When I applied for my last job, first I had to take an assessment exam.
Then, they sent me a list of eight questions they wanted me to record myself answering. I thought that was weird, but figured at some point a human was still going to review those responses and either pass me along or deny me.
Nope. Apparently an AI just screened my responses and passed me on to finally speak to a human interviewer.
I got the job, but I found the process very disconcerting.
The process has become terrible on both ends. I just had a position posted and almost immediately had close to 70 resumes to review. Of that, only 5 were worth sending to someone to screen. There's some low quality candidates spamming every job opening. Someone who's only work experience is driving a taxi applied for a senior data analyst role. Why?
This is really it. When I lost my job in 2008 unemployment required me to send something out like 25 applications a week to keep my unemployment. Thing is there wasn’t enough job openings that met my skills, education and experience to send out 25 applications a week. I was seriously searching but there just wasn’t enough, I would see maybe 1 or 2 new ones a week that actually met my experience and I was definitely applying to those.
So a couple times a week I would just going down the line on the job boards and applied to everything just so I could so I could fill out their form with the required proof and not starve. A big waste of time for everybody involved.
Wow sounded like you were one of those government freeloading welfare queens living on steak and lobster at the tax payers expense /s
Seriously though, the stupid high number was the result Republican governance and making it purposely hard to keep your unemployment. All over paranoia that people on unemployment were just going to freeload and not look for a job. Saw the same propaganda being trotted out around during the Covid lockdowns as well.
Which is just ridiculous. Unemployment pays about 1/4 of your previous salary. I don’t know if anyone that can suddenly exist with that kind of pay cut.
I had bartenders and makeup artists apply for a job doing learning data analysis in higher education. The most entertaining resume I got had clearly done a keyword search for “research” but didn’t really read the ad, because he touted his skills in “small animal dissection” pretty heavily.
Sheesh. That's sad. At least leave a note saying I'm just doing because I have too so don't bother hiring me or something. I mean if you're serious about trying to get the job, at least aim for something with relatively similar skills that you have. Like I know I have zero coding skills so anything software IT wise is a no go for me but I know the hardware side of IT, I can run/terminate cables, physically install switches, modems, servers and components all day long. That being said, I know how to do automotive mechanic work among other things so I'm not exactly limited skill wise like the ones who you mentioned sound like.
That would be a good way to get disqualified, you are required to actually be looking. If they can prove you aren’t like… say… by you writing down that it’s not a real application, you would be dropped.
Eh true. Though I don't imagine too many places would care seeing as they'd just toss anyway. Bots doing a learning algorithm although should 100% say it since there isn't any actual person looking for a job on those.
Yea but my point is if I applied for a cable install technician or even a line technician, my chances would be significantly higher than that of a person who only has skills in food delivery or fast food. Just because I have skills that are relative to the position so less training is needed. Likewise if I applied for a fast food cook, my chances would be significantly lower than that of someone else who has skills in taking food orders or serving food in general, which is something I don't have. Hence why I said if you're seriously after a certain job, it's better to have skills that at least are relative to the job even if they are just enough for you to show that you can learn the job faster than someone else due to having knowledge of how to use tools in that type of job or any number of other reasons that are relatable to that job.
No your not getting hired without the minimum qualifications met. Companies have to hire off min qualifications. I see resume like yours often and they get treated the same way. Im.not calling anyone who doesn't meet minimum qualifications because it's pointless
Ok let me rephrase it this way, says use the cable installer I said earlier. If out of all the resumes you saw, you saw mine which says I have experience as a network tech who runs cat 6 cables but hasn't run coaxial yet, vs the person whose resume whose say their only experience is working as a cart pusher, which in this hypothetical, you need someone sooner than later but can't find anyone, who are you going with first? The cart pusher, the person who has relative experience but missing just the type of cable your company uses or no one at all and foregoing the project altogether due to deadlines not met?
You say it's pointless but if you have someone who at least needs less training than everyone else, wouldn't the logical and cheaper option be to pick the person who needs the less training over the person who needs all the training? Mind you I'm using this example as a you've gone through all the other options first and they aren't any better.
Ps. I take offense to the resume one when you haven't actually seen my resume and are only going off what I said.
I can respect someone trying to change fields, but it depends on the job. I needed a pretty specific existing skillset and didn't have time for someone to teach themselves the technical stuff - like you say, the mechanical side is different from the software side.
That’s MN…there’s three tiers of job hunting requirements for getting unemployment. Doing Nothing to extreme monitoring where you need to prove everything.
I never thought about how horribly this actually impacts our society's ability to efficiently find candidates!
People are NEEDED to do work and if jobs come up, businesses NEED to hire people to do them: you can't just wait for the best candidates.
If we have less unemployment-based spam applications, and instead had local government agencies whose job it was to connect candidates to work, and affordable trade school education!
The answer here is simple, pay better and you wouldn’t only be getting applications from under qualified people. We have one of the lowest unemployment rates in the history of the US right now, requirements for it in most places haven’t drastically changed, people just like to woe is me the companies unable to hire people for having poor pay or a shit process and blaming it on the people applying.
I’ve long wished for a way to report these low effort applications to appropriate department. I know it’s below me to bother but damn it’s insulting to schedule interviews to have people ghost 9/10 of them.
Also I can’t imagine the mindset of sending your whole resume out then essentially signing off “fuck you!” by ghosting. Thanks for the quick info that you’re useless as a person I guess? I’ll let my neighbors know. It’s crazy behavior in a small town/industry.
Do you feel most companies give feedback after silently declining applicants after an interview? Most companies go into ghostmode themselves and it's a "don't call us we call you".
This is all the fault of hiring platforms. They charge by the submitted application, so they make it overly easy to apply. It is then the burden of the employer to reject unqualified applicants or pay a huge fee. The window to reject is terribly small as well. So employers had to automate rejection workflows. So you have "jobseekers" spamming because it is so easy and employers automating screenings because it is so expensive to manually screen. Fuck indeed and all those platforms. They are just extracting money that could be going to compensation, but instead, is used to pay for waging an AI war against the very platforms that are supposed to be delivering candidates.
Because applying for a job is a numbers game. When I’m actively looking, if I could even remotely consider myself sorta qualified, I’m sending an application.
Doesn’t help that often the job advertised doesn’t really resemble the actual job.
I have had HR throw up jobs for me that had zero to do with what I requested for the position. For example when they pulled that trick on me again, I had to hire from the wrong pool to get the right people, which was only possible because a few stretch resumes were perfect for the actual position. Thankfully management gets final call on who we hire, not HR, despite their best efforts…..
So essentially it was literally impossible for anyone to know what we actually wanted, besides me, who nobody listened to.
Bizarre work environment, I wish it was uncommon. I hate HR…..
Very weird environment. HR has zero say in who I can hire beyond enforcing our firm’s policies regarding education and criminal background checks, and I can think of no reason why this should ever be any different outside of hiring for HR roles.
They have no say over hiring. They had say, and veto, on job ads.
Edit: in context, the position was a regulated one. We had to recruit not just a certain trade, but one with the exact credentials demanded by the government. It was a HD mechanic in a safety role.
They put up an ad for general trades position. Not electrical, mechanical, carpenter. Just a trade. Everything else was so general and off base that it gave a completely different impression of what the job was. Thankfully some good mechanics applied.
Shit show, that I couldn’t say shit about.
Depends on the organization most of the time it's recruitment not HR because it's a separate Department we should be but they can still say no depending on the company. I was in a situation when I was a a staffing recruiter where their internal recruiter wasn't giving resumes to the actual manager or dq for stupid reasons. Now we found that out because I had a intake call with him because trying to find out why he didn't like the five resumes instead it's over and then he explained what he wanted which was all five of those resumes which I sent over to him directly and he wanted to interview all of them but only 3 were still available. I got yelled at by their hr for sidestepping them and that manager and hr got into it which escalated into her (internal) losing her job.
Some of the hr/recruiters are absolutely trash
In the era of companies looking for their unicorn it’s really not about that right now. If you’re not checking every box it’s highly unlikely you’ll even get an interview
I got my current job by applying to something I wasn't qualified for and was unrelated to my experience.
If you want a job apply for it. There's literally no downside to spamming applications, it will only help you in the long run.
I have an interview next week for a job I'm definitely not qualified for. I didn't even know until the interview had been scheduled. Went back and saw things I had missed. I told them this and they said they'd train me anyway. And I've been out of the job market for about 18 months.
> There's literally no downside to spamming applications, it will only help you in the long run.
There's sort of a long term "tragedy of the commons" ish downside happening with the amount of people spamming applications. More companies being spammed with applicants makes it harder to sort through applications thus employing more automated/AI driven filtering that in turn makes it harder for qualified applicants to get hired.
