Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses Facebook Social Networks

Headhunters Can't Tell Anything From Facebook Profiles 209

Posted by Soulskill
from the too-bad-they-don't-realize-that dept.
New submitter sfcat writes "Companies, headhunters and recruiters increasingly are using social media sites like Facebook to evaluate potential employees. Most of this is due to a 2012 paper from Northern Illinois Univ. that claimed that employee performance could be effectively evaluated from their social media profiles. Now a series of papers from other institutions reveal exactly the opposite result. 'Recruiter ratings of Facebook profiles correlate essentially zero with job performance,' write the researchers, led by Chad H. Van Iddekinge of FSU (abstract). Not only did the research show the ineffectiveness of using social media in evaluating potential employees, it also showed a measurable biases of the recruiters against minorities (African-American and Latino) and against men in general."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Headhunters Can't Tell Anything From Facebook Profiles

Comments Filter:
  • Color me shocked (Score:5, Insightful)

    by RobinEggs (1453925) on Sunday January 05, 2014 @05:30AM (#45869599)
    So a profession with no psychology background can't successfully evaluate peoples' personal statements and associations as a proxy for their professional competence? They're failing to do what even actual psychologists struggle with?

    Wow. Who'd have seen that coming.
    • Re:Color me shocked (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday January 05, 2014 @05:56AM (#45869665)

      Any employer basing its decision to hire me based on social network profiles is not an employer I'd like to have. I don't have a FB profile and I don't see a reason to start now. My current employer seems to agree. During the interview I was honest and upfront about it, even though they didn't ask I told them straight away "I know companies these days scour prospective emplyee social network profiles, but the thing is I'm not on FB, Twitter, Pinterest, Instagram, tumblr, whatever-it-is-the-site-of-the-day". Their responsa was "We have no interest in your private life".

      I do have a profile on Linkedin, which I update regularly, though. And by regularly I mean probably once a month, or so. The only other remotely social networking I do is flickr. I do have an account, which I use to share photos and discuss photography with other enthusiasts like myself.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by jones_supa (887896)

        "I know companies these days scour prospective emplyee social network profiles, but the thing is I'm not on FB, Twitter, Pinterest, Instagram, tumblr, whatever-it-is-the-site-of-the-day". Their responsa was "We have no interest in your private life".

        Sounds like a good company.

        • by Lumpy (12016) on Sunday January 05, 2014 @09:32AM (#45870349) Homepage

          It is because it has experienced management in place. The companies that have fresh Grads from Business Management colleges are the ones that have the fools that think that your facebook profile is important.

          The #1 problem with all companies in the past decade. Putting a snot nosed 20 somethings in a management position. I don't care if they have a PHD in something, they are stupid in regards to managing people. The ONLY way to learn how to manage people is by doing it and that takes time. Honestly Management age brackets should start at 35 years old as the YOUNGEST unless they prove themselves to be some kind of people management savant.

          Otherwise you get these idiotic ideas that digging into your employees personal life has any relevancy to their work life. I have worked places where these idiots out of college tried to make everyone post something positive about he company daily on their Facebook/etc as a part of your employment. They claimed it was for "morale boosting". It was simply an attempt at free marketing.

          • by Nemyst (1383049) on Sunday January 05, 2014 @11:52AM (#45871163) Homepage
            Wait, so your solution to young managers not having experience is to delay them getting experience until they're older? How does that solve anything apart from pissing on young people?
            • by BitterOak (537666)

              Wait, so your solution to young managers not having experience is to delay them getting experience until they're older? How does that solve anything apart from pissing on young people?

              I think he said that young people shouldn't be put in management positions. They can work other positions in a company, particularly in groups where they can develop people skills, and by working for a manager, observe what works and what doesn't. An aspiring manager could meet with an actual manager in the company and ask questions like "Why don't you check employee's Facebook pages? I heard in school that it can really help." And the actual manager can reply "We've found that in the real world, Faceboo

            • Wait, so your solution to young managers not having experience is to delay them getting experience until they're older? How does that solve anything apart from pissing on young people?

              Well, it goes like this: The older folks who are being discriminated against in favour of the young wheel-re-inventing over-time-seeking no-family-life having folks for the positions of programmers, or working the assembly line, etc. general activity of actually doing the (with an unfortunate tendency towards working harder instead of smarter) should be promoted to team-leaders to pass their experience to the green-horn rookies; And as these age a bit more, move them up into management positions where their

            • Or put them in management positions where they don't have enough power to harm much?

