Live data from Hacker News

Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

fortune.com

321–330 of 918 posts

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My rule for interviews is the company has to spend equal human time or I decline. This means no 8 hour tests, no talking to computers, no special little projects for me to evaluate me. You get equal face time and no more than 45 minutes of me doing anything by myself (that's the max leeway). If you want me to do anything else either I'm getting paid short term contractor rates or making you make a sizable donation to…

In my experience, candidates who demand equivalent face time always underestimate how much time is spent selecting candidates, reviewing resumes, scheduling interviews, preparing the interview structure, reviewing interviews, advocating for candidates to progress, getting their offers approved, dealing with HR, and the countless other things that go into getting someone from the application phase to being hired. If y…

I don’t know if I would throw out “equal time” as my metric, but it’s not far off. There is always going to be some asymmetry in the interview process, especially in early stages, but there should be some balance to it, an ebb and flow.

Companies asking me to spend 2 or 4 or 8 or 16 hours on a take home quiz before I’ve so much as had a 15 minute screen with HR or the hiring manager go straight into the trash. I’m not putting in serious effort when you’ve put in effectively none.

Hate to be a snarky guy, but the more a company demands up front the more they tend to be a bullshit shop anyway. I have had some random no-name sub-contracting shop in the Federal space cold-call and ask me to submit to a take home assignment with a 16 hour estimated completion time. No surprise, they folded several years after I declined. No one worth a damn put up with their shit.

Recently, I had a recruiter tell me I needed to submit to an hours long coding challenge before any contact with the company. When I respectfully declined to proceed without at least a 15 minute phone screen, I got a reply that, as it turns out, they already had a pending offer out. Had I not held some standards with this employer I would have completely wasted my time.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#322
post #89

I did one of these once. Once . I felt so bad afterwards that I swore them off forever. It's not like the 'interview' was terrible or anything. I knew it was AI from the start. It was just that when I got done with it, I realized that I had talked at a computer for ~45 minutes. And, yet again, I was going to be ghosted by the company (I was), and that I was never going to get those 45 minutes back. That was time I co…

The key is skin in the game. If a human interviews me, if they're wasting my time, they're also wasting their own. So they have some incentive not to do that. But if an AI interviews me, the humans have no incentive not to waste my time. You want to have an AI interview me? No. It can interview my AI agent if you want, but not me . You want to interview me? Put a human on the line.

Exactly, and the AI can be interviewing 1000 other people at the same time.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's where we're headed _if we let these assholes get away with it_. They have the money and guns, but we have the numbers.

Don't ever let anyone brainwash you into thinking we don't have the money and guns either.

Well said. Everybody has power, they just throw it away because exercising your personal power is at best a pita, and at worst, personally dangerous. But retaining access to your personal power requires exercising it from time to time, or it will atrophy.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#324
post #192

> “The truth is, if you want a job, you’re gonna go through this thing,” Adam Jackson, CEO and founder of Braintrust, a company that distributes AI interviewers, tells Fortune. “If there were a large portion of the job-seeking community that were wholesale rejecting this, our clients wouldn’t find the tool useful… This thing would be chronically underperforming for our clients. And we’re just not seeing that—we’re se…

Right; AI interviews select-out candidates who aren't desperate; who tend to be the highest quality candidates. Great job, Braintrust. Some companies genuinely don't care though; they're a meatgrinder that just need to get warm souls into the machine. Ironically: These are the companies that are being eaten alive by AI right now.

Who says companies want the "highest quality candidates?" Some companies would prefer desperate, obedient employees who have no other options and will jump through any hoops they're told to jump through.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#326
Take this entire paragraph and read carefully, and it explains how to kill this trend:

> “The truth is, if you want a job, you’re gonna go through this thing,” Adam Jackson, CEO and founder of Braintrust, a company that distributes AI interviewers, tells Fortune. “If there were a large portion of the job-seeking community that were wholesale rejecting this, our clients wouldn’t find the tool useful… This thing would be chronically underperforming for our clients. And we’re just not seeing that—we’re seeing the opposite.”

Great. So he is explicitly telling us that a boycott will work. There you go folks, you have your marching orders.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#327

I actually don’t mind the idea of AI conducting short 5-minute candidate screens that respect a candidate’s time, but full-on AI interviews are insulting and disrespectful of a candidate’s time.

I do.

The precedent it sets is bad. You're expected to show up as a real person … but the company doesn't have to?

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#328
post #89

I did one of these once. Once . I felt so bad afterwards that I swore them off forever. It's not like the 'interview' was terrible or anything. I knew it was AI from the start. It was just that when I got done with it, I realized that I had talked at a computer for ~45 minutes. And, yet again, I was going to be ghosted by the company (I was), and that I was never going to get those 45 minutes back. That was time I co…

The key is skin in the game. If a human interviews me, if they're wasting my time, they're also wasting their own. So they have some incentive not to do that. But if an AI interviews me, the humans have no incentive not to waste my time. You want to have an AI interview me? No. It can interview my AI agent if you want, but not me . You want to interview me? Put a human on the line.

> No. It can interview my AI agent if you want, but not me.

There must be some clever ways to automate this. Give them a taste of their own medicine - at scale.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#329
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the only thing missing is fetching stuff from warehouse Amateurs, IKEA solved that one decades ago ;) But that's Scandinavian practicality or whatever they use to sell themselves these days :)

When IKEA does it it’s good because IKEA is European.

Nope, is just as bad.

Re: Job-seekers are dodging AI interviewers

#330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My rule for interviews is the company has to spend equal human time or I decline. This means no 8 hour tests, no talking to computers, no special little projects for me to evaluate me. You get equal face time and no more than 45 minutes of me doing anything by myself (that's the max leeway). If you want me to do anything else either I'm getting paid short term contractor rates or making you make a sizable donation to…

In my experience, candidates who demand equivalent face time always underestimate how much time is spent selecting candidates, reviewing resumes, scheduling interviews, preparing the interview structure, reviewing interviews, advocating for candidates to progress, getting their offers approved, dealing with HR, and the countless other things that go into getting someone from the application phase to being hired. If y…

I'm a hiring manager. I don't make people do offline stuff. I do EVERYTHING IN MY POWER to make certain they are not doing more than a phone screen w/HR (absolutely mandated by the company or I wouldn't allow it) and meet with the team. For Senior Managers+, I do require one extra interview with other teams because they'll be interfacing. So, max investment is 2.25h. If we cannot make a decision from that investment, we have failed as evaluators.

Being that I have lost exactly 3 folks over my 15y as a leader and only one of those due to performance (within 6 months of starting as a leader) I think anyone should be able to do this.

Post reply on HN