Site Allowing You To 'Skip the Interview' Launches, Then Promptly Shuts Down (protocol.com) 54
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Protocol: A company proposing job-seekers ask past coworkers to pay money and "sponsor" them for a new job launched, and rather immediately shut down, its website on Wednesday. The main idea behind the site, called "Skip the Interview," was to partner with companies who would set sponsorship amounts for job postings. The job-seeker would then ask current or former coworkers to contribute to this sponsorship fund, controlled by Skip The Interview. The first person to raise the funds gets the job. It seems that Skip The Interview thinks people are willing to back up job references with money. Quite a few people on Twitter and Reddit disagree.
After being roasted on Twitter, an account with the handle @skipinterview responded to some concerns on developer Angie Jones' thread. "We decided to take the site down, as we clearly didn't talk to enough people before launching, and are going to talk to a lot more people before moving forward," the account wrote. The account later tweeted on the thread: "Hi everyone. This is Chris the founder. Our goal is definitely not to be discriminatory in any way. We actually won't do junior roles for that reason. We think anyone who has worked in a role for 3+ years before can raise funds from colleagues." An account named "Chris_Evans_1112" also responded to a negative thread on Reddit, saying the company had launched solely to receive feedback. According to their website, Skip The Interview is processing the negative feedback and refining their pitch. It appears they have more research to do.
After being roasted on Twitter, an account with the handle @skipinterview responded to some concerns on developer Angie Jones' thread. "We decided to take the site down, as we clearly didn't talk to enough people before launching, and are going to talk to a lot more people before moving forward," the account wrote. The account later tweeted on the thread: "Hi everyone. This is Chris the founder. Our goal is definitely not to be discriminatory in any way. We actually won't do junior roles for that reason. We think anyone who has worked in a role for 3+ years before can raise funds from colleagues." An account named "Chris_Evans_1112" also responded to a negative thread on Reddit, saying the company had launched solely to receive feedback. According to their website, Skip The Interview is processing the negative feedback and refining their pitch. It appears they have more research to do.
Re: (Score:1)
I'll make sure to check his yt channel, maybe he'll do an analysis.
Reverse UNO referral bonuses (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: Reverse UNO referral bonuses (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
The way it works is you "sponsor" a job candidate with money. Then, if they are accepted and keep their job for at least two months, you get double your money back (minus fees).
So the motivation is presumably to bet on good candidates with the incentive of making money when they get and keep the job. The hiring companies presumably look at this sponsorship as an indicator of quality and are willing to pay for it.
But it could work backward. I could see companies offering to "sponsor" bad employees to get
Re: Reverse UNO referral bonuses (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:1)
assholes dont come in one gender
Actually, mostly they do and it isn't the one you picked.
Re: (Score:2)
What's your evidence for that?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can it be done the other way round? If there is an asshole
That was my immediate thought too. Actually not quite. I didn't think "if" so much as my thoughts jumping to just the knobcheese I'd pay good money to be rid of.
Re: (Score:2)
It's good corporate practice to use a precisely equal number of male and few male gender pronouns in examples, but in examples of error or bad conduct, always use male pronouns.
Check with your HR. They will back me up on this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You could literally be Hitler and I'd still give you kudos for that.
HR is where those women with masters degrees in lesbian interpretive dance end up.
Re: (Score:2)
But without HR, who would read the performance reviews?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Can it be done the other way round? If there is an asshole on your team who reduces everyones productivity but does their own job , its tough to get rid of them. How about if enough employees sponsor enough money for 1 month severance and 1 month hiring bonus for a new person , the asshole can be thrown out on her ass. (Yes I said her, assholes dont come in one gender)
That is what a probationary period is for, a new employee can be dismissed without cause (subject to payment of 1 full pay period)... Even Australia and the UK permits them for exactly this reason, I cant imagine the US doesn't permit this but allows states to have "at will" employment.
That being said, I've only ever seen 1 person fail probation and that was because she complained to HR about everyone for anything.
Re: (Score:1)
So basically the same as the H1-B program.
Re:Reverse UNO referral bonuses (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm willing to put up some money if companies will please poach our worst performers who are making us lose more money than they get paid...
I Can FINALLY Retire! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If the interview process is meant to reduce risk to a company
OK, but what if the interview process is meant to provide information with which to judge the suitability of the applicant for the job? What then?
I mean, even if the process is poor at doing that evaluation, even then... if that is even the intent, it completely blows up this idea.
Re:Not the worst idea... (Score:5, Insightful)
That sounds like a company I don't want to work for.
Re: (Score:1)
That sounds like a company I don't want to work for.
Which is, I guess, the point. The current system sucks.
I don't know if this new idea is any good, but the current system definitely sucks.
Interviewing is a two way process (Score:2)
Part of the idea of interviewing is not just to let a prospective employer know how I can add value to their organization, but also to provide an opportunity for me to spot problematic employers before I begin working for them.
You could take the job and then quit, but having a string of short jobs will affect your reputation in some circles. It's generally best to identify the problems in the interview and make a decision before it affects your reputation.
Re: (Score:2)
It's weird to me because it doesn't seem like a terrible system.
But it should probably be a short cut to and interview, not skip it.
