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

VP of Engineering - "best of the best" = no more than 12 years experience?

jobscore.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 152 posts

Re: VP of Engineering - "best of the best" = no more than 12 years experience?

#31

Post by epoxyhockey »

KevinEldon wrote: post #10

One way to interpret this is that the Agile Manifesto was published in 2001, so although it's possible you managed agile teams before 2001 it's unlikely, or if you've been successfully managing agile teams since before the manifesto and you're interested in a startup... what's wrong w/ you (seriously... if you're crushing it w/ agile for 12 years and now enterprises are all scrum-happy and you aren't making boatloads…

I think that your analysis is great. However, I'm not confident that Justin put as much thought into the posting.

Re: VP of Engineering - "best of the best" = no more than 12 years experience?

#32

Post by el_fuser »

KevinEldon wrote: post #10

One way to interpret this is that the Agile Manifesto was published in 2001, so although it's possible you managed agile teams before 2001 it's unlikely, or if you've been successfully managing agile teams since before the manifesto and you're interested in a startup... what's wrong w/ you (seriously... if you're crushing it w/ agile for 12 years and now enterprises are all scrum-happy and you aren't making boatloads…

Nah... Lightweight processes were discussed as alternatives to waterfall way back in the 90s during my software engineering courses. "Rapid application development" and RAtional unified process were the "hot" lightweight methodologies when I started work in 1996. Scrum has been with us since 1995.

Re: VP of Engineering - "best of the best" = no more than 12 years experience?

#33

Post by el_fuser »

emidln wrote: post #19
el_fuser wrote: post #13

Not only is it blatantly ageist... It's stupid. They want someone that has been building engineering organizations for 5-12 years, after having been an individual contributor. Then , they want you to drop back into an individual contributor role. At least initially. Wink wink nudge nudge.

It's not ageist. It doesn't say People who are 50 need not apply. From reading this job posting, someone who is 80, worked as a mechanic, a waiter, a clerk, and then picked up some newfangled technology might qualify. Besides the whole Agile not being codified for more than 12 years thing, if you've been out of the loop managing for 12 years, they say they don't want you. Part of the process apparently involves showi…

As i posted above... Lightweight processes were discussed as alternatives to waterfall way back in the 90s during my software engineering courses. "Rapid application development" and RAtional unified process were the "hot" lightweight methodologies when I started work in 1996. Scrum has been with us since 1995.

And yes, it's blatantly ageist... It falls under the disparate impact provision:

"In addition to prohibiting intentional discrimination against older workers (known as “disparate treatment”), the ADEA prohibits practices that, although facially neutral with regard to age, have the effect of harming older workers more than younger workers (known as “disparate impact”), unless the employer can show that the practice is based on an RFOA."

Re: VP of Engineering - "best of the best" = no more than 12 years experience?

#34

Post by jbae29 »

It appears to say that they want (ideally) someone with 5-12 years of experience managing a team, after a successful career as an individual contributor. To me, that implies that they don't someone who has been just a manager for the last twenty years.

So it's possible that you could have been a developer for twenty years and then a manager for ten years and still be within their ideal range. Considering the CEO is about 24 years old, it's hard to believe that that is the case, though it is possible.

Re: VP of Engineering - "best of the best" = no more than 12 years experience?

#35

Post by nieve »

frostmatthew wrote: post #24
clone1018 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Seems like they're breaking the law to me, but it's not completely black and white. In the odd chance it would happen, wouldn't saying "20+ years of experience required", prevent anyone younger then 20 years from joining the company?

I'm not a lawyer but my guess is requiring years of experience isn't discrimination since it would only help, not hurt, the protected class (older workers).

The minimum isn't the important part - they're putting a cap on experience at 12 years which will exclude the vast majority of protected workers, basically anyone who didn't switch careers very late.

Re: VP of Engineering - "best of the best" = no more than 12 years experience?

#36

Post by KevinEldon »

epoxyhockey wrote: post #31
KevinEldon wrote: post #10

One way to interpret this is that the Agile Manifesto was published in 2001, so although it's possible you managed agile teams before 2001 it's unlikely, or if you've been successfully managing agile teams since before the manifesto and you're interested in a startup... what's wrong w/ you (seriously... if you're crushing it w/ agile for 12 years and now enterprises are all scrum-happy and you aren't making boatloads…

I think that your analysis is great. However, I'm not confident that Justin put as much thought into the posting.

I do not know this startup. But I suspect your spot on... this feels like the kernel of a good idea, a way to filter out the wrong kind of application (not necessarily too old) and it's being interpreted (or misinterpreted). I honestly hope the best for this startup and hope some woman or man qualified to help them gets an interview... I suspect, for top candidates, the language will be awkward (but maybe top candidates... not guys like me... see through that).

Re: VP of Engineering - "best of the best" = no more than 12 years experience?

#39

Post by el_fuser »

rosser wrote: post #17
qnk wrote: post #9

I am not a lawyer, but is this not illegal in the U.S.? Checking The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission website[1], it says under the "PROHIBITION OF AGE DISCRIMINATION" section: (e) Printing or publication of notice or advertisement indicating preference, limitation, etc. [1] http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/adea.cfm

They're not putting specific limitations on age , but on experience . I'm pretty sure the latter is as kosher as matzoh.

No... It falls under disparate impact.

Re: VP of Engineering - "best of the best" = no more than 12 years experience?

#40

Post by frostmatthew »

nieve wrote: post #35
frostmatthew wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not a lawyer but my guess is requiring years of experience isn't discrimination since it would only help, not hurt, the protected class (older workers).

The minimum isn't the important part - they're putting a cap on experience at 12 years which will exclude the vast majority of protected workers, basically anyone who didn't switch careers very late.

My response was to clone1018's comment/question that wouldn't anything saying X+ years of experience qualify as discrimination.
Post reply on HN