There are 11M open jobs as the quitting spree continues | Hacker News Reader

There are 11M open jobs as the quitting spree continues

cnbc.com

34 pointsVicterius15 comments

And yet employers are getting sillier and sillier in their hiring practices while HR is on a holy crusade to create as much discord as possible within companies.

Even up here in Canada, employers are getting pickier and pickier even as their workforces bleed workers in gouts of resignations. I think they’re desperately trying to find people who won’t leave at the first sign of shitty manglement practices by becoming more stringent with their applications process instead of just increasing their fucking wages.

McDonalds is now offering $18/hr in my town and is still chronically understaffed. Meanwhile, applicants are being turned off by hiring processes that now include four, five, and even six interviews.

News flash: you don’t get better employees by making the process harder and more stringent, they’re valued enough that any better company is going to snatch them up long before you’re done with your bullshit process. All you are going to get are the desperate ones who can’t get hired anywhere else.

> you don’t get better employees by making the process harder

100% this

been offered 4 interviews (after a 1h screening) for a senior position

what were they thinking, lol

if you want somebody to work with you, then you have to actually hire someone... interviewing is not hiring

> any better company is going to snatch them up

If this were the truth, there wouldn’t be so many job openings. The job openings can only be high because people do not fill any job at all, not one over another.

I am so tired of recruiters.

Today I had one get quite irritated that I dare respond to her boilerplate with a link to my personal "I'm interested but in order to avoid wasting each other's time, here's my minimum requirements" page. She didn't even click the link.

Most recruiters that come across me have wrong incentives. They seem to focus entirely on churning through lots of people to get a hire rather than cultivating candidates and finding the best. So they just flood us with spam and can't seem to handle if the interaction goes off script.

The best luck I've had with "recruiters" is when the recruiter isn't HR. It's a CEO or CTO or some other technical lead. They're so efficient at getting down to brass tacks, having answers to questions, and figuring out if we move forward or not.

I think I'm about ready to just blanket ignore _all_ recruiter emails rather than attempt to filter them.

What roles do you fill, out of curiosity?

A somewhat niche spot of full stack + GIS + mapping + robotics.

My recruiters are almost all working for stealth mode mobile robotics startups.

Real cool! I can see where you get your leverage.

the worst recruiters are those that don't look closely at your profile/resume and or don't ask you what your salary requirements are and then you interview for a job where you do well technically (i.e pass leetcode tests and system design) but the hiring manager sees that the role he is hiring for isn't a fit for your experience, nothing worse than spending hours on interviews where a simple screening would have sufficed to rule me out. These recruiters all ways say something like "oh we are looking for people strong in engineering", but if you and a person who had experience in the role are competing, he would get the job over you 8/10 times, so in essense they are just shotgunning candidates. This is why these days i always insist on meeting the hiring manager before we proceed with the technical interview.

Interviewing is such bullshit. Besides all training and effort workers have to do on their own, we have to sit through these 2 ring circus interviews.

As a hiring manager there are a lot of shitty employees. It’s hard to screen someone, and firing someone is a pain. Better to avoid a crappy hire.

why did companies work so well before? Where are all these crappy candidates coming from when companies worked perfectly well with old-style interviews?

Crappy candidates in my opinion are the ones who go into dev for money.

It was so niche back in the day the applicants were prequalified by just showing up to the interview.

But are those tech/finance/corporate jobs, or jobs that drop you below the inflection point on the lorenz curve?

If only economics could figure out a way to clear the market...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com