          • Re:Color me shocked (Score:5, Interesting)

            by KernelMuncher (989766) on Sunday January 05, 2014 @12:25PM (#45871409)
            I've got to disagree about your belief that young people can not be effective managers. The military routinely turns young college graduates into officers and gives them leadership responsibilities. That system has been successful in the United States for more than two hundred years.

            The main difference between the military and the private sector is in the preparation. The military has a specialized training program (OCS) specifically tailored for leadership principles that all applicants must pass before becoming officers. That lasts for several months. And, for young officers, there's a great support system of experienced officers and NCO's who can give them advice.

            Private corporations generally don't offer training and mentorship programs any more due to cost cutting measures. It's common to have people promoted to management positions with no training whatsoever. And the closest civilian equivalent, an MBA, seems to breed arrogance.
            • by rochrist (844809) on Sunday January 05, 2014 @12:33PM (#45871469)
              Well, yeah, and young officers are notoriously .....uneven...in their management capabilities, which is why we have noncommissioned who actually run things as long as the young officers are smart enough to rely on them. When they aren't, it's usually not very pretty.
            • by gweihir (88907)

              You cite the _military_ as example of successful management? What planet are you living on? The military is the most abysmal failure in that regard. If they were not kept alive by astronomically huge money infusion all the time, they would collapse immediately. Their situation is not even remotely related to what a company has to do in order to be successful.

          • Honestly Management age brackets should start at 35 years old as the YOUNGEST unless they prove themselves to be some kind of people management savant.

            And how exactly are you supposed to wreck and loot entire industires if you don't put inexpierienced, ambitious, rakish young lackies in charge of them?

      • Re:Color me shocked (Score:4, Interesting)

        by erikkemperman (252014) on Sunday January 05, 2014 @06:42AM (#45869801)

        Same here, potential future employers are not going to find me on any social network. And if I were a recruiter, I'd probably consider having extensive profiles online a negative quality -- indicative of spending too much time posing and not enough actually working.

        • by jareth-0205 (525594) on Sunday January 05, 2014 @08:13AM (#45870045) Homepage

          And if I were a recruiter, I'd probably consider having extensive profiles online a negative quality -- indicative of spending too much time posing and not enough actually working.

          Yeah, those horrible employees that have evenings and weekends where they can do things other than working for you, how dare they.

          Stick with the simplest, what people do in their own time is their own concern.

        • by Bronster (13157)

          So says the athiest who had a hangover on New Year's Day and doesn't speak English as a first language and likes Torchwood and uses the word Fuck and develops Android Apps but is looking for something else.

          And I've only read the first two pages of the comments you've posted to Slashdot while logged in.

          Pot/kettle. Looks like you have a plenty extensive online profile on a site which is pretty much one of the oldest social networks of your "tribe" (nerds) and you look down on non-nerds who do the same thing

          • I choose not to use FB and so on myself, but I don't think that implies your assertion that I look down on those (nerds or otherwise) who do. I just said that, inasmuch as an extensive profile says anything at all about the professional qualities of a potential employee, I would probably not count it as positive. That's not the same as looking down on someone, or at least I don't think it is.

            On the other hand, I understand that it can come across as smug to point out explicitly that I don't use, say, FB.

            For

            • by Bronster (13157)

              "And if I were a recruiter, I'd probably consider having extensive profiles online a negative quality -- indicative of spending too much time posing and not enough actually working."

              (and don't worry - I didn't go into the bit with your really disgusting habits like running unpatched Windows XP)

              Maybe a recruiter wouldn't check Slashdot - maybe they would. But you sure look like you spend a bunch of time on here from the frequency of comments - and yet you were dissing other people who spend "too much time p

              • Yes well, okay, I still don't think it is an accurate assertion that I was dissing or dismissing or looking down upon, but clearly you disagree. I guess my mistyping posting as posing, which I just noticed in your quote, didn't help matters along. And your calling my habits disgusting is what, a compliment? I almost feel a need to point out I was kidding about the XP box, but surely that was sufficiently obvious.

                Anyway, thanks for replying. Whether or not you believe me is immaterial, but I honestly don't t

                • by Bronster (13157)

                  Yeah, I was just picking on the XP box rather than the watching "nature documentaries" bit because, well... It was a joke to pick on the XP box, because the average HR person would be more interested in nature of the documentaries and whether you would be likely to do that on work time (people do, amazingly enough).

