1737
there is Indeed a problem
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2023
1737 points (100.0% liked)
Work Reform
10142 readers
155 users here now
A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.
Our Philosophies:
- All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
- Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
- Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
- We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.
Our Goals
- Higher wages for underpaid workers.
- Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
- Better and fewer working hours.
- Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
- Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
There's so many other issues too, such as the fact that old job posts don't really get removed, employers/recruiters also spam multiple websites with their job posts and forget to check them, and some of the job descriptions don't even match what you go and sign up for.
No salaries mentioned on lots of posts, multi stage interviews that somehow demand your free time during work hours, so good luck interviewing for other roles while you have a job. Take home assignments that take multiple hours sometimes, sacrificing a whole evening.
Recruiters that will ask for all your information again, despite having found your phone number from your CV, and once you go through that, tell you they have nothing for you and that they'll be in touch.
Questions that mean nothing in an interview, including acronyms I haven't used or even heard of outside of interviewing for other jobs, because my job doesn't need or use them, we just do the work.
Job is listed as remote
During interview they tell you they expect you to move to bumfuck north dakota within 6 months of starting
To be fair, that is remote.
Job is listed as remote.
During the interview they tell you it only requires 2 days a week in the office. You tell them you don't have a car... they reply there are trains from where you live to where the office is located... you look it up and they're right, it's just a 2 hour commute each way. You start to think "8 hours a week, is like 1.5 hours a day for 5 days, could be worse...". Then you realize their hiring process requires 3 more on-site interviews before even getting an offer.
Got this with Anchorage, Alaska. How did they expect they could hoodwink somebody up to Anchorage?!
Oh, our apologies, we're in AK, you must have assumed we were in one of the other 7 Anchorages in the lower 48:
We've never had this happen before, how strange.
Do NOT do this.
Taking a live proficiency test is one thing, particularly if you're applying for more senior roles, but doing actual projects for free in your spare time should be a hard pass. Full stop.
I made the mistake of doing a take home assignment once. They didn't even have the courtesy to give me feedback on it when I asked.
Not doing a home assignment(or work test as we call them) would mean never getting a job within the industry I work in, or at least not within the country I'm in.
And as someone that have been on both sides of this they are a great tool especially as it gives something to focus on in a technical interview. Though I would say that a requirement for this is that you always give/get actual feedback.
Jesus Christ you just described my life for the last six months.
I feel like these are the real issues - I can't tell how much of OP is meant to be a joke .. "You forget to check the website and you miss the time". I mean, that's on you. Also it's often easy to blag the magic words an interviewer wants to hear, the real danger is that the job is NOT as advertised.
The number of interviews I used to sit in on, and wonder WTF the interviewer was thinking.. One asked a service designer "if you were a type of cake, what would you be?"
I would disagree, those issues are valid too. Why does every website needs its own account, phone number etc? I get so many spam calls when I start looking for a job because of this. Just e-mail me. I'm not going to check your website every day for 2 weeks just to see if you get back to me.
The spam calls also put less value on actually answering my phone, because half the time it is a spam call. Why does every recruiter need to call? Why does every site need a number when I just need one answer, yes or no. I have my CV, I have my skills on my CV, and with one reply I can send you a very short list of what I'm looking for in 2 minutes, not every job needs a 30 minute phone conversation only for the recruiter to decide they have nothing for me.
And yes, there are magic words the interviewer wants to hear as well. As someone who sometimes struggles in higher pressure situations (which my field does not require at all btw), and also struggles with using the correct vocabulary or recalling random phrases and key words they want to hear, it's frustrating to no end.
Honestly, I feel this should have all been streamlined by now, especially when I've already worked somewhere for years and my company has been satisfied with my performance - why is this not enough? Why can't this be quantified somehow? An alternative which very few companies do is give me a technical/practical interview that's actually like the job as advertised. Much easier for remote roles, but can be done in person too. Let me do the job, show you I can do the job, and then you decide to hire me based on that.
I do relate to your last point though, the amount of unrelated riddles or whatever get asked to 'see how I think' or something is ridiculous. Even when I get the answers right, the interviewer themselves don't seem sure. I don't get it.
In my industry, practical interviews are very common, but they're not always reliable. I can get as much from asking someone about their process and being talked through a case study they've chosen, as giving them a practical exercise to perform on the spot. I'd usually do both.
I'm not disagreeing with the overall inefficiency and frustration of the whole process, I've felt it on both sides. It's messy - bad or overstretched HR teams, slow managers, unclear budgets, poor choice of tech platforms...
"Cheesecake with chocolate frosting. Don't ask me why, it's confidential." (stupid questions deserve stupid answers)
The only possible use I could imagine, was to test how people respond to irrelevant stupid questions, since that happens a lot in some workplaces. Do they get frustrated and make it awkward, or shrug it off politely.
Good point. So how would you say I did... was the frosting part too much? ๐
But really, I wonder if it's also a neurodivergence test; in an actual interview setting, I'd probably tend to think about it seriously and answer sincerely, then follow up with details if prompted.
Haha, yeah you might be onto something there. It felt like a way to pull the rug from under people to see how they cope, which wasn't nice. I try to put people at ease in interviews, rather than try to catch them out.
I was ambushed with a "so, what do you do for fun?" once and the sudden context switch made me pause for so long that I must've seemed like I had no life outside of work ๐ฌ
Same, I said "I like electronics and taking things apart", for an IT position. Got the job, ended up on printer duty. That wasn't what I meant by "fun" ๐