[Beltalowda]

> got burnout and disgust at the modern tech hiring practice.

In my experience it's even worse outside of tech.

Because I really need a job I've just been applying to everything. Minimum wage: I don't care. In a way I'm actually looking forward to just show up, do my job, and go home, without stress.

But I get almost no response on those. And I actually spent MORE time for cover letters for those than the tech stuff. On tech I get a response (interview or rejection) for about 1 in 4. Outside of tech? About 1 in 30.

I guess "15 years CV as software dev, that guy is too smart for us" or something like that.

I keep reading about "labour shortages" for lots of low-skilled jobs... Hmkay...

Also not eligible for social security because I'm technically homeless (as in: renting "unofficially").

Might be properly homeless soon... No idea what I'll do.

I don't have a right to work in tech or a high salary, and fine, there's a downwards turn. No problem. But that I have no options beyond "burn all your savings and go homeless fuck you" has left me rather ... disappointed.

Anyway, what I'm trying to say is: it's not "tech hiring" that's the problem. It's just "hiring" or "companies" or whatever.

[the_only_law]

> Because I really need a job I've just been applying to everything. Minimum wage: I don't care. In a way I'm actually looking forward to just show up, do my job, and go home, without stress.

> But I get almost no response on those.

Weren’t these the same people bitching about how no one wants to work?

[sph]

Fuck cover letters. I come from a country where cover letters aren't much of a thing, and most of the dehumanising is writing one, sucking up to the hiring manager why that company might be the best place ever and you're just praying someone, is all their wisdom, gives your CV half a glance, may God shine upon them.

There is something Victorian in this prostration a working-class person must have to do just to be thrown a coin, and when you've sent your 50th CV, your tongue is sandpaper dry from the forced boot licking.

Look, I am not applying to the best company in the world, and you're not offering that much compared to the competition, nor your product is earth-shatteringly interesting. If only I could write "I need money, I am capable for this position, that's all there is to it." Because we all know that is the truth.

And all that effort, just to be ignored in the best of cases. Not even an automated "No. End of message." email.

[mikhael28]

Interviewing is like flirting. Your vibe right now is "fuck dating, I'm a man, you're a woman, let's get married because we don't completely hate each other. You aren't that good looking, neither am I, but time's ticking."

Who wants to settle for that type of partner/employee, especially if that's who they are in the honeymoon phase of dating/interviewing.

[rcbdev]

Conflating finding a partner (flirting) with finding a place that will transact your time and expertise for money (job searching) says more about how you see the world than you might realize.

[mikhael28]

Not everyone flirts for the exclusive purpose of 'finding a partner', to take the analogy further. Some people do it to find someone to sleep with.

Not everyone works to 'transact your time and expertise for money' - some people want to 'fulfill a mission' with meaningful work, and build a purpose driven career.

The analogy works better than you think - at the end of the day, all I'm talking about is making a good first impression. What you may be looking for is up to you, but if you are looking to enter a mutually beneficial relationship whether it's personal, romantic, or financial - acting like a sourpuss isn't going to help you.

[rcbdev]

You are nitpicking my phrasing to fit your rhetoric device - 'finding a partner' does include finding a partner... for the night.

Of course people want a meaningful job to some extent. According to Herzberg's dual-factor theory, challenging or meaningful work is a motivator that gives positive satisfaction in the workplace. But Herzberg successfully identified that the hygiene factors such as salary (meaningful in the 'transaction' sense of a job) are much more important.

'Transacting your time and expertise for money' is one of the main drivers for working (a hygiene factor), 'fulfill a mission' is merely a motivator. We have known and taught this to managers since the 70s.

A competent employer will of course know about this - be it through having competently trained management or just experience. Managers know that some candidates are completely happy with a high hygiene + low motivation mix. In some situations, this is completely fine and not 'acting like a sourpuss' as you describe it.