
Face It. Your Hiring Process Is Broken - mooreds
https://code.likeagirl.io/face-it-your-hiring-process-is-broken-a788168384bb
======
cluvDwYCfT4neS0
I agree with the article's sentiment, but perhaps for different reasons.

I'm 22 and have been unemployed for a few months now. I recently had a handful
of on-site interviews, all of which I didn't pass. I quit my previous job due
to management issues and general workplace issues that were exceptionally
abnormal (apologies for the vagueness, but I don't want to be too
identifiable).

I'm currently living with my parents and recovering from the emotional
exhaustion of it all. To me, at least, rejection itself isn't the real issue
-- if I could get rejected quickly and regularly that would be ideal for
finding a better match. The issue for me is more so the social and emotional
fatigue of getting genuinely interested in the companies I interviewed at and
going through the 5-8 hour on-site process (which, in general, I've actually
enjoyed -- most of the people I've met with at the interviews have been quite
fun to talk with).

I think it's a shame that hiring isn't more efficient. I find searching
through job lists soul-crushingly boring and incredibly tedious. Especially
because many jobs throw around certain technologies as buzzwords and don't
(and likely don't have any intention of) actually using them, making search
engines very ineffective as well.

I miss working on teams and getting things done in the way that only teams
can, but so far that hasn't outweighed my general apathy towards the process
to continue.

So I do think that the hiring process is broken, if only for the existence of
people that are bored and would be happy to work just for its own sake. I'm in
the process of becoming more active in some FOSS projects I care about but I
find working from my room a lot less productive than a proper office
environment.

~~~
rusabd
I used obscure languages as a filter for interesting jobs in interesting
companies, worked really well. Unfortunately, Common Lisp now is so strong
filter pretty much nothing left :) Try Haskell, it is great.

------
concede_pluto
> I have asked every person who has turned me down what I could do better.

I wouldn't say anything either. There's no upside. Why risk giving any kind of
ammo to someone with a grievance they want to justify?

She says she's a frontend developer and a nerd, so why is she pigeonholing
herself in these "digital content coordinator/content marketer" fad jobs
instead of moving up from PHP?

~~~
technion
It's anecdata, and I'm sure it's regional, but around me, there's vastly more
"digital content marketing" jobs than development jobs (front or backend, much
to my chagrin).

------
niuzeta
This was painful to read. I had to stop halfway.

This post dedicates the first several paragraphs - not sentences - on why the
author posted her "rant", why it was a mistake, why she deleted the posts, and
re-posted, multiple times. She could have simply said _" This article was
originally posted on Reddit as a rushed rant, and I dropped out of fear that
it might impact my employability when it gained traction. I decided to post
this, however, because I felt this point needed to be said"_

A couple of "pages" in, I still have no grasp of what the point is, just that
she got lots of attention in Reddit and people. Let's not forget the "RIP my
career" hyperbole.

Past the "why I'm posting this again", the original article starts with "I'm
shooting myself in the foot right now". At this point, this serves no better
purpose than grandstanding for attention. I can see from the provocative title
the article is going to be about hiring process, which we can all agree is
non-optimal. I'm expecting this would either contain critical thought backed
either by data or personal anecdote. This sentiment has been expressed by so
many people, I have hard time believing this would "end" your career. Let's
get to the point.

Past random rants, follows a meta-analysis on a subreddit. The author shares a
screenshot from one subreddit that seems to gear towards job seekers. (the
author mentions /r/jobs) There are no links, none of the post titles she
mentions are found in the top page of that subreddit:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/jobs/top/](https://www.reddit.com/r/jobs/top/) Even
one examplarly post that she shared a screenshot of - "No interview no
nothing..." has 8 upvotes in 3 days. It's not a pinnacle of "concensus". Even
for her standards, it's not representative of any meaningful sample.

Then there's a distracting update on upvotes and comments. _Why does that
matter?_ Two-digit upvotes are not even impressive; look at any post in front
page, right now.

Several pages' worth of reading and I still have no idea why the hiring is
broken. I've learned that there is a subreddit for job hunters and a preview
of random posts, and her imaginations on why. Oh, and the post gained some
traction in Reddit. Sure.

It then links to several medium posts - and no followup. What does the article
by Jason Shen matter? How does that relate to your point? What am I expected
to get out of it that would help understanding your point?

