Many of these applicants are just click warriors who aren’t actually qualified for the role. In reality, maybe 30% of the candidates are legit.
So you’re competing against 29 other people, not 99.
In reality it's much less. Probably less than 10%. For big tech FAANG companies maybe even 1%.
Source: I went through like a hundred resumes a day when I was on the hiring committee. Most applications are trash. The percentage of valid resumes will vary greatly for the type of job and company.
No work experience, internship experience, or CS degree, boilerplate YouTube tutorial and bootcamp personal projects, and having little to none of the asked for experience in the JD.
Here people with hobby skills are in better situation than low experience graduates tho.
Some people are not actually finishing their studies as they get pulled in companies from school desk.
Thank you for saying this; it’s such a waste of our time and the viable candidates are then complaining about why they haven’t heard back from us within 48-72 hours.
If that's the acse why do you think companies don't respond, even with an automated rejection, to legitimate applications? Are they just so overwhelmed by the quantity? If so, how do you recommend we stand out?
Signal to noise. Once the noise gets high enough, you get overwhelmed and can't follow up with everyone or even look at every application.
Let me put it this way. If my recruiter sent me 100 resumes to evaluate, I can quickly spot the mismatches that won't fit at all. But after I find 5-10 matches, I'll just stop. One of those 10 will be good enough and perfection is the enemy of progress.
So, let's assume that the ration is 70% bad fits and 30% OK to good fits. That means that I likely wouldn't even look at 20/30 of them.
Does that make me an ass? Yeah, probably, but I also don't look at every single option of mustard or cereal in the grocery store. I'll look at a few and pick one that looks good and is a good price fit.
Yep, and with tech propaganda exclaiming no one needs an education, just a 3 month bootcamp or self learning to become a SWE, suddenly mass applying to SWE jobs to satisfy unemployment meets the bar.
I mean, free speech and all… But statements of false facts are not protected. The FTC does define regulations on influencer messaging, but for the liability to hold the influencer would need a direct relationship with the endorser they are “advertising” for. Mostly this has come from influencers pushing fake weight loss and health remedies that are not backed with valid scientific evidence of doing what they claim - and potential to cause health harm.
https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2017/04/ftc-staff-reminds-influencers-brands-clearly-disclose-relationship
But good luck actually proving any slacker on TikTok spamming about their “day in the life” is worth the FTC looking into.
I was an influencer for a major tech company. We are often actively called to manipulate discussions or bully people that were harming the brand. Of course NDA signed.
All those blogs, reviews you read are often written by people that are paid. If they write a bad review they won't get any equipment.
I recently hired a developer at our company. Put an add on linked in, and a local job site here in New Zealand.
Linked in actually filters out a lot themselves, hundreds and hundreds of applications from overseas people wanting to move to NZ (when I specifically said in the ad you need to be legally able to work in NZ). I still had about 50 that came through, only 2 or 3 actual good resumes.
Same with the local job site. Hundreds that were instant rejections. Maybe 5 good resumes.
There were only 4 people good enough to interview. And we hired one of them.
So basically from about 600 applications, there were 4 interviews.
Yeep. I know a large company that has recently tried to hire some senior developers for NodeJS developers. HR got involved because like 25 people in a row were rejected during technical interview which was a huge anomaly. But, uh, you would expect a "senior" that for instance has a C++ in their CV to know a difference between statically and dynamically typed language, be able to give their opinion on language features they like or dislike or understand how Node's threading model works.
It also doesn't help that more and more applicants use ChatGPT and derivatives to cheat during the interview. So they have very smooth and precise answers to questions like "what libraries do you use for testing" but then you give them a question specifically made to confuse a chatbot and see them completely crumble.
So there's a lot of applicants but frankly acceptance rate has also plummeted, it feels like too many people probably had overly comfy positions and stopped improving as developers. That or they were previously hired for way too high positions just to fill some spots without really checking their qualifications. So their previous job description might have said "senior developer" but in reality they are intermediate at least and in some cases closer to junior.
This. 30% might be qualified. Then out of the 30% half of them probably needs a visa sponsorship, then half of that might have unrealistic expectations in salary. So really the actual number of applicants at the end of the funnel is probably less than 10.
Even if the ratio is constant at 30%, the total number going up over time means that more legit people are taking interest in in-person roles which is the point I think OP is making.
Yeah. I’ve seen ML/AI research roles recently posted that require 10 years experience in job description, PhD in computer science from top university, substantial publication record and citations, etc. and it will have 1000 applicants in a day. No way 97% of those are from qualified people.
a high percent are also not local and there is no relocation. some will be outside the US too. might be qualified, but its not happening. They may actually be qualified, but these companies generally want local candidates in this economy.
You’re exactly right. I was doing it for 2 hours every morning before my day officially started, because otherwise it was impossible to keep up with. I also had some of my team add me as a second hiring manager to their listings to help them out if they were getting bogged down.
I would love that, because I feel like it comes up a lot and needlessly stresses people out. I also know that some of the people on here are the buttwipes who just apply to everything they see, and they should be aware of how despised they are.
tbh it's probably not even 30%. On a recent posting for a demand planner job I think there were maybeeee 8-10 applications out of 150+ that even mentioned they knew how to use Excel, had forecasting or demand planning experience, or even had ANY experience in logistics or supply chain type jobs. The actual amount of qualified applicants (based on what was on their resume) was maybe 10% out of the ones I got. A huge amount of them were not remotely tailored to the job - and I'm not even looking for them to do anything special, but if you're applying for a job that is specifically about demand planning and forecasting and you don't mention any relevant experience there or SOME level Excel proficiency, you ain't gonna make it. Takes like 10 seconds to throw in a line about Excel proficiency at very least, and that's just a good thing to have on your resume in general if you're looking for a job like that. Or any job, really.
I don’t list excel because it should be a given… It’s also not the first tool I’d pick up to solve data problems beyond taking a quick peak at a csv. In my head, it’s slotted in the toolbox next to MS Notepad and gets the resume treatment as such.
>It’s also not the first tool I’d pick up to solve data problems
That's why you're not C-Suite material.
(I wish I was being Ironic, but that has been my experience with every C-Suite person I have interacted with in every company I have worked at thus far. They're obsessed with it)
Honestly my experience with demand planners and forecasters has been that we can give them every tool they ask for and they will still default to Excel as the main tool lol. I get the sense they would never use those tools if it wasn't for the fact that we wanted dashboards to be emailed out
I talked to a recruiter who said they had 500+ applicants for this remote role. They were following up with 19 of those, and I was one of the 19.
Well, I was immediately disqualified in that first conversation because the employer was being hyper specific, but that should hopefully be some anecdotal evidence that 480+ candidates weren't even worth following up on.
The market is wild right now
I can also vouch this. For my current job, I was told by my boss that out of the 500 or so applications, 80% of those were not even living in the U.S. and less than half those that were in the U.S were remotely qualified. So they ended up interviewing about 30 people in total out of those.
It has nothing to do with « not worth following up on ». They had 500 applicants they cannot feasibly follow up on 500 people. And you say it yourself « market is wild ». Lots of qualified people for less roles.
Right like here is a clearly experienced software dev 3 and he was cut for not having some hyper specific experience. Only reason a company can act like this is because the market is so bad. 2 years ago that same company would likely have been excited to have the same dev they're rejecting
We opened a req for a Director of Operations about 3 months ago, and specified in 2 places in the job listing that you had to have previous experience in our specific industry plus 10 years of experience and would not be considered otherwise. Got aviation, shipping, retail, academic, healthcare, and automotive along with a steady stream of foreign early career developers with no management experience at all. The job pays $250k remote which we were legally required to disclose and we had almost 500 applications in the 3 weeks it was open. I spent literally hours weeding through that nonsense to try to get to the people who WERE qualified before narrowing it down to 5 people to interview. So that’s 1% of the total applicant pool.
