Comment by linsomniac

Comment by linsomniac 13 hours ago

>ridiculous hoops people are put through to get a job these days

I'm sure that's true in some areas, but our last hire I was shocked at the ridiculous lengths the applications would go to to avoid putting in even a minimum effort to apply for the job. Like the Van Halen brown M&M test, we put a line in the middle of the job advert saying "If you've read this, put your favorite color in at the top of your job application message. We had low double digits % of people who would do that.

Honestly, on our next hiring round, I think I'm going to make people fill out a google form to apply, and have any of our job posts say "Apply at <URL>" and completely ignoring any apps we get through Indeed or the like. We had a team of 3 people reviewing applications for an hour or two a day for a month and most of the responses were just human slop.

kalinkochnev 12 hours ago

As a new college grad I might be able to add some insight.

We're stuck in a stalemate where the sheer volume of applications for employers to handle and applicants to send makes them take shortcuts, leaving both sides wonder why people aren't trying.

If somebody has to send in 300-500 applications (which is not unheard of) and answer the same questions till they go blind, it's not surprising that certain things are missing or people don't care. Applicants don't have any reason to believe their info isn't thrown in the trash by an LLM as soon as it is sent.

Lazy people will always be a problem but until there is transparency or trust developed I doubt we will see meaningful change.

Reply View 2 replies

linsomniac 12 hours ago

>Applicants don't have any reason to believe their info isn't thrown in the trash by an LLM as soon as it is sent.
That's leading to an escalation where because applicants believe their apps are just getting fed to the LLMs, employers have to use an LLM. ;-/

Reply View | 1 reply
- venturecruelty 6 hours ago
  
  Look at the power dynamics then. Who has more power in this situation: people with rent and mortgages? Or companies with more money than God? Companies could simply stop using LLMs and tomorrow and be fine. They brag about laying off thousands while turning record profits; they can turn off the slop machines.
  Let's not blame the people with no power in this situation.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies

johnnyanmac 4 hours ago

> Like the Van Halen brown M&M test, we put a line in the middle of the job advert saying "If you've read this, put your favorite color in at the top of your job application message.

TBH I can't blame them. you're applying to hundreds of applications repetitively with qualifications that barely matter because you're encouraged to apply anyway. You can only spend so many hours reading HR-drivel (that at this point may or may not be ai-generated) before you focus on just finding "job title, salary , location), and then slamming apply. It's just not worth editing my resume to add some weird qualifier if I don't even think I'm going to get a reply. It's another hoop.

It's the complete inverse of hosting Van Helen at your show. It'd be more like trying to make a cashier recite their company motto. They are not that dedicated to any one role. They can't afford to be.

---

I don't know if it's feasible for your situation, but smaller teams tend to have candidates email their resume. It can still be LLM'd, but I will tend to pay more attention if I feel like I have a direct communication channel. Not yet another greenhouse application form. It leaves room to be more free form with my pitch as well.

Reply View 0 replies