A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires • Hacker News Board

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#281

Post by moyta » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 9:28 AM UTC

vostok wrote: post #158

inopinatus wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL but I took business law 101, which taught me that courts almost universally lean strongly towards the employee when considering restraint clauses. Moreover, if you have a current employer that is sufficiently disrespectful of their employees that they'd even consider enforcing an anti-moonlighting clause in this circumstance, with the preposterous assertion that it qualifies as employment - run away now. The la…

It is a requirement of my country's regulators that I ask for my employer's approval before I do any other work for compensation.

Damn, what country is that? Sounds like a very controlled, restrictive environment.

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#282

Post by walshemj » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 9:29 AM UTC

creatine_lizard wrote: post #230

Udo wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This works, but make sure they spend the 2 hours in your office and not 12 hours at home solving a 2 hour problem.. This goes against the core message of the article. The candidate is supposed to think about a problem on their own, and propose a well-reflected solution on Monday. That's pretty much the opposite of "sit down in this noisy corner in an unknown environment and give us something in two hours". > The ot…

There can be legal issues from the candidate's side too -- people on an H-1B visa in the US may not be able to accept payment for work outside of the company they've been hired by.

Actually its common for many if not all employers to ban outside work with out approval from your manager.

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#283

Post by blowski » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 9:29 AM UTC

stillworks wrote: post #273

TeMPOraL wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed interesting how different people are. Here, I'm like you. But it carries over to normal job - I work best when left alone. Especially when I have a tough problem to solve, just having people sitting close to me makes me frustrated, and if they're talking, then I won't be able to concentrate at all. It takes a lot of energy for me to be able to work in the presence of other people.

I understand where you are coming from... I think somehow the world was agreeable enough to drink the Pair-Programming KoolAid. The consulting companies or body shops were happy since they could bill 2x the number of heads for the same amount of time. The "buy-side" of Pair Programming were happy because the KoolAid evidently worked. Don't get me wrong, I am all in favor of getting my code eye-balled by anybody becau…

What works for one person doesn't work for everybody. I feel that it does work for me - it keeps me focused on the problem at hand without getting distracted, over-engineering the solution, or yak-shaving.

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#284

Post by walshemj » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 9:30 AM UTC

bjt wrote: post #214

vhab wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If hiring a freelancer to do a little thing tends to generate all sorts of nightmarish legal liabilities, your company is either a government contractor or it has even bigger structural problems than hiring. It might not be an issue for your company, but your candidate might have a non-compete (or other clause) preventing them from accepting compensation or even performing work for another company at all. Things ge…

Any company trying to enforce such a non-compete against someone who just earned $200 would spend a lot more than that in legal fees. This feels like legal paranoia to me.

HR don't care they can afford the cost where as an individual employee is unlikely to be able.

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#285

Post by xor1 » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 9:30 AM UTC

nolite wrote: post #104

pauljaworski wrote: post #21

This is literally the only way I've gotten job offers. I'm a very competent programmer, but when I'm asked to solve some silly puzzle with someone staring over my shoulder, I freeze under pressure and can not think at all. Luckily not everyone thinks solving leetcode problems is a good way to hire.

I've been in situations together with clients deploying a product, them presenting it for their managers, orpreparing for a big demonstration, and something goes wrong due to some unforeseen environmental factor you couldn't have imagined or predicted, and breaks in a way you don't expect, despite the weeks of testing you've done. You've got your main client staring over your shoulder, arms crossed saying fix it, and…

>clients

The type of situation you're describing is is why I avoid working for any sort of shop or agency.

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#286

Post by yAnonymous » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 9:31 AM UTC

>I will purposely challenge their solution to see how they react.

Exactly like Google, who tell applicants that their solution is wrong when it isn't. Most people complain about how bad their application process is and that interviewers don't know anything. Nope, they just weed out smart asses like you that are a pain to work with.

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#287

Post by walshemj » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 9:33 AM UTC

TeMPOraL wrote: post #255

rizzom5000 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That only makes sense if you're talking about people who are unemployed. As someone who is already employed full-time, I simply don't have the time to solve your problems for free just to see if you'd like to invite me over for an interview. I avoid these problems like the plague and very much prefer to whiteboard. If you pay me consultant rates, I can more easily justify the effort.

> As someone who is already employed full-time, I simply don't have the time to solve your problems for free just to see if you'd like to invite me over for an interview. That means you don't care enough about changing jobs. There are people who will happily do that "interview" for free even when being employed full-time. The only relevant question for the company is whether there are enough qualified candidates will…

So your filtering for the "desperate" job seekers

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#288

Post by walshemj » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 9:35 AM UTC

moron4hire wrote: post #113

throwaway4job wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This isn't a viable approach for much of the hiring pool, as a majority of working engineers have contracts which explicitly forbid work for contract for other employers. As such, if you hire any of those, you're hiring somebody with a proven willingness to ignore their contract, which is a strong anti-pattern.

>> a majority of working engineers have contracts which explicitly forbid work for contract for other employers. Well that was very, very dumb of them. Maybe we engineers ain't so smart after all.

Custom and practice - you need to read your company handbook /contract some time.

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#289

Post by throwaway_3452 » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 9:36 AM UTC

I had my first ever whiteboard interview recently. I severely underestimated how difficult it is to write code as compared to a terminal. At the end of it I came out feeling deflated and rather angry as the same piece of work on a machine would have been trivial.

Re: A Method I’ve Used to Eliminate Bad Tech Hires

#290

Post by deepaksurti » Thu, Nov 10, 2016, 9:42 AM UTC

codeulike wrote: post #271

deepaksurti wrote: post #269

>> They refuse to do the project because “someone will hire me without it”. This is wrong in certain cases. The candidate may have significant contribution to an open source project or may have shipped an open source project as an owner. Why should that candidate not refuse? You already have the code in front of you. If you as an employer cannot take the time out to go through that and evaluate what you would otherwi…

But the method proposed is only 20% about code. It's mostly about seeing how someone approaches a piece of work and discusses a solution in a meeting. You can't get that from browsing GitHub.

Agreed. The Github code is a substitute for the take home assignment. If his GH code is good enough as per the employer standards, invite him in office to explain the work he did on that project.

Now employers don't want to do that most likely I assume is because no one wants to go through the pain of figuring out the details of GH code. OTOH, the employer is expecting the candidate to understand the problem assigned to him and come up with a solution!