[berkle4455]

I’ll give you the point of view you won’t like but it’s the truth: Candidates from “top companies” come with a lot of baggage. They’re going to expect a continuance of the massive inflated salaries they enjoyed at those top companies along with all the associated perks and amenities. They tend to be very egotistical, don’t want to be burdened with doing interview tests, white boards, or take-homes, and generally have this annoying holier-than-thou HN-level of arrogance.

So why in the world would I want to hire an overpriced ex-rest-and-vester when I can instead hire someone hungry with a track record of making a difference at small to medium companies?

[tomtheelder]

I actually agree totally. My experiences doing hiring and then subsequently working alongside folks for the past decade or so have led me to view FAANG experience on a resume as a moderate negative signal. It’s not at all that I don’t think the folks who work there aren’t smart or talented- they have just disproportionately been difficult in the interview process and had impossible salary demands while being not being stronger performers than their peers.

[noisenotsignal]

Are those “with a track record of making a difference” also ok with interview tests, white boards, and/or take homes? I don’t know if viewing excessive tests with disdain is a characteristic solely exhibited by ex top tech; I feel like that’s a universal sentiment among top talent regardless of their background. Not wanting to be burdened with unnecessary burden is a good thing!!

I also don’t think people generally have a problem with interviews. You have to be assessed somehow, obviously, and people at top companies still get interviewed when jumping to other top companies. I’ve really only seen serious complaints (that is, beyond mild grumbling) when interviewing is a huge time sink for a specific company, especially when that company’s compensation is lower and/or the communication process is poor (e.g. ghosting).

Why in the world would anyone interview with you if your company offers less than top tech for equal or harder interviews? (Spinning your rhetoric back at you for added effect. I don’t know what your hiring is like.)

[geodel]

Why in the world would anyone interview with you if your company offers less than top tech for equal or harder interviews?

People who need job will apply. Its not like some one is forced to apply when otherwise they could get million dollar a year job to develop deep machine learning AI at Google.

[Invictus0]

Because they are still able to pass your stupid whiteboards even if they don't want to do it (spoiler: no one wants to do it)

[saratogacx]

I'm actually dealing with this right now. I have a previous-FAANG new hire into my organization and when they came for their drug test they started complaining and "providing feedback" about the package they signed (pay, benefits, WFH policies, etc.) to the poor recruiting person who was just performing the test.

If that attitude persists, it doesn't matter how good they are, their toxicity will override that skill and they'll be out before long.

I'm saying this as someone who came here from FAANG companies and put in a lot of personal effort to not become the FAANG brat.

[closeparen]

>when they came for their drug test

Your organization does drug tests, and you think this guy is the toxic one?

[lazystar]

adding to this, op, your org does drug tests and the recruiters have to administer them?