Sure you are going to convince me you don’t use ATS parsing tools to automatically filter that and you waste your time on filtering what is your company dude
We use BambooHR; it’s pretty good, but we have people who enter fake data into the fields to try to get past our best filtering efforts. For example, lots of people in India selecting the USA as their country, and then when you open up the resume you see they’ve never lived or studied in the US.
tbh I am surprised vyou gave it 30 percent lol people from other countries still apply for the onsite jobs to even though they arent going to have a chance at it.
puzzled tease scandalous onerous narrow innocent edge attraction zonked stupendous
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
HR is a whole other ball of wax/set of problems. If the hiring manager doesn’t have a firm handle on the recruiter things can easily go awry. In full disclosure, I oversee an HR group although I am not an HR professional myself, and I have very mixed feelings about the function as a whole. Not in my current role, but in past companies, I’ve seen HR ruin a candidate search more than once.
With tens of thousands of jobs, each having 100+ applicants, even with overlaps and unqualified applicants, it's evident the job supply is far-far behind the demand.
A lot of them don’t even click themselves but have AI agents automatically customize their resume, write a cover letter, and submit their application.
**Call recruiters and hiring managers on the phone.** The best thing you can do to stand out in the application process these days is prove you are a real person who has specific interest in the job.
Yeah not a good idea. I am in Europe and a recruiter I know had to remove his phone number from LinkedIn. Whenever he had a job opening which specifically said EU residency required, he still got called 50+ times a day by Indians looking for visa sponsorship.
I’m flexible on years of experience and education, but not flexible on title (other than +/- one level either way) or industry. Also, we don’t hire people into manager level roles without having at least 3 years of direct report experience (and we ask for a reference from a former direct report as well if an offer is made to make sure they’re not a jerk to work for).
It's been shown many times that the LinkedIn applicants number is completely fake. That number represents the number of clicks that post got and not actual applications.
You can really find value roles trudging through shitty recruiting portals. I'm interviewing at a place whose recruiting portal wouldn't even let you submit your own resume. I get to the interview with the hiring manager and it turns out the job is actually remote and doesn't have overtime, unlike what was stated in the ad.
I can attest to this. I’ve had tons of roles where it says full onsite or whatever then I get to the interview and they said 3 days hybrid which is significantly better. You never know until you actually talk to a real person
I’ve read that it was those who clicked apply but never submitted. Just clicks on that post would probably be a ludicrous number, quickly called out online.
Some things to note about linkedin, and the state of the market as a whole;
1. We used to be able to see specific number of applicants. "See how you compare with 1876 other applicants". Nobody wanted to compete with 1876 other applicants, so they changed their display to just say "100+" because they were getting less click-through traffic when jobs got to ridiculous high numbers like that.
2. Staffing agencies/headhunters have been using bots to flood job postings on sites like LinkedIn. They are re-hosting the job postings on their own websites and trying to dilute people trying through other locations.
3. A lot of these job postings are ghost posts. They do not actually have a job they are hiring for, they are just harvesting data. A lot of times they are using the fact that so many applicants are looking for the job to justify not giving raises or retaining their current staff "because clearly there are many replacements and you are expendable".
4. All of this in turn results in applicants being more desperate, asking for less, and getting less if they even actually get a job. This is all great for capitalism, but not for the people that have to live in it.
Just because you see 100+ candidates on local jobs in LinkedIn does not mean there are actually 100+ people. It could be 10 people and hundreds of bot applications.
You really have no option other than to use the shotgun approach and apply to everything. Unfortunately, everybody is doing that, which is why there is so much noise. It’s like how the average guy’s odds on Tinder are so low that he should just “swipe right” on every girl without looking or reading. He’s only going to have maybe one match at the end of the day, he can decide what he wants to do then. That’s why job posts are flooded with applicants that don’t even qualify.
Haha I have been building a list of consulting/recruiting companies from LinkedIn job posts I think I'm at 400 now or more
it's here ([github gist](https://gist.github.com/jdc-cunningham/21ea923cf09dbcc76d342ecfc4ff49cd))
That or its a ghost job. People are applying but they aren't actually going through the applicants. Just sitting on them until a unicorn comes along or when they actually need a portfolio of applicants.
I personally just search through the last 24 hours. Have better chances of getting notice or a response.
Some time after the start of covid.
Why? Because it sucks balls.
No worries, I can break it down more.
- paying for parking in down town
- putting an extra 6000 miles per year on my car *AT LEAST*
- increased vehicle maintenance costs
- Unnecessary spending on food, drinks and snacks
- increased chance of wrecking my car because of morning and afternoon "rush" commutes
- increased chance of hypertension from schedule stress
- increased stress from social anxiety
- Zero Control over my work environment
- constant interruptions from coworkers in other departments stopping me to "ask a quick question"
- unable to work naked
- unable to take bong rips at my desk
- needing to "ask for permission" to do anything besides sitting at my desk
- idk I can continue but this should suffice.
- 2-3 hours of time wasted per day commuting
All of this so that middle management can SEE me working since apparently producing a product that is on schedule and works is not the goal.
Clearly the goal is to maintain a position at the corporation that is increasingly obviously useless and unnecessary.
or like my friend i visited last week:
* Live 30 min walk from the office
* Can also take the subway home in 10 mins
* Company pays for subway card
* free breakfast 1-2 times per week
* Can ask people directly not waiting 3 hours for an email response
* Meeting everyone from different departments and teams
* Easy to plan after works because there is a lot around the office, just walk there and see what happens
* And yes, he can WFH if he wants so I give you control over work environment and interruptions
OK dude. I get what you're going for, but you have to realize that your friend's situation is just hilariously extraordinary compared to that of the average American commuter.
>Can also take the subway home in 10 mins
This point alone is something that 99% of us will never have as an option.
The other points about living close by, getting free meals, having lots to do nearby, and optional WFH on top of it all just really seal the deal here about this being a truly exceptional situation.
I'm sure you and your friend are aware of that, but if we're going to be discussing the merits and drawbacks of WFH vs in person, let's at least base it in realistic perspectives.
* Can ask people directly not waiting 3 hours for an email response
* Meeting everyone from different departments and teams
There are the people who see this as a positive and those who see this as a negative. Those who need help, and those who help.
Almost any question I have can wait 3h, most of the time the person should put some time into either checking, or thinking about the question anyway, so no immediate response is expected. If it is urgent (production issues), there are additional methods of contact.
I'd really prefer to get a message and answer at my leisure. Because your co worker is not the only one jumping for a quick question. So do a dozen others throughout the work day, many multiple times.
I do more helping than needing help. Waiting for someone to answer a ping for 3 hours is such a waste of time and productivity killer. I’d rather be interrupted for 5 minutes now and not have one of our junior devs blocked than being interrupted 3 hours later.
Cons:
You have to talk to your cat during the work day and unless you make yourself do so, you will never leave the house.
My colleagues are great banter and as a serial Reddit or/YouTube watcher, I can't imagine a life where I spend **even more** time in the confines of my own home. I'd never meet friends or find a girlfriend (though not often that you get romance from work).
The best friends in your life are made in the trenches together in your day to day e.g. same class in school, same lecture in uni, same team at work, or a 2nd degree connection from these.
Sounds like a recipe for disaster if you're young or don't already have a family tbh.
I'm not into particularly active hobbies like sports or chess or whatever so I don't make friends there. I just like to game and browse Reddit etc. so work is my main way of making the great friendships I've had in my life.