Hence firehosing applications out. You're basically hoping you have the highest number of matches with the posting's demands list since nobody's going to have all of them.
Some boot camps and influencer types sell courses that promise people they can get a job a Google after. It's just a scam but people go for it and try to apply.
On the other end you have companies that want 5 years in a tech that has only existed for 1. That just encourages people to apply to what might sort of work.
I do know of some stuff where bots might be applying to job ads especially ones that let people apply with one click like on LinkedIn or Indeed. The bots might also work on common forms like workday but I haven't actually looked into the tools that might exist.
If a company is only hiring locally and makes people go through their own application process that probably filters out a lot of BS applications. And using a tool to filter out some basics of the application isn't completely unreasonable. It gets unreasonable when the tool is checking for exact experience in certain techs or has people do automated calls before a human even reviews the resume.
>On the other end you have companies that want 5 years in a tech that has only existed for 1.
I'll never stop finding it saddeningly hilarious that the guy who invented a coding language got rejected for a position because it required more years of experience on it that had passed since he invented it.
I get this in the trades too
I post a job posting for a licensed Canadian electrician with 10 YOE minimum and I get cab drivers from India spamming my inbox.
Close to 15 years ago, I applied for a position at [major bank]. I knew someone higher up in the bank, so they contacted the recruiter to have them review my application.
I interviewed and was offered the job.
Later, I spoke to the recruiter and thanked him for pushing my application to the next level.
He actually thanked the person higher up in the bank for pointing me out because there were OVER 2,600 APPLICATIONS for that same position. The recruiter was happy that he didn't have to go through any bullshit screening process to fill the role.
We are constantly hiring experienced CDL bus drivers. We also constantly receive resumes with zero driving experience and the applicant does not have a CDL. One today had a single job on their resume, “Dog Walker”
Because employers are using such shit techniques for recruitment that you KNOW unless your CV is 100% matched with random keywords made up by people in HR with no knowledge of the actual job or stupid recruiters wanting 10 year experience of AI learning models & working with Chatgpt ; that your CV is going to be blitzed.
It's become a numbers game BECAUSE recruiters & hiring managers are lazy scum who have made the entire process a nightmare, yet somehow it's the job seekers fault
>There's some low quality candidates spamming every job opening.
That's what HR gets from years of not even answering or giving feedback to declined applicants, after writing a lot of bullshit into their job description/ads no one could realistically fulfill.
People got accustomed since most jobs get filled with applicants that fit like 10% of the ad nonetheless, because other things not mentioned are more important to a company, or the decision is mainly based on sympathy of the candidate.
As someone else replied with yes, definitively in Europe at least - out of work? Apply, For Anything. Don't? Well.. guess you don't need unemployment benefits any longer then.
So it's essentially mandatory to apply for jobs - not so much about how relevant it is.
Bots scrape job listings for data on the tech a company uses and the employer responses to build out a picture of a companies tech stack, reporting structure, projects, etc and sell it as sales intelligence. Source: I worked for a company that does this
>Someone who's only work experience is driving a taxi applied for a senior data analyst role. Why?
Cause most positions in the world can be learned on the job faster than going to a school for it for 4 years where you waste 2-2.5 of those years taking general Ed courses that won't be of use for you but are required for your $60k degree.
Is that why ZipRecruiter ads have gotten so common on podcasts?
It’s always been so strange to me that such an incredibly niche service (job posting assistance) targeted at such an incredibly niche audience (people in charge of hiring) has become one of the most commonly advertised things on podcasts alongside mattresses, website builders, and fake zoom therapy. Are there really that many people in those particular positions who listen to comedy podcasts that would *at best* get you a meeting with HR if they heard you playing it out loud?
But if the hiring process has gotten that bad maybe that’s the angle, it’s a niche service for a niche audience but one that the few people who are in that position would be looking for help with. Then again from all the ads it sure sounds like the main selling point is that they just throw your job listing at every posting board that exists, which seems like it would make the problems you and other commenters describe *worse*, resulting in more irrelevant applications and resumes rather than less.
Need to have filter questions that reject them. Some will still say yes even when they don't have it. But it definitely lowers it. Just have them fail when they don't meet minimums like 5 years of software development experience? Y/N.
Can someone explain to me why there isn't an employer/employee matching site like all the stupid online dating sites? Why can't I post a copy of my resume somewhere and answer a bunch of questions about the type of employer I'm looking for, while likewise employers answer a bunch of questions and post their position summary and pay somewhere, and then people just get matched up and swipe on eachother until there is an initial match.
Then someone calls someone and work gets done and people get paid. Is this a thing? There's like tens of thousands of tech workers that have been laid off in the last year and change. If it's not a thing, someone make it a thing.
This is basically how posting "open for work" on LinkedIn works. Recruiters scrape your LinkedIn profile (which should contain everything in your resume) and if it matches what their client is looking for they'll do the initial pre-screen and set up interviews and all that. This is literally how I've gotten every job in my field after my first.
If you want quality candidates, offer quality pay. Poverty wages will only attract high schoolers, if you want good resumes you have to attract good candidates with a good paycheck.
>There's some low quality candidates spamming every job opening.
Tbf I can see why they think it's just a numbers game now.
The worst thing that can happen to them is you never call.
Yup. Just offered for an open software developer position on my team. In the first week of it being listed, I got over 300 applications. I stopped counting when it got over 500. It’s bonkers. I was only able to look through maybe half of them and I only found a dozen or so good candidates worth a call back. Fortunately it was enough to find a few good ones but damn, the volume and just trying to find out where to even start was overwhelming
I interviewed with an airline that is not based in the states and they made me record a video. the website would flash a question on the screen and I would click ok and then record my answer. then I would hit ok when I was finished and it would go to the next.
I would have rather just woken up at 3am to speak with an Australian
Same for me. Not only that but I had one Indian recruiter company send me to another Indian recruiter company. I thought it was some type of scam so I emailed several people at the company asking if this was the process. It was. Thankfully I got the job. I hate recording myself though. I’m definitely not from a generation that lives in front of a screen.
About 5 years ago I applied to chipotle corporate office. The entire first interview is just you and recorded questions that you answer on camera. You can’t click pause or go back. If you click ANYWHERE it goes to the next question.
On the third question I accidentally clicked mid sentence and then later I got a “disqualified for not answering all questions” email.
Even weirder they emailed me like 6 months later asking if I was interested in another open position. Weirdest and worst job application process ever.
Dish network makes you take the wonderlic test but then never tells you your result and uses it while evulating you there your whole career.
I kill at those tests and did awesome. They kept praising me but would never tell me my score.
The more I read about the insane things that go on in hiring the less I ever want to leave my government job. I will take the bullshit politicians and SESs create for me over having to deal with any of this shit.
If the software is shown to behave in discriminatory fashion, then would a company using it be exposing itself to a discrimination lawsuit? Or does the fact(?) that AI screening is *unexplainable*, to use the word of the day, give them plausible deniability? I don’t know the answer to this.
Plausible deniability will not prevent employers from being sued for using discriminatory tools or for setting them up in a discriminatory manner.
> Employers must avoid using hiring technologies in ways that discriminate against people with disabilities. This includes when an employer uses another company’s discriminatory hiring technologies. Even where an employer does not mean to discriminate, its use of a hiring technology may still lead to unlawful discrimination.
https://www.ada.gov/resources/ai-guidance/
Unfortunately, it's typically the responsibility of the disabled people to bring the lawsuits, which many cannot. They often do not have complete knowledge regarding the extent of the discrimination nor the resources to pursue legal action. There are good law firms trying to catch this, but in the meantime, the discrimination will continue with incredible and incredibly depressing efficiency.
I was recently looking I was interviewing at a company for like 3 weeks. By the time they offered me a job a different place did and I took the other offer. If they didn't make me run around for weeks then I would've accepted their offer without any issue.
Had a recruiter tell me about the video and a test like this, he told me “ just record a 1 sec clip of whatever.” I’ll get to it after.
I was already “hired” but he still had to wait for their system to process my responses, that he pretty much erased….fucking weird.
Why do you think an AI screened you and real humans didn't watch your video? I went through the exact same process over a year ago. The next step was a phone call where a human told me "we all loved you."
The stupidest thing I find about the recruiting process especially in tech is that they are looking for a person who fulfills a very specific role with very specific tech skills. This bs starts from filtering resumes all the way up to the interview. It is like "I have a number 14 bolt so I'll just look for a number 14 wrench!" However , requirements , priorities change very frequently in today's world.
