this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2023
1668 points (97.3% liked)

Work Reform

9976 readers
129 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:

Our Goals

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Cyberflunk@lemmy.world 22 points 1 year ago (11 children)

I hire in technology. I can easily spend weeks filling a position. Candidates lie through their resumes and interviews 20 wasted interviews = 30 hours cultivating those interviews I have about a 26% no show, no response to missed interviews. Posting a job equals literally hundreds of emails, recruiters, off shore companies, and badly done resumes.

Headhunters talk big and deliver bottom barrel candidates, no one likes recruiters, so great candidates hardly use them.

When I use tools like one way interviews so I can screen hundreds of candidates, the feedback is "it's not personal enough", then no show on an appointment THEY MAKE

I'm a small business, my resources for hiring aren't extensive.

Just want to give some flavor to the other side of this.

[–] volvoxvsmarla@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ok, but - and please don't think I mean this in an offensive way, I am asking this in the most naive way - isn't that your whole job? I get that it is annoying, but you don't waste 30 hours, you just work 30 hours. Hours that you get paid for and hours that you would use to do the same job/try to hire for another position otherwise. Of course you could get more done (i.e. more people hired) in a unit of time, but at the end of the day that's not your problem really, is it? You did everything correctly. You still get your hours paid.

[–] cjthomp@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

"hires for" doesn't just mean "in-house recruiter"

Hiring is probably not their only responsibility

load more comments (9 replies)