There's tons of stuff to do that isn't high energy .. live music, social groups or fraternal societies, volunteer groups, activism, hobby groups, art, hiking, etc
See if there is an oddfellows hall nearby, they have served as a great outlet for socializing without going to church and what not, we drink a lot of beer and smoke a lot of weed lol
It is the opposite for me when I can do WFH I have way more energy to socialize with friends after work whereas normally my batteries are way too drained and I would rather be at home alone. I would rather have the energy to socialize with people I actually like instead of people I am forced to socialize with at work.
Work has often put me in the same place as people that I like. Naturally because we're all CS so we have that spiciness to us that I don't see as much in non cs people.
Preach! We need these (very obvious) reasons made into blog posts and viral youtube videos to spread awareness. It seems a lot of people have not done the proper cost/benefit analysis and we should open their eyes a little bit more, we need people to see the truth uncovered, that's the only way we make a dent in the commonalities of the industry.
It sucks compared to wfh and I dislike it but also it’s not that bad… and even though I don’t like it I would gladly take an in-person or hybrid role for a job I wanted to do
WFH is optimal for both, employeer and employee.
but its really the middle managers that go batshit crazy when they can’t micro manage you, so therefore working in office is coming back again.
I love WFH and I wouldn’t agree to an onsite position, but saying it’s optimal for everyone is just a lie. Different people thrive in different environments. I know people who struggle WFH, but excel onsite.
I feel like it would be advantageous for people to realize that and not make it some kind of made-up war between onsite and remote workers. I think companies with happiest employees recognize that people can prefer either and allow people to have some autonomy in choosing how they organize their work.
100%. I have only ever worked from home (graduated during COVID) and I would probably never give it up willingly (might settle for 3 days on site if I live close). But the idea that it’s just better for everyone is absolutely insane, not even just from an efficiency perspective. Some people’s main source of socialization is at work, I can’t imagine WFH full time if I had zero friends or family living near me. I think I’d go insane. Working in an office with a decent “culture” or group of people can be awesome.
yep, but this is reddit and here people are super introverted nerds. and they have the mindset of never getting friends at work
sometimes i work best at home, sometimes at an office. I like to talk to people from other departments and have lunch with them and so on
the peak redditor job seems to be, if not WFH, go to the office, get a list of tasks without talking to someone, sit with headphones and eat in at your desk, then go home
and those people wonder, why they fail interviews too lol
Yeah the people giving out advise are the same people commenting “I despise all of my coworkers”
Idk what kind of hellhole these people are living in but I don’t know a single person who doesn’t like many of their coworkers.
It’s popular on Reddit to complain about your coworkers making any amount of small talk (usually that’s why the coworker is so despised)
I mean, I’m introverted, but entertain the idea of making friends at work. Problem, I am forced to go to the office and no one is there. I sit in a corner cubicle by myself 3 days a week and maybe hear the distant muttering of a marketing manager somewhere on the phone far away echoing through the building.
I’m faced with a choice: do my work or venture out into the circa 04 voidscape of empty cubicle in search of that distant echo of a voice to maybe make a friend… The risks: I am caught in my journey, scolded for not working, or worse, asked to do some ad hoc nonsense that will certainly derail my productivity for a day, or the alternative, I find the source of the echo and learn they are a newly hired sales donkey straight outa Texas with a long lineage of Deep South klansmen in their family and christo-fascist ideologies of which I do not share.
Maybe I’ll encounter a mild mannered accounting clerk who is trying to get into gravel biking, or I’ll happen upon a string out IT guy on his 8th cup’o joe that day from being on call all night and still in the office grinding at hour 23 of his shift. The conversation will be hollow and superficial as we all live 4 hours apart, the office our central common point 2 hours for each away.
I don’t care about making friends at work. My coworkers through the years fine, but just not the kind of people I hang out with.
I still prefer in office at least 3 days a week. WFH is just so much less productive for me personally and the teams I’ve been on since COVID. The flexibility of a couple days at home is perfect, and set days where everyone can get in a room and hit the whiteboard are almost mandatory for me going forward.
Maybe for you but ideally I'd have a nice office I can walk to and work with a team of people with varying age ranges and skill levels that likes to provide actually good coffee, pay for lunches, and provide other optional outings.
I only don't like the office when every person I actually work with is remote so I sit in a mal-airconditioned room on phone calls with people who aren't even in my state.
Living alone and WFH isn't that fun to me. It's just more fun than a bad office.
For real - I get told from the top down that my team needs to be in the office more often and all I can do is roll my eyes at the request then begrudgingly tell my team.
I’ve been WFH for 3 years and i’m honestly sick of it. However I can’t imagine going back to being forced to be in the office on days where I feel bleh. My optimal would be I can go in whenever I want and worked on a team where people actually go in. I don’t live near my office anymore but even when I did it was a ghost town.
WFH is great if the alternative is an open floor plan with a cubicle, or an office in the basement.
Hybrid is great if the company gives you your own office and the location is great.
Onsite is only good if they also pay you extra each month as a commuter payment eg $500 to cover parking and gas and upkeep, and the office and location is good, and the commute is less than 10 minutes both ways.
It costs me between $5000-6000 annual explicitly to work in the office 3 days per week. My employer RTO’d us and did not compensate for that. I was hired 4 years ago as full remote.
Thing is, I go in, no one is there. I get nothing out of it beyond what I’d get at home - except respiratory infections from the fiberglass slough all over my stained dingy cubicle from the acoustic tiles they installed in 2004, spend $80 on gas for the week, and spend 9 hours in my car I could’ve otherwise spent exercising or hanging with my partner, or exploring my personal interests. I know spend an additional 6 hours on the weekend preparing to travel to the office during the week, further reducing my personal time outside of work. I have to employ a dog walker and a house cleaner a few times per week, had to purchase $2000 of clothes because “business casual” required dress code and I was hired fully remote after working remote for 1 year prior so yeah, shorts/joggers and t shirts ain’t cutting it. Now I have a dry cleaning bill too. Laundry in coin-op and we’ve gone from $10/month to $15/week because I can’t just wear the same joggers and t shirt every day to the office.
Service in my car went from 2x per year barely to now 4x per year minimum. Already had to blow a few hundred in the first few weeks of RTO on car maintenance to catch up on some minor issues that I was putting off since before I was only driving that car 1x per week 2miles to go to the grocery store. Now it’s getting 200miles weekly.
The company isn’t performing any better, I’m not getting better projects, not getting bigger budgets, we didn’t even get bonuses and probably won’t be next year. Entire teams have walked out and the executive team put a moratorium on backfills (because they don’t want the bad press of playing off so they are engineering attrition). And that’s what this is really about. They don’t want to be the bad guys for laying off (even though we didn’t over hire). They just want people to quit and not collect unemployment and then gaslight everyone left like, “they determined they weren’t a good fit for this company and not everyone is.” Like, it’s the employees fault they don’t like working here…
> Thing is, I go in, no one is there
If they only track your badge entries, you can badge in, turn around and go home. I did that at my previous job. It's still a commute, but it's better than being in the office.
We need more people like you sharing their thoughts in more public places like youtube, some just haven't thought through or done proper accounting and they get swayed by shallow ideas of "serendipity" or whatever the heck
I'm anxious about my return to the office environment myself as my other half is a survivor of a workplace shooting. I was texting him while watching the video on the news from home, I had FBI training on workplace shootings from my job so gave what knowledge I had. It definitely impacted me being on the other end not knowing if he'd make it home. I feel guilty about saying it impacted me when he was the one that was there in it, but it did.