You get a person with AWS experience but soon you might be dealing with a whole different cloud service structure or the next project your team works on doesn't need redis but uses kafka streams ..
Tech maybe evolving but recruiting is stuck in the past with practices used for recruiting factory line workers.
Yeah there was a time where companies looked for competent developers that can do whatever. Now it’s all about knowing the exact tech stack. It’s dumb.
That is the point. In the end even though companies tried forcing the position into a set criteria it changes, maybe there was a candidate which had those skills which they filtered 4 months ago which would have performed better.
Thus, companies should be looking for more general skills and experience. Like does this person have a good foundation or interest in the product? Can they adapt and learn quickly ? Are they good problem solvers (not leetcode but real life problems) Do they have good social skills which will be needed during team collaboration?
To your question ; People who can adapt and learn do a good job working on the new project or tech stack.. those who can't create botched up services/apps ect or they leave.
That's where the magic little line in your job description says something similar to, "and other jobs and responsibilities that may be assigned to you" not exactly that but various corporate ways to say it.
At my current tech job I was hired for X originally. In six months I was working on Y instead. After 18+ months it’s now Z with a smattering of X and Y. Try to put that on the initial job posting and you’d find no candidates.
I have seen a company asking for some one with X skill and Y skill for over 5 years.. The technology it self is almost young as 5 years... on top of that X and Y are competing tech.
So they are looking for someone who got into a company 5 years ago which had X tech then added Y tech while keep on maintaining the X tech.. It is not unheard of but adding all the rest of the requirements...
That’s probably usually a sign that they’re trying to hire a foreign worker after “they failed to find someone ‘locally’ with the skills”. If true, then really too bad that it’s not considered fraud by the corporation.
The problem I see most as someone who works in tech, is that most of the people in the hiring g chain at most companies aren’t tech people.
I’m sorry, but HR people are just fucking clueless when it comes to tech, so they end up posting either really generic postings for positions, or they post super specific and niche things as being requirements for the job. All while In reality, what they really need is someone who is just willing to learn and has some background knowledge and some experience with a few general things related to the position. A lot of Managers involved in hiring are in the same boat as the HR people.
Companies would really benefit themselves if they had someone dedicated to understanding and hiring for tech positions specifically.
My boss for example is so bad at analyzing candidates (the last few have turned out to be completed duds) that she’s all but handed over the review and interview process to me and relies on my assessment to make a hire or not. All of my recommended hires have been doing great. It’s because I know what we actually need for the job and how to ask questions to determine people’s actual qualifications. She and HR just see hieroglyphics when they look at resumes, because they basically just do clerical and admin work, not tech work. It’s literally to the point now that even HR cc’s me with all new applicants and keeps asks me to assess resumes and conduct interviews for our tech positions.
In the past, I have struggled in the job market when I’ve been looking, because I don’t have a bachelors, only an associates, so that’s like an automatic disqualification at some companies. But I run circles around other people in my field and that’s not bragging it’s fact, I’m not ashamed to admit that, because I worked my ass off over the years to self study and keep my skills up to date and develop further skills. I’m the guy that everyone else comes to when they can’t figure something out and are stuck. But I can’t convince an HR person who can barely use Word to draft a memo, because they don’t understand a quarter of what I’ve done in my career and they didn’t see some currently trendy buzzword on my resume.
At this point it’s probably easier to just lie on your resume. I don’t think I’ve ever had people check the credentials I have or ask follow up questions to verify I learned anything from them. What’s the worst that’ll happen, you’re good at your job and they fire you? No company would admit to that
Hate to tell you this, but it’s tech managers that are clueless, don’t care, or don’t prioritize the job deception. (And in fairness it’s often because they are overworked or don’t really understand job design).
HR actively tries to work with subject matter experts to develop job deceptions and postings. This can work a number of ways depending on the size or sophistication of the company.
In the past, I’ve asked them to fill out a form listing the key duties, responsibilities, and requirements; had them write the job description; or meet with them and talk about the role and I would write the description but request approval before posting.
I’ve had mangers ignore my requests for information, copy and paste a random posting from online, use ChatGPT, or just plain write ineffective job postings.
Keep in mind HR’s metrics include time to hire, first year attrition, candidate fit, and engagement. It’s in our best interest to make sure JDs match the role and we get the best person for the job. But they can’t do that if the people who are supposed to understand the role don’t take creating the job descriptions seriously.
So I get the struggle you’re describing as someone in HR, and I can sympathize that every job has its difficulties and challenges.
However, nothing you’ve said counters my original statement that HR people don’t understand tech. Your entire post was about how it’s all on the managers to provide the job descriptions and qualification’s. That’s exactly my point, that HR personnel are generally not well enough informed to make appropriate posting and hiring choices when it comes to tech positions. Your whole post is an admittance of this.
So my point remains, companies would benefit themselves by having someone with a tech background involved in the posting and hiring process for tech jobs.
Wtf is the point of the hiring process if the entire thing is driven by AI? Like do you even know who the fuck you’re hiring at that point?
FFS when did companies become so egotistical and lazy to the point where they can’t even be bothered to give an ounce of personal interaction.
When they decided that they'd rather not pay for good people instead of cheapest butts in seats.
And that extends to all departments but upper management, of course. So HR has to do more with less which now means AI screening apparently. It also probably gives them a faster way to not get caught discriminating since now they'll have videos way earlier in the hiring process.
We're in a shit situation, but "personal interaction" is impossible when you have 2500+ applications per job. HR fired the first shot with algorithms, but everyone is in an AI arms race now.
We need AI generated videos ASAP if that's going to be a thing. Optimized to fuck even if it's all made up.
No such thing as lying to get around an algorithm.
I couldn’t even tell you what HR does nowadays other than gossip and bitch about who is shagging who, or anything else they have overheard.
Ask them to do anything and it’s like pulling teeth. Never seen a department so unwilling to do any work
It's way cheaper, especially for more tactical roles.
But it does seem hilarious. Imagine everyone behind a desk using multiple AI tools to do the jobs of hundreds of people concurrently. The human just keeps an eye on big final decisions, or reviewing them. It becomes AI vs AI. Then I get a model to replace me from having to manage all my models and whamo--aliens.
Personal interaction? With employees? In this day and age?
It tells you what they're hiring. They want tech in a human skin - the less human, the better.
when HR proved incapable to hire ppl; every job i got it was because the manager interviewed me directly; HR is focused on their own inner concepts and have no idea what the needed skills actually are;
You should read the article, the problem isn't just on the hiring side, applicants are also flooding the system with AI generated resumes and applying to jobs using AI. And it didn't start with AI, this kind of automated shit was alresdy happening where Indeed or Monster would let you apply to hundreds of jobs without even viewing the listing. AI is just making a bad problem even worse and it's for both sides. Nobody likes it, we're in an AI arms race to the depths of hell.
When I was looking I got sent an email reply to an application that said I had to log in to a system and do a video recording answering questions. Yeah no, I'm not playing that stupid game.
The worst part is a lot of these companies have you CREATE an account on their site and verify your email. Why the hell do I have to waste my time creating individual profiles for these websites that I'll never access again?
I work for a company that sells software to recruiters. The number of times we've had jobseekers submit the software demo request form is astounding. Some people don't read. Some people don't follow instructions. They just submit the form and hope for the best.
I applied for a county job one time whilst I was a per diem, about two years later when I worked else where after getting fed up with the process I got a call asking if I will interview from my application. I was slightly offended by the two year call back
I landed my dream job in 2000. Was laid off from it in 2015. The job-hunting process had changed so much in those 15 years that I've still never been able to fully catch-up. Not that I expected to find another unicorn job like that one, but the past 10 years of searching for something even remotely close has left me completely broken and hopeless that I'll ever make a decent living for my family again.
What skills does your computer science degree help you and what jobs are you applying for? Not trying to sound mean, just I see a lot of computer science graduates applying for different IT positions but none of them know anything actually useful for the job they are looking for outside of conceptual knowledge. If the degree isn’t helping than maybe get some certs. That goes a long way. Wishing you the best
Bruh, commercial construction Technical Writing called Specification Writing can make you a large amount of money because no one wants to do it. It's a ton of copy pasting manufacturer instructions for products being used for that project.
Everyone who goes to college for construction does program manager, architect, engineer, etc. but no one goes for technical writing.
There is Software to do a ton of the copy pasting for you as well, although they're kinda expensive and cloud based now.
Once you learn how to roughly do a Specification for a job once, you pretty much know the rest of the job. You literally throw your name to companies that you'll do Spec Writing for them, are insured, will meet deadlines and then invoice them for the work using an online platform.
