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

If You Want This Job, We Must Interview You Forever

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 415 posts

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

#281

Post by bazmattaz »

bombcar wrote: post #10
coldcode wrote: post #7

Sad someone out there will assume this is for real and plan to change their interviewing to this. I've been in interviews where you had to talk with every single person on the team (8, half of which didn't show); a gang interview with me in the middle for several hours; 4 separate interviews with multiple people who all asked complicated puzzle questions; and a place where every team member talked about how they did…

There’s a form of dysfunction if a team can’t trust a subset of the team to make a decision on a new team member. Likely it’s an attempt to avoid all possible blame.

Maybe, I worked at a company where it was done in the name of of inclusion. The company wanted the whole team to be involved so that each team member could feel included in the process and have a say.

Bit overkill if you ask me

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

#282

Post by piinecone »

coldcode wrote: post #7

Sad someone out there will assume this is for real and plan to change their interviewing to this. I've been in interviews where you had to talk with every single person on the team (8, half of which didn't show); a gang interview with me in the middle for several hours; 4 separate interviews with multiple people who all asked complicated puzzle questions; and a place where every team member talked about how they did…

> architect designed classes, lead designed methods, and programmers filled them out

Incredible. So they all have to take vacation at the same time (and stick together too — the architect lays out the suitcase, the lead gathers the clothes, etc.)

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

#283

Post by CamperBob2 »

throwawaysleep wrote: post #140
kortilla wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This sounds like something that should have its own entry in the DSM V.

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

#284

Post by ozim »

P5fRxh5kUvp2th wrote: post #267
treyfitty wrote: post #94

I’ve been interviewing for 8 months. Getting to many final rounds, 1 lowballed offer, 1 rescinded offer, and it’s playing a mental toll. Today, I got a rejection that went along the lines of “everyone loved you and there was absolutely 0 negative feedback, but we just found a better fit.” I almost broke down, but hid behind a facade of positivity because the long weekend was starting and my kids can’t afford a bummed…

Why shouldn't it require a thick skin?

Because later business treats people in a way where "everyone can be replaced" but interviews are like "we are looking for someone who will save our company".

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

#285

Post by therealdrag0 »

lovich wrote: post #76
sulam wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not really. It comes down to the asymmetry in hiring outcomes. It is much more expensive to hire a bad employee than it is to hire a good employee. It’s gotten exceptionally hard to just fire people in corporate America, at-will employment notwithstanding.

Is it more expensive than leaving the position open for months though? I’ve seen multiple companies I’ve applied at and my own employer just sit with empty roles which meant the job never got done. I was under the impression from the startup world and my won engineering experience that getting to market with a substandard product was always better than never releasing because you were aiming for perfection.

It is easy to imagine it’s more expensive to hire a baddie vs an empty role. Have you not worked with people who were a drain on the entire team? I rather have deadlines pushed back than a bad hire.

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

#286

Post by bigDinosaur »

erwnerve wrote: post #254
PebblesHD wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Day-rate contracting can get you very close if the last minute renewals are something you can deal with. The telcos are currently going through a hiring period and I’ve seen 1250/day plus super offered a few times recently. For perm roles, it’s certainly much harder, and I’ve only seen one IC role offered in market at over $220k at the firms I’ve worked at, but the flip side is I’ve seen a few higher ones offered to…

> The old adage still applies, the jobs you want aren’t advertised and the candidates you’re looking for aren’t on job boards looking. For someone new-ish to Sydney without much of a network, where should I be looking, if not the usual job boards?

Job boards can still give decent results? They just don't give you the best possible results and have a lot of real trash (sorry, employers, but offering 70k for someone with 4 YOE in software is a not-so-amusing joke and I shudder to think of what working for you is like).

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

#287

Post by laserlight »

nuclearnice1 wrote: post #106
citizenkeen wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they said in the interview they’re very comfortable with Vue.js and Postgres, and then you find out after a few weeks that actually they barely know Vue or Postgres, they actually come from a React/SQLite background, they’ve overpromised. Rather than ensuring every bullet point on their resume is factual through six interviews I’ve found it’s better to assume they’re honest and as capable as advertised, interview…

I agree with the other poster. The possibility of ending up unemployed is a bit stressful here. What percentage of people get let go within 90 days?

> The possibility of ending up unemployed is a bit stressful here.

Isn't getting unemployed always a possibility? It seems to me that parent commenter makes things clear and transparent to the candidate. Otherwise, the company could just fire without any such probation period anyways. Why should a company stick with an employee if the employee misrepresented themselves in the first place.

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

#289

Post by cbdc_watcher »

treyfitty wrote: post #94

I’ve been interviewing for 8 months. Getting to many final rounds, 1 lowballed offer, 1 rescinded offer, and it’s playing a mental toll. Today, I got a rejection that went along the lines of “everyone loved you and there was absolutely 0 negative feedback, but we just found a better fit.” I almost broke down, but hid behind a facade of positivity because the long weekend was starting and my kids can’t afford a bummed…

The whole rat-in-a-maze interview vibe is creepy and suppressive of true intellect. Solving a maze that the candidate had not studied recently is going to be a trial and error situation unless one gets very lucky with their first try. And if one had studied the maze recently then it's testing for rote learning, not intellect.

I normally ask the interviewing team to allow me to ask an advanced (worthy of PhD thesis) comp sci question for every canned leet code exercise they ask me to do.

They usually say no thank you. Or they say we believe you have the skills (based on the tens of github/youtube links on my resume) and won't test you.

Don't let them get away with one-sided penalty kicks.

Post reply on HN