[doix]

> Are we talking like 10-15 applications per hour?

Pretty much, around 5 minutes per application.

>provide detailed information about every job I've had since I was a teenager, every reference up front, agree to legal statements, or whatever else they might insist on, knowing I could be fired later on if I get any of it wrong

Either you're completely overthinking it and you can just omit a bunch of stuff, or you're applying to some job that requires security clearance and they use those questions to prescreen. I remember the application for some defense contractor was too painful and we gave up.

But if it's some standard jobvite or whatever form, just fill it in. Only include relevant tech jobs and your university education (if you have a degree) and move on.

If it's really that big a deal for you, shortlist 50 jobs from those job search sites. Then go to /r/slavelabour and pay someone $15 bucks to apply for you (given your CV and email).

> That said I'm willing to have my mind changed on this. Maybe all of these jobs are actually super eager to hire despite being so hostile to applicants.

It's more likely that at some point that bought a license for the applicant tracking software and they'll use it forever. They probably have it on some default settings so it's not the best for tech jobs. That doesn't mean they aren't serious about hiring.

But those job aggregator sites are a bit shit, they'll have listings for jobs that are already filled or no longer available.

[anon50118810]

We may be talking past each other. I'm talking about applications for unremarkable positions at large corporations where the application forms are either branded by the company or done through something like iCIMS, Taleo or Workday. You create an account and then you're faced with several steps asking for who knows what. The experience question might be "List all past jobs starting with the most recent" with no date limit. Later on you'll have to agree that you answered everything fully and honestly or you can be fired. Maybe I'm a fool for taking that seriously but the meaning is straightforward to me.

These are also the sorts of positions I think people are talking about when they talk about HR being a barrier, filtering on keywords, or how important it is to network around them before applying. So I don't think it's a matter of the company being stuck with software they can't do anything about, instead the hostile and opaque application process mirrors their actual hiring process, or at least I assume so. I'm happy to hear if you have any insight from the recruiting side at these places.

[doix]

> List all past jobs starting with the most recent" with no date limit. Later on you'll have to agree that you answered everything fully and honestly or you can be fired. Maybe I'm a fool for taking that seriously but the meaning is straightforward to me.

This is the most standard thing ever. The ycombinator job board[0] works the exact same way. No one is going to fire you if you leave out that you worked at Pizza Hut when you were younger. They will fire you if you claim to have worked at Google but never actually did. Or if you claim N years of experience in some technology despite never using it. Just make sure your CV matches what you enter into the software and that you're not lying on your CV, that's it.

> I'm happy to hear if you have any insight from the recruiting side at these places.

I have experience working on the recruiting side of a fairly large company that used Jobvite (which is why I mentioned it, first piece of software I could think of) for their application tracking system. It asked you the same sort of questions, even some really stupid ones like your Myers Briggs personality type, despite me arguing very strongly against it.

Yes, HR would do some filtering, they probably filtered out good candidates and let many bad ones through to the next stage to get filtered by the hiring people. This shouldn't stop you from applying, who cares if you get filtered out by HR at X% of the time? You'll get through 100-X% of the time, and if you apply to a lot of places, that'll be a lot of people looking at your CV. An application should not take you longer than 5-10 minutes, it's not a big investment of time.

> instead the hostile and opaque application process mirrors their actual hiring process, or at least I assume so

Yes, the hiring process will be shit. But it's not intentionally hostile, it's "hostile" because that's the way it's always been and there's too much momentum to change it. I'm certain the Myers Briggs questions turned off many good candidates. I would immediately close a job application if it was asking stuff like that (assuming I wasn't desperate). But the company was genuinely looking to hire good people. I feel like you underestimate how difficult it is to change anything at a large company where tech is a cost center :).

[0] https://www.workatastartup.com/

[anon50118810]

Resumes are like sales brochures, but for applications you should follow the instructions, see https://www.thebalancemoney.com/do-you-have-to-include-all-j....

There are many tech jobs out there that just ask you to send in a resume and cover letter and answer some questions. Saying it's technically possible to get an interview from sending out an unfocused 5-10 minute application to a big corporation using something like Taleo is not a strong argument in itself to do that.