                  I'm happy to agree that you don't really (or don't realise that you do) look down on other services. Certainly posing => posting changes the nature of your post significantly!

                  Anyway, I think

          • I wasn't aware we were discriminating against Torchwood fans now?

      • If you don't have a FB presence, you will be rejected for being an "unfavorable fit with company culture," which is of course their legally acceptable terminology for "being over 30."
        • by bsa3 (200) *

          Under US federal law, discrimination against persons under 40 years old is perfectly legal (although states can enact stricter legislation). It may or may not be a good idea, but you can't get into trouble with the EEOC for it.

      • by Chemisor (97276)

        > hire me based on social network profiles is not an employer I'd like to have

        In today's job market the employer you'd like to have is the one that would hire you. Why he gives you the job is irrelevant since the alternative is to have no job and die.

        • Wow...so you die without a job?

          If you have no sig other to help you through the tough times, no family to depend on, and no friends to turn to...there is still that horrible horrible government thing. You will not die without a job, but you certainly need to be confident enough in who you are to not blow your own brains out for fear of the "no job and die" beliefs.
      • I haven't worked at a large enough number of companies to claim I have a good sample size going, but I've worked at a few that were good despite shitty shitty HR departments. I've also worked at one that seemed to have a really nice HR process and staff, and the job itself was shitty. It should have been obvious from the start, but I was younger and am dumb.
      • by AmiMoJo (196126) *

        They are database admins, and their databases are shit. You give them a job spec which they turn into a query by adding some meaningless buzzwords. They check their stack of CVs for matches, maybe email a few people. None of them fit so their job as admin is to bullshit both sides into thinking they are perfect for each other.

        It would be better if you had direct access to the database, but then you would be able to tell that it is worthless and wouldn't pay them to do queries any more.

    • by gweihir (88907)

      HR routinely gets the wannabes, where huge Ego and really small skills collide. Short-term, this is a brilliant solution. Long-term, it is fatal.

  • Biases (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I could have told you the biases off the top of my head. The anti-minority, anti-male headhunter is nothing new. Most headhunters are female and white, though several headhunter companies I have done business with are minority run and almost exclusively monochromatic (i.e. all black, all hispanic). They all have biases in general against men, BUT this seesaws to the other side as they are hiring for increasingly technical or executive positions as they rather play the odds that the person is hired and th
    • Re: Biases (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward

      They are biased against men because if they hire to many men they get hit with a discrimination lawsuit (of course, hiring all women would because perfectly fine in this feminized age) This is even true when the men are more qualified (and if equally qualified, I'd always choose a man over a younger woman because he won't miss time die to childbirth. Unless of course the woman is sexy and it's a position wherever that would benefit, like sales or bartender)

    • "Monochromatic" ---- very interesting descriptive term.

      Human resources is with little doubt one of those necessary evils, and acts as a firewall against the unwashed masses which includes quite a mix of people ranging from liars to incompetent to "don't understand the market", etc. And the nature of the work means constantly dealing with people you have never seen before.
      • Re:Biases (Score:4, Insightful)

        by DarkOx (621550) on Sunday January 05, 2014 @06:52AM (#45869829) Journal

        I don't think anyone is suggesting HR is not necessary but to continue your analogy:
        If the the HR / recruiting firm pairing at some places I have worked was a firewall/IPS pair it would:

        Have an insanely high false negative rate frequently forwarding malicious traffic with will known signatures

        Drop large amounts of legitimate traffic to important assets like the web farm, with log events of "just because, or I don't remember why".

        Forward traffic originally destine for other unused address to live hosts without any filtering to meet some minimum number of resumes^H^H^H^H connections setups.

        Interpret it policy rules on a per connection basis, frequently with different and non-deterministic results and log nothing.

  • by Sycraft-fu (314770) on Sunday January 05, 2014 @05:39AM (#45869621)

    Problems with using social media aside, headhunters are fucking lazy morons. I've never personally had to deal with them, thankfully, but one of my friends, being a consultant, does often and they are universally wastes of flesh. They are not concerned with trying to find the best candidate for the job, carefully vetting resumes and checking experience. Rather they are interested in finding someone as fast as possible and mating them with a job so they can get their fee. They rarely have the faintest idea of what they are talking about in terms of technical requirements and so on.

