|
PokeJoe posted:While we're at it drug tests are just as bad. Unconstitutional as unreasonable search and seizure of my piss fortunately any place that drug tests is a place you wouldn't want to work at (e.g. government, non-US companies, etc) Ciaphas posted:anyway given that i made it to the in-person interview stage, is there any point in asking for feedback or further communication with the company in question? ive been inclined to think no, since their response was a pat "click button to reject candidate" on greenhouse.io i have asked for feedback at multiple places and none of them have ever actually given it to me, even after the HR person agrees to it initially
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 21:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 14:22 |
|
|
Ciaphas posted:that job i flunked at the interview for last week? they're still making recruiting posts for that position on job search sites doesn’t mean they didn’t and it fell through. people accept, then reneg on offers too quote:anyway given that i made it to the in-person interview stage, is there any point in asking for feedback or further communication with the company in question? ive been inclined to think no, since their response was a pat "click button to reject candidate" on greenhouse.io like, you can try, nothing bad will happen, but almost certainly their policy is “no”
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 21:06
|
|
|
CRIP EATIN BREAD posted:background checks are easy to pass unless you're a fuckup. I worked with a guy in his 40s who can't work any place that does background checks around here because a cop caught him with weed when he was in high school in a shithole state that doesn't seal juvenile records. one of the Dakotas - forget which one
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 21:46
|
|
|
Munkeymon posted:I worked with a guy in his 40s who can't work any place that does background checks around here because a cop caught him with weed when he was in high school in a shithole state that doesn't seal juvenile records. one of the Dakotas - forget which one lol someone who smoked weed as a teenager? I don't think we want anyone like that around here
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 22:56
|
|
|
Munkeymon posted:I worked with a guy in his 40s who can't work any place that does background checks around here because a cop caught him with weed when he was in high school in a shithole state that doesn't seal juvenile records. one of the Dakotas - forget which one he should definitely be able to get that expunged if he can demonstrate hardship because of it and has a few hundred bucks to pay an attorney to handle it for him, but yeah poo poo like that is incredibly dumb.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 23:26
|
|
|
ADINSX posted:lol someone who smoked weed as a teenager? I don't think we want anyone like that around here yeah c-suite is for people who do coke not weed
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2018 23:42
|
|
|
Sapozhnik posted:yeah c-suite is for people who do coke not weed 
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 00:26
|
|
|
ADINSX posted:Even better, being condescending while still supporting the other side of the argument. We know your future employer obviously wants to know everything they're legally allowed to know, thats why there should be a law that prevents background check companies from revealing certain information. That law could also specify standard forms for two organizations interacting with each other, lets say if a company did their background checks in house. When you call up the school and ask "did x person go there" then you get back a "yes/no" not the full transcripts (that contain the deadname) you and i will both be cold in our graves and the united states won't have consistent laws along these lines lol @ the idea that your employer won't be able to rummage through your private matters at will. that would be interfering with the holy right of free contract between a transnational corporation and the individual wage worker! ADINSX posted:You can bet if that check included information that would make a CIS white guy uncomfortable, like idk, the weird sex positions they're into that law would already exist. there are already lots of things that background checks get into that would make cis white guys uncomfortable i mentioned one myself: a background check firm demanded my tax returns, twice some other fun ones:
like, invading your privacy extensively is the norm getting your deadname listed in an hr database somewhere is not the only unpleasant outcome. everything about you is slurped into documents you would really, really rather not have them be in
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 05:45
|
|
|
Pie Colony posted:fortunately any place that drug tests is a place you wouldn't want to work at (e.g. government, non-US companies, etc) some states offer tax breaks for implementing drug test programs 
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 05:46
|
|
|
I do so many random drug screens and dumb paperwork I’m numb at this point
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 06:16
|
|
|
love to hand out pii to incompetents who have zero incentive to protect it
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 07:11
|
|
|
Pie Colony posted:fortunately any place that drug tests is a place you wouldn't want to work at (e.g. government, non-US companies, etc) The only companies that I've ever heard of doing drug tests are American. It's certainly not common in Europe.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 14:43
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:The only companies that I've ever heard of doing drug tests are American. It's certainly not common in Europe. it sounds super illegal so it probably is
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 16:51
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:The only companies that I've ever heard of doing drug tests are American. It's certainly not common in Europe. "non-US companies" is a euphemism for "Indian IT megacorp" tcs / infosys / wipro are infamous for drug testing, along with every other privacy invasion you can think of
