Live data from Hacker News

Should asking puzzle questions in technical interviews be illegal?

news.ycombinator.com

11–20 of 27 posts

Re: Should asking puzzle questions in technical interviews be illegal?

#12
Any selection procedure can be said to "discriminate" against certain groups of people. Do people need a certain height and weight to be good soldiers? Many army recruitment systems have minimum requirements. Do you need an Ivy LeagueMBA to be a highly paid consultant at McKinsey?

Questions like these often are about the questioner than anything else. If I were to ask "Should it be illegal for McKinsey to demand an MBA from Harvard before hiring people?" , it probably reveals more about my attitudes than anything else.

 What made you consider such  an idea?  Any negative experiences with puzles in an interview? I am genuinely curious.

Re: Should asking puzzle questions in technical interviews be illegal?

#14

Any selection procedure can be said to "discriminate" against certain groups of people. Do people need a certain height and weight to be good soldiers? Many army recruitment systems have minimum requirements. Do you need an Ivy LeagueMBA to be a highly paid consultant at McKinsey? Questions like these often are about the questioner than anything else. If I were to ask "Should it be illegal for McKinsey to demand an M…

Although I come from academic background, I have lost all faith in computer science. IMO, people are focusing on all the wrong things. Web 2.0 is a step in the right direction. It's much more fun and creative than academia ever was.

As you might guess, I don't think much of technical interviews, especially the ones with puzzles.

Re: Should asking puzzle questions in technical interviews be illegal?

#16
post #6

discrimination should be legal. forcing you to hire someone you don't want to isn't freedom.

On discrimination laws:

http://www.eeoc.gov/facts/qanda.html

You'll see a number of groups identified at various points. Lists of them usually start with something like "race, color, religion..." These are known as 'suspect classifications' and discrimination is often not possible except where a suspect class is involved.

Suspect classes themselves have been defined by the Supreme Court via 14th amendment rulings, and include specific criteria that determine what level of scrutiny is applied to the law. If a victim is not a member of a suspect class, then it will be very difficult to prove discrimination. (Though it can happen, for example Gay Marriage in MA)

Companies have a great deal of freedom to 'discriminate'(defined in global scope) in hiring practices, though their ability to 'discriminate'(defined in legal scope) is limited for good reason.

(I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. I also don't think puzzle tests should count as discrimination.)

Re: Should asking puzzle questions in technical interviews be illegal?

#17
For hiring in the U.S., discrimination is legal if it's done on the basis of what are called "bona fide occupational qualifications". This is the legal principle that allows, say, police departments to reject people who don't meet physical standards, or modeling agencies to reject people just because they're ugly.

You could make a good case that success on puzzle questions has a decent correlation with success as a programmer--that is, the ability to solve puzzles is probably a BFOQ for programmers, so it's safe from a legal standpoint.

Re: Should asking puzzle questions in technical interviews be illegal?

#18

Any selection procedure can be said to "discriminate" against certain groups of people. Do people need a certain height and weight to be good soldiers? Many army recruitment systems have minimum requirements. Do you need an Ivy LeagueMBA to be a highly paid consultant at McKinsey? Questions like these often are about the questioner than anything else. If I were to ask "Should it be illegal for McKinsey to demand an M…

Although I come from academic background, I have lost all faith in computer science. IMO, people are focusing on all the wrong things. Web 2.0 is a step in the right direction. It's much more fun and creative than academia ever was. As you might guess, I don't think much of technical interviews, especially the ones with puzzles.

I have to say, I'm inspired by pg's whole idea that the ultimate test of what you bring to society is what you can think up and build, and that barriers to your doing just exactly that, have fallen much lower. I'm still freakin' abuzz over that, together with the fact that there will probably soon be YC imitators, and that YC itself will expand, to make that a reality. Currently I'm contemplating 'which job to do, which would stall my career the least' (I do need one for the short term), but in the medium term even, it may be possible to work on exciting, possibility-busting ideas. Being that life is short, I can't get over the possibility that this'll be the new modus operandi.

This would be at the level of what the early internet hippies promised, way back in the beginning :)

Re: Should asking puzzle questions in technical interviews be illegal?

#19
post #8
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What defines these "certain groups" of people and why should anyone be forced to employ them? If you think that they'd make superior employees, nothing is stopping you from employing them. If you're correct, that will give you a significant advantage over employers who make the wrong choice. Why aren't you willing to make money from being correct?

There are anti-discrimination laws in place. The question is with respect to those laws and whether they are violated by puzzles. In a world without such laws, what you say applies.

The answer is 'no'. Those laws are not violated by puzzles.

The whole point of a job interview is discrimination.

Re: Should asking puzzle questions in technical interviews be illegal?

#20
post #8
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What defines these "certain groups" of people and why should anyone be forced to employ them? If you think that they'd make superior employees, nothing is stopping you from employing them. If you're correct, that will give you a significant advantage over employers who make the wrong choice. Why aren't you willing to make money from being correct?

There are anti-discrimination laws in place. The question is with respect to those laws and whether they are violated by puzzles. In a world without such laws, what you say applies.

Why the interest in "law" when you can drive those evil companies out of biz AND make lots of money if you're right and they're wrong?
Post reply on HN