
Thanks for Submitting Your Résumé to This Black Hole - johnny313
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/25/opinion/sunday/thanks-for-submitting-your-resume-to-this-black-hole.html
======
ryandrake
Whenever this subject comes up, predictably the answer here is always Blah
blah blah network network network. For a demographic always looking for the
scalable solution to a problem, HN seems pretty attached to the least scalable
option. The numbers just don't make sense to me.

Let's generously assume that you meet and have excellent working relationships
with 100 people at each of the 4 jobs you've had. Of those 400 people, say,
conservatively, 50% think so highly of you that they'd be willing to stick
their neck out help you with your next job search. Out of those 200 people,
50% are no longer working for that company. Out of those 100 people, let's
optimistically assume you actively kept in touch with all of them over the
years. Now, maybe 50% are working for a company where you'd actually like to
apply. Out of those 50 companies, 20% actually have a job opening that fits
your background. Out of those 10, maybe 2 actually know and can put you in
touch with the hiring manager for that opening. And your success chance
through the interview pipeline has got to be worse than 50%.

Tweak my numbers up or down a little, but I think it's a pipe dream for most
workers: You have to have an enormous address book full of high-power contacts
in order to end up at the end of the funnel with one or two who are both
willing and able to successfully help you get a job. And once you've exhausted
that network (all it takes is to blow a few interviews), then what?

~~~
curun1r
Meh...working in the opposite direction, I just took two companies that, off
the top of my head, would seem like attractive places to work (Stripe and
AirBnB). Both have listed openings of the somewhat rare position that I'd be
looking for (Engineering Manager). I went to LinkedIn and searched for each
company and looked at just recruiting profiles. I found 12 and 8 mutual
contacts, respectively, that I could easily ask to pocket a referral bonus in
exchange for forwarding my resume along with a small recommendation note.

Granted, I make the effort to network, especially with people who I have
enough of a working relationship with that they'd recommend me. But it seems
just based on my quick sanity check, that networking could easily work well
enough to find a job should I decide I need one. And that's not even counting
the 4-5 unsolicited contacts per month that come in from recruiters that I was
referred to them by someone I know.

Sample size of 1 and perhaps I distinguish myself more than others, but I can
say with certainty that the effort I've put into networking means I won't have
problems getting an interview in the current market. If the market tanks, the
story might be different.

~~~
erikb
What do you understand as "Engineering Manager"? In software an engineer that
upgraded to managing other engineers seems to be common practice.

~~~
curun1r
Yes, it's common practice. It's how I originally became a manager. That's why
it's somewhat rare to see job openings for those management positions. Most
companies would rather promote from within than hire an someone from outside
the company. Managers are often most effective when the people being managed
believe they understand the work being done intimately and the easiest way to
show that is to have done that work prior to becoming a manager.

But management is also a discipline apart from the work being done by the
team. I made a ton of mistakes early in my time as a manager. I was also
fortunate enough to work for a company that had a management training program
that was hugely helpful. And I'm also fortunate to have a parent that teaches
interpersonal dynamics in a business school, so I've had a lot of exposure to
the theory behind the practice. I feel this has made me a lot better manager
now than I was when I first started, despite the fact that my actual abilities
to write code have suffered somewhat from lack of practice.

~~~
erikb
Yeah, alright. That makes sense.

------
apsec112
In my job search, I've been surprised by how often you submit a resume online,
and then you don't even get a rejection email. It's a true "black hole" in
that you never hear back, not even with a "no thanks". I think it's
disrespectful of candidates to ask them to spend time filling out an
application, and then leave them hanging because you're (presumably) too lazy
to read it.

~~~
kintamanimatt
Part of the reason is that rejected candidates tend to ask why they were
rejected, which is a massive time sink. The logic goes that it's better to
black hole than it is to be inundated with requests for reasons.

~~~
amorphid
When recruiting, I chose to reject thousands of people.

For obvious rejections, I sent an auto generated email that looked like it
could be from a human. If someone asked why they'd been rejected, I'd simply
say the hiring manager chose to focus on more obvious matches for the
position, and that was the end of it. Maybe 1 in 100 asked for feedback, but I
didn't keep stats.