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 17:31
|
|
|
Progressive JPEG posted:love to hand out pii to incompetents who have zero incentive to protect it My old manager had his filled-out onboarding papers emailed to the entire company. So, salary, SSN, phone, address, work history. And since his wife worked there, included all of her information as well. Kicker was he came in at a higher pay than many that had worked there (management experience), so there was a lot of discrimination lawsuits filed when people found out they were being screwed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 17:33
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:you and i will both be cold in our graves and the united states won't have consistent laws along these lines loving lmao is you think divorcees face even remotely similar harassment or discrimination to queers. but again you're basically just saying "the way things are suck oh well ". whereas everyone else is saying "the way things are sucks and should change ". the background check company could easily confirm all the salient points of an applicant without telling the HR at your employer I relevant things like your trans status, hiv status, unimportant criminal convictions, etc. the ideal is if everyone had a personal ID and it was illegal for non government entities to store any identifier but your personal ID. just fully normalize personal identification. but in the current lovely world, at the very least background check vendors could show even an ounce of restraint. did I mention my transunion credit report still has my old dead name in huge letters on the cover and lists my actual legal name in tiny print as an fka in the last page and they refuse to fix it because I am the product and not a human to them. existing in this system is dehumanizing 
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2018 23:22
|
|
|
jit bull transpile posted:existing in this system is dehumanizing yep not unique to the trans experience -- it is the fundament on which the whole thing is built you're a disposable human resource. so am i.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2018 05:23
|
|
|
jit bull transpile posted:loving lmao is you think divorcees face even remotely similar harassment or discrimination to queers. i'll give you that -- the cases i named that would make cis white males uncomfortable are not matters of pre-employment discrimination but rather career dangers the danger is not that divorcees will face discrimination, it's that the chinese wall between hr and management will break down such that divorcees are forced into unpleasant economic circumstances
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2018 05:25
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:i'll give you that -- the cases i named that would make cis white males uncomfortable are not matters of pre-employment discrimination but rather career dangers jesus christ what is wrong with you
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2018 13:44
|
|
|
ultravoices posted:jesus christ what is wrong with you its the shoes take off the shoes, nbsd, they're somehow cutting off blood flow to the head
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2018 15:26
|
|
|
Captain Foo posted:Where is trans status protected in the us outside of MA nowhere.... 
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2018 15:38
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:i'll give you that -- the cases i named that would make cis white males uncomfortable are not matters of pre-employment discrimination but rather career dangers i have a solution: gently caress hr and gently caress management the workers should take ownership of the company and its direction "why not redistribute its wealth at that point" you may say and that's a loving great idea
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2018 15:48
|
|
|
Progressive JPEG posted:love to hand out pii to incompetents who have zero incentive to protect it at this point in history i figure anybody who wants it has it
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2018 15:56
|
|
|
I know mine got leaked — thanks OPM
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2018 16:25
|
|
|
Pollyanna posted:i have a solution: gently caress hr and gently caress management the incentives are all hosed up. i guarantee you cooperatively owned firms still perform intrusive background checks and mishandle pii. amusingly executives usually have even shittier invasions of privacy than your line workers. they eat investors poo poo with a smile and then turn around and visit it on the regular folk
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2018 17:07
|
|
|
lancemantis posted:I know mine got leaked — thanks OPM I even had done an sf-86 so rip me
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2018 17:11
|
|
|
Currently reading the salary negotiation book that nbsd recommended. It's good and I will confidently attempt to own my next job offer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2018 19:32
|
|
|
qhat posted:Currently reading the salary negotiation book that nbsd recommended. It's good and I will confidently attempt to own my next job offer. you're gonna get owned lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 30, 2018 21:09
|
|
|
idk if i mentioned it in this thread but earlier this year we passed on someone because he wouldn't give us salary expectations. like, outright refused. i guess he read everyone's favourite salary negotiation article. he would have been better off just firing off a nice high number tbh, at least then we would have countered with something
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2018 13:00
|
|
|
not that I think that was a great tactic or anything but I doubt that you guys were even all that interested in the dude I mean you could've just low-balled the hell out of him, what would you be risking?
