Hacker News

points by DeusExMachina 1 day ago | 0 comments

A friend that works as a manager told me that companies stretch the interview process on purpose so that at the end you will accept a lower offer that you normally would because you are exhausted by the process.

[–] throw0101c 1 day ago

> A friend that works as a manager told me that companies stretch the interview process on purpose so that at the end you will accept a lower offer that you normally would because you are exhausted by the process.

1. It depends on how desperate the applicant is: if they're searching while still employed then they can walk (like GP did).

2. Even if they are desperate, they may take the offer… for now… so they can start getting a salary again, but that won't prevent them from continue to look. In which case you're paying for them to learn a job which they'll leave and you'll have to pay someone (else) a second time to learn as well.

False economy IMHO.

[–] red-iron-pine 1 day ago

bingo. hiring is expensive, onboarding is expensive, offboarding is annoying and has non-trivial-risk, and dragging it out means work isn't get done in that position.

unless you're looking at VP and up level roles where there may be a significant delta in risk, cost, and pay it's probably not worth it.

[–] scott_w 1 day ago

And if you’re hiring a VP who isn’t able to see through the tactic… do you even want that?

[–] xyzzy_plugh 1 day ago

I've mentored a lot of young engineers and something I often point out is that there is practically zero risk in accepting an offer. Many companies also do not even present the full paperwork to sign until your first day or two.

You don't have to show up on the start date, though you do have to be mindful of the bridge you may be burning. But it is totally reasonable to show up to a few days of work, and declare "you know what, I don't think this is a good fit" and no one will be offended. They don't have to know that you already accepted another offer.

Exploding offers, low-ball offers, all bullshit. But you don't have to play their games.

[–] t0mpr1c3 1 day ago

This is certainly valid in "right to work" states like Pennsylvania. If there is no notice period, then there is no penalty from accepting multiple jobs. Having accepted a job, there are also various ways to push the start date forward.

Some corporations will exploit whatever advantages they perceive. I overheard one hiring manager refer to their process as "the hunger games".

[–] cowlevel 1 day ago

Another benefit: if people start doing this often, companies might start using actual notice periods that apply to both sides.

[–] schnitzelstoat 1 day ago

Usually the manager doesn't care about this though - a p-number is a p-number, it doesn't matter if they are paying them $200k or $100k (assuming the salary range for the position was that large).

If anything the manager would prefer a higher offer that the candidate is likely to expect than a low-ball which they reject and then the hiring process has to continue.

[–] runamuck 1 day ago

Yup. I never had any incentive to haggle over the Salary. If I got them to agree to a lowball, no one ever rewarded me, or cared.

[–] ismailmaj 1 day ago

It's just the good old boring sunk cost fallacy.

[–] cyanydeez 1 day ago

it also just gets to the scammer end of the "who is stupid enough to keep doing this to the end". The point of a lot of scammer's poor grammar, huge red flags, etc, is _they_ dont want to waste _their_ time with someone other than the biggest marks in the world.

I just thought it should be clearer how many of these businesses likely operate to filter out.

[–] icantevenhold 1 day ago

Maybe I misunderstood but are you saying that companies have these lengthy interview procedures to filter out smart/capable/non-desperate candidates?

Sounds a bit counterproductive

[–] rjbwork 1 day ago

Depends on your goals.

A lot of places are looking for unambitious, mediocre, status-quo following bodies to fill seats and follow arcane bureaucratic processes. Too much critical thinking is bad. Ability to deal with long drawn out bullshit is good.

[–] icantevenhold 1 day ago

whelp I guess that makes sense.

I love working in tech because it’s so cushy and chill but it’s the most stupid (and delusional) industry i ever worked in.

[–] cyanydeez 18 hours ago

I'm saying business managers tend to follow patterns that gets them to the numbers on their paper. What you, or a single employee, sees as counter productive is often just a means to an end.

They'll spend 5x your ask for a raise finding someone to fill your position because denying you keeps the rest of their payroll in line. And if you consider these people communicate across their industries, they will make informal cartels that depress all employee wages.

So I wouldn't be surprised if there was just a natural way to filter our employees who would be to demanding by making them jump through more hoops.

[–] prmoustache 1 day ago

That can only really work if you are unemployed or they know your salary is is still way below.

[–] locknitpicker 1 day ago

> companies stretch the interview process on purpose so that at the end you will accept a lower offer

That doesn't pass the smell test. That would mean those companies do not care about filling a role of hiring competent workers. If your guy is willing to wait two whole months for your offer, you are either Google or you are trying to hire a dude who no company on earth wants.

[–] 6510 1 day ago

If your salary depends on how many underlings you have you want them to do as little useful work as possible. Hiring becomes is a very time consuming delicate process, you need 3 full time employees to find those 5 perfect sheep men.

[–] breakpointalpha 1 day ago

This is what car dealerships in the US do too. Waste a ton of time and keep you there for hours to fatigue you into accepting whatever bullshit they throw at you in the "close".