Tell HN: Don't post if you're not actually hiring | Hacker News Reader

Tell HN: Don't post if you're not actually hiring

76 pointswhistlerbrk29 comments

Second time this has happened to me and I'm frankly annoyed. I'm dabblin with the idea of full time and over the last two "Who's Hiring" posts I've found company's which have both piqued my interest and for who I have many many years of relevant experience in their stack. I write, excited to have a conversation, point to a relatively polished portfolio, and an HR person comes back to tell me that the position is filled or they are hiring a stronger match.

I don't want to whine too much but I feel like there is some SV pedigree nonsense going down here. Bottom line. Don't post in that thread if you have no intention of talking with the people who email you.

View on HN

As someone who is actually hiring (not on the HN thread), has actually hired people in the last few weeks, is actively interviewing new people, and has had the "you're not actually hiring" accusation leveled at them, please consider that maybe they are really hiring, but:

- are swamped with people applying in addition to trying to build a product,

- may actually have hired someone, and that person may actually be a better hire.

I'm sorry you had a bad experience. I really am. That doesn't mean there's malice at play. Also, please try not to kill the messenger; it is entirely possible that even if malice is at play, the person you're talking to isn't the perpetrator. It would not be the first time that a hiring manager believes there's an open rec until they try to fill it.

I don't know what you are referring to with "SV pedigree nonsense", but I'm assuming you mean that people aren't willing to hire you because you haven't been in the right SV scene. That's certainly possible. I can also tell you that my team currently has zero people in SV, people across the US and outside of it (as in transatlantic), and we still had the issue I described above. That doesn't mean that isn't what happened in your case, of course.

(EDIT: formatting.)

Quick question -- have you ever told someone a position was "filled" when you were still actively fielding?

That's the behavior the OP was referring to.

No. I have not done that when I was hiring, and I would rather resign than do that now if I were told to do so today.

We have obviously not moved forward with some candidates. They got answers; they were always candid and truthful, and combining that with appropriate tact is somewhat of an art ;)

That's reassuring. Thanks.

>> It would not be the first time that a hiring manager believes there's an open rec until they try to fill it.

I was hiring a team a few months ago, and I was under a lot of pressure to fill positions. We find a guy that I'm on the fence about, and I'm pressured to pull the trigger. My response, "I'll do it if I truly have one more open rec." So we hire him.

A few weeks later I'm still interviewing candidates and I find a women who is terrific, and who I wish I had found earlier, as she would have been a no-brainer hire. She's excited. I'm excited. I go to pull the trigger with my boss, only to be told, "we're reevaluating the rec, we'll probably hire someone, but just a few months down the road."

Hiring is one of the most political things an organization does. Having been on the hiring side of the equation for a while now, I would never take a company's disinterest in me to heart. A candidate's qualifications are important, but they are always the last thing on the checklist before hiring someone. You never know what item on the checklist above your qualifications didn't get ticked.

I was really mad about that episode. That and other things caused me to leave.

Have you considered that a) you may genuinely not be a good fit or b) they have in fact hired somebody since you contacted them?

You have a good point, I'm just thinking there are non-malicious explanations to consider first.

Without revealing too much about the company in particular which led me to post, a) I am very easily a good fit b) a day has elapsed since the "Who's Hiring" post, so I really don't think so. But yes, I could be completely wrong and misreading this all.

Since only a day has elapsed since the "Who's Hiring" post, maybe it is simply that the company you applied to is waiting a bit to get cvs on the pipeline to decide who they will interview.

Data point: I advertised a job on whoishiring and within a day had received 40+ strong resumes (and 100+ overall). I only made it through maybe 5 before I found the one we hired. I responded "thanks for hiring" to as many of the others as I could before I had to get back to my regular duties. Unfortunately, many got no reply at all. I would scan some the later ones sometimes just to see if maybe even better folks had applied. Yes, there were probably even stronger folks who applied later but I had to make a move and go for the earlier guy or risk losing the known (at the time) quantity. I'm sure this is pretty standard for most people hiring on HN. I wouldn't take it too personally.

Yeah I'd expect this is pretty standard, what bugs me is when I reply and don't get a response, and see the posting again for the next month.

