Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions • Hacker News Board

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#201

Post by sweettea » Thu, Apr 07, 2022, 4:21 PM UTC

derelicto wrote: post #114

This is very anecdotal, but I have a friend that interviewed at Google for a Remote SWE position - everything indicated that it was remote: the posting, the recruiter and the hiring manager. Now they announced RTO, his manager said: "We're excited to have you at the office" - he was really confused about this messaging, so they forced him to apply to work remotely (even if he had been hired as such) denied his applic…

I too interviewed at Google for a remote position; we got through team matching, and I'd found a great new potential manager, before one of his bosses nixed the idea of me being permanently remote. My recruiter ended up finding me another team match under a different director where I could be permanently remote, but the delay and difficulty was a major factor in me going to Facebook, which has a strong commitment to remote work.

Just to be clear, I really loved my Google recruiters -- they were very forthright and open with me during the whole process, and the Facebook recruiter was honest too. Great recruiting experiences. They worked really hard to move fast, and I think I went from initial phone screen to offer at FB within two weeks, and from phone screen to team matching at Google within three.

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#202

Post by davidw » Thu, Apr 07, 2022, 4:22 PM UTC

I think smaller/mid sized companies have fully embraced remote in many cases. The people I talk to appear pretty serious about it and have highly distributed teams that just aren't all going to go back to an office.

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#203

Post by TameAntelope » Thu, Apr 07, 2022, 4:23 PM UTC

Yeah at this point I either would look for on-site positions or for companies that logistically cannot call people into the office, heh.

My company, for example, literally has no real estate. There is no office to even go into.

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#204

Post by AtlasBarfed » Thu, Apr 07, 2022, 4:23 PM UTC

cheeze wrote: post #63

aaomidi wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah but you're also amazon

And?

"Amazon's a normal workplace"

- NYSE Trading Desk Employee

"Amazon cares about you"

- A deep water explosives petroleum rig diver

"Amazon is a supporting and caring environment"

- Ukrainian volunteer soldier

"Amazon cares about the success and long term health of every employee"

- A Russian soldier digging trenches near Chernobyl

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#205

Post by kmonsen » Thu, Apr 07, 2022, 4:24 PM UTC

readonthegoapp wrote: post #113

Quoted post unavailable.

The NATO stuff is really silly. It is not like NATO is in any way pressuring countries to join. There are countries desperate to join that NATO choose not to accept. People and countries should be free to choose their own destiny, not based on some history or sphere of influence.

Russia/Warsaw pact was different, they had to station troops in the countries to keep them in the "alliance". Any NATO country is free to leave at any time.

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#206

Post by hasmatteam » Thu, Apr 07, 2022, 4:24 PM UTC

Google recruiters have been doing this sort of thing for years. Most google SWE roles advertised in San Francisco didn't exist there, they just advertised to dupe you into taking the bus to Mountain View. I was told that if my interview was successful I'd need to work in Mountain View for a while, then apply to work in SF.

I asked a friend who works there, he said that requested to move to SF as soon as he was done with his first few month. He's a there 3 years, fairly senior and with three kids, commuting from the east bay (he loved covid), but he's still on the "waiting list".

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#207

Post by mschuster91 » Thu, Apr 07, 2022, 4:24 PM UTC

iooi wrote: post #182

jacquesm wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, and then he finds that not only is there breach of contract but that the company is also quite vindictive and will use any kind of claim as a reason to not even consider hiring you in the future, assuming that it stays within the one company and doesn't get passed around between recruiters.

Every background check that companies put you through include any history of litigation against employers, no need for recruiters to talk to each other.

I can understand at least the reasoning behind checking criminal history of potential hirings (even though as an European, I disagree with the concept on a fundamental level and it's illegal in Germany to demand a criminal record check outside of very specific industries).

But how on earth do civil lawsuit records in the US end up anywhere where the background-checking industry can get their grubby paws on them?!

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#208

Post by bryanrasmussen » Thu, Apr 07, 2022, 4:24 PM UTC

I don't understand the point of this actually, if supposedly the hiring process is so expensive and error prone and takes so long to get the right person, why would you go through all that with someone who says they will only work remote and then when it is time for work to start say - gotcha!

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#209

Post by marcosdumay » Thu, Apr 07, 2022, 4:24 PM UTC

sdoering wrote: post #49

> [...] the job opening didn't say remote, the agreement they signed didn't say remote. I don't understand. Do people sign a contract that states something differently than they were being told verbally before? Imho what isn't in writing doesn't exist. Especially when it comes to "promises" from potential employers. For example I would not trust a promised raise in 12 months when nothing was done in writing. Even wit…

> Do people sign a contract that states something differently than they were being told verbally before?

Yes. All the time.

And verbal agreements are valid contracts too, if you can prove they exist (but good luck in that).

Anyway, this particular case looks more like the OP believed on the promises of a 3rd party (the recruiter), so it's not actually a contract.

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#210

Post by IdEntities » Thu, Apr 07, 2022, 4:25 PM UTC

I went through a long remote job search in mid-2019. What I experienced was that even when companies said they were open to remote, my status as a remote hire was almost always a decisive factor in them hiring some other candidate over me. I need to remain remote for family reasons so it's a bit disappointing to hear that the recruitment and interview problems for remote candidates may not have improved that much from COVID.