Comment by Arch485

Comment by Arch485 3 days ago

As someone who is currently looking for a job, I don't like this idea.

All this does is increase the effort and barrier to entry to apply for a job. This is not a good thing. Applying to jobs is already time consuming as it is; nobody wants more hoops to jump through.

I understand that recruiters/hiring managers/whatever get a lot of junk applications, but frankly, it is your job to sort through them. You are paid to do this.

Could the hiring/job seeking process be better? Yes, absolutely. Currently, it's terrible, and almost everyone involved is making it worse. But the solution is not mailing job applications.

drdec 3 days ago

I think you are ignoring the advantage for the applicant.

The reduction in what are essentially spam applications means your genuine application will stand out and be more likely to be considered.

Things that help employers find qualified candidates also help those qualified candidates.

Reply View 5 replies

Arch485 3 days ago

I don't fully agree. I agree that helping employers find qualified candidates is good for those candidates, but I don't agree that making applications mail-in only would achieve that end. It doesn't solve a lot of the larger problems when it comes to job applications, and just makes things harder for the applicant.

Reply View | 0 replies
verzali 3 days ago

That never seems to happen in practice. The number of jobs I have applied to that required additional effort and that never bothered to reply is just too high.

Reply View | 3 replies
- duck 3 days ago
  
  What was the "additional effort" you've had to do before?
  
  Reply View | 2 replies
  
  verzali 7 hours ago
  
  All sorts. Some make the application process very long, some ask for what is essentially a long cover letter through written questions, some ask you to complete tests, one sent me an IQ test...
  
  Reply View | 0 replies
  
  Leynos 3 days ago
  
  Filling out an application form by hand.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies

jaredklewis 3 days ago

> I understand that recruiters/hiring managers/whatever get a lot of junk applications, but frankly, it is your job to sort through them. You are paid to do this.

Recruiters, hiring managers, and whatevers are humans too, with ordinary human limitations. Just because they are paid to do something doesn't mean they gain superhuman capabilities.

Even if I am a recruiter with nothing else to do, if I get 5k applications for a role each week, I won't individually review 5k applications in a week. It's not possible. So I will have to rely on some automated system that filters out most of those applications. Who knows how good that system is.

On the other hand, if I get 100 mail applications for a role each week, that I can review that.

I'm not in love with this proposal, but I definitely see the appeal. Adding a little cost/effort on the applicant side automatically filters out a ton of applicants that have not bothered to learn anything about the role or company.

In the past I've had success with adding things to the job description like: "please include a link to your favorite gif in your email." And that filters out about 95% of applicants who don't read the job description and don't have a gif link in their email. But with LLMs I imagine those kinds of filters work less well than before.

Reply View 1 reply

Arch485 3 days ago

That's a fair point! It is true that recruiters are human and cannot review 5k applications per week.
I don't mean to say that recruiters must/should review all applications, because indeed this is sometimes impossible. I'm just saying that, as a recruiter, your job is to review applications and you should therefore not be making things harder for the applicants.
Asking for someone's favourite GIF to filter out junk applications is a great idea. This does not detriment the applicant, and it makes the recruiter's job easier. This is good. Making all applications mail-in is not good, because it detriments the applicant (by way of costing significantly more time and some money), while also not solving some of the larger problems when it comes to the job application process.

Reply View | 0 replies

Magmalgebra 3 days ago

> get a lot of junk applications, but frankly, it is your job to sort through them.

But this isn't their job. Their job is to hire someone who passes the hiring bar. If they can do that without ever looking at a random resume everyone at the company is happy.

An unstated thesis of the article is that several years from now people who want to accomplish that job just won't look at resumes submitted online - whatever anyone's feelings about it.

Reply View 0 replies

ghusto 2 days ago

This is beneficial to both parties, it's not just to throw spikes on the road for applicants without care.

The less nonsensical applications they get, the more time they can give your application.

> I understand that recruiters/hiring managers/whatever get a lot of junk applications, but frankly, it is your job to sort through them. You are paid to do this.

Indeed they are, and that is what they're doing by asking for a written application.

Reply View 0 replies

wat10000 3 days ago

Applying by mail sounds easier than the usual online form nonsense.

Reply View 0 replies