[Miserlou57]

I was a contractor at a FAANG for a few years, and they handed me a job. In the few weeks of transition between the two (some paperwork, etc.) a job posting and req ID was created and posted on their jobs site. I freaked out for a bit, but everything worked out so I can only presume (in California) that was a requirement.

What amazed me was it said (maybe on LinkedIN?) how many poor souls actually took the time to apply to the position. It was in the hundreds. I can't help but feel bad knowing they never had a chance.

[Scoundreller]

Happens in public/gov sector regularly.

PT role turning into FT… it’s going to the PTer.

Temporary budget allocation became permanent and determinate spot becoming indeterminate? Same.

[nullfield]

In the public sector, tbh, the quality of candidates is so bad that everyone you get on the first round of applicants can be totally unqualified.

So, you have to reopen the posting or start all over.

And the second set of candidates is just as bad.

So you close it and rewrite the description (not that fucking HR was competent at that in the first place), and go back to step one, which you are highly likely to repeat.

[caprock]

I've seen similar things happen. This is a great example of the unintended second order effects of regulation. Good intentions don't ensure good outcomes.

[red-iron-pine]

linkedin has one-click applications for many large orgs; in all likelihood they saw something that said "FAANG" and "similar to you skills" and clicked it.

a previous F500 company I worked for and was involved with hiring for was constantly posting jobs but only really took application seriously when they were referrals or through the company job site directly.

[creer]

By now this seems to be a serious problem. It's too easy to apply for a job. Disincentive all around: it's too easy to be lazy and over-specify or mis-describe a job offer. Then it's too easy for randos to apply because it's just a few clicks at most. Then it's too easy to dismiss with a broad comb because of all the randos. etc, etc. At this point the "job posting to job application" pipeline is completely broken and anyone who cares should rather leverage their network. Both to hire and apply, or use deliberately more obscure pathways such as professional society meetings or company web sites only, or job fairs, etc.

[emchammer]

Yes, just go in there, look them in the eye, give them a nice, firm handshake, and don't take no for an answer.

Please.

I went visiting some local businesses in-person the other summer looking for a part-time job. One HR lady seemed annoyed that I showed up, and told me "we don't have a front door", and unironically said "keep checking our web site". She seemed confused when I asked her to hand my resume back to me. One vestibule intercom told me to put my application in the slot. One major international corporation told me that they would give me a decision on the spot, then changed their tune during the interview.

Please.

[TheCapeGreek]

You're not wrong, but all you've ended up describing to the poster is that you don't actually have a network to leverage for finding work - which is what they're advocating for here, not walking into places to hand physical resumes.

[johnnyanmac]

IDK, maybe we should go back to that. At least interaction with a human is guaranteeed.

Netorking has its own problems that are much harder to solve.

[TheCapeGreek]

Perhaps.

For the time being, leveraging a network is still the best way to get hired.

I think in my career so far in ~8 companies and many clients, I only got one of those jobs From a "cold" job posting application. Everything else was at least a soft referral by an acquaintance.

[samaltmanfried]

If the role was advertised on LinkedIn, out of those hundreds of applicants there's probably only a small minority that have appropriate experience and right to work.