For a few candidates who were unlikely to be a fit, I'd reject them, and say
why I didn't think it'd a match. Usually if I heard back, it was simply to say
thank you for acknowledging them. For one position, I was recruiting a CTO. I
rejected one Craigslist sourced applicant, and gave him reasons why he didn't
fit the CEO's list of filtering bullet points. He responded with information
that flipped him from a no to a yes, he got the interview, and eventually got
the job!

~~~
chrisper
>For a few candidates who were unlikely to be a fit, I'd reject them, and say
why I didn't think it'd a match.

I read that a lot of people don't do this because they are afraid of $RANDOM
lawsuit.

~~~
throw_away_777
I always assume this is just an excuse - they don't give you a reason because
there is no reason for them to give you a reason. If there was some benefit
for them to giving you a reason they would not fear the lawsuits. Maybe some
people from Europe can talk about whether companies give them reasons, I
suspect even in Europe companies don't tell applicants why they didn't hire
them.

~~~
amorphid
If you're rejecting someone for because they'd never get the job, it's not
worth explaining why. Reasons include the candidate wasting their time to
impress you in a way they will never work, getting sucked into a sob story
about how they really need a job, and the candidate starting an argument, etc.

Here's an extreme example. I rejected a candidate, and felt bad for him. I
gave a specific reason why he'd never get the job. A few hours later, he
showed up in the lobby of our office building, coked out of his mind (that's
what it looked and felt like, but he was probably just intensely upset). He
started demanding to see HR. Shit went from chill to super uncomfortable in 0
seconds flat. I walked up to him, suggested he leave, at which point he
realized I'm twice his size, and he departed. Yikes!

I stopped giving invalid rejection explanations after that. It's just not
worth it, and that's part of living in the world that sucks more than I'd like
it to.

------
gnarbarian
The worst is when you have to fill out countless repetitive and exhaustive
applications for ONE job because they don't have enough a proper interface to
indeed/LinkedIn/etc

I probably spent 7 hours on application paperwork for my current job. Complete
with detailed personal history that had to be 100% accurate going back 10
years.

I had 3 other offers expire before I got my offer from my current employer.
Then once I accepted it was another month before I knew if I passed the
background checks. That wanted me to start a few days after I finally knew
without giving proper notice to my current employer too!

Thankfully this only had one 3 hour casual interview and it was more a waiting
game than endless hours poured into interviews for a job I might not get. I
knew this would be a better choice than the other offers and I'm glad I did
what I did.

~~~
busterarm
I accepted an offer at a subcontractor at Gulfstream once. Crazy process,
including them demanding I send all kinds of crazy info including SSN via
email unencrypted.

Anyway, I spent several weeks asking them over and over when my start date was
supposed to be, because eventually my soon-to-be employer's contract with GD
was going to expire and I also wanted to give my current employer notice.

After a couple of months of this, I got fed up on a Friday and wrote an email
telling them that I'm rescinding my offer and they went crazy and then kept
calling me through the weekend and telling me I could start on Monday begging
me to start...telling me I should just walk away from my current employer with
no notice.

Walked away from that situation and never looked back. Glad I did it. My
background check cost them nearly $500 and I imagine it hurt their
relationship with General Dynamics. First clue should have been the fact their
entire HR department was offshored.

~~~
gnarbarian
The only thing that kept me going on this was excellent communication with
both my new manager and HR. They guided me through the process and were very
honest about where we stood and how I should answer ambiguous questions in the
application. I was certain I would pass the background check but nonetheless
it felt unnerving to let those other offers expire for something that was not
really a sure thing.

Also some of the background checks can cost quite a bit more than $500. The
preliminary ones are fast but the thorough federal one I'm undergoing now
takes around 6 months.

I passed a similar one a few years ago which cost the employer more than 30k
and took more than a year to compete.

