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

Google launches Hire, a new service for helping businesses recruit

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 357 posts

Re: Google launches Hire, a new service for helping businesses recruit

#121

Post by puranjay »

hellofunk wrote: post #63
lettergram wrote: post #10

I for one, will never use a Google product again. They level of creepiness and data they have on all their users is insane. I personally have switched to DuckDuckGo, Fastmail, FireFox (the mobile browser is awesome btw), and will replace Android as soon as a viable alternative is presented. Smooth sailing. The problem with Google, is they are building a repository for themselves, but also for government. Couple that…

> and will replace Android as soon as a viable alternative is presented One alternative that's been around for a while you might like if you want to continue using smart mobile devices is an operating system made by Apple (not Google), called iOS (used to be called iPhone OS but it can now be used on tablets too even some music players like iPods have it). Just throwing that out there, they have a lot of similar feat…

I second this. It's definitely a niche product from a little known indie developer, but iOS is definitely worth using in my books.

They seem to have pretty good design chops as well ;)

Re: Google launches Hire, a new service for helping businesses recruit

#123

Post by puranjay »

Spivak wrote: post #24
_pmf_ wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Couple that with the fact that they do not offer anything that deserves the moniker "customer service".

If you pay them you get good customer service. Google Play, YouTube Red, Chromecast, Chromebook, Nexus, all have pretty good service.

Just ask the thousands of pissed off AdWords advertisers about their customer service

Re: Google launches Hire, a new service for helping businesses recruit

#124

Post by thaumasiotes »

readhn wrote: post #3
pasharayan wrote: post #2

It's easy to forget, but LinkedIn doesn't have rich resume data of candidates. With Hire, Google now gets rich resume & employee data - data, when coupled with search history, that can now be used to build better user profiles than before. Given this, "Hire" is (or could become) a trojan horse into replacing the network effect that LinkedIn has created.

Linkedin doesnt have resumes?? Every linkedin profile is technically a resume. Dates, roles, qualifications are all there along with references.

"Resumé" appears to have a very special meaning to some people. Triplebyte specifically advertises a "no-resumes" process. But when I interviewed with them, the first thing they asked was "where have you worked before, and what did you do there?"

Re: Google launches Hire, a new service for helping businesses recruit

#126

Post by libertine »

agentgt wrote: post #41

My company makes recruiting software and it we knew it was only a matter of time (a couple of years ago... now its obvious) before Google would enter the recruiting industry. Particularly because the major players other than LinkedIn basically rely entirely on Google. All Indeed, Monster, CareerBuilder do is buy Google Ads and then essentially resells the marketing. This is similar to the situation TripAdvisor is in…

I just don't get how this is considered "normal" - they create the ecosystem, let it thrive with the content users generate, and after some category/apps reach a certain interesting threshold, Google gathers all the data they have access to and use their massive distribution system to deploy their version built on the back of their userbase.

I think it's dangerous, in all honesty. The same goes for Apple/Facebook/Amazon. If they build an ecosystem they shouldn't be able to take advantage of it to build and deploy products.

Re: Google launches Hire, a new service for helping businesses recruit

#127

Post by millstone »

arpit wrote: post #42
Spivak wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't the replacement for Android right now iOS? Still proprietary but Apple seems to take a much tougher stance on privacy.

It seems more a marketing strategy than a real belief in user privacy. For example, see the latest rejection of ad-blocking VPN apps from the App Store https://9to5mac.com/2017/07/15/apple-reportedly-shifts-app-s...

It's not marketing - Apple goes out of their way to build privacy into their products. For example, the way that Apple Maps has no persistent user identifier and prevents Apple from knowing your location history.

Regarding ad-blocking VPNs, I can see why one might be sad to lose these and disagree with Apple's move here. But it's not a privacy decision - it's an ad-blocking decision. VPNs actually focused on privacy, like privateinternetaccess, aren't being removed from the App Store.

Re: Google launches Hire, a new service for helping businesses recruit

#128

Post by inetsee »

What I'd really like to see is a database of information about employers that's not readily available until you become an employee, like non-compete agreements, intellectual property assignments, etc.

If you've quit your job, sold your house / given up your apartment, moved all your stuff to a new city, then on your first day at your new job they hand you a stack of documents to sign including some (like non-compete agreements) that would have significantly influenced your decision to accept the job offer, then the employer has a great deal of leverage to get you to sign those documents.

It would be nice if this kind of information were more readily available in advance to people considering job offers.

Re: Google launches Hire, a new service for helping businesses recruit

#129

Post by pm90 »

libertine wrote: post #126
agentgt wrote: post #41

My company makes recruiting software and it we knew it was only a matter of time (a couple of years ago... now its obvious) before Google would enter the recruiting industry. Particularly because the major players other than LinkedIn basically rely entirely on Google. All Indeed, Monster, CareerBuilder do is buy Google Ads and then essentially resells the marketing. This is similar to the situation TripAdvisor is in…

I just don't get how this is considered "normal" - they create the ecosystem, let it thrive with the content users generate, and after some category/apps reach a certain interesting threshold, Google gathers all the data they have access to and use their massive distribution system to deploy their version built on the back of their userbase. I think it's dangerous, in all honesty. The same goes for Apple/Facebook/Ama…

I have mixed views about this. I see your point that its definitely an unfair advantage to Google since its the default search engine and can gather so much data. But the existing job sites (indeed, for example) have done a piss poor job so far. I guess what I'm saying is: I would have been a lot more concerned if Indeed was amazing and Google stepped in specifically to destroy it before it got too big (like MS did with IE and Netscape).

Re: Google launches Hire, a new service for helping businesses recruit

#130

Post by Lery1934 »

skuhn wrote: post #39
Androider wrote: post #30

I was just about to select a recruitment management service. Both Lever and Greenhouse has "call us" pricing, and sadly Google Hire follows the same trend. Only Workable has a clear pricing page, which gives them a big plus in my book. Since we're on G Suite, Hire could be a natural fit but the requirement to book a demo (and the accompanying upside-down shaking to see how much money falls out of our pockets) is a bi…

Stay away from Lever. It's a slick web application along the lines of the fanciness of Asana's interface. What it isn't is a sane applicant tracking system. It doesn't reliably notify you when candidates apply. It supports virtually zero job board integrations. It very much wants you to adapt to it, with very little support for the other way around. The interface is over-complicated to the point of being unusable for…

All true.

And to be honest I have always been very turned off by their boastful "We only hire 50/50 Male/Female developer team." It's so in your face, it's like "why not hire the best person for the job?" Or when I see their internal job ads here, its like "Gee, I wonder if this is for a Male engineering role or a Female engineering role," or "Hope they didn't hire a bunch of dudes last week."

So for a variety of reasons I am an anti-advocate for Lever; I will never have business with them and I have successfully pointed several companies to better ATS.

Post reply on HN