[ryanSrich]

Am I missing something here? The title says 1 hour hire but the problem listed says 7.5 (rails test: 0.5, backend: 3, frontend: 4). That seems anything but efficient and somewhat strange.

Why not provide the potential candidate with some actual work that you need done?

[jlarocco]

7.5 hours of candidate time, one hour of the hiring engineer time.

[ryanSrich]

So they expect me to put in 7.5 hours of my time but they only want to spend an hour of their time. Got it. Sounds like a great company to work for...

[jlarocco]

Agreed. Maybe their next step can be a 1-800 number style menu system for doing the initial phone screenings :)

[apoorvamehta]

One day for a several year investment seems pretty logical to us.

[loteck]

Why not 2 days, then? Maybe he should complete an entire project for free - why not, for a "several year investment?"

Personally, I think it's great when companies not only advertise these kind of practices with pride, but then send staff out onto the net to defend them against a veritable tide of criticism. It will certainly help you narrow your pool of applicants, and that is clearly what you are after - it says so in your "how to hire a human" flowchart! Haha.

[minimaxir]

Employment is a two-way street, especially for someone in-demand as a Rails engineer.

[rhizome]

Something about this post tells me that there is not actually that high of a demand, and that there may actually be a glut.

[vinceguidry]

Strictly-speaking, there are probably more people that know Rails then there are jobs requiring it. Even given that, the balance of power in the labor market is still supply-side. A Rails engineer can easily get jobs in just about any other platform fairly easily, and probably already has on occasion. But a company can't magically turn a need for a Rails coder into a need for a Java one.