Hacker News Reader

Comment by shahbaby | Hacker News Reader

If a company is not even willing to have a real person speak to you at the start of the recruitment process, what does that say about them? Or about the legitimacy of that job posting? Or about the people you would be working with if you did get hired?

Regardless if you get an offer or not, you will invest a significant amount of finite time in each interview cycle and if you do get an offer, you'll be investing even more time into that company.

So no matter who you are, protect your time and remember that interviewing is always a 2-way street.

View on HN

Are you familiar with the concept of a recruitment funnel? It is not financially worth it to personally talk with every single person that applies to a company.

Well then it’s not financially worth it for capable people to work for that company. And of story

Not all capable people are willing to reject a company because they upload their resume to an automated system than giving it to a human to talk with.

It's every company. If you reject companies for this, you are living under a bridge right now.

> It's every company. If you reject companies for this, you are living under a bridge right now.

I just finished a successful job search, and only had 1 company (of maybe 50 applications) try this.

Americans are uniquely (c|f)ucked that way because, lol regulation would be worse

I think it's happening everywhere, even in places with strong worker protection laws. Applicants aren't workers, and regulation is anyway laggy.

Well then it's not financially worth it to have a job, because every company does this because if they didn't they'd need to triple in size with recruiters.

Something must be wrong with this logic because it clearly is financially worth it to have a job.

> it clearly is financially worth it to have a job

Yes, for the company.

> Well then it's not financially worth it to have a job, because every company does this because if they didn't they'd need to triple in size with recruiters.

Every company does not do this. I always refuse tasks like this unless I've talked to a human before hand, as unless the company has invested a little effort, then I won't invest any effort.

That's what a resume is for.

thats what the ATS is for

After you've filtered down the resumes, if it's not financially worth it to put a human on the phone for the initial screen, that means you don't value the people you hire.

And if the cost to do that initial screen is almost zero, it also means that you may not even have a job opening and are just testing the waters.

No matter how you slice it, it's a bad look.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com