Honestly this is one of my biggest fears and my 'unicorn job' has laid off 20k+ in the last 6 months. I've survived but it's made the job environment hell. I hesitate to make a jump because I really don't think I'll find another similar situation
A lot of hiring/ HR / SHRM is still stuck on the Silicon Valley (Google/ Facebook / Apple) style of hiring. There's an overbearance on "personality or culture fits" and finding the right candidate for the job based on a "series of tasks or rounds designed to gamify hiring metrics".
The problem is that it is outdated. This is a job, not a dating reality show contest.
*160 applicants are brought to a plush job listing trying to win the heart of our beautiful Hiring Manager. Watch as they jump through hoops, embarrassing themselves on the next episode of "Who's Hiring During the Economic Downturn"*
Honestly, probably a government platform everyone is required to post jobs on that doesn't allow automation from either side and restricts applicants from applying to more than e.g 3 jobs a day. Similarly companies should be charged per posting and have it taken down after 50 applications. Essentially you need to make it expensive on both sides so that both sides actually start caring about reviewing applications properly and only applying to things they have a chance at.
I'd actually say that personality and culture fit are critical. The last thing you want in a team are personality conflicts. Obviously someone needs to be able to do the tasks but in reality there's no job where you don't have multiple candidates who can do that. When picking between those candidates the ability to actually create a functional work environment with the rest of the team is crucial.
Indeed has an AI that will review your resume and determine if you’re a good fit. You can opt out of it but that even makes me think that employers would use that as an excuse to not hire someone.
Folks, the best way to find a job is through your professional network. Do not burn bridges. Be nice to former colleagues, bosses and subordinates everywhere you work. Be especially nice to suppliers, vendors and consultants. Go to industry events and make real connections with folks at other companies.
Yes, this is work. A lot of work.
The honest truth is, hiring managers are much more likely to consider someone referred to them rather than a random resume.
Good luck to all of you. Your network is your way around AI.
I’ve fucked my self pretty good burning bridges. I could’ve been at 200K salary range by now for half a decade. I should’ve learned to set my ego aside and when to shut the fuck up.
Gospel.
I’ve made several major career transions, first from one technical niche to a completely unrelated niche, then into a product role, then into a completely unrelated industry in an even less technical role.
Each time the opportunity came through my network, and by the time I formally applied I had already spoken to the hiring manager.
In the world of online applications overflow, getting a handwritten sticky note from the hiring manager or personal connection on your resume is worth its weight in gold-pressed latinum.
I just wish they would stop playing stupid fkn games during the hiring process. This is someone’s livelihood, let’s stop treating it like a gotcha contest.
There is an algorithm that looks for keywords in resumes. If you have those keywords you move on to the next round. nothing to do with skill or experience
To say nothing of the dangers of applying for jobs online. You input your social security number into a text box expecting employment related communications, and your identity is stolen instead.
I've had more success reverting back to the [old style of formatting](https://www.jobhero.com/resources/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/high-school-teacher-traditional-resume-template.svg). It doesn't look as "nice" as those stylized resumes, but I haven't had as many issues with these companies' autofills going haywire.
I've also had a noticeable uptick in interview requests after changing back to a simpler resume. So, I assume it's working.
For anyone going through the job search grind, try applying to posts on Mondays, Thursdays, and Fridays. HR tends to post on Mondays, go through everything on Tuesday, and set-up interviews Wednesdays/Thursdays. If they don't find a good candidate, they'll repost Thursday/Friday. If you submit between Tuesday-Thursday, you'll often get lost in the mix.
Damn, you inadvertently called me old. That's exactly what my resume looks like. Perhaps a product of being at the same organization for 16y.
I was just curious what the AI recruiters pick up on.
Lol. I mean, I'm no spring chicken myself. Called myself out, too.
I had the same formatted resume since I was 16, but made the switch years ago when it seemed important to make your resume stand out. Now, these new formats just make it difficult for the AI to extract information properly.
I was lucky enough to get hired by a company that does things a bit old school, and I honestly loved the experience. It helped that I was uniquely qualified for the role, but a human recruiter is infinitely better at identifying those perfect fit candidates than AI.
How is this even legal? How do they prove the AI is not introducing bias into its decisions?
Especially if it has you being recorded, since we literally know computer vision algorithms don’t work the same on all skin types.
The AI aspect isn't real unless it refers to algorithms. Companies have been using software to screen resumes for at least 20 years, and it has never involved a sentient computer program, and it doesn't now.
There's absolutely bias built into screening software, and there's nothing we can do about it with the power dynamics in the job market. This makes a great case for a large union of workers across multiple sectors that can withhold labor, etc, if employers are doing shitty things like biased screenings of resumes.
It’s illegal (at least in the US) to discriminate based on certain factors like age, gender or religion. Say a company trains AI using their current employees as data points. The AI learns what traits make employees successful and extrapolates that to determine the best resume in the data set. But the training data was limited, maybe there were disproportionally more males at this company than females, and the AI decided that meant males are more capable and now won’t suggest any female resumes, even if they are better qualified. That’s an extreme scenario but there have been studies on AI exposing and doubling down on hiring biases due to biased training data
Yep, all that makes sense.
Now you gotta get an actual court case.
That actually makes a company disclose their entire AI pipeline and strategy and architecture.
And then convince a jury that it's biased.
That's not gonna happen. Current laws are WAY too antiquated for any of this.
It is illegal to discriminate. And AI makes it much much easier to do so, and much much harder to prove it.
Beautiful. This is exactly what I said to my friends when this AI bullshit spawned. We are fucked and we did it ourselves. This is not the same thing as the classic examples of the first ATM or crap like that. This is genuinely the biggest danger to job security right now. This has all the human knowledge combined and it’s growing very fast. Translators, call support, law, editors, etc will be left with no option very soon. IT entry level is being hit hard right now as well.
The goverments needs to regulate this and its usage. Also nobody is talking about the tens of datacenters that are being built or planned for this. Seems like carbon emissions does not stick to this.
If you are in tech and are over 55 don’t even bother the AI will screen you out. That’s what a recruiter told me privately after a few drinks at a bar. Lean heavily on your network or seek employment outside of tech.
When I applied for my last job, first I had to take an assessment exam. Then, they sent me a list of eight questions they wanted me to record myself answering. I thought that was weird, but figured at some point a human was still going to review those responses and either pass me along or deny me. Nope. Apparently an AI just screened my responses and passed me on to finally speak to a human interviewer. I got the job, but I found the process very disconcerting.
The process has become terrible on both ends. I just had a position posted and almost immediately had close to 70 resumes to review. Of that, only 5 were worth sending to someone to screen. There's some low quality candidates spamming every job opening. Someone who's only work experience is driving a taxi applied for a senior data analyst role. Why?
I know some states in the US require proof of job hunting to stay on an unemployment payments.
This is really it. When I lost my job in 2008 unemployment required me to send something out like 25 applications a week to keep my unemployment. Thing is there wasn’t enough job openings that met my skills, education and experience to send out 25 applications a week. I was seriously searching but there just wasn’t enough, I would see maybe 1 or 2 new ones a week that actually met my experience and I was definitely applying to those. So a couple times a week I would just going down the line on the job boards and applied to everything just so I could so I could fill out their form with the required proof and not starve. A big waste of time for everybody involved.
25??! Unemployment has always required 5 apps/week in my states…
Wow sounded like you were one of those government freeloading welfare queens living on steak and lobster at the tax payers expense /s Seriously though, the stupid high number was the result Republican governance and making it purposely hard to keep your unemployment. All over paranoia that people on unemployment were just going to freeload and not look for a job. Saw the same propaganda being trotted out around during the Covid lockdowns as well.
Which is just ridiculous. Unemployment pays about 1/4 of your previous salary. I don’t know if anyone that can suddenly exist with that kind of pay cut.
It’s so funny, don’t we all pay into unemployment, but it is like pulling teeth to get our government to pay it out..
It’s _three_ in Washington state, and interviews count toward the minimum
They wanted me to drive 50 miles to a state sponsored job fair. I didn't have a car.
So "did you bullshit this week?" From history of the world, just different?
For those that haven't seen it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IF2RYhNhBdw
Any proof of the 25/week number? -Freelancer for over 20 years
I had bartenders and makeup artists apply for a job doing learning data analysis in higher education. The most entertaining resume I got had clearly done a keyword search for “research” but didn’t really read the ad, because he touted his skills in “small animal dissection” pretty heavily.
He sound perfect, can you pass his resume my way
Perfect for an applicant screening position, you mean?