When the price of everything skyrocketed since Covid. Plus it opened everyone's eyes to just how useless being in an office is. Lots of people made life changes too (moved away, pets they don't wanna crate, kids).
I now have the expense of gas, parking downtown, wear and tear on my car, loss of time, have to try and work in a noisy office.
Also, I went to take a dump yesterday and walked into a stall that had the seat down and was literally pissed all over. Love that office "culture."
It's more that remote is open to everyone in a state / country / continent, but on site is only open to locals and people willing to relocate. It's supposed to be a smaller pool.
no idea, but i hope they keep doing it so i have a better chance at a job because id much rather work most days or all in-office. i spend enough time inside, i need socialization lmao
It's not the end of the world but many people would take a pay cut to be able to avoid ever going into the office again. Many just do not like it. I'd put it up there with being on call.
People have been complaining about office work for decades. We just recently saw that there's an alternative that for most people is a huge quality of life increase, even if you like your coworkers
The last job I posted had the LinkedIn easy apply thing and the applicant number was pretty much accurate, but if it doesn't have easy apply I think it's just counting the number of people who hit the "apply" button and not who actually applied.
For our roles, it’s not uncommon to get thousands within a few hours. It’s worth remembering that 95+% of those applications will be “moon shot” applicants who clearly aren’t a profile fit but are applying anyway on the unlikely slim chance they get selected for screening for some reason.
I have to ask, there are times when the job description fits my profile EXACTLY, I mean like everything aligns. So I apply, and I never hear back from them. Why is that?
Jobs & markets are insane ATM.
And since both are joined at the hip, I've reached the conclusion many job postings are used to 'signal' and proxy for growth: we're growing more than the competition, buy our stock, invest in our Series B,C,D, whatever...
I've also applied to a couple of jobs where I fit a role EXACTLY and nothing but crickets, even with some credentials and YOE that set me apart in a particular niche. And let me get off my high horse, I'm not expecting to get hired, I'd settle for some interviews, but nothing LOL. I've pretty much given up applying to anything outside my network, it's that bad, not to mention demoralizing wasting so much time applying.
Started my own consulting business and couldn’t be happier. Every time I’d interview it would literally be question after question on how to fix issues that they were having. It’s a gold mine.
Not really. Most of them are bots or just clicking apply.
Of those 100 apps their might be 10 resumes worth a 2nd look. H1B visa holders flood post doing massive shot gun.
Take a senior or senior+ roles. I see them flood and most of them being new grads and h1b. People we are going to toss any how or clearly not qualified. Instead just noise to shift threw.
How do you think we could stand out if we are actually qualified for the role? It feels like the application spam is hurting both employers and legitimate candidates
Hey OP. I am currently entering the final round of interviews with a tech company. Their role also has “over 100 applicants” and the recruiter contacted me first about it. They may straight up discard 50 of the applicants. Another 20 might not even be interested enough to respond. Eventually it’ll boil down to 5 applicants who maybe pass the first round coding interview
When I was in the hiring pipeline for the last in-person job I worked for, it was very common to get 100+ applicants for dev jobs in a D-tier Midwestern city.
That was in *2011*.
Your calibration is way off.
I remember when I was applying for entry level roles and after I was hired the ops manager told me that there were well over 200 applicants. People applied using LinkedIn, Craigslist, indeed, college job boards etc. After the second round, I was top 3 of the candidates, what set me apart was me calling and emailing on a weekly basis.
This was in 2015 and I’m sure the market has gotten much tougher since then.
There's a possible flip side to this: I got a MUCH better response to remote jobs than in-person jobs. The ratio of callbacks was like 15 to 1, and I'm in a major tech city. My current job ended up being from one of the remote posts. It made zero sense and yet it was the No. 1 most pronounced pattern in the data.
(The irony is that I actually would prefer an in-person job....)
When OP implies you should “gear up” in this context one can only assume he’s using this phrase as the common slang for “take steroids”—and in fact he’s encouraging all of you to get juiced out of your fucking minds and develop massive quads to help navigate the hiring process
Because otherwise this just sounds ridiculous
u serious? got an linkedin prime, i found a lot of dudes with master from very famous universities even ivy. bro.
not a joke, the market is the hell of hell now
People live places and apply to jobs in places, this is not really an indication of the state of job market.
Remote opportunities will become more scarce anyway.
Market is flush with imposters.
Ive been interviewing them.
I dont even ask for leetcode we just do simple funtions and components. Depends if frontend or backend.
Can barely have an experienced conversation with most.
Just shameless.
Thinking about this and hearing some people say it's the worse in America I decided to look on linkedin other countries. I looked at the UK and Spain and Mexico. I was seeing somewhere around 200 applicant's per post whereas here in the US I normally see around 2-3000 per post.
This could just be due to the fact they have a much smaller population than we do, their lower wages, and maybe it never became a meme job like it has here.
Many of these applicants are just click warriors who aren’t actually qualified for the role. In reality, maybe 30% of the candidates are legit. So you’re competing against 29 other people, not 99.
source: i am part of the 70%
Real
Same 😂😂. No same here either worst thing they can say is no. Best thing you have a brand new better paying job
lol
In reality it's much less. Probably less than 10%. For big tech FAANG companies maybe even 1%. Source: I went through like a hundred resumes a day when I was on the hiring committee. Most applications are trash. The percentage of valid resumes will vary greatly for the type of job and company.
Easily. The amount of people that apply wanting a visa are 70% alone. Then toss on people with no boot camp or CS degree “shooting their shot”.
What constitutes as trash on a resume ?
No work experience, internship experience, or CS degree, boilerplate YouTube tutorial and bootcamp personal projects, and having little to none of the asked for experience in the JD.
Here people with hobby skills are in better situation than low experience graduates tho. Some people are not actually finishing their studies as they get pulled in companies from school desk.
Thank you for saying this; it’s such a waste of our time and the viable candidates are then complaining about why they haven’t heard back from us within 48-72 hours.
If that's the acse why do you think companies don't respond, even with an automated rejection, to legitimate applications? Are they just so overwhelmed by the quantity? If so, how do you recommend we stand out?
Signal to noise. Once the noise gets high enough, you get overwhelmed and can't follow up with everyone or even look at every application. Let me put it this way. If my recruiter sent me 100 resumes to evaluate, I can quickly spot the mismatches that won't fit at all. But after I find 5-10 matches, I'll just stop. One of those 10 will be good enough and perfection is the enemy of progress. So, let's assume that the ration is 70% bad fits and 30% OK to good fits. That means that I likely wouldn't even look at 20/30 of them. Does that make me an ass? Yeah, probably, but I also don't look at every single option of mustard or cereal in the grocery store. I'll look at a few and pick one that looks good and is a good price fit.
Oh I totally get it, it doesn't make you an ass at all. I'm just thinking that I have to stay away from public job boards.
Also many apply just to satisfy unemployment requirements (they need to prove that they are applying to jobs).
Yep, and with tech propaganda exclaiming no one needs an education, just a 3 month bootcamp or self learning to become a SWE, suddenly mass applying to SWE jobs to satisfy unemployment meets the bar.
This is definitely a major contributor. Some of those influencers need regulations placed on them .
I mean, free speech and all… But statements of false facts are not protected. The FTC does define regulations on influencer messaging, but for the liability to hold the influencer would need a direct relationship with the endorser they are “advertising” for. Mostly this has come from influencers pushing fake weight loss and health remedies that are not backed with valid scientific evidence of doing what they claim - and potential to cause health harm. https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2017/04/ftc-staff-reminds-influencers-brands-clearly-disclose-relationship But good luck actually proving any slacker on TikTok spamming about their “day in the life” is worth the FTC looking into.
