Hacker News Reader

Comment by notaustinpowers | Hacker News Reader

I remember I once applied for a job that was entry level mortgage customer service or something like that, paying just $45k/yr, can't remember exactly. I had to go through 5 interviews over the course of 4 weeks, with the final interview being with the VP of Marketing. Got the job offer, was waiting for the paperwork, and was called the next day that they are actually going on a hiring freeze and cannot hire me.

It was absolute buffoonery to me. Why on God's green earth is the Vice President of Marketing interviewing the candidate for an entry level customer service position? Especially after I already interviewed with an HR rep, the Head of HR, and the Team Manager before them. Do they not trust their team?

It makes me feel like these interviews are just to make management feel important again since it was a WFH role.

View on HN

Tech companies inflate roles, especially in sales teams, so that enterprises think they're talking to someone important, when in reality it's just a dude with his second job out of college. Same with Investment Banking Vice Presidents (although IB VPs will definitely have the experience to back it up, if not the authority in a deal).

The job titles in the different industries are pretty interesting, also, that inflate/confuse things.

At financials (and sometimes sales departments), you have, from most junior to senior: 1. Associate 2. Analyst 3. Vice Presidents 4. Directors (MD - Managing Director)

Whereas in software/tech, it's usually Directors that are subordinate to Vice Presidents.

I heard a major US back had something like 9k VPs. Reason is the same as GP. Everyone felt special when they had a VP personally handling their account.

I have seen Product Management go this route. Seen Senior Directors with 5 or less, sometimes 0, direct reports.

I'm not an expert, but I was once told that in many jurisdictions banks etc. have so many "Vice Presidents" because it's essentially part of legal requirements for some of the tasks the VPs do - sometimes you literally need someone who is, at least on paper (and thus Responsible) appropriately high in management structure.

Personally I once needed[1] to have private, personal bank account opening, vetted officially "by board of the bank", but probably through similar council of seemingly overinflated job titles, but whose job titles included appropriate legal responsibility for the action taken.

[1] Run of the mill personnel could not even get answer why, ultimately it turned out due to various legal requirements someone with high job title had to sign off on "We know this customer and verified they are so and so"

I contracted at AT&T for a couple years. Everyone hired there into an office job is technically hired as a manager, regardless of their actual role, because then you can't unionize.

Sometimes companies do weird things to avoid rules or laws, having 9k VPs sounds like they would be doing something similar.

I get your point. But to me it sounds like you dodged a bullet.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com