Like maybe your resume misses a keyword or two, but you have people vouching for you and willing to make a stake on it even. That seems worthy of maybe doing the interview even if they're less than perfect on paper. But I'd never want to hire so done I haven't spoken to
Wait, what month is it? (Score:5, Insightful)
By the time you interview someone, you should already know that they are technically qualified, or you haven't done your job. Interviews are less about screening in the best people than screening out those who aren't a good fit for the company, and being able to choose between otherwise equally qualified candidates. A resume or a pay-for-points system can't tell you that one candidate is a joy to be around and has the presence necessary to do certain client-facing jobs, or if someone is an abrasive loudmouth interrupter with terrible hygiene.
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Re: (Score:3)
Unless that software is written and maintained by a single person there is some level of interaction.
The amount and type of interaction can flavor what you're looking for, but it's still interaction. For example you don't want an anti social person that will passive aggressively sabotage a project because they feel slighted.
Re: (Score:2)
By the time you interview someone, you should already know that they are technically qualified, or you haven't done your job.
By the time you interview you should already know there's a moderate chance they are technically qualified. Unless you've already seen their work (which isn't an option for most people) all you have to go on before you interview is a CV, and maybe a short conversation.
Re:Wait, what month is it? (Score:4, Insightful)
Why would the candidate want to skip the interview? The interview is a chance to check the company and your potential new boss out, to see if it's a good place to work or if you are going to be stuck maintaining some bastard legacy code from hell.
There are often warning flags at interviews that tell you to steer clear of companies too, like stupid whiteboard exercises and assignments. If they ask you to sit an exam you know you need to look elsewhere.
Re: (Score:2)
I so hate it when I have to agree with you ;).
Re: (Score:2)
It is often less about the speed and perfectness of an answer than how an interviewee handles themselves.
Ha ha ha. No, in software it's become a contest to see who can memorize/regurgitate the questions from a single website better. Miss a question and you may not even get every interview scheduled in your loop. Better luck in 6 months. (literally, I've got friends who reapplied to google over and over for years until they finally 'aced' every question in a single run)
Re: (Score:2)
(literally, I've got friends who reapplied to google over and over for years until they finally 'aced' every question in a single run)
All that effort to work for Alphabet. Google is a fading memory.
buy a job is this an MLM scam? (Score:3)
Where to get the job you need to buy your sales kit?
Internships? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
That's probably version 2, after he talks to more people.
I doubt they give a rat's ass about Twitter (Score:3)
It's stupid, but.. (Score:3)
Astroturf problem (Score:2)
Are they just trying to solve the fundamental astroturf problem? That is, how do you know a review or a reference is legitimate? A lot of big companies with way more resources are trying to solve that (Amazon) and aren't even close.
Most references won't be very forthcoming, preferring not to answer direct questions. They'll confirm someone's start and end dates, and that's about it.
In some jobs it's really important if people show up to work on time. The best way to find that out is to hire them and see
Oh hi (Score:2)
"Hi everyone. This is Chris the founder. Our goal is definitely not to be discriminatory in any way."
Hi Chris, fuck you and your fucked-up predatory idea of forcing people to raise money to get a job.
Drowning in a vat of sewage would be a just and fitting end for you, returning you to that which you were made from.
The only sponsorship... (Score:2)
I'm not sure what planet this guy is from that he thinks people should be able to typically get former coworkers to financially sponsor him into getting a new job.
Also, this whole process is essentially just a bribery scheme - whoever bribes the most the fastest gets the job. How is that even legal?
The first person to raise the funds gets the job (Score:2)
What happens to the other people?
Do their "sponsors" get their money back?
I somehow think not.
Re: (Score:2)
Their money goes to the bookie, who then pays out to the winners.
Re: (Score:2)
Right, so what planet is this guy living on that he thinks that his former coworkers are just going to front money for a former coworker to find a new job when it doesn't even guarantee him the job?
It's essentially a lottery, and has every outward appearance of a scam.
Who wrote that business plan? (Score:2)
Sounds like, smells like a con game. (Score:3)
I wouldn't touch this with a proverbial 10' pole.
My initial reaction to a request for sponsorship would be "Who let the multi-level marketing, ponzi scheming droid in?". If it was someone I knew and respected, we would have a deep heart to heart over a bottle of Jameson.
This is wrong in so many ways but at the core it wants to replace the work and skill required to hire the people you want and need with a "wisdom-of-the-crowd" magic box. WTF. Who would fall for that?
As someone hiring, I would never subscribe to this. Why would I? I know how to hire the right people with a zero failure rate. As someone looking for a job, I know I would sound like an Amway cult acolyte to anyone I approached for sponsorship. I prefer to exhibit a different flavour of insanity in the work place.
My experience is that the wrong people are hired when you don't put in the effort to find the right person. When the wrong person is hired it is almost always because the effort was not applied. This zero interview idea is just a casino game with a wacky and skewed randomizer.
Comment removed (Score:3)
This will backfire (Score:2)
People will be more willing to set up a Good Riddance Fund to get a bad apple out of their team than pay to lose a valuable colleague.
Never mind getting rid of the assholes (Score:1)
Gaming the system (Score:1)
So many flaws here. So the idea is to reward investors with double their money of the candidate last 2 months. Company presumably pays nothing until start of the 3rd month.
Company gaming the system:
-I need interns to abuse, but have no cash. I get people to come in for free, fire them after 2 months minus 1 day. Repeat forever.
Candidate gaming the system:
-I invent a friend, and I invest my 2 months pay into myself via that friend. I last 2 months and a day, and have doubled my money.
After that, maybe I s