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

Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 455 posts

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#241

Post by sweettea »

kmonsen wrote: post #179
wldcordeiro wrote: post #164

I've seen this around, Meta/FB for example currently are hiring people anywhere and letting them work remotely because of current circumstances but you have to declare that you're open to relocation and pick a "home office" regardless of your preference for remote work.

I'm remote for Meta/FB I can say that remote means remote. There is no pressure to come to the office, and they are OK with people relocating away from the office. The comp gets adjusted based on zip code or something like that. You are probably coming out ahead anyway, from what I have seen the adjustments are smaller than the cost of living and tax comparisons. I do live in the area and meet up with coworkers from…

I want to reiterate this: I live literally three hours from any Meta office, I have never heard anyone encourage me to go to an office, and my team even has no three people in the same state. There's certainly the freedom to live near and go to the office if you need that work-life separation, but it's a freedom. And I really admire our senior leadership working to spend more time geographically distributed and remote themselves, to show their commitment to make Facebook treat geographically diverse, remote employees with equality.

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#242

Post by kaapipo »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #230
bialpio wrote: post #219

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Small note: there are people who cannot change work in IT because it would affect their visa or immigration status.

H1-B transfer is possible if your potential new employer will perform the transfer with USCIS. (Edit: typo corrected, thanks kaapipo)

*your

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#243

Post by bialpio »

JohnFen wrote: post #217
riotnrrd wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very few workers in the U.S. have actual employment contracts. If you work in the tech sector in the U.S. you almost certainly don't. Instead, your employment is "at-will"; i.e. terminable by either party, with or without cause or notice (unless you live and work in Montana). You may have received a written offer of employment when you were hired (outlining your title, salary, hiring bonuses, etc.), but that is not a…

> If you work in the tech sector in the U.S. you almost certainly don't. I've been working in the tech sector in the US for a long time, and have had an employment contract at literally every company. I'm genuinely surprised to hear that people are working without one. That seems unwise.

Same - I've always had contract (but the sample size is quite small). The problem is that even if you have "full remote" in your contract, you also probably have "at will" in the same contract, which IMO means they can still play the game of "come in person or you're fired".

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#244

Post by Zak »

marcosdumay wrote: post #209
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.

It would surprise me very much if the written contract didn't have a provision about superseding any previous agreement.

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#245

Post by AlotOfReading »

picardo wrote: post #214
y-c-o-m-b wrote: post #162

Amazon is doing this. I went through the process and the recruiter tried to manipulate me into "assigning a local office" otherwise it has to go through "an approval process". I told him put it through the approval then or I walk. He also tried car-salesman tactics of trying to get me to accept a lower total comp package. I stood firmly at the top of my range and after days of trying to convince me otherwise, they fi…

Being assigned an office doesn't mean that it's not remote. It entirely depends on the team. I worked for a team that wanted me in office for three days a week last year. My current team is entirely remote, but I'm still assigned to an office that I can go to anytime I want, which is totally optional.

On the other hand, I had exactly this sort of issue with Amazon subsidiary Zoox a couple months ago. We had verbally agreed on terms that would have me doing primarily remote work. When they finally sent me terms, they specified full time in-office and changed a few other things like salary. The excuse was that some higher-up wouldn't approve remote right now, but they were trying to convince them.

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#247

Post by dymk »

cvhashim wrote: post #231
sweettea wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

G is losing candidates given how long the team matching process takes place.

I know multiple people (including myself) who have passed up opportunities at Google because of how long it takes for them to make a hiring decision. It's incredible how much value they must be leaving on the table.

At some point, Google won't be the kind of place that people wait around for. Then they're really screwed.

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#248

Post by md_ »

uuyi wrote: post #95

> I'm not sure what the compensation model for recruiters is, but it seems to encourage bringing in as many candidates as possible over treating them with honesty and respect. From experience dealing with recruiters for the last 25 years they universally lie to both sides to pocket the commission at all costs. I drove 400 miles once to do an interview for a solution architect position. Got there and the company were…

This is probably more true for headhunters than for in-house recruiters.

FAANG mostly (completely?) use in-house.

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#249

Post by volkadav »

jhatemyjob wrote: post #88
cheeze wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And?

Amazon trains its employees to be back stabbers. I'm at the point where if I see a long stint Amazon on your resume, I count that as a point against you, because if we work together, you're probably gonna try to give me the runaround and/or fuck me over.

every single manager i've had whose sole managerial experience was Amazon/AWS before i encountered them was a raging turdwaffle, and having 20+ years of experience i've seen my share of shitty managers to compare them to.

please, any readers, i beg of you: think three times before diving in that swamp.

Re: Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions

#250

Post by voakbasda »

bluefirebrand wrote: post #220
mystickphoenix wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Focusing on remote-only, remote-first, remote-from-scratch companies is how I ended up at my current, and literally best company I've ever worked for, gig. Obviously the pool of such companies is smaller than in-person and they tend to have more competition for roles, but my unscientific guess is that pool is growing larger. Bonus points for those companies because they didn't have to "figure it out" or change upper…

I would love to go to a remote first company. How do you even find such a thing without just being super lucky? I'm actually onboarding at a remote position right now where the people I work with are clearly used to everything happening in an office. It's Thursday, I started Monday, and I have spent a grand total of maybe 3 hours speaking to my teammates or direct manager. I've been dumped with a ton of documentation…

If there isn’t an IRC, Slack, or other instant messaging system in place, that should be the first step. Without that, I cannot imagine how remote work would actually… work.

From there, start being proactive about asking questions or starting conversations. Do not wait for others to reach out. You must initiate. That is a huge part of remote culture.

If you are initiating on instant messaging and not generating feedback or conversation, then you have a much bigger problem.

Post reply on HN