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2018 13:12
|
|
|
funny because my boss assumed the guy wasn't that interested in us if he wouldn't give us a number and we had 6 other interviews that day so vOv
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2018 13:14
|
|
|
"this guy doesn't look desperate and subservient enough, pass" which may have been a good call idk. who am I to judge here.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2018 13:56
|
|
|
Cold on a Cob posted:idk if i mentioned it in this thread but earlier this year we passed on someone because he wouldn't give us salary expectations. like, outright refused. i guess he read everyone's favourite salary negotiation article. smh if you think it's the candidate who missed out in this case
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2018 14:33
|
|
|
Cold on a Cob posted:idk if i mentioned it in this thread but earlier this year we passed on someone because he wouldn't give us salary expectations. like, outright refused. i guess he read everyone's favourite salary negotiation article. yeah, that’s on you guys, not on the candidate. there’s absolutely no reason why not the applicant should have to strike first at price, especially considering how much of a disadvantage candidates are already at at the negotiating table
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2018 15:12
|
|
|
Cold on a Cob posted:idk if i mentioned it in this thread but earlier this year we passed on someone because he wouldn't give us salary expectations. like, outright refused. i guess he read everyone's favourite salary negotiation article. it’s now illegal in multiple states to either ask for someone’s payment history or not reveal the payment details of a job listing should the candidate ask for it fyi
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2018 15:40
|
|
|
Cold on a Cob posted:idk if i mentioned it in this thread but earlier this year we passed on someone because he wouldn't give us salary expectations. like, outright refused. i guess he read everyone's favourite salary negotiation article. didnt you live in canada i thought canadians were supposed to be sane wrt labor relations
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2018 15:46
|
|
|
he’s not owned he’s not owned!
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2018 16:09
|
|
|
i'm not the boss i just do the technical interview, so i can't speak to whether this is legal or not in canada also i'm not defending the what we did, just adding another data point against the "never ever state your salary expectations to a company" advice that gets handed out without consideration for how companies hold all the drat cards everyone else that day had no problem giving us a number all of which were 10 to 30k above our budget, lol but at least with those numbers my boss was able to say "we lost these candidates because y'all won't give me more budget" to his bosses the talent deficit posted:smh if you think it's the candidate who missed out in this case i don't disagree, idk if i posted about it in here but i quit over 14k/yr (i wanted a 24k bump they offered 10k) and they brought me back as a contractor for 44k more per year vOv
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2018 16:55
|
|
|
fwiw we ask what they are expecting for a salary here, not asking what they currently make or made prior when i'm asked what i make currently in an interview i just state "i want x + 10%" where x is what i'm actually after
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2018 16:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 19, 2024 14:22 |
|
|
Cold on a Cob posted:fwiw we ask what they are expecting for a salary here, not asking what they currently make or made prior this is fine but requires you to know what your actual market value is / have some idea of what the company is looking for. if this question was asked early in the process before the candidate had a clear picture of all the responsibilities of the job then it was absolutely correct for them to stand fast. if it was later in the process then they probably just didn't have a very good idea of what the market looked like and also were correct to stand fast. also they could have just been a stubborn rear end. i'm gonna rule out the first option because of what you said about talking to so many other candidates in the same day. if your boss expects the candidates to be opening the negotiation then they need to wait until the end of the interviewing process- not open with it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 31, 2018 17:04
|
|