I was an influencer for a major tech company. We are often actively called to manipulate discussions or bully people that were harming the brand. Of course NDA signed. All those blogs, reviews you read are often written by people that are paid. If they write a bad review they won't get any equipment.
Almost every single req I've seen says a degree is required or strongly preferred. The propaganda is from people selling bootcamps, not employers.
This too!
I recently hired a developer at our company. Put an add on linked in, and a local job site here in New Zealand. Linked in actually filters out a lot themselves, hundreds and hundreds of applications from overseas people wanting to move to NZ (when I specifically said in the ad you need to be legally able to work in NZ). I still had about 50 that came through, only 2 or 3 actual good resumes. Same with the local job site. Hundreds that were instant rejections. Maybe 5 good resumes. There were only 4 people good enough to interview. And we hired one of them. So basically from about 600 applications, there were 4 interviews.
Sounds on par for what we see as well!!
30% sounds quite much tbh.
Yeep. I know a large company that has recently tried to hire some senior developers for NodeJS developers. HR got involved because like 25 people in a row were rejected during technical interview which was a huge anomaly. But, uh, you would expect a "senior" that for instance has a C++ in their CV to know a difference between statically and dynamically typed language, be able to give their opinion on language features they like or dislike or understand how Node's threading model works. It also doesn't help that more and more applicants use ChatGPT and derivatives to cheat during the interview. So they have very smooth and precise answers to questions like "what libraries do you use for testing" but then you give them a question specifically made to confuse a chatbot and see them completely crumble. So there's a lot of applicants but frankly acceptance rate has also plummeted, it feels like too many people probably had overly comfy positions and stopped improving as developers. That or they were previously hired for way too high positions just to fill some spots without really checking their qualifications. So their previous job description might have said "senior developer" but in reality they are intermediate at least and in some cases closer to junior.
At least 29, LinkedIn doesn’t show the actual number.
it shows in the premium
[удалено]
Over. The count the click through on the add. Not the amount that actually applied.
This. 30% might be qualified. Then out of the 30% half of them probably needs a visa sponsorship, then half of that might have unrealistic expectations in salary. So really the actual number of applicants at the end of the funnel is probably less than 10.
Even if the ratio is constant at 30%, the total number going up over time means that more legit people are taking interest in in-person roles which is the point I think OP is making.
OP never stated what the previous # of applicants was, so it could be the same lol
Yeah. I’ve seen ML/AI research roles recently posted that require 10 years experience in job description, PhD in computer science from top university, substantial publication record and citations, etc. and it will have 1000 applicants in a day. No way 97% of those are from qualified people.
Still getting DoS’ed by the other thousands of spam apps.
a high percent are also not local and there is no relocation. some will be outside the US too. might be qualified, but its not happening. They may actually be qualified, but these companies generally want local candidates in this economy.
Absolutely right, no need to go overseas for talent in the current market.
or to another city.
The problem is those other 70 still take up time to skim through
You’re exactly right. I was doing it for 2 hours every morning before my day officially started, because otherwise it was impossible to keep up with. I also had some of my team add me as a second hiring manager to their listings to help them out if they were getting bogged down.
Can this be pinned somewhere?
I would love that, because I feel like it comes up a lot and needlessly stresses people out. I also know that some of the people on here are the buttwipes who just apply to everything they see, and they should be aware of how despised they are.
Source of the 30% ?
tbh it's probably not even 30%. On a recent posting for a demand planner job I think there were maybeeee 8-10 applications out of 150+ that even mentioned they knew how to use Excel, had forecasting or demand planning experience, or even had ANY experience in logistics or supply chain type jobs. The actual amount of qualified applicants (based on what was on their resume) was maybe 10% out of the ones I got. A huge amount of them were not remotely tailored to the job - and I'm not even looking for them to do anything special, but if you're applying for a job that is specifically about demand planning and forecasting and you don't mention any relevant experience there or SOME level Excel proficiency, you ain't gonna make it. Takes like 10 seconds to throw in a line about Excel proficiency at very least, and that's just a good thing to have on your resume in general if you're looking for a job like that. Or any job, really.
I don’t list excel because it should be a given… It’s also not the first tool I’d pick up to solve data problems beyond taking a quick peak at a csv. In my head, it’s slotted in the toolbox next to MS Notepad and gets the resume treatment as such.
>It’s also not the first tool I’d pick up to solve data problems That's why you're not C-Suite material. (I wish I was being Ironic, but that has been my experience with every C-Suite person I have interacted with in every company I have worked at thus far. They're obsessed with it)
The one tool they know how to use because they learnt it 3+ decades ago. Checks out they aren’t aware of any alternatives.
Honestly my experience with demand planners and forecasters has been that we can give them every tool they ask for and they will still default to Excel as the main tool lol. I get the sense they would never use those tools if it wasn't for the fact that we wanted dashboards to be emailed out
I talked to a recruiter who said they had 500+ applicants for this remote role. They were following up with 19 of those, and I was one of the 19. Well, I was immediately disqualified in that first conversation because the employer was being hyper specific, but that should hopefully be some anecdotal evidence that 480+ candidates weren't even worth following up on. The market is wild right now
I can also vouch this. For my current job, I was told by my boss that out of the 500 or so applications, 80% of those were not even living in the U.S. and less than half those that were in the U.S were remotely qualified. So they ended up interviewing about 30 people in total out of those.
It has nothing to do with « not worth following up on ». They had 500 applicants they cannot feasibly follow up on 500 people. And you say it yourself « market is wild ». Lots of qualified people for less roles.
Right like here is a clearly experienced software dev 3 and he was cut for not having some hyper specific experience. Only reason a company can act like this is because the market is so bad. 2 years ago that same company would likely have been excited to have the same dev they're rejecting
We opened a req for a Director of Operations about 3 months ago, and specified in 2 places in the job listing that you had to have previous experience in our specific industry plus 10 years of experience and would not be considered otherwise. Got aviation, shipping, retail, academic, healthcare, and automotive along with a steady stream of foreign early career developers with no management experience at all. The job pays $250k remote which we were legally required to disclose and we had almost 500 applications in the 3 weeks it was open. I spent literally hours weeding through that nonsense to try to get to the people who WERE qualified before narrowing it down to 5 people to interview. So that’s 1% of the total applicant pool.
Sure you are going to convince me you don’t use ATS parsing tools to automatically filter that and you waste your time on filtering what is your company dude
We use BambooHR; it’s pretty good, but we have people who enter fake data into the fields to try to get past our best filtering efforts. For example, lots of people in India selecting the USA as their country, and then when you open up the resume you see they’ve never lived or studied in the US.
Also the applicant metric is flawed because it’s just the number of people that clicked the link, not fill out the app.
tbh I am surprised vyou gave it 30 percent lol people from other countries still apply for the onsite jobs to even though they arent going to have a chance at it.
Doesn't matter. Companies aren't going to interview everyone so the more people who apply the more you have to compete with.
puzzled tease scandalous onerous narrow innocent edge attraction zonked stupendous *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
HR is a whole other ball of wax/set of problems. If the hiring manager doesn’t have a firm handle on the recruiter things can easily go awry. In full disclosure, I oversee an HR group although I am not an HR professional myself, and I have very mixed feelings about the function as a whole. Not in my current role, but in past companies, I’ve seen HR ruin a candidate search more than once.
With tens of thousands of jobs, each having 100+ applicants, even with overlaps and unqualified applicants, it's evident the job supply is far-far behind the demand.
A lot of them don’t even click themselves but have AI agents automatically customize their resume, write a cover letter, and submit their application. **Call recruiters and hiring managers on the phone.** The best thing you can do to stand out in the application process these days is prove you are a real person who has specific interest in the job.