~~~
pduszak
What kind of background check costs $30k? Were they looking at past finances?

~~~
jdmichal
Six months and $30,000 sounds about right or maybe even a little low for a US
secret clearance. There's a reason they're estimated to be worth about $10,000
a year. Insanely expensive and time consuming to get.

(OP has mentioned in another thread that this was not a secret clearance, but
very similar.)

~~~
RyJones
Probably a level 5 or 6 certification of public trust.

------
chiefofgxbxl
Minus the dog learning to type at the end, sounds like my experience applying
for jobs: submit application online to several places, get a "resume received"
email, some automated email a few days later to get one's hopes up, and then
get that denial email.

I don't want to hear some euphemistic email detailing how I was a very strong
candidate but among a large qualified pool of applicants or how the team was
impressed with my resume but _unable to move forward at this time_... just
tell me I didn't get the job already and cut out all the flowery soup.

~~~
jansho
> ... just tell me I didn't get the job already and cut out all the flowery
> soup.

Amen to that. Recently I submitted five applications and four of them ended up
as duds. What really annoys me is that I had to chase the recruiters to find
out for myself that either the job is too senior or they forgot to take down
the advert. The best one so far is when a recruiter claimed they never
received my application when I got a _confirmation email_ earlier.

Please guys, don't be lazy! Don't play games! Don't make _me_ look desperate,
geez.

~~~
lacampbell
After I've sent out an application I don't give it any more thought. I don't
wonder if it's been read or if they'll ask for an interview or how long it
will take them. I look for the next job to apply to.

As far as I am concerned, a rejection wastes both of our time. Unless they
want an interview, why bother communicating any further?

~~~
jansho
Not when I was deeply interested in those jobs, and took my time tailoring the
applications to them. I don't usually mass-send my CV, I prefer to shortlist
jobs and focus on them. See, I would appreciate at least a note about the
outcomes. But it's either no contact or it drags on for ages until they
somehow realise that the position is no longer available. It's a bit
unbelievable, and I'm starting to doubt myself.

These days too I notice that recruiters have become more mechanical and not
very interested in finding out more about you as a person. It's like they
forgot that they've got two clients, the organisation and the applicant.

Sigh. To be honest I've never had this experience before so it's a bit
demoralising. But hey let's keep carrying on.

~~~
lacampbell
I would honestly question why you are spending a long time tailoring an
application, or pinning hopes on any one application. I wouldn't say I mass
send CVs - but I try not to spend over an hour because I don't see it as a
good time investment.

Anyway I'm hardly an expert, but this attitude and process has helped me.

~~~
rleigh
Why? Because there are two extremes here:

1) Selectively applying only for positions in companies where you truly care
about the specifics of the role and the overall purpose of the company,
because you want a specialised role and/or professional progression.

2) Indiscriminately applying for anything which vaguely seems like you might
be able to do, even if it's not a good match and you care little about it.

I've not done a huge amount of interviewing, but last time I did so it was
painfully obvious which categories the CVs fell into. All the (2) applicants
were immediately rejected on the grounds of not meeting the required job
criteria or were ranked much lower than the (1) candidates for not having
relevant experience in the area or zero demonstrated interest in the area or
specific position either on paper or in the interview.

You must tailor both the CV and cover letter to make a good impression. That's
the careers advice I was given, and it's good advice. Not taking the time to
do so makes it much more likely your application will be rejected outright, or
be ranked below better applications. If your application doesn't demonstrate
any clear interest or specific aptitude for the position, it's going to
naturally make you appear less desirable than candidates with the same skills
which do. The CV is selling you to the people reading it, and if no effort is
made to market your skills and experience for the position on offer, then
you're selling yourself short.

Last time I had to apply for a job, I spent a lot of time looking over job
listings, and submitted four applications to four places, all tailored bar
one. I got four interviews and three job offers. The hours spent tailoring
each application paid off in terms of the response. And I got a job in a field
I cared about, rather than something random. The one I didn't get an offer for
was with Google, and that was mostly untailored because they weren't hiring
for a specific role; I wouldn't have accepted an offer in any event, so no
loss for that one!