    So ya, I'm sure this doesn't help. Particularly since what people put on their social networking sites varies a ton. Some people have lots of work related things, some have none. Doesn't really translate to job performance, just to what they like to share or not share.

    Sounds like more what they are doing, particularly based on the discrimination report, is finding people they think "look good" meaning largely white and particularly good looking female, and sending them on.

    • by Justpin (2974855)
      I would have to agree, I see job adverts from recruiters which are simply jobs taken off company websites with the name removed. Or they will quote obsolete standards, qualifications and software you need to be able to use. Years ago VDU operator, was really common, as they used the old trope monitor = computer.
    • They're not lazy. They're smart.

      They know they get paid for the people hired. The more shots in the dark the more people hired and the more commissions.

      Just another example of incentives that cause bad behavior instead of good behavior.

  • by Mashiki (184564) <mashiki&gmail,com> on Sunday January 05, 2014 @05:47AM (#45869649) Homepage

    So what does it say about people who don't have a facebook profile? I'm guessing that we're scary dangerous people, who are terrorists and working to subvert the government. /sarc

    Actually might not be far from the truth these days in the minds of some flappy headed nutbags.

    • by rusty0101 (565565)

      I have a suspicion that for people w/o a FB profile, the fix is to find a FB profile of someone with a similar name, and assume that they can gather sufficient information about that person to make a determination about you. In short I don't think they really know what they are doing (as evidenced by the story itself) so any method of giving themselves a feeling that they are getting something of value will do. But that's mostly just a suspicion, and you could be right.

      • The scary thing about these sorts of shenanigans by companies is what if you're of average height, average build, brown hair, and your name is John Smith.

        How can you know that the "investigation" they do into your facebook profile is actually on the right person?

        • by tftp (111690) on Sunday January 05, 2014 @12:48PM (#45871601) Homepage

          How can you know that the "investigation" they do into your facebook profile is actually on the right person?

          Does that matter to HR? They have no engineering deadlines to meet, and no products to deliver to the customer. In a large company (where HR is most likely to be a significant group) HR would be well insulated from financial results of the business. Nobody is going to double-check resumes that they threw away.

      • I have a suspicion that for people w/o a FB profile, the fix is to find a FB profile of someone with a similar name, and assume that they can gather sufficient information about that person to make a determination about you.

        There's a person in Facebook with same name as mine, with a cool crow mask on his face. I always wish that his profile is used to make conclusions about me.

    • by couchslug (175151)

      Solution:
      Groom a deceptive online identity designed to get you work and stay off social media for other purposes as they are just vain entertainment. That others do not is to your advantage.

      If you want to get anywhere in life you must understand the value of lying and hypocritcal behavior towards your many institutional enemies. Ethics are for application to friends and neutrals. It's not sociopathic to treat the portion of society which is genuinely your enemy as your enemy. We are conditioned otherwise, b

  • Wrong! (Score:5, Funny)

    by TrollstonButterbeans (2914995) on Sunday January 05, 2014 @05:58AM (#45869671)
    This article only reinforces the value of social media in evaluating future job performance in the human resources industry. I'll explain!

    Since there is zero correlation, it is like reading tea leaves and a headhunter can reach any interpretation possible. Meanwhile, the zero correlation means any tea leaf reading cannot be falsified.

    Arbitrary opinions and no valid way of measurement --- which makes the interpretations completely subject to whim! It is the perfect industry, possibly only surpassed by the "how to write a successful resume" sector of the economy!

    With no right or wrong answers, what's not to LOVE!!!
    • by DarkOx (621550)

      I think you are to something more thn you think. Social media provides a plausable somewhat reasonable sounding explanation for their actions, when/if they need to explain themselves to either their boss, the client firm, and maybe some legal process. Even if they have to craft said explaination after the fact.

  • ...no one is doing actual data analysis. From what I'm seeing in the story, recruiters are 'sort of getting a feel for' candidtes by looking at fb, twitter, and other social media pages, rather than using standardized analysis to do some variety of a Briggs-Meyer analysis of the candidates and compare those results with the requirements of the job posting they are looking to match the candidates up with. Granted I don't expect that any of the recruiters involved have even the slightest idea of how to match

    • by gweihir (88907)

      Indeed. Recruiters are mostly incompetent. Got a good look at that at Google, were they were not hiding it very well and I had inside information in addition. (Some insiders got pretty fed up by not being able to hire people they urgently needed...)

      They then kept contacting me year after year, until I finally told them that yes, they could re-interview me at my usual consulting fee for time spent. That finally got the message across.

