Live data from Hacker News

The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

askamanager.org

251–260 of 623 posts

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

...source?

Old people who manage legacy systems, like that one guy duct-taping a bank's online operations.

Are they really the "best" developers? It just sounds like a different skillset and mindset, not necessarily better or worse.

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#252

We once had a contractor who interviewed pretty well. After a while I noticed that it was impossible to have a technical discussion with him. He only took notes and never said much. I also noticed that he never delivered anything the same day. He took notes and then next morning it was done. I once told him to fix a simple bug NOW and had him sit next to me. He starred at the screen for several hours and did nothing.…

If the "ghostwriter" was good, would you have cared?

It's typically a good idea to know the folks you've given code access to.

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#253
post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I recently went through a round of interviews for a job where strong communication skills are vital. One interview was just me responding to simulated emails in a shared google doc so the interviewer could see me work through the responses. In addition to witnessing my real time edits, I guess they also had the benefit of a higher level of confidence that the product was my actual work effort.

Dear lord, that sounds horrible. I understand the reasoning, but corresponding with people — especially in formal settings — makes me anxious, and I end up composing and re-composing (and sometimes re-re-composing) a lot of my messages. The end result isn't bad, but if I were being watched and graded in real time I'm pretty sure I'd fail.

Sounds like the interview would effectively filter out candidates that would not be a good fit for a job that is mostly corresponding with people.

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#254
post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like the "fine" case is a scam as well. You're too lenient.

If the work is getting done, whether by 2 or 1 person what are they scamming you of?

Software development work has more attributes to it than a binary "done" / "not done". The quality of what you get is going to be orders a magnitude worse when the work is being done by a team of cheaters compared to when it's done by an honest person who didn't cheat to score a job.

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#255

I once hired a guy who had no experience, but seemed like a good culture fit for our company and seemed very interested in learning. We interviewed him and made e-mail communication a large part of the interview, because it is a critical part of our business. And his communication was great! After hiring, a recurring problem we had was his e-mail to us and to customers were terrible. Bad grammar, bad spelling, uncorr…

This is why we can't have nice things. Or in other words, why we must usually do a coding test per company we apply for, and not just 'point them at the Github'.

Or stuff that's so old, it predates Git, let along Github

Here's some code I wrote back in 1987/88, for example.

http://www.retroarchive.org/swag/MISC/0153.PAS.html

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#256
post #244

I've been a hiring manager for remote positions for a long time. If your recruiting channels are good, most of your candidates are going to be honest and good intentioned. But interview enough people, and you'll start encountering people trying to abuse remote work. They're not interested in contributing to your company. They're only interested in collecting paychecks while they do as little work as possible for as l…

I know a guy who's actively interviewing to take on a second remote job while keeping his first. He has no plans to make either party aware that he has other employment. His argument is that at his current job he can get all of his assigned work done in 10-20 hours a week (though he doesn't share with them that he's basically only working part time) so he has plenty of time to take on a second job where he also expec…

I agree that the conflicting meetings bit could be tricky, but I don't think he has a moral obligation to inform either company of what's going on, assuming one company's work doesn't interfere with the assigned work from the other. Also I would hope that the two companies he ends up working at aren't even remotely in competition with each other, because that would be unethical.

If both companies are happy with the guy's work output, then he is fulfilling the terms of his employment, at least in spirit and morally/ethically.

(I'm aware that some companies include in their employment papers a clause that states that employees won't take on other employment. I believe I've signed such a thing at my current job. But I personally consider such clauses to be unethical in the first place, and would feel no qualms violating that if I was in a position to want to do so. Unfortunately I'm pretty sure nearly all salaried jobs will stipulate something like that, so it's not like people can vote with their feet.)

I would personally find this sort of arrangement to be pretty stressful, and wouldn't do it, but if someone wants to give it a go, more power to them.

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No… they have documented evidence that the company noted discrepancies between his interview and subsequent comments. Nothing there states that this was a problem; it’s a diff. Besides, he quit.

Missed the quiting part. It doesn't really matter if it's a diff. It matters that it was a diff that the husband apparently thought pertinent enough to mention. If it plays any part in the decision, or can show that they preferred single people in the interview, then it could be basis for a law suit (whether it would win or go to settlement is a different issue).

Nothing in the letters even hints that it played a part of the decision-making process for hiring or firing. The husband also mentioned his hair was different and he now wears glasses. Does that mean corrective vision also played a part in the process?

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#258
post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll present an alternate case, mine. I'm in a senior IC role sitting in India making almost 1/4th of what my US Counterpart makes. I work as much as them if not more. We as Indians are always taught to be sincere and obedient and I try to show that in my work trying to stay up finish the work so that my sincerity is never questioned. I'm always on the side to prove my quality - even though I'm highly underpaid for t…

Are you paid a fair market rate for your geographical location in India? (i.e., are other local companies offering worse or better benefits?)

If they earn the equivalent of 30-50k (25% of a US senior IC), I imagine they can afford a decent standard of living, eg in Mumbai.

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#259
post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you described can just as easily be done on-site. Remote work merely lets these people actually do something they might enjoy instead of sitting in a chair and pretending to work for 8 hours. I’ve met people likely this and they’d rather pretend to be busy than actually do something.

> What you described can just as easily be done on-site. You can't get two on-site jobs at the same time. One of them is going to notice that you're not there.

I think the point was that many on-site employees get their work done just fine, but spend half of their in-office hours goofing off on Facebook or reading HN or whatever. So in principle that "wasted" time (assuming it is indeed a waste) could be put to use for a different company, with double the compensation. Obviously there are severe logistical issues if you're on-site!

Re: The new hire who showed up is not the same person we interviewed

#260
post #71

I once hired a guy who had no experience, but seemed like a good culture fit for our company and seemed very interested in learning. We interviewed him and made e-mail communication a large part of the interview, because it is a critical part of our business. And his communication was great! After hiring, a recurring problem we had was his e-mail to us and to customers were terrible. Bad grammar, bad spelling, uncorr…

That sounds to me like it would meet the legal definition of fraud. A lawsuit to recuperate the wages and damage to the business might even be worth looking into.

The only people who win in a lawsuit are the lawyers.
Post reply on HN