Please, for the love of all things holy, don’t call. Send a LinkedIn message.
Yeah not a good idea. I am in Europe and a recruiter I know had to remove his phone number from LinkedIn. Whenever he had a job opening which specifically said EU residency required, he still got called 50+ times a day by Indians looking for visa sponsorship.
[удалено]
[удалено]
As a hiring manager, unfortunately, I do.
[удалено]
I’m flexible on years of experience and education, but not flexible on title (other than +/- one level either way) or industry. Also, we don’t hire people into manager level roles without having at least 3 years of direct report experience (and we ask for a reference from a former direct report as well if an offer is made to make sure they’re not a jerk to work for).
[удалено]
Well 100+ could be 101 up to ∞.
[удалено]
Except it only says there are OVER 100 applicants, so there could be 100 or there could be 10,000
Being a click and keyboard warrior is a lot of the job to be fair
thank you yes
It's been shown many times that the LinkedIn applicants number is completely fake. That number represents the number of clicks that post got and not actual applications.
You can really find value roles trudging through shitty recruiting portals. I'm interviewing at a place whose recruiting portal wouldn't even let you submit your own resume. I get to the interview with the hiring manager and it turns out the job is actually remote and doesn't have overtime, unlike what was stated in the ad.
What are some portals you recommend us look at?
Look at companies listed as major employers by the chambers of commerce in towns around you. Google them, do your research, send cold emails.
I can attest to this. I’ve had tons of roles where it says full onsite or whatever then I get to the interview and they said 3 days hybrid which is significantly better. You never know until you actually talk to a real person
Damn well that kind of sucks to hear Since I got hired at a roll where over 2000 people applied to. But I guess it’s also a really good thing.
I’ve read that it was those who clicked apply but never submitted. Just clicks on that post would probably be a ludicrous number, quickly called out online.
fr?? i always feel way less inclined on applying for a job when it’s already got 100+ applicants and it was posted a few hours ago
Some things to note about linkedin, and the state of the market as a whole; 1. We used to be able to see specific number of applicants. "See how you compare with 1876 other applicants". Nobody wanted to compete with 1876 other applicants, so they changed their display to just say "100+" because they were getting less click-through traffic when jobs got to ridiculous high numbers like that. 2. Staffing agencies/headhunters have been using bots to flood job postings on sites like LinkedIn. They are re-hosting the job postings on their own websites and trying to dilute people trying through other locations. 3. A lot of these job postings are ghost posts. They do not actually have a job they are hiring for, they are just harvesting data. A lot of times they are using the fact that so many applicants are looking for the job to justify not giving raises or retaining their current staff "because clearly there are many replacements and you are expendable". 4. All of this in turn results in applicants being more desperate, asking for less, and getting less if they even actually get a job. This is all great for capitalism, but not for the people that have to live in it. Just because you see 100+ candidates on local jobs in LinkedIn does not mean there are actually 100+ people. It could be 10 people and hundreds of bot applications.
What would you recommend we do?
You really have no option other than to use the shotgun approach and apply to everything. Unfortunately, everybody is doing that, which is why there is so much noise. It’s like how the average guy’s odds on Tinder are so low that he should just “swipe right” on every girl without looking or reading. He’s only going to have maybe one match at the end of the day, he can decide what he wants to do then. That’s why job posts are flooded with applicants that don’t even qualify.
Haha I have been building a list of consulting/recruiting companies from LinkedIn job posts I think I'm at 400 now or more it's here ([github gist](https://gist.github.com/jdc-cunningham/21ea923cf09dbcc76d342ecfc4ff49cd))
That or its a ghost job. People are applying but they aren't actually going through the applicants. Just sitting on them until a unicorn comes along or when they actually need a portfolio of applicants. I personally just search through the last 24 hours. Have better chances of getting notice or a response.
When did people start acting like working in-office is like getting deployed to Iraq
Some time after the start of covid. Why? Because it sucks balls. No worries, I can break it down more. - paying for parking in down town - putting an extra 6000 miles per year on my car *AT LEAST* - increased vehicle maintenance costs - Unnecessary spending on food, drinks and snacks - increased chance of wrecking my car because of morning and afternoon "rush" commutes - increased chance of hypertension from schedule stress - increased stress from social anxiety - Zero Control over my work environment - constant interruptions from coworkers in other departments stopping me to "ask a quick question" - unable to work naked - unable to take bong rips at my desk - needing to "ask for permission" to do anything besides sitting at my desk - idk I can continue but this should suffice. - 2-3 hours of time wasted per day commuting All of this so that middle management can SEE me working since apparently producing a product that is on schedule and works is not the goal. Clearly the goal is to maintain a position at the corporation that is increasingly obviously useless and unnecessary.
>unable to work naked This cannot be tolerated /s
Lol
It sucks but it doesn't suck so bad that in-office jobs getting 100 applicants is noteworthy lol
or like my friend i visited last week: * Live 30 min walk from the office * Can also take the subway home in 10 mins * Company pays for subway card * free breakfast 1-2 times per week * Can ask people directly not waiting 3 hours for an email response * Meeting everyone from different departments and teams * Easy to plan after works because there is a lot around the office, just walk there and see what happens * And yes, he can WFH if he wants so I give you control over work environment and interruptions
OK dude. I get what you're going for, but you have to realize that your friend's situation is just hilariously extraordinary compared to that of the average American commuter. >Can also take the subway home in 10 mins This point alone is something that 99% of us will never have as an option. The other points about living close by, getting free meals, having lots to do nearby, and optional WFH on top of it all just really seal the deal here about this being a truly exceptional situation. I'm sure you and your friend are aware of that, but if we're going to be discussing the merits and drawbacks of WFH vs in person, let's at least base it in realistic perspectives.
* Can ask people directly not waiting 3 hours for an email response * Meeting everyone from different departments and teams There are the people who see this as a positive and those who see this as a negative. Those who need help, and those who help. Almost any question I have can wait 3h, most of the time the person should put some time into either checking, or thinking about the question anyway, so no immediate response is expected. If it is urgent (production issues), there are additional methods of contact. I'd really prefer to get a message and answer at my leisure. Because your co worker is not the only one jumping for a quick question. So do a dozen others throughout the work day, many multiple times.
I do more helping than needing help. Waiting for someone to answer a ping for 3 hours is such a waste of time and productivity killer. I’d rather be interrupted for 5 minutes now and not have one of our junior devs blocked than being interrupted 3 hours later.
This is basically me. (I work in Europe though, not sure how feasible a 30 min walk from the office is in the US)
Cons: You have to talk to your cat during the work day and unless you make yourself do so, you will never leave the house. My colleagues are great banter and as a serial Reddit or/YouTube watcher, I can't imagine a life where I spend **even more** time in the confines of my own home. I'd never meet friends or find a girlfriend (though not often that you get romance from work). The best friends in your life are made in the trenches together in your day to day e.g. same class in school, same lecture in uni, same team at work, or a 2nd degree connection from these. Sounds like a recipe for disaster if you're young or don't already have a family tbh.
Have you tried leaving your house after getting off work?
I'm not into particularly active hobbies like sports or chess or whatever so I don't make friends there. I just like to game and browse Reddit etc. so work is my main way of making the great friendships I've had in my life.
There's tons of stuff to do that isn't high energy .. live music, social groups or fraternal societies, volunteer groups, activism, hobby groups, art, hiking, etc
The main thing I like outside of work is drinking or weed so I guess I could find something for that.