~~~
lacampbell
Where are you finding these jobs? I am talking about the context of online job
boards. The descriptions are often quite vague or written by someone non-
technical. I have no idea if the place would be a good place to work at just
by reading them. So I really don't feel it's worth a lot of time to do a lot
of research.

I like my current job and I can't even remember what the job description said.
Anyway maybe your technique works for your area and your skillset - but I'd
fall flat on my face if I tried it here.

~~~
rleigh
It was a combination of company websites and academic job boards. In my case,
this was ARM, jobs.ac.uk and a couple of others. I ended up in an academic
software developer position, doing scientific image processing.

In the past, I have trawled through sites like Monster, Reed and other big
generic sites, and generally been unsatisfied. I've had my share of generic
and fairly boring positions from this route. You essentially have to take the
best of all the rubbish that's on offer in an area that's practical to be.
You're right that the descriptions are rubbish and next to useless, and I
think in most cases this route should be avoided if at all possible.

But if you decide up front exactly which field you really want to work in, and
then proactively look for companies working in that area which are hiring, or
might be hiring, you can get something you really want and raise the chances
of being hired as well. Particularly if you proactively reach out to groups
which you want to work with; several people on my current team got hired after
working for groups in other organisations doing related stuff--just being
known helps, and being known to be doing good stuff helps even more.

~~~
lacampbell
Sounds like you have more education in a specific field (image processing).
You know the industry you want to be in and the kind of companies that have
those positions. Similarly, those companies have strong ideas on the kind of
people they want and you're a good match.

FWIW, 2/3 jobs I've found on job hunt boards have been pretty good. I'm much
more interested in what the team are like and the environment than I am the
specific problem domain.

You are probably right that networking is better though. I read somewhere that
the time to start networking is not when you want a job - that comes across as
being needy. I'm trying to do it more now, at a time where I'm comfortable in
my role. I'm hoping it works both ways - I'll also find talented people I'll
be able to recommend to employers or work with.

------
jellin
I have almost 10 years of experience and I've been looking for a job for the
last year. I've sent applications to some companies, carefully selected and
for which I'm 100% enthusiast about. I've sent custom cover letters, I've been
studied the product and provided feedback and improvements. And still I don't
deserve even an email saying that I've been rejected.

With some companies I was exchanging email, providing all the info, and then
suddenly I never received any further reply.

I think that it's good for the company to filter out candidates, but something
must change, as candidates we expect at least a rejection email, especially
when your life depends on it.

~~~
siculars
You don't depend on them. They depend on you. Always remember that wherever
you work: they are renting your time, you are always working to better
yourself.

Keep staying positive and know there is an opportunity out there for you.
Don't get discouraged!

~~~
dukeluke
IT workers are losing leverage in the US. Many have been offshored, and most
remaining positions are being centralized to a handful of tech hubs in the
country. It's good to not lose hope, but don't think as an IT worker, your
have infinite leverage.

------
dkarapetyan
I'm more and more convinced that being a cog in some corporate machine is
coming to an end. We've collectively refined corporate processes to the point
that it no longer requires human ingenuity or creativity. This has all
happened under the guise of making things more efficient so that a stock
ticker will be less volatile and will consistently move up and to the right.
The candidate tracking software that this article parodies is one example of
such an automated and "efficient" system. One gets the sense that the
recruiters are almost secondary. Soon a "dog" will really be able to screen
candidates for a job.

I don't think I'm saying anything new here. The mechanization of such work has
been happening for a while now and the smart move is to start planning for
that inevitability. Anything that requires basic pattern matching and
procedures is pretty much gone. My retirement account I think is currently
managed by a "robo advisor". Hiring humans to do such mechanical tasks will
start getting more and more expensive relative to tweaking some parameters in
some neural network coupled maybe with some domain specific
policy/optimization framework.

Personally I don't think this is such a bad state of affairs. Why should
societal optimization tasks be handled with heroic human effort when we can
just do it with math?

~~~
troymc
While math can be used to optimize some function(s) (for "societal
optimization"), math is silent about the question of what to optimize. There's
no general agreement about that. (For example, should there be regulations to
reduce river pollution?)

