• sirblastalot@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    That strikes me as highly reflective of google’s position of power; from the employer’s perspective, the point where the diminishing returns are no longer worth it is related to the point where they’re losing too many applicants from interview exhaustion. If you’re not google, not offering the kind of pay and such that google does, your break-even point is likely much sooner.

    Additionally, from the worker’s perspective, the only-3-interviews rule is an assertion of our power. And, as an added plus, if enough people adhere to it, it will shift that break-even point even for places like Google, and resist the shifting of that burden onto unpaid workers.

    • model_tar_gz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      The article I posted pointed out that they’re trying to not waste the candidate’s time, as well. They used to do 12 fucking rounds of interviews—and because it’s Google, people tolerated that crap. One of my best friends is an old-school Googler that got in through that gauntlet.

      Keep that in mind when you claim it’s an employer’s power play—in this case, it’s really not. More than four interviews, twelve, sure I can believe that. You should read about what some of the elite tier government special ops groups go through.

      At this point we’re quibbling over a delta of one interview—I think we’re probably pretty close, or close enough to say “agree to disagree on the rest.”

      Cheers.