  • My own experience. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by drolli (522659) on Sunday January 05, 2014 @06:26AM (#45869751) Journal

    I have a profile on a business social network. I am a physicist (PHD) , and have worked a long time in science.

    Everybody looking at my profile for longer than 20 seconds can figure that out.

    I have a solid electronics/condensed matter/analog measurement background.

    Everybody looking at my profile for longer than 40 seconds can figure that out.

    But as it happens, i am a curious guy with diverse programming skills, which I have been using *from time to time*, but i know enough to talk to IT experts who really know what they are doing

    Everybody looking at my profile for longer than 1 minute can figure that out.

    So what i typically get/got is:
    -we need a junior PHP programmer (yeah, sure - come on, admit you just searched for "PHP" and ignored the other skills, which you never heard about)
    -do you like a job as *expert* for [Skill X, which was listed explicitely as "little experience"] (Oh, you like to sell anybody to you customer. At least you read my profile, but, thanks, no)
    -in the interview (after beeing asked by the headhunter to apply): why do you apply here? (Yeah, because the company you hired to look for me "found" me - obviously they did not infrom you at all about the previous conversation.)

    And what i see in the company i work for:
    -I get a profile from our internal headhunters, whithout any infromation how that got onto my table.
    -I should evaluate people for things of which i have no idea at all, but "it sounded similar" (to the HR intern)
    -50% of hour HR seem to be interns. The HR has probably the highest rotation rate in the company; even the management has a felt half-life time of a year (sure, thats going to work out)

    • by Common Joe (2807741) on Sunday January 05, 2014 @08:21AM (#45870067) Journal

      I'm hunting for a job and there are days I feel like poking a blunt stick in my eye because it would be less painful. I blame HR and head hunters because of my experience in the past with them. (They are almost all totally incompetent.)

      My current resume says I'm an application and database programmer. (In short: Oracle, PostgreSQL, C#, and Java is my current forte.) My blessing and curse is that I'm a jack-of-all-trades so I work in just about any language and I have. On the job boards, companies see the word "Java" on my resume (because I worked on Java apps recently) and that I worked on web apps 7+ years ago and they immediately assume I'm a current Java EE programmer. Phone interviews last all of about 3 minutes before they realize that I'm not who they are looking for. I don't get calls for anything else. I try to bury the Intranet stuff I did so it doesn't stand out and I try to highlight the ability for jack-of-all-trades. Doesn't quite work and I'm sure as hell not going to put "Not a web developer" on my resume. (Apparently, it's a mortal sin to list anything "negative" so I can't put the word "not" on my resume or cover letter.)

      So, here I am. Stuck. Unable to properly convey on job boards what I can do and getting the wrong kinds of calls. I think I'm going to go find a blunt stick.

      • Jack of all trades is not the way to find a job. Companies are looking to fill a specific position. Craft a resume high lighting each of your specialities.
        • Jack of all trades is not the way to find a job. Companies are looking to fill a specific position. Craft a resume high lighting each of your specialities.

          You're right. Jack of all trades is not how I advertise myself on the surface. I always start out with "application and database developer". I try to let my history speak for itself. Unfortunately, companies also don't know what they're looking for a lot of times. I read so many job openings with requirements that just reek because they are a list of disjointed abilities that no single person can have (without training) -- even if they are already a jack of all trades. HR and managers typically have a

      • by Zarhan (415465)

        As the others have said, tailor your resume to emphasize that you are jack-of-all-trades.

        I'm a CCIE and have a doctorate in computer networks, have authored an RFC, and now approaching 20 years of experience in the field, which supposedly puts me into the camp of network expert.

        Expect, in reality, my work in last six months has consisted of e.g.:
        - Database design, operations and reporting (MSSQL and Mysql)
        - AJAX programming (Javascript), and all the intricasies that bunch of di

  • isn't it like 52% of americans are female? i vaguely remember that statistic from the ads for the Man Show.

    • Like all political terms "minority" and "majority" really depend on context. The terms may have mathematical roots, but they aren't used in strictly mathematical terms. With gender the math gets really tricky because the numbers start virtually equal, and women's small advantage is mostly due to our science knowing how to keep them around a couple more years.

      In the context of feminism, women are a minority because a lot of the issues facing them are more similar to the issues facing minorities those facing

      • by gmhowell (26755)

        TL;dr:

        Words mean whatever I want them to mean so that I'll win my argument.

