has all of the individual skills that will be used on the job.
Job training is not as much worth it for companies when employees can switch jobs at the drop of a hat.
Sans all of those qualifiers, anything more than 3 rounds is a deal breaker for me. If you don't know if I'm the right fit after 3 hours, verifiable experience, a public body of work, and a list of references, then your company culture isn't a good fit for me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The reason they want to remove the risk is because it takes years to prune bad talent.
In my long and storied career, well long at least, every single truly heinous, project-killin', crazy person actually interviewed pretty well. Honestly, I don't have a good solution to the problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then give them a reason to stay (note: it's also not all about money)
Whatever you offer, including non-monetary, someone else can offer and then also spend their training budget on higher comp.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This a hundred times over. I still remember in 2020 multiple places asking me "I see you've used .NET core, what *version* have you used?". I had a kind of career crisis/breakdown, where I realised no one gave a shit about anything except my utility as a walking set of tech keywords. Accepting that it wasn't working for me was one of the best things I've done for my career.
> where I realised no one gave a shit about anything except my utility as a walking set of tech keywords. I am genuinely asking. Why is this objectionable? Why do people find it so horrible that their labour is a commodity? To me that just tells me I should treat my labour like a merchant treats his goods. Always be checking the market to ensure you have something worth selling and while you might sign long term deal…
Because we, generally speaking, are people and not robots ;)
That being said, I agree with your point : people would have less issues if they just felt happy about whatever makes logical sense. That's just way too hard to live by for most people.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This a hundred times over. I still remember in 2020 multiple places asking me "I see you've used .NET core, what *version* have you used?". I had a kind of career crisis/breakdown, where I realised no one gave a shit about anything except my utility as a walking set of tech keywords. Accepting that it wasn't working for me was one of the best things I've done for my career.
did you expect others to have empathy for you?
Many software engineers have accepted that they have to continually learn and will do so.
This process though, makes it impossible to know what to learn with an impossible random and unknown credential set. It's not the same as something like elevator attendants having an obsoleted skillset. It's a combination of not having time in a lifetime to even try to specialize in the random employer chosen skillset. When instead, employers should expect a good engineer to adapt quickly and employers should also commit to training staff.