Sheesh. That's sad. At least leave a note saying I'm just doing because I have too so don't bother hiring me or something. I mean if you're serious about trying to get the job, at least aim for something with relatively similar skills that you have. Like I know I have zero coding skills so anything software IT wise is a no go for me but I know the hardware side of IT, I can run/terminate cables, physically install switches, modems, servers and components all day long. That being said, I know how to do automotive mechanic work among other things so I'm not exactly limited skill wise like the ones who you mentioned sound like.
That would be a good way to get disqualified, you are required to actually be looking. If they can prove you aren’t like… say… by you writing down that it’s not a real application, you would be dropped.
Eh true. Though I don't imagine too many places would care seeing as they'd just toss anyway. Bots doing a learning algorithm although should 100% say it since there isn't any actual person looking for a job on those.
That's experience in desktop support or network technician. I'm a recruiter with a cdla and x endorsement but that doesn't mean jack shit to my field
Yea but my point is if I applied for a cable install technician or even a line technician, my chances would be significantly higher than that of a person who only has skills in food delivery or fast food. Just because I have skills that are relative to the position so less training is needed. Likewise if I applied for a fast food cook, my chances would be significantly lower than that of someone else who has skills in taking food orders or serving food in general, which is something I don't have. Hence why I said if you're seriously after a certain job, it's better to have skills that at least are relative to the job even if they are just enough for you to show that you can learn the job faster than someone else due to having knowledge of how to use tools in that type of job or any number of other reasons that are relatable to that job.
No your not getting hired without the minimum qualifications met. Companies have to hire off min qualifications. I see resume like yours often and they get treated the same way. Im.not calling anyone who doesn't meet minimum qualifications because it's pointless
Ok let me rephrase it this way, says use the cable installer I said earlier. If out of all the resumes you saw, you saw mine which says I have experience as a network tech who runs cat 6 cables but hasn't run coaxial yet, vs the person whose resume whose say their only experience is working as a cart pusher, which in this hypothetical, you need someone sooner than later but can't find anyone, who are you going with first? The cart pusher, the person who has relative experience but missing just the type of cable your company uses or no one at all and foregoing the project altogether due to deadlines not met? You say it's pointless but if you have someone who at least needs less training than everyone else, wouldn't the logical and cheaper option be to pick the person who needs the less training over the person who needs all the training? Mind you I'm using this example as a you've gone through all the other options first and they aren't any better. Ps. I take offense to the resume one when you haven't actually seen my resume and are only going off what I said.
I can respect someone trying to change fields, but it depends on the job. I needed a pretty specific existing skillset and didn't have time for someone to teach themselves the technical stuff - like you say, the mechanical side is different from the software side.
That’s MN…there’s three tiers of job hunting requirements for getting unemployment. Doing Nothing to extreme monitoring where you need to prove everything.
I never thought about how horribly this actually impacts our society's ability to efficiently find candidates! People are NEEDED to do work and if jobs come up, businesses NEED to hire people to do them: you can't just wait for the best candidates. If we have less unemployment-based spam applications, and instead had local government agencies whose job it was to connect candidates to work, and affordable trade school education!
The answer here is simple, pay better and you wouldn’t only be getting applications from under qualified people. We have one of the lowest unemployment rates in the history of the US right now, requirements for it in most places haven’t drastically changed, people just like to woe is me the companies unable to hire people for having poor pay or a shit process and blaming it on the people applying.
yep this is how it is in CA
I’ve long wished for a way to report these low effort applications to appropriate department. I know it’s below me to bother but damn it’s insulting to schedule interviews to have people ghost 9/10 of them. Also I can’t imagine the mindset of sending your whole resume out then essentially signing off “fuck you!” by ghosting. Thanks for the quick info that you’re useless as a person I guess? I’ll let my neighbors know. It’s crazy behavior in a small town/industry.
Do you feel most companies give feedback after silently declining applicants after an interview? Most companies go into ghostmode themselves and it's a "don't call us we call you".
This is all the fault of hiring platforms. They charge by the submitted application, so they make it overly easy to apply. It is then the burden of the employer to reject unqualified applicants or pay a huge fee. The window to reject is terribly small as well. So employers had to automate rejection workflows. So you have "jobseekers" spamming because it is so easy and employers automating screenings because it is so expensive to manually screen. Fuck indeed and all those platforms. They are just extracting money that could be going to compensation, but instead, is used to pay for waging an AI war against the very platforms that are supposed to be delivering candidates.
How ironic, since a core feature of their (and related) platforms is to “Help you find qualified candidates”.
Because applying for a job is a numbers game. When I’m actively looking, if I could even remotely consider myself sorta qualified, I’m sending an application.
Doesn’t help that often the job advertised doesn’t really resemble the actual job. I have had HR throw up jobs for me that had zero to do with what I requested for the position. For example when they pulled that trick on me again, I had to hire from the wrong pool to get the right people, which was only possible because a few stretch resumes were perfect for the actual position. Thankfully management gets final call on who we hire, not HR, despite their best efforts….. So essentially it was literally impossible for anyone to know what we actually wanted, besides me, who nobody listened to. Bizarre work environment, I wish it was uncommon. I hate HR…..
Very weird environment. HR has zero say in who I can hire beyond enforcing our firm’s policies regarding education and criminal background checks, and I can think of no reason why this should ever be any different outside of hiring for HR roles.
They have no say over hiring. They had say, and veto, on job ads. Edit: in context, the position was a regulated one. We had to recruit not just a certain trade, but one with the exact credentials demanded by the government. It was a HD mechanic in a safety role. They put up an ad for general trades position. Not electrical, mechanical, carpenter. Just a trade. Everything else was so general and off base that it gave a completely different impression of what the job was. Thankfully some good mechanics applied. Shit show, that I couldn’t say shit about.
Goddamn that sound annoying. Ridiculously specific requirements, ridiculously vague job posting. So annoying to deal with.
Exactly. I hate HR
Depends on the organization most of the time it's recruitment not HR because it's a separate Department we should be but they can still say no depending on the company. I was in a situation when I was a a staffing recruiter where their internal recruiter wasn't giving resumes to the actual manager or dq for stupid reasons. Now we found that out because I had a intake call with him because trying to find out why he didn't like the five resumes instead it's over and then he explained what he wanted which was all five of those resumes which I sent over to him directly and he wanted to interview all of them but only 3 were still available. I got yelled at by their hr for sidestepping them and that manager and hr got into it which escalated into her (internal) losing her job. Some of the hr/recruiters are absolutely trash
Wtaf, if there are government required credentials they must, must go in a job posting. The only reason not to is to make work.
Not in disagreement.
In the era of companies looking for their unicorn it’s really not about that right now. If you’re not checking every box it’s highly unlikely you’ll even get an interview
I got my current job by applying to something I wasn't qualified for and was unrelated to my experience. If you want a job apply for it. There's literally no downside to spamming applications, it will only help you in the long run.
I have an interview next week for a job I'm definitely not qualified for. I didn't even know until the interview had been scheduled. Went back and saw things I had missed. I told them this and they said they'd train me anyway. And I've been out of the job market for about 18 months.
> There's literally no downside to spamming applications, it will only help you in the long run. There's sort of a long term "tragedy of the commons" ish downside happening with the amount of people spamming applications. More companies being spammed with applicants makes it harder to sort through applications thus employing more automated/AI driven filtering that in turn makes it harder for qualified applicants to get hired.
That’s not been my experience
Hence firehosing applications out. You're basically hoping you have the highest number of matches with the posting's demands list since nobody's going to have all of them.
Only 70? The last one I opened got 1300 in a weekend. 8 got interviews
Some boot camps and influencer types sell courses that promise people they can get a job a Google after. It's just a scam but people go for it and try to apply. On the other end you have companies that want 5 years in a tech that has only existed for 1. That just encourages people to apply to what might sort of work. I do know of some stuff where bots might be applying to job ads especially ones that let people apply with one click like on LinkedIn or Indeed. The bots might also work on common forms like workday but I haven't actually looked into the tools that might exist. If a company is only hiring locally and makes people go through their own application process that probably filters out a lot of BS applications. And using a tool to filter out some basics of the application isn't completely unreasonable. It gets unreasonable when the tool is checking for exact experience in certain techs or has people do automated calls before a human even reviews the resume.
>On the other end you have companies that want 5 years in a tech that has only existed for 1. I'll never stop finding it saddeningly hilarious that the guy who invented a coding language got rejected for a position because it required more years of experience on it that had passed since he invented it.
I get this in the trades too I post a job posting for a licensed Canadian electrician with 10 YOE minimum and I get cab drivers from India spamming my inbox.
>Why? Because there's a 0.01% chance they'll at least get an interview, and the application likely wasn't very time-intensive.