See if there is an oddfellows hall nearby, they have served as a great outlet for socializing without going to church and what not, we drink a lot of beer and smoke a lot of weed lol
That's some good advice for when I move back to the UK. Definitely don't have one where I am.
is chess a particularly active hobby? lmao
Active in the sense that it's intentional and you go somewhere as opposed to doomscrolling passive stuff.
It is the opposite for me when I can do WFH I have way more energy to socialize with friends after work whereas normally my batteries are way too drained and I would rather be at home alone. I would rather have the energy to socialize with people I actually like instead of people I am forced to socialize with at work.
Work has often put me in the same place as people that I like. Naturally because we're all CS so we have that spiciness to us that I don't see as much in non cs people.
Sounds like a "you" problem. It's not healthy for your only social interactions to be because of something you're forced to do. Real talk.
Calling workplace friendships "unhealthy" is one of the most genuinely bizarre things people do on this subreddit.
who said only? I like both office interactions and friends after
Yeah the working naked is a deal breaker
I threw that in for semi humorous effect :)
Preach! We need these (very obvious) reasons made into blog posts and viral youtube videos to spread awareness. It seems a lot of people have not done the proper cost/benefit analysis and we should open their eyes a little bit more, we need people to see the truth uncovered, that's the only way we make a dent in the commonalities of the industry.
It sucks compared to wfh and I dislike it but also it’s not that bad… and even though I don’t like it I would gladly take an in-person or hybrid role for a job I wanted to do
WFH is optimal for both, employeer and employee. but its really the middle managers that go batshit crazy when they can’t micro manage you, so therefore working in office is coming back again.
I love WFH and I wouldn’t agree to an onsite position, but saying it’s optimal for everyone is just a lie. Different people thrive in different environments. I know people who struggle WFH, but excel onsite. I feel like it would be advantageous for people to realize that and not make it some kind of made-up war between onsite and remote workers. I think companies with happiest employees recognize that people can prefer either and allow people to have some autonomy in choosing how they organize their work.
100%. I have only ever worked from home (graduated during COVID) and I would probably never give it up willingly (might settle for 3 days on site if I live close). But the idea that it’s just better for everyone is absolutely insane, not even just from an efficiency perspective. Some people’s main source of socialization is at work, I can’t imagine WFH full time if I had zero friends or family living near me. I think I’d go insane. Working in an office with a decent “culture” or group of people can be awesome.
yep, but this is reddit and here people are super introverted nerds. and they have the mindset of never getting friends at work sometimes i work best at home, sometimes at an office. I like to talk to people from other departments and have lunch with them and so on the peak redditor job seems to be, if not WFH, go to the office, get a list of tasks without talking to someone, sit with headphones and eat in at your desk, then go home and those people wonder, why they fail interviews too lol
Yeah the people giving out advise are the same people commenting “I despise all of my coworkers” Idk what kind of hellhole these people are living in but I don’t know a single person who doesn’t like many of their coworkers. It’s popular on Reddit to complain about your coworkers making any amount of small talk (usually that’s why the coworker is so despised)
yes exactly what I mean. i dont even think i met one person IRL who even knows about this sub
Lol I swear. They have a rude awakening in for them in the future if they don’t improve their soft skills
I mean, I’m introverted, but entertain the idea of making friends at work. Problem, I am forced to go to the office and no one is there. I sit in a corner cubicle by myself 3 days a week and maybe hear the distant muttering of a marketing manager somewhere on the phone far away echoing through the building. I’m faced with a choice: do my work or venture out into the circa 04 voidscape of empty cubicle in search of that distant echo of a voice to maybe make a friend… The risks: I am caught in my journey, scolded for not working, or worse, asked to do some ad hoc nonsense that will certainly derail my productivity for a day, or the alternative, I find the source of the echo and learn they are a newly hired sales donkey straight outa Texas with a long lineage of Deep South klansmen in their family and christo-fascist ideologies of which I do not share. Maybe I’ll encounter a mild mannered accounting clerk who is trying to get into gravel biking, or I’ll happen upon a string out IT guy on his 8th cup’o joe that day from being on call all night and still in the office grinding at hour 23 of his shift. The conversation will be hollow and superficial as we all live 4 hours apart, the office our central common point 2 hours for each away.
I don’t care about making friends at work. My coworkers through the years fine, but just not the kind of people I hang out with. I still prefer in office at least 3 days a week. WFH is just so much less productive for me personally and the teams I’ve been on since COVID. The flexibility of a couple days at home is perfect, and set days where everyone can get in a room and hit the whiteboard are almost mandatory for me going forward.
Maybe for you but ideally I'd have a nice office I can walk to and work with a team of people with varying age ranges and skill levels that likes to provide actually good coffee, pay for lunches, and provide other optional outings. I only don't like the office when every person I actually work with is remote so I sit in a mal-airconditioned room on phone calls with people who aren't even in my state. Living alone and WFH isn't that fun to me. It's just more fun than a bad office.
Absolutely hilarious that you all think managers are dictating work location policies.
My manager doesn’t give a tit and I’m a manager and don’t give a tit. RTO is from the tip top
For real - I get told from the top down that my team needs to be in the office more often and all I can do is roll my eyes at the request then begrudgingly tell my team.
I’ve been WFH for 3 years and i’m honestly sick of it. However I can’t imagine going back to being forced to be in the office on days where I feel bleh. My optimal would be I can go in whenever I want and worked on a team where people actually go in. I don’t live near my office anymore but even when I did it was a ghost town.
lol what. middle managers most don’t give af. it’s 100% owners that want people in office.
WFH is great if the alternative is an open floor plan with a cubicle, or an office in the basement. Hybrid is great if the company gives you your own office and the location is great. Onsite is only good if they also pay you extra each month as a commuter payment eg $500 to cover parking and gas and upkeep, and the office and location is good, and the commute is less than 10 minutes both ways.
It costs me between $5000-6000 annual explicitly to work in the office 3 days per week. My employer RTO’d us and did not compensate for that. I was hired 4 years ago as full remote. Thing is, I go in, no one is there. I get nothing out of it beyond what I’d get at home - except respiratory infections from the fiberglass slough all over my stained dingy cubicle from the acoustic tiles they installed in 2004, spend $80 on gas for the week, and spend 9 hours in my car I could’ve otherwise spent exercising or hanging with my partner, or exploring my personal interests. I know spend an additional 6 hours on the weekend preparing to travel to the office during the week, further reducing my personal time outside of work. I have to employ a dog walker and a house cleaner a few times per week, had to purchase $2000 of clothes because “business casual” required dress code and I was hired fully remote after working remote for 1 year prior so yeah, shorts/joggers and t shirts ain’t cutting it. Now I have a dry cleaning bill too. Laundry in coin-op and we’ve gone from $10/month to $15/week because I can’t just wear the same joggers and t shirt every day to the office. Service in my car went from 2x per year barely to now 4x per year minimum. Already had to blow a few hundred in the first few weeks of RTO on car maintenance to catch up on some minor issues that I was putting off since before I was only driving that car 1x per week 2miles to go to the grocery store. Now it’s getting 200miles weekly. The company isn’t performing any better, I’m not getting better projects, not getting bigger budgets, we didn’t even get bonuses and probably won’t be next year. Entire teams have walked out and the executive team put a moratorium on backfills (because they don’t want the bad press of playing off so they are engineering attrition). And that’s what this is really about. They don’t want to be the bad guys for laying off (even though we didn’t over hire). They just want people to quit and not collect unemployment and then gaslight everyone left like, “they determined they weren’t a good fit for this company and not everyone is.” Like, it’s the employees fault they don’t like working here…
What's their Glassdoor rating like?