~~~
dkarapetyan
Sure but what do you trust more, a properly designed control system with
various safeguards to allow for the right amount of river pollution, or
politicians arguing about which of their buddies should get the rights to
polluting that river the most?

In the future I imagine your question about the river pollution is almost
nonsensical. That is if we manage to actually get there. Going by current news
about the future of earth's ecology we might not actually make it much
further. Gotta admit though heroic human optimizations seemed like they got us
pretty far but the lag time in reacting to things is a bit too long when
humans are in the loop. So the sooner they are out of that critical loop the
better.

Speaking of which: [http://www.sciencealert.com/photos-reveal-more-
than-200-brig...](http://www.sciencealert.com/photos-reveal-more-
than-200-bright-blue-arctic-lakes-have-started-bubbling-with-methane-gas)

~~~
troymc
My example was one many _human_ questions where "math" provides no objective
answer, because not every question has an objective answer, particularly some
questions of morality, fairness, or personal taste.

Some more examples:

* Is it okay to jaywalk with children across a busy street?

* Is it fair to give the bigger piece of chicken to the boy, rather than the girl, because "he's a boy"?

* Which is better-tasting, peaches or plums?

(I'm not arguing for moral relativism. There are some moral questions where
everyone agrees on the answer.)

------
crispyambulance
The best way to avoid the "black hole" is to not throw your resume into it in
the first place.

Instead, use your professional networks and friends. Reach out to actual human
beings. Find any way you can to bypass the bullshit online job application
systems and HR departments.

When people (or programs) go through a stack of resumes, it's all about
finding reasons to eliminate as many as possible as quickly as possible using
the flimsiest of criteria. Of course it's going to create hard feelings but
what should one expect when putting oneself into a giant horde of applicants?

~~~
arvinsim
So you're screwed if you didn't invest in contacts early in your career even
if you have the needed experience and skills?

Having a good professional network is not something you can just "turn on" at
will.

~~~
enraged_camel
You would be surprised. With a few months of investment attending local
meetups, you can meet a lot of people. If you take the extra step and, say,
volunteer for speaking engagements, you can establish yourself as an authority
in your area of expertise fairly quickly. You won't become a DHH overnight,
but you'll still be miles ahead of those who still play the resume game.

~~~
speeder
What to do if you don't have resources to do that? (Example: me. No friends,
negative net worth, zero income, no car, no bicycle, no bus money, most
clothes have holes in them)

~~~
empath75
Get a job at a temp agency and start networking from within whatever shitty
placement they give you. I literally started my career in a mail room working
with developmentally disabled people and ex convicts. Now I'm a senior
software engineer.

------
M_Grey
I've been so thoroughly broken by naming schemes like "Gravity" or "Flaming
Biscuit" or whatever, that I've basically trained myself (at least here) to
read things like "Black Hole" as a project name. Imagine my brief
consternation when I thought, "Who in their right mind would name a resume
hosting service 'Black Hole'?!"... then saw the source and felt incredibly
stupid.

Beyond that, let me just add my voice to the multitude shouting, "Holy shit,
yes, and it's terrible!"

~~~
tormeh
I recently deleted an issue in redmine while meaning to delete a comment. It
had a confirmation popup saying "do you really want to delete this issue?". I
thought "sure, in Redmine they probably call comments issues."

------
amgin3
In my experience in searching for a job, companies invite for 3 interviews and
a coding test, then decide the position isn't clearly defined, so they restart
the entire process and ask you to re-apply. Then you go through 3 more
interviews and another coding test, and then one more interview, then you
never hear from the company again. Since the whole process took 4-months, you
are now broke and homeless.

------
Tagore
I've literally never gotten a job by sending out resumes. Every single job
I've had I got through some connection or another.

I actually refused to send my current job a resume. The conversation went like
this:

Can you send them a resume?

No- here's my LinkedIn.

But can you send them a resume?

No- here's my LinkedIn.

OK, can you come in for an interview?