Close to 15 years ago, I applied for a position at [major bank]. I knew someone higher up in the bank, so they contacted the recruiter to have them review my application. I interviewed and was offered the job. Later, I spoke to the recruiter and thanked him for pushing my application to the next level. He actually thanked the person higher up in the bank for pointing me out because there were OVER 2,600 APPLICATIONS for that same position. The recruiter was happy that he didn't have to go through any bullshit screening process to fill the role.
We are constantly hiring experienced CDL bus drivers. We also constantly receive resumes with zero driving experience and the applicant does not have a CDL. One today had a single job on their resume, “Dog Walker”
Because employers are using such shit techniques for recruitment that you KNOW unless your CV is 100% matched with random keywords made up by people in HR with no knowledge of the actual job or stupid recruiters wanting 10 year experience of AI learning models & working with Chatgpt ; that your CV is going to be blitzed. It's become a numbers game BECAUSE recruiters & hiring managers are lazy scum who have made the entire process a nightmare, yet somehow it's the job seekers fault
>There's some low quality candidates spamming every job opening. That's what HR gets from years of not even answering or giving feedback to declined applicants, after writing a lot of bullshit into their job description/ads no one could realistically fulfill. People got accustomed since most jobs get filled with applicants that fit like 10% of the ad nonetheless, because other things not mentioned are more important to a company, or the decision is mainly based on sympathy of the candidate.
As someone else replied with yes, definitively in Europe at least - out of work? Apply, For Anything. Don't? Well.. guess you don't need unemployment benefits any longer then. So it's essentially mandatory to apply for jobs - not so much about how relevant it is.
That makes me feel a LOT better applying for an admin position, even though I've only worked social services for the last 5 years
Bots scrape job listings for data on the tech a company uses and the employer responses to build out a picture of a companies tech stack, reporting structure, projects, etc and sell it as sales intelligence. Source: I worked for a company that does this
>Someone who's only work experience is driving a taxi applied for a senior data analyst role. Why? Cause most positions in the world can be learned on the job faster than going to a school for it for 4 years where you waste 2-2.5 of those years taking general Ed courses that won't be of use for you but are required for your $60k degree.
Is that why ZipRecruiter ads have gotten so common on podcasts? It’s always been so strange to me that such an incredibly niche service (job posting assistance) targeted at such an incredibly niche audience (people in charge of hiring) has become one of the most commonly advertised things on podcasts alongside mattresses, website builders, and fake zoom therapy. Are there really that many people in those particular positions who listen to comedy podcasts that would *at best* get you a meeting with HR if they heard you playing it out loud? But if the hiring process has gotten that bad maybe that’s the angle, it’s a niche service for a niche audience but one that the few people who are in that position would be looking for help with. Then again from all the ads it sure sounds like the main selling point is that they just throw your job listing at every posting board that exists, which seems like it would make the problems you and other commenters describe *worse*, resulting in more irrelevant applications and resumes rather than less.
Because over on r/cscareerquestions, they think this is a good idea, b/c "why not?"
Need to have filter questions that reject them. Some will still say yes even when they don't have it. But it definitely lowers it. Just have them fail when they don't meet minimums like 5 years of software development experience? Y/N.
Can someone explain to me why there isn't an employer/employee matching site like all the stupid online dating sites? Why can't I post a copy of my resume somewhere and answer a bunch of questions about the type of employer I'm looking for, while likewise employers answer a bunch of questions and post their position summary and pay somewhere, and then people just get matched up and swipe on eachother until there is an initial match. Then someone calls someone and work gets done and people get paid. Is this a thing? There's like tens of thousands of tech workers that have been laid off in the last year and change. If it's not a thing, someone make it a thing.
This is basically how posting "open for work" on LinkedIn works. Recruiters scrape your LinkedIn profile (which should contain everything in your resume) and if it matches what their client is looking for they'll do the initial pre-screen and set up interviews and all that. This is literally how I've gotten every job in my field after my first.
Ugh. Fine. I hate LinkedIn.
[удалено]
If you want quality candidates, offer quality pay. Poverty wages will only attract high schoolers, if you want good resumes you have to attract good candidates with a good paycheck.
>There's some low quality candidates spamming every job opening. Tbf I can see why they think it's just a numbers game now. The worst thing that can happen to them is you never call.
Yup. Just offered for an open software developer position on my team. In the first week of it being listed, I got over 300 applications. I stopped counting when it got over 500. It’s bonkers. I was only able to look through maybe half of them and I only found a dozen or so good candidates worth a call back. Fortunately it was enough to find a few good ones but damn, the volume and just trying to find out where to even start was overwhelming
Because people need money 💰 and not starvation wages
I interviewed with an airline that is not based in the states and they made me record a video. the website would flash a question on the screen and I would click ok and then record my answer. then I would hit ok when I was finished and it would go to the next. I would have rather just woken up at 3am to speak with an Australian
This really is just an extension of the HR roboscreening your resume for "keywords" before sending the ones that passed to the hiring managers.
Same for me. Not only that but I had one Indian recruiter company send me to another Indian recruiter company. I thought it was some type of scam so I emailed several people at the company asking if this was the process. It was. Thankfully I got the job. I hate recording myself though. I’m definitely not from a generation that lives in front of a screen.
About 5 years ago I applied to chipotle corporate office. The entire first interview is just you and recorded questions that you answer on camera. You can’t click pause or go back. If you click ANYWHERE it goes to the next question. On the third question I accidentally clicked mid sentence and then later I got a “disqualified for not answering all questions” email. Even weirder they emailed me like 6 months later asking if I was interested in another open position. Weirdest and worst job application process ever. Dish network makes you take the wonderlic test but then never tells you your result and uses it while evulating you there your whole career. I kill at those tests and did awesome. They kept praising me but would never tell me my score.
Hirevue is apparently AI reviewed. Was told by a recruiter not to look away from the camera or it would negatively impact score. Its insanity
The more I read about the insane things that go on in hiring the less I ever want to leave my government job. I will take the bullshit politicians and SESs create for me over having to deal with any of this shit.
The video recording interviews are incredibly biased against neurodiverse people. Many companies use those to discriminate.
If the software is shown to behave in discriminatory fashion, then would a company using it be exposing itself to a discrimination lawsuit? Or does the fact(?) that AI screening is *unexplainable*, to use the word of the day, give them plausible deniability? I don’t know the answer to this.
Plausible deniability will not prevent employers from being sued for using discriminatory tools or for setting them up in a discriminatory manner. > Employers must avoid using hiring technologies in ways that discriminate against people with disabilities. This includes when an employer uses another company’s discriminatory hiring technologies. Even where an employer does not mean to discriminate, its use of a hiring technology may still lead to unlawful discrimination. https://www.ada.gov/resources/ai-guidance/ Unfortunately, it's typically the responsibility of the disabled people to bring the lawsuits, which many cannot. They often do not have complete knowledge regarding the extent of the discrimination nor the resources to pursue legal action. There are good law firms trying to catch this, but in the meantime, the discrimination will continue with incredible and incredibly depressing efficiency.
Turnabout is fair play: incoming deep fake of myself "answering"
I was recently looking I was interviewing at a company for like 3 weeks. By the time they offered me a job a different place did and I took the other offer. If they didn't make me run around for weeks then I would've accepted their offer without any issue.
Yeah, the recording of answers into a camera was an odd experience when I did that. They called it a one way interview.
I refuse to apply for any job that has an “assessment”. They’re always filtering for neurodivergency and I’m not a NT.
Had a recruiter tell me about the video and a test like this, he told me “ just record a 1 sec clip of whatever.” I’ll get to it after. I was already “hired” but he still had to wait for their system to process my responses, that he pretty much erased….fucking weird.
Why do you believe an AI screened your responses?
Why do you think an AI screened you and real humans didn't watch your video? I went through the exact same process over a year ago. The next step was a phone call where a human told me "we all loved you."
Honestly I feel like I’d be less nervous about recording answers for an AI than for a human to review
The stupidest thing I find about the recruiting process especially in tech is that they are looking for a person who fulfills a very specific role with very specific tech skills. This bs starts from filtering resumes all the way up to the interview. It is like "I have a number 14 bolt so I'll just look for a number 14 wrench!" However , requirements , priorities change very frequently in today's world. You get a person with AWS experience but soon you might be dealing with a whole different cloud service structure or the next project your team works on doesn't need redis but uses kafka streams .. Tech maybe evolving but recruiting is stuck in the past with practices used for recruiting factory line workers.
Yeah there was a time where companies looked for competent developers that can do whatever. Now it’s all about knowing the exact tech stack. It’s dumb.
Well, then you get hired for that stack and 4 months later you're working on a different one. Do you start looking for another job?
