Is there a way to be more clear about whether the company will apply for an H1B for a candidate, as opposed to sponsoring an existing one? I have a lot of friends who talk to companies that end up saying, "we only sponsor existing visas."
Proposed Who Is Hiring Spec
11–19 of 19 posts
Re: Proposed Who Is Hiring Spec
#12This is not going to work unless it is enforced by software running on the HN servers. Many of the hiring posts are posted by non-hackers who don't give a flying roomba about specs and correct formatting. The ideal format would be something generated by a set of dropdowns and textareas, but then again, would it still be HN?
For job-seeking engineers, it would be interesting to then write another script that filters for only the posts in the correct formatting. This at least gives some level of comfort that you're talking to hackers and not sales/business people.
Re: Proposed Who Is Hiring Spec
#13Is there a way to be more clear about whether the company will apply for an H1B for a candidate, as opposed to sponsoring an existing one? I have a lot of friends who talk to companies that end up saying, "we only sponsor existing visas."
It is really, really hard to apply for an H1B for a candidate unless they just graduated from college and are on OPT. If they are on OPT they basically have 2 chances to apply for an H1B. If you don't, then the employer would have to apply on your behalf on April 1, with a coin-flip probability of getting one, and even if they got one the employee couldn't start work until October 1. That makes anything except an H1B transfer prohibitively risky and inconvenient.
Re: Proposed Who Is Hiring Spec
#14This is not going to work unless it is enforced by software running on the HN servers. Many of the hiring posts are posted by non-hackers who don't give a flying roomba about specs and correct formatting. The ideal format would be something generated by a set of dropdowns and textareas, but then again, would it still be HN?
Also, prospective employees don't both reading the details either, and just mass apply to jobs, regardless of whether or not the employer asks for local candidates only, etc.
Re: Proposed Who Is Hiring Spec
#15I really like this, but salaries should definitely be considered something that could (optionally) be added as well. I guess this is the HN way of turning a simple proposal by dang (for feedback) into an engineering problem where we try to solve: ============================================================ The optimal method of describing a job post where the utility of most users/readers is, at least, mostly satisfi…
I think salaries should be required-- if not by rule, then by convention.
Companies have been asking candidates to give their salary up front ("expectations" or "history") without ever justifying it when it's obviously not in our best interest to do so...yet they do already have a budget for these positions, so let us decide if we are in the range or not. (Rather than applying for jobs which will never offer a salary commensurate with our experience because we read the demand for high end skills and "salary commensurate with experience"-- and don't realize it's someone trying to score a deal, and not really offering a market salary.)
Re: Proposed Who Is Hiring Spec
#16The real answer, as many have tried to implement, is another site/tool entirely. One that allows filtering, notifications etc. Pretty easy to build, not so easy to get community engagement unless the HN folks endorse it officially as an alternative.
Another site probably won't solve the underlying problem that Who is Hiring addresses - the problem of non-YC companies posting jobs on HN. Basically, Who is Hiring provides an outlet for what would otherwise be spam. Move it off to another site and then non-YC companies will still want to post on HN because that's where the eyeballs are. The companies posting in Who is Hiring aren't posting on HN because they have n…
A simple HTML form with options that then posts to that thread and formats would solve the problem.
Then the post is still on HN and is formatted to the spec.
Re: Proposed Who Is Hiring Spec
#17"Onsite" and "remote" are not sufficient, unfortunately. Remote should be obvious, but a lot of companies say "remote" when they mean "you can work at home a couple days a week"... rather than really remote. So we need a new word for "work from home ok" thats distinct from "remote" (Which means "work from another state ok" I don't mind employees requiring you to be in the same country, but in the same state is a problem.)
Re: Proposed Who Is Hiring Spec
#18[deleted]
Re: Proposed Who Is Hiring Spec
#19The parameters will need to be extensible and this only kills the proposition imho.