I imagine that my response will be heavily criticized, but as someone who hires people regularly, I throw away any application with bad grammar. In my experience, the most versatile and successful candidates can not only program, but can also write properly.

The above sentence, "Yeah I'd expect this is pretty standard, what bugs me is when..." is a comma splice. You should replace the comma with a semicolon or a period. "Yeah I'd expect this is pretty standard," and "what bugs me is when..." are independent clauses and thus should not be be split with a comma.

Maybe you're more careful with your applications, but it's easy for these types of things to slip in if such errors are habitual. It may be hurting your chances, as I'm probably not the only grammar Nazi out there.

Yeah I'll agree with you. I don't usually proofread any of my comments online (maybe I should). Funny thing is that I once considered getting a major in English.

I'm curious what OP thinks they should do if "the position is filled or they are hiring a stronger match". There aren't that many alternatives.

1) Edit or remove the post 2) Keep the position open for longer than 24 hours.

Yes, it's entirely possible that an amazing candidate somehow saw the post, applied, and got hired in 24 hours, but more likely is that there was no open position in the first place.

Yeah, specially hate those "we are always hiring" companies that are just "waiting for antirez to apply".

Super lame. Is there a github list of those companies? Would be nice to have a blacklist to check against.

This practice is so prevalent from what I've seen that you'd be better off with a whitelist. Sigh.

Back when I was searching, I also hated it when "Valley or REMOTE" meant "Remote, in that we'll try to get you to move to the Valley for a meager salary."

I write, excited to have a conversation, point to a relatively polished portfolio, and an HR person comes back to tell me that the position is filled or they are hiring a stronger match.

No, actually they are hiring. They just aren't hiring you.

When companies say the position is "filled," it's just an artful way (or so they would like to think) of saying that they're passing on you -- but are still looking for a better match.

So when you see the exact same ad posted again next month, in the very same spot, don't be in the least surprised.

Yes, it sucks that things are this way. It's a sucky industry generally, when it comes to simple things like communicating honestly, and treating candidates is if they're regular adults (capable of taking a straight-up rejection), rather than children, who need to be fed a "line" so they'll go and play somewhere else.

Maybe don't assume the worst of people immediately? Why would someone take the time to post jobs to hacker news if they didn't really have openings? You're implying that is what they're doing, which makes no rational sense.

Like others have said, it's very possible the position has already been filled or you were not a good fit.

I think there is a discussion to be had about supply, demand, capability, filtering and communication. Im personally fine with the unnecessary whos hiring since I ignore them. I also believe that y combinator has every incentive to enable these companies. But infuriating potential employees and validators of a product does not seem productive to ensuring high quality work

I concur, very similar experience.

My favorite, even though this has now been buried:

REMOTE is code for "Rube who will accept half the going rate for their position". If you can't afford to pay at least $150,000 for a "Senior Lead" position, you aren't going to get a senior lead.

Eh? Depends on the going rate. I bet that there are senior leads in, say, Fargo ND, or White Horse YT (or other places...) that would be happier with less than 150k/year.

Now, If you said $60k, I'd agree, though it is possible you could find someone with senior lead skills in an emerging market who might be happy with this.

The cost of living adjustment is somewhere around 60k between Fargo ND and SF, and Senior Lead developers frequently offer for over 200k in SF. attempting to pay a developer less than half of the adjusted salary is a blatant attempt to take advantage of that developer.

By that same token, if you attempted to pay a senior lead developer only $120 in SF (the salary you suggested such a dev is worth adjusted for the move), you'd not get a senior or lead developer.

Just because you enjoy the job doesn't mean you shouldn't be appropriately compensated for doing the job.

I absolutely agree that:

> Just because you enjoy the job doesn't mean you shouldn't be appropriately compensated for doing the job.

I am not sure of the exact numbers (haven't been in the market enough lately to pay close attention) but there is some cost of living difference between SF and ND (for example), and thus I'd expect to pay developers in different areas differently even though they have the same skill set. The particular numbers don't matter, the difference is the essence.

Or am I missing your point? Is your point that a senior lead dev should have a globalized, singular payscale? That seems like an interesting argument, but I'm not sure one that is supported by the labor data I've seen.

The $60,000 number above is the cost of living difference. Minus that, if you want the actual talent, the pay should be similar.

Agreed.

They're probably looking for yahoo-ers.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com