        • There's a conversation about Republicans between an Irishman and an American. The Irishman is talking about Socialists who don't go to Church (but swear they're Catholic), want to fire Queen Elizabeth, and sympathize with terrorists. The American is talking about Capitalists who go to an extremely Protestant Church for six hours a week, have a very poorly concealed crush on the Queen, and think that freedom doesn't apply to anyone the government has deemed a terrorist. Then an Aussie shows up, and he's talk

  • by cascadingstylesheet (140919) on Sunday January 05, 2014 @07:27AM (#45869909)

    Like anything else, social networking info is a possible source of useful info. As long as you understand the limitations.

    I doubt that the average headhunter is good at evaluating much of anything, social networking or no. But that goes for the average {most professions} too ...

    • I suppose there's the blind squirrel corollary.

      You know the guy they exclude with this has posted a pimpin', guns, and money Selfey.

  • My first instinct about the use of social media for job applicants has nothing to do with job performance, but feels more like a social background check -- is this person a "partier" or some kind of political "radical"?

    My next thought is that maybe they use it as background for salary negotiations -- does this person have a big family/kids which would be expensive for insurance? Are they overextended financially and can be coerced into accepting a lower salary?

  • So far I have only met one, with a background in psychology, who could determine anything at all.

    Most recruiters are completely clueless. They don't know _anything_. They know nothing about the world outside of their bubble. They have no idea what the company needs. They have no idea what the slave wants. They just randomly match and mix.

    Now add to that that usually only the bad companies outsource hiring (at least in Germany) and you will get bad employees matched with bad employers.

  • I get contacted on linkedin a few times a month by recruiters. Half the time it is people who work for companies and actually want to talk to me. The other half it is third-party head-hunters, and what they want is for me to tell them anyone who may be interested: ie, they contact me, a stranger, and ask me to do their job for them. Of course, they usually offer a finder's fee of some sort, but if a recruiter/headhunter doesn't have his or her own bag of tricks, or even an hr professional subscription to

  • I think that HR departments should be prevented from examining any social media for hiring but that said, I look at different people's facebook pages and I can tell if they are a complete tool, looser, go getter, nutcase, or criminal. When I am buying something through an online classified I will check that person's email for a FB match. It is great to get a picture of them to identify them at the coffeeshop etc. But many of these people have pictures of themselves infront of their weed stash, treating wome
  • by russotto (537200) on Sunday January 05, 2014 @11:57AM (#45871207) Journal

    Maybe it's just Sturgeon's Law, but most recruiters couldn't get a clue in a clue sanctuary while doused in clue scent.

    You could take a typical recruiter, drop them in the middle of Facebook HQ, and tell them to find some PHP experts, and they'd come back with a janitor, two administrators, and a high school kid who was visiting.

    You could give them the resumes of the top people in the world, mixed with some from recent San Quentin parolees, and they'd do no better than chance at picking the good ones.

    Facebook may or may not be a way to judge potential employees. But even if it were, most recruiters couldn't do it.

  • 1) Back in the day when it was universities-only, "what happened on Facebook, stayed on Facebook". So students were candid on Facebook, making it useful to analyze their personalities.

    2) Then Facebook opened up to the public, and (potential) employers could view (potential) employees' posts durung their university days. So many students used their privacy settings to hide the bad stuff, and were able to remain candid on Facebook.

    3) Then (potential) employers started demanding Facebook passwords. People star

  • by Sarusa (104047) on Sunday January 05, 2014 @05:21PM (#45873477)

    This seems to be a common theme, but recruiters on LinkedIn, who have easy access to prefiltered data right from my own fingers, can't even manage to comprehend that.

    My info: EE/CS, no interest in management, no interest in relocating from west coast.

    Recruiter: Hey Sarusa, plz call me about this great ME (Mechanical Engineer) management opportunity in Madison, Wisconsin that just opened up.

    I'm not making that one up. I wish I were. Ones that bad happen rarely, but weaker forms of that happen constantly.

  • They can't tell, but can they tell that they can't tell?

    I'd wager several pounds that the answer is "no". http://www.xenodochy.org/ex/quotes/knowsnot.html [xenodochy.org]

  • ...as a matter of policy is not a company I would ever care to work for, or even do business with. Employers need to stop being Big Brother, because they're appallingly awful at it.

The major difference between bonds and bond traders is that the bonds will eventually mature.

Working...