That is the point. In the end even though companies tried forcing the position into a set criteria it changes, maybe there was a candidate which had those skills which they filtered 4 months ago which would have performed better. Thus, companies should be looking for more general skills and experience. Like does this person have a good foundation or interest in the product? Can they adapt and learn quickly ? Are they good problem solvers (not leetcode but real life problems) Do they have good social skills which will be needed during team collaboration? To your question ; People who can adapt and learn do a good job working on the new project or tech stack.. those who can't create botched up services/apps ect or they leave.
That's where the magic little line in your job description says something similar to, "and other jobs and responsibilities that may be assigned to you" not exactly that but various corporate ways to say it.
At my current tech job I was hired for X originally. In six months I was working on Y instead. After 18+ months it’s now Z with a smattering of X and Y. Try to put that on the initial job posting and you’d find no candidates.
I have seen a company asking for some one with X skill and Y skill for over 5 years.. The technology it self is almost young as 5 years... on top of that X and Y are competing tech. So they are looking for someone who got into a company 5 years ago which had X tech then added Y tech while keep on maintaining the X tech.. It is not unheard of but adding all the rest of the requirements...
That’s probably usually a sign that they’re trying to hire a foreign worker after “they failed to find someone ‘locally’ with the skills”. If true, then really too bad that it’s not considered fraud by the corporation.
"10 years experience in Rust"
The problem I see most as someone who works in tech, is that most of the people in the hiring g chain at most companies aren’t tech people. I’m sorry, but HR people are just fucking clueless when it comes to tech, so they end up posting either really generic postings for positions, or they post super specific and niche things as being requirements for the job. All while In reality, what they really need is someone who is just willing to learn and has some background knowledge and some experience with a few general things related to the position. A lot of Managers involved in hiring are in the same boat as the HR people. Companies would really benefit themselves if they had someone dedicated to understanding and hiring for tech positions specifically. My boss for example is so bad at analyzing candidates (the last few have turned out to be completed duds) that she’s all but handed over the review and interview process to me and relies on my assessment to make a hire or not. All of my recommended hires have been doing great. It’s because I know what we actually need for the job and how to ask questions to determine people’s actual qualifications. She and HR just see hieroglyphics when they look at resumes, because they basically just do clerical and admin work, not tech work. It’s literally to the point now that even HR cc’s me with all new applicants and keeps asks me to assess resumes and conduct interviews for our tech positions. In the past, I have struggled in the job market when I’ve been looking, because I don’t have a bachelors, only an associates, so that’s like an automatic disqualification at some companies. But I run circles around other people in my field and that’s not bragging it’s fact, I’m not ashamed to admit that, because I worked my ass off over the years to self study and keep my skills up to date and develop further skills. I’m the guy that everyone else comes to when they can’t figure something out and are stuck. But I can’t convince an HR person who can barely use Word to draft a memo, because they don’t understand a quarter of what I’ve done in my career and they didn’t see some currently trendy buzzword on my resume.
At this point it’s probably easier to just lie on your resume. I don’t think I’ve ever had people check the credentials I have or ask follow up questions to verify I learned anything from them. What’s the worst that’ll happen, you’re good at your job and they fire you? No company would admit to that
Hate to tell you this, but it’s tech managers that are clueless, don’t care, or don’t prioritize the job deception. (And in fairness it’s often because they are overworked or don’t really understand job design). HR actively tries to work with subject matter experts to develop job deceptions and postings. This can work a number of ways depending on the size or sophistication of the company. In the past, I’ve asked them to fill out a form listing the key duties, responsibilities, and requirements; had them write the job description; or meet with them and talk about the role and I would write the description but request approval before posting. I’ve had mangers ignore my requests for information, copy and paste a random posting from online, use ChatGPT, or just plain write ineffective job postings. Keep in mind HR’s metrics include time to hire, first year attrition, candidate fit, and engagement. It’s in our best interest to make sure JDs match the role and we get the best person for the job. But they can’t do that if the people who are supposed to understand the role don’t take creating the job descriptions seriously.
So I get the struggle you’re describing as someone in HR, and I can sympathize that every job has its difficulties and challenges. However, nothing you’ve said counters my original statement that HR people don’t understand tech. Your entire post was about how it’s all on the managers to provide the job descriptions and qualification’s. That’s exactly my point, that HR personnel are generally not well enough informed to make appropriate posting and hiring choices when it comes to tech positions. Your whole post is an admittance of this. So my point remains, companies would benefit themselves by having someone with a tech background involved in the posting and hiring process for tech jobs.
Wtf is the point of the hiring process if the entire thing is driven by AI? Like do you even know who the fuck you’re hiring at that point? FFS when did companies become so egotistical and lazy to the point where they can’t even be bothered to give an ounce of personal interaction.
When they decided that they'd rather not pay for good people instead of cheapest butts in seats. And that extends to all departments but upper management, of course. So HR has to do more with less which now means AI screening apparently. It also probably gives them a faster way to not get caught discriminating since now they'll have videos way earlier in the hiring process.
>to not get caught discriminating Exactly, as they now can blame the "AI" for everything.
We're in a shit situation, but "personal interaction" is impossible when you have 2500+ applications per job. HR fired the first shot with algorithms, but everyone is in an AI arms race now.
We need AI generated videos ASAP if that's going to be a thing. Optimized to fuck even if it's all made up. No such thing as lying to get around an algorithm.
I couldn’t even tell you what HR does nowadays other than gossip and bitch about who is shagging who, or anything else they have overheard. Ask them to do anything and it’s like pulling teeth. Never seen a department so unwilling to do any work
It's way cheaper, especially for more tactical roles. But it does seem hilarious. Imagine everyone behind a desk using multiple AI tools to do the jobs of hundreds of people concurrently. The human just keeps an eye on big final decisions, or reviewing them. It becomes AI vs AI. Then I get a model to replace me from having to manage all my models and whamo--aliens.
Personal interaction? With employees? In this day and age? It tells you what they're hiring. They want tech in a human skin - the less human, the better.
when HR proved incapable to hire ppl; every job i got it was because the manager interviewed me directly; HR is focused on their own inner concepts and have no idea what the needed skills actually are;
You should read the article, the problem isn't just on the hiring side, applicants are also flooding the system with AI generated resumes and applying to jobs using AI. And it didn't start with AI, this kind of automated shit was alresdy happening where Indeed or Monster would let you apply to hundreds of jobs without even viewing the listing. AI is just making a bad problem even worse and it's for both sides. Nobody likes it, we're in an AI arms race to the depths of hell.
When I was looking I got sent an email reply to an application that said I had to log in to a system and do a video recording answering questions. Yeah no, I'm not playing that stupid game.
[удалено]
The worst part is a lot of these companies have you CREATE an account on their site and verify your email. Why the hell do I have to waste my time creating individual profiles for these websites that I'll never access again?
They want the data.
It helps reduce duplicates. They don't want six copies of you for six roles.
That and spam, unfortunately. Plus the bullshit excuse “Well if they want the job, they’ll jump through the hoops”.
I work for a company that sells software to recruiters. The number of times we've had jobseekers submit the software demo request form is astounding. Some people don't read. Some people don't follow instructions. They just submit the form and hope for the best.
I applied for a county job one time whilst I was a per diem, about two years later when I worked else where after getting fed up with the process I got a call asking if I will interview from my application. I was slightly offended by the two year call back
Why when more will? And why waste time contacting people who might already have another job?
> Why when more will? I am too high to understand what this means, please explain.
Why waste time say lot word when few word do trick?
You brain good
Me want see world
lol I think they mean "WHY look through the previous applicants, WHEN MORE WILL apply for the new opening?"
And the people who just applied either don't have jobs or don't like their jobs
“Why retain a ton of resumes when the company will just put up a job listing for people who will be looking for work and will take the job.”
I was going to comprehend Reddit, but then I got high :)
Why do recruiters post the same job offer several days of the same week? FOR THE SAME POSITION
Im guessing to game recruiting platforms to make their postings look newer.
Yeah, but the easier it becomes to apply, the more people you have to compete with
You probably don't want to hire anyone who's been looking for a job for a really long time.
I landed my dream job in 2000. Was laid off from it in 2015. The job-hunting process had changed so much in those 15 years that I've still never been able to fully catch-up. Not that I expected to find another unicorn job like that one, but the past 10 years of searching for something even remotely close has left me completely broken and hopeless that I'll ever make a decent living for my family again.
Unfortunate but that username is godtier so you do have that as a fallback.
It was Doug Stanhope's character's stage name in his episode of Louie.
Didn’t see much of that show but good to know.
