EDIT: My broader qualm is this. If you've got hundreds of open req.s, but fail a candidate based on a quiz that you know the candidate doesn't know (but which aligns with one specific job posting), you're maybe doing hiring wrong.
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-spacex-employees-lawsu...
Not following the legally required procedure is bad, though.
The problem is that companies following the "fire at least 10% every year in every department" Jack Welch philosophy tend to let some good people go. It's a management philosophy that just assumes that there's no such thing as a really good team, full of worthwhile players.
Its an attitude that works better in professional sports, where hyper-competitiveness is more often an asset than a liability. The knock-on effects of a bunch of coworkers trying to outdo one another to make the cut seem as though they'd make for a crappy work environment, which I believe is what VieElm was talking about.
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2012/07/microsoft-downfall-em...
Optimistic that in the distant future we will be eligible.
All at the time when I'm rejecting other offers expecting to have a chance to talk to SpaceX.
Regardless, I greatly admire the company's ambition and goals. The methane powered Raptor engine for the MCT is just sheer insanity. I love it. SpaceX inspires many of us, young and old.