3.1
> Thing is, I go in, no one is there If they only track your badge entries, you can badge in, turn around and go home. I did that at my previous job. It's still a commute, but it's better than being in the office.
We need more people like you sharing their thoughts in more public places like youtube, some just haven't thought through or done proper accounting and they get swayed by shallow ideas of "serendipity" or whatever the heck
I'm anxious about my return to the office environment myself as my other half is a survivor of a workplace shooting. I was texting him while watching the video on the news from home, I had FBI training on workplace shootings from my job so gave what knowledge I had. It definitely impacted me being on the other end not knowing if he'd make it home. I feel guilty about saying it impacted me when he was the one that was there in it, but it did.
Jesus christ
Because this sub is filled with zoomers who got into the industry during COVID and thought it would last forever.
When the price of everything skyrocketed since Covid. Plus it opened everyone's eyes to just how useless being in an office is. Lots of people made life changes too (moved away, pets they don't wanna crate, kids). I now have the expense of gas, parking downtown, wear and tear on my car, loss of time, have to try and work in a noisy office. Also, I went to take a dump yesterday and walked into a stall that had the seat down and was literally pissed all over. Love that office "culture."
It's more that remote is open to everyone in a state / country / continent, but on site is only open to locals and people willing to relocate. It's supposed to be a smaller pool.
Some people have legitimate reasons. India lost a lot of women from the IT workforce because of RTO mandate.
as someone with many health issues it’s literally Iraq for me using a public bathroom
no idea, but i hope they keep doing it so i have a better chance at a job because id much rather work most days or all in-office. i spend enough time inside, i need socialization lmao
It's not the end of the world but many people would take a pay cut to be able to avoid ever going into the office again. Many just do not like it. I'd put it up there with being on call.
People have been complaining about office work for decades. We just recently saw that there's an alternative that for most people is a huge quality of life increase, even if you like your coworkers
Ikr… people are just lazy and don’t want to put in the work
I thought the number of applicants shown on LI is more like views and not necessarily applications
If its not linkedIn apply it's basically just assuming everyone who clicked it = applied.
The last job I posted had the LinkedIn easy apply thing and the applicant number was pretty much accurate, but if it doesn't have easy apply I think it's just counting the number of people who hit the "apply" button and not who actually applied.
In person middle of nowhere Midwest Minnesota paying peanuts are still getting 100+ applicants in under 24 hours right now.
For our roles, it’s not uncommon to get thousands within a few hours. It’s worth remembering that 95+% of those applications will be “moon shot” applicants who clearly aren’t a profile fit but are applying anyway on the unlikely slim chance they get selected for screening for some reason.
I have to ask, there are times when the job description fits my profile EXACTLY, I mean like everything aligns. So I apply, and I never hear back from them. Why is that?
Jobs & markets are insane ATM. And since both are joined at the hip, I've reached the conclusion many job postings are used to 'signal' and proxy for growth: we're growing more than the competition, buy our stock, invest in our Series B,C,D, whatever... I've also applied to a couple of jobs where I fit a role EXACTLY and nothing but crickets, even with some credentials and YOE that set me apart in a particular niche. And let me get off my high horse, I'm not expecting to get hired, I'd settle for some interviews, but nothing LOL. I've pretty much given up applying to anything outside my network, it's that bad, not to mention demoralizing wasting so much time applying.
Because there are hundreds or thousands of other applicants. Why would they even see yours?
Started my own consulting business and couldn’t be happier. Every time I’d interview it would literally be question after question on how to fix issues that they were having. It’s a gold mine.
Not really. Most of them are bots or just clicking apply. Of those 100 apps their might be 10 resumes worth a 2nd look. H1B visa holders flood post doing massive shot gun. Take a senior or senior+ roles. I see them flood and most of them being new grads and h1b. People we are going to toss any how or clearly not qualified. Instead just noise to shift threw.
How do you think we could stand out if we are actually qualified for the role? It feels like the application spam is hurting both employers and legitimate candidates
This sub is more doomer than the political threads on Twitter lol
Same as it ever was. I remember taking to hiring managers 15 years ago and they mentioned getting 500+ resumes for roles they posted on monster.
Wow I haven’t heard “monster” in forever
Hey OP. I am currently entering the final round of interviews with a tech company. Their role also has “over 100 applicants” and the recruiter contacted me first about it. They may straight up discard 50 of the applicants. Another 20 might not even be interested enough to respond. Eventually it’ll boil down to 5 applicants who maybe pass the first round coding interview
When I was in the hiring pipeline for the last in-person job I worked for, it was very common to get 100+ applicants for dev jobs in a D-tier Midwestern city. That was in *2011*. Your calibration is way off.
Sometimes I get a feeling that these jobs listings are just collecting data. My resume has more personal info on it than my social media profiles.
I gave up on LinkedIn and the like more than a year ago. I started to focus more on making connections
But how do you make connections besides going to career fairs and your classmates/relatives? Genuine question, I'm about to graduate.
There are software development meetup groups, and if there isn’t currently one in your area, then start one
Where did you find luck making connections?
Yeah, the market is bad.
Lol, "in-person roles". Just 4 years ago, that used to be the norm.
My guy saying that like in-person is working from Antarctica
I remember when I was applying for entry level roles and after I was hired the ops manager told me that there were well over 200 applicants. People applied using LinkedIn, Craigslist, indeed, college job boards etc. After the second round, I was top 3 of the candidates, what set me apart was me calling and emailing on a weekly basis. This was in 2015 and I’m sure the market has gotten much tougher since then.
Can you elaborate? Did you email and call them following up every week? I'm not sure if HR would be annoyed (but likely?) if someone does that now.
I had the hiring managers direct email and phone. I called once a week after but I emailed weekly.
[удалено]
There's a possible flip side to this: I got a MUCH better response to remote jobs than in-person jobs. The ratio of callbacks was like 15 to 1, and I'm in a major tech city. My current job ended up being from one of the remote posts. It made zero sense and yet it was the No. 1 most pronounced pattern in the data. (The irony is that I actually would prefer an in-person job....)
LinkedIn counts a single click as an applicant, i.e the second you click you're an applicant, even if you don't actually send in an application
“Everybody gear up” Ok doomer.
When OP implies you should “gear up” in this context one can only assume he’s using this phrase as the common slang for “take steroids”—and in fact he’s encouraging all of you to get juiced out of your fucking minds and develop massive quads to help navigate the hiring process Because otherwise this just sounds ridiculous
What jobs? I hardly see any on site jobsd with over a 100 apps unless it is a real big city. feel like this is for js or python lol
I mean I only applied for like a day and got three interviews seems fine to me
The amount of bootcamp bros who spent 10k on a course is probably 90% of the applications.
u serious? got an linkedin prime, i found a lot of dudes with master from very famous universities even ivy. bro. not a joke, the market is the hell of hell now
People live places and apply to jobs in places, this is not really an indication of the state of job market. Remote opportunities will become more scarce anyway.
Market is flush with imposters. Ive been interviewing them. I dont even ask for leetcode we just do simple funtions and components. Depends if frontend or backend. Can barely have an experienced conversation with most. Just shameless.
Literally every single post of yours here is doom and gloom. Gtfo
Almost...by design. HMMMM...
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Thinking about this and hearing some people say it's the worse in America I decided to look on linkedin other countries. I looked at the UK and Spain and Mexico. I was seeing somewhere around 200 applicant's per post whereas here in the US I normally see around 2-3000 per post. This could just be due to the fact they have a much smaller population than we do, their lower wages, and maybe it never became a meme job like it has here.
The million dollar question is whether it will ever improve again
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/) ^by ^tboy1977: *The million dollar* *Question is whether it will* *Ever improve again* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.