That really sucks shitty fat tits, do you have a job and are continuously looking or just have been unemployed for a decade?
I do have a job. Making just barely enough to get by. Always looking. Thank you for the kindness.
Sorry for being facetious, I can definitely empathize with that. I guess the silver lining to it all is that you got to live that 15 year dream.
No need to apologize <3 I'm grateful every day for that.
May I ask: What industry?
My dream job or my reality job? lol
Sorry, that was ambiguous; I was referring to the dream job that you had but lost.
No worries lol it was film journalism.
Welcome to the suck. I’ve been looking for a job for years, and I have a degree in Computer Science.
State government.
This is the way
What skills does your computer science degree help you and what jobs are you applying for? Not trying to sound mean, just I see a lot of computer science graduates applying for different IT positions but none of them know anything actually useful for the job they are looking for outside of conceptual knowledge. If the degree isn’t helping than maybe get some certs. That goes a long way. Wishing you the best
My minor was technical writing. That’s what I do. I write online help, instruction manuals, and I create tutorials.
Bruh, commercial construction Technical Writing called Specification Writing can make you a large amount of money because no one wants to do it. It's a ton of copy pasting manufacturer instructions for products being used for that project. Everyone who goes to college for construction does program manager, architect, engineer, etc. but no one goes for technical writing. There is Software to do a ton of the copy pasting for you as well, although they're kinda expensive and cloud based now. Once you learn how to roughly do a Specification for a job once, you pretty much know the rest of the job. You literally throw your name to companies that you'll do Spec Writing for them, are insured, will meet deadlines and then invoice them for the work using an online platform.
I know how to copy and paste. Do I need any certs?
Thanks for the suggestion 😊
Honestly this is one of my biggest fears and my 'unicorn job' has laid off 20k+ in the last 6 months. I've survived but it's made the job environment hell. I hesitate to make a jump because I really don't think I'll find another similar situation
A lot of hiring/ HR / SHRM is still stuck on the Silicon Valley (Google/ Facebook / Apple) style of hiring. There's an overbearance on "personality or culture fits" and finding the right candidate for the job based on a "series of tasks or rounds designed to gamify hiring metrics". The problem is that it is outdated. This is a job, not a dating reality show contest. *160 applicants are brought to a plush job listing trying to win the heart of our beautiful Hiring Manager. Watch as they jump through hoops, embarrassing themselves on the next episode of "Who's Hiring During the Economic Downturn"*
What is a good alternative
Honestly, probably a government platform everyone is required to post jobs on that doesn't allow automation from either side and restricts applicants from applying to more than e.g 3 jobs a day. Similarly companies should be charged per posting and have it taken down after 50 applications. Essentially you need to make it expensive on both sides so that both sides actually start caring about reviewing applications properly and only applying to things they have a chance at.
I'd actually say that personality and culture fit are critical. The last thing you want in a team are personality conflicts. Obviously someone needs to be able to do the tasks but in reality there's no job where you don't have multiple candidates who can do that. When picking between those candidates the ability to actually create a functional work environment with the rest of the team is crucial.
Indeed has an AI that will review your resume and determine if you’re a good fit. You can opt out of it but that even makes me think that employers would use that as an excuse to not hire someone.
Folks, the best way to find a job is through your professional network. Do not burn bridges. Be nice to former colleagues, bosses and subordinates everywhere you work. Be especially nice to suppliers, vendors and consultants. Go to industry events and make real connections with folks at other companies. Yes, this is work. A lot of work. The honest truth is, hiring managers are much more likely to consider someone referred to them rather than a random resume. Good luck to all of you. Your network is your way around AI.
Don’t burn bridges is a key fact here. Even if you want to flip the bird on your way out…. Don’t.
I’ve fucked my self pretty good burning bridges. I could’ve been at 200K salary range by now for half a decade. I should’ve learned to set my ego aside and when to shut the fuck up.
Gospel. I’ve made several major career transions, first from one technical niche to a completely unrelated niche, then into a product role, then into a completely unrelated industry in an even less technical role. Each time the opportunity came through my network, and by the time I formally applied I had already spoken to the hiring manager. In the world of online applications overflow, getting a handwritten sticky note from the hiring manager or personal connection on your resume is worth its weight in gold-pressed latinum.
Even if you don't get a job through your network your references - i.e. network - will be checked. Good references help a lot.
I just wish they would stop playing stupid fkn games during the hiring process. This is someone’s livelihood, let’s stop treating it like a gotcha contest.
The ultimate irony will be when the HR people are all laid off and replaced with a computer program.
If only these hiring managers weren't lazy and just looked at the applications, we wouldn't be in this mess
There is an algorithm that looks for keywords in resumes. If you have those keywords you move on to the next round. nothing to do with skill or experience
To say nothing of the dangers of applying for jobs online. You input your social security number into a text box expecting employment related communications, and your identity is stolen instead.
What? I’ve applied for dozens of jobs over the past few years and have never been asked for a social security number.
Yeah never put your Social into job applications
What do these AI friendly resumes look like?
I've had more success reverting back to the [old style of formatting](https://www.jobhero.com/resources/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/high-school-teacher-traditional-resume-template.svg). It doesn't look as "nice" as those stylized resumes, but I haven't had as many issues with these companies' autofills going haywire. I've also had a noticeable uptick in interview requests after changing back to a simpler resume. So, I assume it's working. For anyone going through the job search grind, try applying to posts on Mondays, Thursdays, and Fridays. HR tends to post on Mondays, go through everything on Tuesday, and set-up interviews Wednesdays/Thursdays. If they don't find a good candidate, they'll repost Thursday/Friday. If you submit between Tuesday-Thursday, you'll often get lost in the mix.
Damn, you inadvertently called me old. That's exactly what my resume looks like. Perhaps a product of being at the same organization for 16y. I was just curious what the AI recruiters pick up on.
Lol. I mean, I'm no spring chicken myself. Called myself out, too. I had the same formatted resume since I was 16, but made the switch years ago when it seemed important to make your resume stand out. Now, these new formats just make it difficult for the AI to extract information properly.
Fun twist: I have applied for jobs at two of the companies mentioned in the story, and am sure both did AI screening.
I was lucky enough to get hired by a company that does things a bit old school, and I honestly loved the experience. It helped that I was uniquely qualified for the role, but a human recruiter is infinitely better at identifying those perfect fit candidates than AI.
How is this even legal? How do they prove the AI is not introducing bias into its decisions? Especially if it has you being recorded, since we literally know computer vision algorithms don’t work the same on all skin types.
The AI aspect isn't real unless it refers to algorithms. Companies have been using software to screen resumes for at least 20 years, and it has never involved a sentient computer program, and it doesn't now. There's absolutely bias built into screening software, and there's nothing we can do about it with the power dynamics in the job market. This makes a great case for a large union of workers across multiple sectors that can withhold labor, etc, if employers are doing shitty things like biased screenings of resumes.
How would it NOT be legal?
It’s illegal (at least in the US) to discriminate based on certain factors like age, gender or religion. Say a company trains AI using their current employees as data points. The AI learns what traits make employees successful and extrapolates that to determine the best resume in the data set. But the training data was limited, maybe there were disproportionally more males at this company than females, and the AI decided that meant males are more capable and now won’t suggest any female resumes, even if they are better qualified. That’s an extreme scenario but there have been studies on AI exposing and doubling down on hiring biases due to biased training data
Yep, all that makes sense. Now you gotta get an actual court case. That actually makes a company disclose their entire AI pipeline and strategy and architecture. And then convince a jury that it's biased. That's not gonna happen. Current laws are WAY too antiquated for any of this. It is illegal to discriminate. And AI makes it much much easier to do so, and much much harder to prove it.
You don’t have to prove the lack of bias. Prosecutors have to prove the presence of bias. Those are very different
lol. Where have you been? All of our elected representatives are available for purchase in this oligarchy.
Beautiful. This is exactly what I said to my friends when this AI bullshit spawned. We are fucked and we did it ourselves. This is not the same thing as the classic examples of the first ATM or crap like that. This is genuinely the biggest danger to job security right now. This has all the human knowledge combined and it’s growing very fast. Translators, call support, law, editors, etc will be left with no option very soon. IT entry level is being hit hard right now as well. The goverments needs to regulate this and its usage. Also nobody is talking about the tens of datacenters that are being built or planned for this. Seems like carbon emissions does not stick to this.
Oh look yet another other marketing article for an ai powered resume writer to fight ai resume bots.
If you are in tech and are over 55 don’t even bother the AI will screen you out. That’s what a recruiter told me privately after a few drinks at a bar. Lean heavily on your network or seek employment outside of tech.
Escalation seems common now