And that's when I stopped. The author is right; this post would likely hinder
her employability. If I had Googled her name, and saw this meandering screed,
I would have second thoughts in bringing her in. Not because she's become too
controversial figure to be a risk, but due to her apparent lack of
organization of thought. Not to mention apparent need for attention. Even this
response is a screed, because there's no central point or articulation to
respond to.

Best of lucks to the author, I hope she gets better vindication than internet
endorsements.

~~~
paulddraper
Okay, I picked up where you left off.

> It is complete and utter nonsense that people find it hard to garner female
> and minority applications through traditional channels...We aren’t getting
> hired, and aren’t being paid well, because of unconscious biases.

Support for this comes from a large number of (not listed) medium.com posts.

Then we launch into James Damore.

> Or, for shits and giggles, check out the Google Manifesto, and see that some
> milquetoast gish galloping member of /r/IAmVerySmart decided to ram his face
> into Google’s hiring practices and get himself fired over crying about
> diversity hurting hiring practices.

After complaining "tons of writers just here on medium.com...discredited with
a hand-wave", the author in the next breath dismisses Damore and his citations
of Wikipedia, research articles, Wall Street Journal, The New Yorker, etc. [1]
with a hand-wave.

> There is no biological basis to be found for any of this Google Manifesto
> garbage.

Tear that 10-page manifesto apart you want, but take more than one sentence.
"This is BS because I say so."

And I stopped there.

[1]
[https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-I...](https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3914586/Googles-
Ideological-Echo-Chamber.pdf)

------
zaptheimpaler
Okay....

First, /r/jobs skews towards young people just getting started, and further
skews towards people who are having trouble finding a job. Those who aren't
having trouble don't bother posting rants about it. So you can point to a 100
complaints there, it doesn't mean its a representative sample of all job-
seekers. Selection Bias.

I mean even BASIC statistics would say at least count what PERCENTAGE of posts
are "I cant get a job" relative to the total. Just finding 10 posts saying "I
can't get a job" means there are 10 people in that situation .. it says almost
nothing about the market except that there are 10 frustrated people.
Unrepresentative Sample.

Companies don't offer feedback on why they rejected candidates because of
legal issues. OP - now that you are a recruiter, are you going to give
candidates feedback even when HR tells you never to do that because it might
get you sued? Are you willing to put your job on the line and risk getting
your company sued? If not, then perhaps you understand why it is the way it
is..

The point about not enough "diverse" candidates in hiring channels. Again,
refuting it by saying women are so MUCH MORE DETERMINED is 1. bullshit
stereotyping (there are no gender differences, remember???), 2. doesn't
address the point. If roughly 20-25% of CS majors are women (look it up), OF
COURSE the hiring pool will tend to reflect the same ratio - 2/10 women, 8/10
men. When the pipeline is skewed all the way starting from school/college, it
will remain skewed in jobs too. The employers cannot fix the pipeline. Biased
Population => Biased Sample.

Your own linked article shows 28% CS majors are women, and 28% of people with
jobs in IT are women!! Does not sound particularly biased to me.... how about
learning some statistics before ranting?

Also, believe it or not, everyone gets rejected from jobs they are qualified
for. There are only so many spots.. and many more candidates. So many who pass
the minimum bar will get rejected because a better qualified candidate came
along!

A whole lot of frustration does not make an argument. I agree the hiring
process IS broken because of clueless recruiters, low salaries, ridiculously
high interview bars etc. But uninformed rants don't help. Of course, some will
call me a sexist... as if I can only be on "team diversity" or "team sexist".
The (statistical) truth is much subtler than either of those poles. I'm on
"team look at the data without a pre-conceived notion of what you want to
find".

I agree some of the problems she mentions with hiring are there. I am against
this particular article because its very poorly thought through. Its twisting
facts and collecting anecdotes to suit a pre-determined narrative.

------
brad0
The cultural point the author brings up sounds interesting. What's the ratio
of male:female in India vs USA?

------
rarec
After a certain point, you really have to wonder if, just maybe, it's you.
Anecdotally, those who somehow can't find work in this field might be sending
all the wrong signals. Are companies looking for less than what you want?
Sure. However, are your skills and connections actually worth that much?

This also doubly counts if you've made yourself a public figure in any way.
Quite a few companies may not want to have to deal with someone who is very
likely to talk poorly about them.

~~~
brianwawok
The post burned my eyes. Couldn't make it halfway. Hopefully the resume is a
bit easier to read? My goal isn't to judge resumes by how they look, but they
can't burn my eyes.

