States should mandate that time spent at a job interview must be paid proportional to the average rate of the position you are applying for. This includes take home work!
The reason for this is that if I know you are spending as much as you might spend for an employee on interviewing me, then I know that you are serious about this being a possibility.
This also means you can't send a take home to 1000 candidates, review a few tens of them, and then hire 1. A process I think is rather common at many shops.
>States should mandate that time spent at a job interview must be paid proportional to the average rate of the position you are applying for. This includes take home work!
Beware of unintended consequences. One of the reasons mentioned in the article for why interviews were so long is that companies are risk adverse and don't want the risk of being saddled with a bad employee. If you mandate that interviews must be paid, the same dynamic would apply. Specifically, companies would care even more about your resume/linkedin/experience, because they don't want to waste money on marginal/inexperienced candidates.
My approach for take-home work is to offer to pair on it with the hiring manager or one of my future team-mates. This way it's mutual and I see how it'll be to work with that person as well. If that seems like a ridiculous waste of time for one of their employees, well...
States should mandate that time spent at a job interview must be paid proportional to the average rate of the position you are applying for. This includes take home work!
The reason for this is that if I know you are spending as much as you might spend for an employee on interviewing me, then I know that you are serious about this being a possibility.
This also means you can't send a take home to 1000 candidates, review a few tens of them, and then hire 1. A process I think is rather common at many shops.