‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

28% of job postings on company career sites have been open over 90 days

302 points · 364 comments · rubatrejo

  1. Aurornis · · focus · HN ↗
    This statistic constantly confuses people who haven't done hiring.

    If we decide we're going to grow headcount by 10 senior software engineers, we don't copy and paste the same job listing 10 times. We leave it open and collect resumes through that. At a large or fast growing company, we might never stop interviewing and hiring senior software engineers. The listing stays open for a year or more.

    There are also specialty roles where hiring takes months. I've had niche roles open where we didn't get any applicants with any experience on the topic for over 90 days on multiple occasions.

    1. alightsoul · · focus · HN ↗
      So you should apply to old job postings? Consensus in LATAM seems to be, they just forgot to take them down and they already have someone or in Latin America if you repost the same opening over and over the consensus seems to be the company is toxic they have a turnover problem, maybe you should say outright you're looking for 10 people
      1. Aurornis · · focus · HN ↗
        Some common sense goes a long way. If the job listing is from a company with 10,000 people, you can assume that they're always hiring. Submit away.

        If the listing is generic like "senior software engineer" and all of the requirements are generic like being able to program or do teamwork, it's probably a generic listing.

        Applying anyway is a safe bet, but I wouldn't invest as much energy into tailoring your resume if it's a 6 month old posting from a 50 person company with a website that looks like it's from 2009. That company probably forgot to take the listing down.

        > maybe you should say outright you're looking for 10 people

        This wouldn't help because you have no way of knowing if they've already hired 9 people or 1 person.

        The target can also change constantly. At a large enough company you continuously lose people for natural reasons, like retirement, moving for a spouse, moving to be closer to family. Past a tipping point you're just always hiring.

        1. oejxiwjxjwjd · · focus · HN ↗
          > you can assume that they're always hiring.

          You can, but you’re probably wrong and are wasting your time and effort going through lord knows how many hoops to submit a simple CV.

          Were submissions as simple as “here’s my CV, contact me if you like what you see”, then this wouldn’t be a problem. But when you have to sign up to the millionth HR service with the same 50 “please input the info that’s already on the resume you’re submitting” steps over and over again just to never hear back from the company or get rejected 6 months later, “submit away” is not an acceptable answer.

          > This wouldn't help because you have no way of knowing if they've already hired 9 people or 1 person.

          Yes, it would. Even if only 1 of the 10 spots is available, it still is a valid listing. Not knowing if the listing is valid at all is way worse.

          Asking for “common sense” only works if the situation you are in makes sense to begin with. Job listings are a cesspit of bad behaviour, dark patterns, disrespectful processes and incongruous offers.

          What we need is some sort of regulation on how job listings are posted and how candidates can and should apply.

          While we’re at it, it should be utterly ILLEGAL and absolutely liable to have a job listing up with no salary range or a salary range that’s too wide to give a sense of what compensation looks like—lying about it should trigger serious legal consequences as well.

          It’s about time candidates were treated with some dignity.

          1. alt227 · · focus · HN ↗
            This kind of attitude is why some people cant find jobs. Meanwhile the ones who just emailed their cv and didnt overthink it are happily working.
            1. ikr678 · · focus · HN ↗
              Taking time off your existing role to do multiple interviews for something that turns out to pay 10-15% less than you are currently on is insulting.
              1. red-iron-pine · · focus · HN ↗
                how are you getting to multiple interviews without having a concrete-ish idea of what the pay will be?

                literally the first thing I talk about with recruiters during an initial phone screen.

                yeah okay there may be a ~5-10k, maybe even a little more, bit of wiggle-room but if I can't make a reasonable guess where I'll land why would I even consider interview #2 when I already have an existing role?

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.