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

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

askamanager.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 623 posts

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

#31

Post by ljm »

defen wrote: post #11

While I don't doubt this sort of thing happens, the following line leads me to believe that this is an exercise in creative writing by someone: > In the meantime, legal approved security to put a trace on John’s computer to review if there have been outside messages or if his work is being completed with outside help or on a different computer altogether.

Most management software on a company laptop (or endpoint in jargon-speak) will be set up to allow this and your company's policy will allow them to activate monitoring software if an investigation is required. It probably won't be used unless you're already in deep shit, which the person in TFA pretty much was.

It's not that unusual.

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

#32

Post by bink »

kurthr wrote: post #16
simmanian wrote: post #5

Practices like this are hilariously common in the industry. Right out of college I accepted a job offer at a small consulting company on the east coast. They promised they would give me free housing at their luxury apartment for the first few months and give me all the training I need to excel in areas of my interest. I flew across the country and found out the whole thing is not as advertised. Their luxury apartment…

And people wonder why managers like hiring in person workers? It's not that you can't fake some stuff like this in person, but it's both harder (more expensive) and a lot more obvious.

This is a pretty uncommon scenario, though. Making everyone work on-site on the off-chance that someone will fake an interview seems like a severe over-reaction.

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

#33

Post by clueless123 »

In my experience, At large companies that hire a lot of contractors, it is not that hard to pull this off. I've seen where the contractors A team do all the interviewing, then you get a C or C- team assigned to work in your project. By the time you "give them a chance", complain up the management chain, go sideways to HR and actually change the team, the contracting firm already got 6 months worth of salary from the team. In short, they do it because it is profitable.

PS.. To add insult to injury, the "engineers" on the team will update ther CV's to show that they worked for "large company X".

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

#34

Post by advisedwang »

endisneigh wrote: post #15

Record the interviews. Problem solved.

I've seen legal depts fight against this. They're worried the recording will capture some question or comment that could be evidence of discrimination. (e.g. someone asks "Did you have a good Christmas?" and is later accused of discriminating against non-Christians)

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

#36

Post by kccqzy »

bink wrote: post #32
kurthr wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And people wonder why managers like hiring in person workers? It's not that you can't fake some stuff like this in person, but it's both harder (more expensive) and a lot more obvious.

This is a pretty uncommon scenario, though. Making everyone work on-site on the off-chance that someone will fake an interview seems like a severe over-reaction.

A strategy I've seen is that you can make only the new hires work on-site for their first year or so. Once they've proven themselves in their first year, they can start working remotely.

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

#37

Post by tempnow987 »

defen wrote: post #11

While I don't doubt this sort of thing happens, the following line leads me to believe that this is an exercise in creative writing by someone: > In the meantime, legal approved security to put a trace on John’s computer to review if there have been outside messages or if his work is being completed with outside help or on a different computer altogether.

right - that's weird language. That said, machines are often under GPO / Mdm type control, and it is trivial if needed to monitor a machine if there is an OK (ie, not used to harass / flirt / spy) on someone.

Normally best practice is that someone outside of workgroup reviews results for a predefined concern (ie, slacking off, running a side business on company time, etc). This is just because you can end up with tons of personal details (ie, bank balances - wow they are rich / poor etc). With remote work I think this is less common / would be less acceptable. I have some light govt exposure and this was sometimes done to see if folks were browsing porn (ie, new firewall or something would start reporting adult site use and then they'd do something on the actual computer to see what was up) or slacking - partly because govt work didn't always have good productivity metrics to work against. More recently they just seem to block things like porn at work by default.

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

#38

Post by andylynch »

defen wrote: post #11

While I don't doubt this sort of thing happens, the following line leads me to believe that this is an exercise in creative writing by someone: > In the meantime, legal approved security to put a trace on John’s computer to review if there have been outside messages or if his work is being completed with outside help or on a different computer altogether.

We used to do this in the 90s for suspected fraud/ misuse of office. I’m sure it’s way easier now.

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

#39

Post by hui-zheng »

> HR is going to send up a quick red flag and John is likely to resign claiming a poor fit rather than get caught committing or admitting fraud.

Though at this point they all know John is committing fraud, they still decided only to approach this guy claiming a poor fit for his resignation. I don't know why they do that. They have discussed a lot and considered many things. I am sure there are many reasons to do so. but do they just want John to go away and then try that same thing with another company?

It might be too strong to say this, but a failure to confront evil is a evil.

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

#40

Post by PragmaticPulp »

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 long as possible. They might already have a full-time job or other remote jobs, or maybe they're just trying to travel the world and do a "four hour workweek" thing where they answer e-mails once a day and phone in a couple hours of work at key times during the week.

The common theme is that they aren't really interested in fighting too hard for the position. As soon as the interview or job turns out to be something they can't just talk and smile their way through, they're out, just like this:

> I think my last update for a while: as soon as HR got on the call with him, before they could get through their first question, John said the words “I quit” and hung up the calls. He has since been unreachable!!

Always makes me wonder how many dysfunctional companies are out there letting deadbeat remote employees collect paychecks and do as little work as possible because nobody cares enough to press the issue.

Post reply on HN