Interview.

A month passes.

Can you come in for another interview?

Interview.

Hired.

~~~
rhodysurf
Counter point, I have gotten two job offers by just submitting resumes online.
But I work in a state without tons of competing talent, so that could help.

~~~
BoysenberryPi
What state if you don't mind me asking? I really want to just move out to the
midwest or somewhere where there aren't a lot of programmers.

~~~
Tagore
New England (not a state, but let's not get too specific here,) but off the
beaten track. Small town with a big University. There are really only about
four companies around here who could credibly offer me offer me a job doing
something I want to do at a rate I want to do it for.

That's a double-edged sword. On one hand I have to be pretty careful not to
burn bridges or hop jobs, cause if I want to stay around here I'll run out of
both quickly. On the other hand established developers around here all know
each other, pretty much, so the network effect is very, very strong.

And that even means easy intros to people who work remotely for interesting
companies elsewhere (which seems to be more and more a thing.) Just in the
last month I've met people, through my local network, who work for places like
Trello, Circle, etc.

The Circle guy in particular- well, he came up to introduce himself after a
talk I gave, and some of what he's doing for Circle is very much up my alley,
so if I wanted a different job or a remote job (I don't at the moment) I might
hit him up.

------
Overtonwindow
This is the finest account of the resume/employer process I have ever laid
eyes on.

------
cardiffspaceman
For how ever many weeks you might wish to collect unemployment checks, you
have to show that you're looking actively, in my jurisdiction. One might have
a network of contacts but it's going to take some time for that network to
lead to the kind of events that count as evidence that you're looking for
work. On the other hand the black holes can lead to lots of events of that
nature. So worst case, the black holes actually generate something (is Hawking
radiation the right term?) that you can use to keep those checks coming.

------
rampage101
I don't get why referral is counted for so much especially when there are
referral bonuses which would encourage employees to refer basically anybody
they know.

With all these companies having massive HR departments, I also don't
understand how a resume goes unread or un-responded to when it takes maybe 10
minutes max to go through a resume thoroughly.

~~~
alain94040
You grossly over-estimate the time it takes to read a resume. It's way below
30 seconds per resume. Probably on average closer to 10.

Try it for yourself: set up a timer, open your resume. How quickly can you
figure out how much experience you have, do the job titles match more or less
the position, any description that lists similar stacks to the one your group
uses? 10 seconds.

~~~
rampage101
It takes 10 seconds to read a resume? So you just throw out the resume if you
don't immediately see "similar stacks"?

I wrote "thoroughly" meaning reading the whole thing, and possibly looking at
their links, or doing some small research about something on their resume.

------
bgribble
I have actually had really good experiences as both a job seeker and a hiring
manager with Hired. Their platform makes it easier to keep track of candidates
and makes it less likely they will fall through the cracks.

My experience with hiring in the past is that startups that do it completely
internally with no HR or recruiter support are likely to get overwhelmed and
drop the ball. Recruiters drive the process along but they are motivated to
put any ass in the seat and are not usually completely trustworthy from either
the job seeker or the client side. A marketplace solution like Hired, Vettery,
etc makes the process lot more transparent and has a rhythm that helps keep
hiring managers on task.

Of course I'm a programmer and I'm in NYC and what works for me, here doesn't
work for everybody, everywhere.

------
jkaljundi
Have been toying around with an idea of recruitment and job application
service which would try to turn the tables and show candidates who's
interested in them. So instead of applying, the first step would be a question
from candidate to company saying "tell me more about this job". The company
would then need to actively get back to the candidate. The advantage to the
company would be a much larger pool of candidate contacts, although they would
also need to work those contacts more.

It might not be a solution for jobs and company types described in this
thread, but in many industries, company types and countries the lack of
candidates is a much bigger problem than too many candidates.

~~~
JSeymourATL
> the first step would be a question from candidate to company saying "tell me
> more about this job". The company would then need to actively get back to
> the candidate.

