Live data from Hacker News

If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

newyorker.com

131–140 of 415 posts

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you actually pass an interview which you weren’t really interested in to begin with? Decline with some BS excuse? The amount of deception you’ll have to do is what holds me back from constant “practice” interviewing

“The compensation is not adequate enough to make me want to leave.”

And if the compensation is so high you want to leave, just leave.

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#132
post #50

Interviewing is hard, requires skills precisely zero people are trained to do, and has huge long-term upsides and downsides to a business. I'm a programmer. I trained for years to do that. Then I'm asked to hire someone. A task I have zero experience or training at. Spoiler alert - any actual competence is a fluke. At my peak I was hiring maybe 2 or 3 people in a year. Mostly I hired people I'd heard about who came w…

Maybe I'm accidentally good at interviewing and hiring. At least, all my hires have worked out well. I've never hired anyone who didn't last long and all ended up being great. I don't trust 'professionals' to do that hiring. Maybe what I'm trying to say is we should train the people on the team on whatever it is they are missing in order to hire people better. The people on the team know best what they are looking fo…

I'm the same, I can't relate to the tons of posts I see about people struggling to filter for good candidates. I think part of it might be my autism. Since I can't read non-verbal communication I can't be "tricked" by it like a neurotypical person would. I have to consciously observe/analyze their non-verbal behavior in a totally unfeeling way. I would normally struggle detecting if someone was lying in a social setting, but with technical questions a person is either correct or incorrect.

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#133
post #25

I don't disagree with this articles satire, as it lines up with my experience if you remove a bit of the hyperbole. I am however curious as to why companies continue to do this and seem to be increasing their interview requirements in the face of an inability to hire. The most reasonable sounding answer I can come up with is that executives are balking at engineering pay and rationalizing it to themselves by demandin…

It is super expensive to hire someone. The costs are enormous. Let's take a hire that will make $10,000 per month, nice round number. Someone in HR has to write the job description. This takes the HR person's time, the hiring manager, the hiring manager's boss just to get the information for a job description Job description cost with hiring manager: $500 Job description cost with hiring manager's boss: $500 HR perso…

Companies give tiny raises to loyal employees. If hiring is so expensive why don't companies make effort to retain employees by giving them raises that make their compensation at least at par with that of the new hires.

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#134
post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I’ll side with you. I lead a big team, but also an employee myself, I find probation period a very uncomfortable concept. There is no promises in interviews. You ask your questions, you get your answers, you make your decisions. If your questions ask for promises to make your decision easier, you are doing it wrong. From my perspective, any hire that ends up with negative probation outcome should be marked against in…

I can absolutely see this position, for me it’s more a case of protecting ourselves against the rare but increasing occasions of candidates actually making misleading claims. As I’ve said in a sibling comment, for me I like to be able to take basic skills at face value, and focus on core competencies. If someone can learn the skill during probation, that’s totally fine.

To me it seems simpler to just let someone go if they're not working out after 90 days; no need to tell every new hire that they're "on probation".

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I just interview endlessly. At least one a week. You need to develop a callus to interviewing. Find the time for it by rubber stamping a few code reviews. It gets boring after a while. Just a very repetitive process after 100 or so.

What if you actually pass an interview which you weren’t really interested in to begin with? Decline with some BS excuse? The amount of deception you’ll have to do is what holds me back from constant “practice” interviewing

Tell them you got another internal role at your company. It's reasonable and totally unverifiable.

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#136

My last job search took a toll on my mental health. I felt like a worthless person for 3 months. I could feel (or imagine?) the disdain of the interviewers as I was failing their tests. The fake enthusiasm on their side as they rejected me ("that was great! But we're not going to move forward with you! Good luck!!!") and on my side while pretending I was excited when in fact I was worried about money and the gap on m…

This entire industry is a joke with its interviews. Its not a reflection on you.

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I just interview endlessly. At least one a week. You need to develop a callus to interviewing. Find the time for it by rubber stamping a few code reviews. It gets boring after a while. Just a very repetitive process after 100 or so.

What if you actually pass an interview which you weren’t really interested in to begin with? Decline with some BS excuse? The amount of deception you’ll have to do is what holds me back from constant “practice” interviewing

I frequently do. I get at least one offer a month.

You don’t need a BS excuse. You can just say you took a higher offer/offer with more vacation.

A lot of these companies aren’t paying competitively anyway, so they are used to people declining.

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#138
post #73
post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I found it funny that a week ago I got an email from a Google recruiter, offering me to enter their interviewing machinery. I bluntly told him that I rejected the offer because of the horror stories regarding 5-7 interviews in Google. The recruiter's reply was that it was ok of this was not an appropriate time for me , and that we would stay in touch. How can they be so dense? Of course it may be that they are also j…

Google is one of the few companies that has enough talent applying to be able to turn away perfectly good candidates. All those hoops you jump through ensure you're willing to go above and beyond a healthy level to "serve" the company.

The multi-round interview process should be renamed "The Severance procedure."

Any Severance fans?

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if you actually pass an interview which you weren’t really interested in to begin with? Decline with some BS excuse? The amount of deception you’ll have to do is what holds me back from constant “practice” interviewing

“The compensation is not adequate enough to make me want to leave.”

And if they know that not to be the case, the offer is probably good enough to leave for anyway. So in my practicing, I found a new job.

Re: If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

#140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I just interview endlessly. At least one a week. You need to develop a callus to interviewing. Find the time for it by rubber stamping a few code reviews. It gets boring after a while. Just a very repetitive process after 100 or so.

100+? Are you just interviewing at anywhere and everywhere?

Yes. I target hybrid roles in places I have no interest in living. Use an burner number app to pretend I live nearby, and away I go.
Post reply on HN