Jobs

I'll tell you what let's meet in the middle. Make the job application work with my auto fill and I'll put down a $1 deposit .

Poor dear is sad he has to do his job.

What if instead companies paid someone to review applications? It takes >10s to skim a resume. Even if you spend a full minute per resume and get 500 reesumes for a job, that’s less than 1 work day

And while we’re here: companies should be required to compensate people for work done for the company, which includes attending interviews and doing labor (e.g. code tests)

OK. But I also want 20 dollars for every time a recruiter sends me job spam.

Sure, and taking an in person interview or home assignment should be paid as well then to signal us that company is serious and it’s not a fake opening

"Am I out of touch with the world"
...
"Please stop telling me i am wrong and give me answers that support my initial idea"

I'd like to demonstrate my new product, the Neck OsteO-Stretcher Extreme. Guaranteed to provide the discerning millionaire with superior neck alignment and length by exploiting our state of the art GRAVITY DEPLOYMENT™ technology! Now only $9,999, buy yours today!

Linked In: Facebook for people who want to return to the office.

Simple solution to this problem: just don't apply in that assholes' company.

This is a weird post.

The first paragraph is bonkers.

The second paragraph is essentially just trying to cover his ass.

Though, from a philosophical standpoint, there isn't anything wrong with asking this. On the other hand, if it really was his position to frame this as a thought experiment, the question would have been posed differently the first time around.

This is really annoying because the purpose of philosophising on things is to be allowed to ask questions like this.

A polarising figure, Sam Harris once said in an interview "What's wrong with eating babies? If we have too many babies lying around, and we want to eat them, why can't we?"*

Some people (including Alex Jones) took that and ran with it: "Sam Harris defends cannabalising babies", even though the entire point of his statement was to demonstrate how laymen should stay the fuck away from philosophy because they cannot understand the question is designed to establish a moral foundation.

• note, the clip is satirical beyond the quote I linked, the channel is literally called "out of context"

The full interview is here for full disclosure. Though I'll warn you. You'll lose brain cells watching Cenk try to deliberately misinterpret Sam to make him look like a villain.

Landlords of shitty places in areas here, where there's very little available to rent, got sick of showing places that are so bad people just noped out of them or ghosted the landlord on a very understandable fashion.

Their solution is to charge $200 for a viewing because people were apparently not serious about wanting a place.

Seems similar.

Pay $20 to apply for a fake position that was only put up to trick investors into thinking the company is growing. The fee will guarantee you an in-person interview with an unpaid intern instructed to say no all all interviewees (in person, because even if someone gets mad and attacks them - it's just an intern). Parking validation is not included.

This is not a bad idea but just make it a refundable fee. Maybe larger depending on how badly they want to fill the position. Job shops would have to spend a shit ton of money to spam employers so they could focus on real applicants. If you show up, you get your money back regardless of having or not having an interview.

Remember to charge him for interviews when his business model falls through.

Applying for jobs and interviews should be paid time. Don't change my mind

Companies will find some way to monetize those fees. Those multi-million executive salaries won’t pay themselves.

Don’t forget to tip the interviewer, too.

Considering the question posed was, "Am I insensitive to the world if...," I will politely say the answer is "Yes," and impolitely say, "you huge dipshit."

Avoid the vitriol

You first, motherfucker.

Arent the people doing the interview on the clock. Fuck off.

I’ve been to interviews that were literally scams. Nah man you have to provide the good faith effort on your end too.

I stopped using Upwork for the same reason. They wanted me to pay to be able to bid for a job.

This isn't to guarantee an interview as some are saying. What he's saying is an application fee, so you don't have 90% of your applicants wildly unqualified for the job that need to be screened out every time. It's kind of the same idea of charging half a cent for every email sent to drive down junk mail, which, functionally, is what a lot of applications are unfortunately.

At some point, the screening process AND the application process are going to be so automated that it will be like the sorting hat from Harry Potter. Automate the position description, automate the screening, automate the application process (you are here), automate the interviewer, automate the interviewee...

One day you'll just wake up and without you or the company knowing, a hat will drop on your head and tell you where you work now.

Also, anyone looking for work that hasn't begun automating as much of their application process as possible should get started immediately. Applying is a volume game, especially right now.

At a minimum, you should anticipate submitting about 80 applications to get a few interviews and possibly a job. SHRM data backs this up. It's obviously less for niche or less desirable positions and more for others, but 80 is a good frame of reference. If you're looking for WFH positions in fields where WFH wasn't the norm before covid, double the number.

You know I hate to say it but this isn't the single worst idea I've ever heard, it would still fucking suck though.

1$ to be sure to get an interview? Doesnt even sound that bad? A small fee for a guaranteed interview, rather than hoping 1 in 20 even replies, sounds fine..

What if we had smart contracts as a type of escrow for this? That way the multitude of bots applying for the jobs have to put something up, and the job poster has to put something up as like a mutual escrow.

I think the problem job posters are having is it’s never been easier to apply to a job. Bots can apply to hundreds of jobs on your behalf in minutes. Now multiply that by the thousands of applicants per job and you’ll start to see the problem. Too many applicants per job. It’s similar problem to spam filtering. There was a thought experiment about requiring emails to cost a real amount of currency to be received or sent which would theoretically reduce spam. Note, I’m not suggesting job applicants use of bots is spam, just illustrating a similarity between the two problem domains.

This is LinkedIn isn’t it? This exactly the trash you’d expect from tech bros choosing this as their social media platform of choice. Reminder: Microsoft owns LinkedIn & you can delete your account today (since 90% of your messages & recruitement is spam/trash).

What we need is a unified set of standards for job listings and for resumes. Make it easy to see which workers and which jobs are a bad fit. Just formatting and key words would be huge.

if I'm guaranteed a human interview and not an AI chatbot ...yeah I would pay 20 dls as shitty as it is