Such a service exists. It's called Retained Search, an old-school, high-touch,
high-feel service reserved for executive level, mission-critical roles. It's
also expensive, 25-33% of first year target compensation. Naturally, companies
are incentivized to use cheaper approaches first.

------
wott
I've had a recruiter writing me to thank me for my application, but
unfortunately blah blah résumé blah blah position blah blah. The thing is I
had never applied to anything at her company nor sent her a résumé, I had just
asked her a question once. Which she had never answered...

------
akhilcacharya
That's why it's best to just directly contact a recruiter.

------
lukaszjb
WTF I just read?

~~~
jkaljundi
Humour (or humor in American English) is the tendency of particular cognitive
experiences to provoke laughter and provide amusement. The term derives from
the humoral medicine of the ancient Greeks, which taught that the balance of
fluids in the human body, known as humours (Latin: humor, "body fluid"),
controlled human health and emotion.

------
batguano
No way all this happens in a mere two months. It'd get dragged out for four,
at least.

------
good_vibes
+1 for entrepreneurship

------
tiatia
You would not believe me how many applications I wrote. I know the black hole.

There are a few rules.

Never apply to a job that uses Taleo, SAP or any other "application"
interface. A real job requires to send or upload a resume and an _OPTIONAL_
cover letter. Ignore everything else.

Never apply for a job that requires anything unusual (only non-smokers, hand
written resume, time of birth for astrological evaluation, hard copy of
application etc.). I am even skeptical about "motivational" letters. All these
are signs that your future boss is nuts.

Be very open to create "sample" work, like a 10 page marketing plan or an
"investment analysis of 5 companies". Just be very clear that this will be
billed at your consulting rate too.

Remember the second most stupid people work in HR (with the most stupid people
working in real estate). This does not mean the every HR person is an idiot -
in fact I am sure there are brilliant people -, it is just a reflection of the
entry requirements for these jobs.

I never really found a decent job after my PhD and I was desperate for years.
The funny thing is: Now I get sometimes offered two jobs a day by just meeting
people. I don't even engage in the conversation. They wouldn't be able to
offer any salary that would make me even considering taking a job. And if I
look at my former peer, never getting a job in the past may be the best thing
that ever happened to me.

------
dezb
what a waste of my life reading that stupid page..

------
kareemsabri
As a counter example, I got a great job from one of those black holes.

~~~
shawnz
What makes it a black hole if you got a reply?

~~~
a3n
Black holes emit radiation from their edge, when incoming material is
disintegrated.

------
Tagore
The issue here is that it's very, very difficult to figure out if someone can
code, at all, from a resume. You might have a masters in CS and still be
hopeless when it comes to actually writing even very simple things. You'd be
surprised at how often that is the case...

So, when I hire, I do so through through connections. I ask friends "Do you
know anyone who can actually code who is looking for a job?"

And if it's just me, that's the end of it, but... let's say I'm hiring for a
venture-backed firm, or for a department in a bank or something. In that case,
I have a fiduciary duty to put a job ad out there, and I have to be able to
show that I received a lot of resumes and "looked them over." By which I mean
unceremoniously threw away. Who has the time to look over 1,000 resumes, most
of which are complete bullshit?

I was going to hire my friend's friend anyway, but I had to solicit your
resume along with many others to provide some cover. I threw your resume away
without glancing past the education section (if you had gone to an Ivy I might
have looked twice.) Capisce?

~~~
jachee
Sounds like you waste a lot of people's time to lie to higher-ups.

~~~
Tagore
Yep- don't hate the player, hate the game. I'm legally obligated to do so in
some cases. That's what fiduciary means.

~~~
tutufan
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

~~~
Tagore
Except that is what it means. The term is used mainly in certain contexts
these days, so you might have gotten the impression that it only applies in
those contexts, but 'fiduciary' has a broader meaning.

To quote from Wiki (I know): "[t]he distinguishing or overriding duty of a
fiduciary is the obligation of undivided loyalty" and I'd argue that taking on
capital imposes just such an obligation, such that trying to hire the people
most likely to maximize your investors return is indeed a fiduciary duty, one
that implies other duties.

