That's been my observation. Tons of openings, but many companies lean toward denials, under the assumption that firing the wrong person is more costly than not hiring the right person. It also seems that many companies are looking for ready-to-go engineers, rather than being willing (or able) to build talent in-house. The only door open to many junior devs is the internship-to-hire funnel.
>>Tons of openings, but many companies lean toward denials, under the assumption that firing the wrong person is more costly than not hiring the right person.
This might be their claim, but they almost always end up hiring wrong people and firing them.
Its really simple, making hiring decisions based on an interview is really like deciding to go into a long term relationship with a person based on the make up they put up during a date.
If you are choosing on these qualities alone, then the prettiest person would get selected. This says nothing about the person at all, or worse, bad people are likely to put up more make up to hide other obvious flaws.
> ...assumption that firing the wrong person is more costly than not hiring the right person.
I take it you've never had to hire or fire anyone. At mid-sized and large companies, it's a cumbersome process and, unless they're complete sociopaths, firing is also unpleasant for the firing manager and the team. It also means taking on the work and cost of doing a new candidate search and another new hire ramp-up.
If easy-hire/easy-fire worked, everybody would be doing it.
Oh, the assumption is definitely warranted in many/most situations. Though there are often alternatives (such as contract-to-hire) to mitigate the risks.
This reminds me of this recent HN post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16337434