Maybe flawed people were better than brute algorithms.

I’m applying to jobs, and the amount of AI assessments, rounds, AI interviewers, questionnaires, is nuts.

One of these emails for example,

It’s rough.

  • curiousaur@reddthat.comEnglish
    26·
    22 hours ago

    I’ve been hiring for a year now and I can’t get anywhere. Open the job listing for 5 minutes and have 10 million applications. Many are fake made up people. Many are repeated entries, like 100 for the same person but with slight differences, like they are trying to hedge their bets. Have to close the listing after those 5 minutes since there’s already far too many to sift through, which means only automated, generated applications got in.

    Sift through all of those, interview a few folks, find no worthy talent, start over. It impossible, there is just too much noise.

    • HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.orgEnglish
      3·
      7 hours ago

      I totally get that it can be overload or even crushing for hiring managers, personal department people, and serious recruiters.

      But as things look, companies absolutely want that useless oversupply, as if they want to actively devalue and disrespect people. Take Siemens for an example. They have introduced AI into thier hiring portal. They offer to give you messages about new roles. But that subscription does not even allow to filter their open positions by continent. If I look for a job in Germany, I get open positions in India. And one cannot filter this. What the fuck?

      And pretty much in general, companies, job sites, and recruiters do not allow any useful specifity. I cannot filter offers by post code. This already makes most offers useless if I don’t use a car. Offers do not specify the actual place of work. They are often not clear about home office rules. They go all wishy-washy about the desired use of AI in software development - which is a huge differentiator for both sides of the table. I could go on. I once had two rounds of interviews until the HR people told me that they required - for a position of developing complex mathematical software - mandatory on-call service every seven weeks, 24/7 for a full week, on top of the normal work. Hard no from me. Excuse me? They could have saved me, and themselves substantial time if they had put that right into the job description.

      And one more thing, you speak of job seekers as “talent”. But “talent” means at the root that somebody who isn’t fully trained yet on something appears to have the natural capability to eventually learn it well, probably. For experienced professionals which have put many thousands of hours into studying something, practicing it, and actually becoming masters in it, that’s devaluating, too. The whole process is obviously designed to devalue people.

    • TonyOstrich@lemmy.zipEnglish
      11·
      20 hours ago

      Would it make any sense to switch to some kind of physical application process? Not necessarily in person, but require the applications/résumés be mailed in? The advantage that these automated models have is that they are basically for the user to submit as many applications as possible. Requiring that the application be physically mailed would create at least some small barrier and cost that would mean the applicants wouldn’t be able to apply a near infinite number of times.

    • SocialMediaRefugee@lemmy.worldEnglish
      13·
      22 hours ago

      Almost better off posting the address where you are hiring and see who comes in person to apply. That would be a bigger hurdle for serious applicants.