Ask HN: What has to change? I'm sick of it
As far as I know I've never expressed any interest or given them any of my information outside of being a customer for several years. However, they continued in their email asking me to provide them with lots of information about myself without actually telling me a single actionable piece of information about any role.
Regardless, I replied (on a Sunday!), telling them (paraphrased) "I did find it strange as to why they were reaching out to me specifically. But even so, I do like Chewy from my experiences with them as a company. So I would definitely entertain the idea." I gave them some basic information about myself(YoE, Education, Tech focus) and asked the following questions (with some personal information removed)
- What are the pay ranges on your senior positions?
- Is remote a possibility?
- What does your overall interview process look like?
And unfortunately, Chewy is not the only company behaving this way. They were just my breaking point from seeing this happen multiple times.
29 comments
[ 416 ms ] story [ 1508 ms ] thread2) the profession of recruiter is very different from developer, it has a different kind of personality type, with different norms for social interaction; some are great, some are mediocre, gushing with enthusiasm when they think you're going to help them get a bonus, dropping all communication the moment that's not true. A recruiter with mediocre professionalism is doubtless just as common as a developer with mediocre coding skills.
3) most likely, they sent you the email, then got a person for that position, and didn't follow up to let you know that the position was filled. Not right, but no upside for you to let it get you angry, which hurts no one but you.
4) many companies are having hiring freezes, often with little notice; as uncomfortable as this is for us as developers, it is probably worse for recruiters, in terms of their own job prospects. It is possible (I have no inside knowledge here) that the recruiter that sent you the email has been laid off in the meantime...
Early on in my career I actually worked with some very good recruiters, so maybe my bar is a little higher than it should be.
On point #4 this is definitely a likely possibility that I didn't consider. Definitely some sort of blind spot/collateral damage the company didn't consider if that's the case. But well, shit happens. NBD.
I agree there is no upside to allowing it to create stress or upset. However that does not mean there isn't a common good upside to taking action to dissuade such actors.
For example refusing to use the services of companies which have treated you badly, either as a customer or a candidate.
For example 2, publicly naming and shaming companies which are profiting off tragedy of commons social goods which polite behavior typically falls.
You need to adjust your expectations.
You're wasting your time even thinking about this - it's like being mad at the wind for blowing in a certain direction.
Just because you were mildly interested in the spam doesn't make it not spam.
It's Chewy themselves, using an email address from their domain.
Apparently, 10+ years ago, I showed some interest in some Google product aimed at developers. It's been so long, I cannot even recall which one.
For the past 5-6 years, I've been receiving emails from Google recruiters. When I finally asked one where did they get my address, he said that I was labeled in their "database" as a software engineer, and that "database" is shared across the whole organisation.
Insofar as I know, I've never been referred to Google
Yet every couple years I get a Google recruiter coming at me
Always entertaining to answer their question, "why did you apply for this job" with, "I didn't. You contacted me."
If there was one book I could read to understand this company's business model and future, what would it be?
I'm very careful about what company I join after a string of bad experiences (or even good experiences that failed). I don't just care about engineering, I want to understand the product and business I'd be working on/for on a deeper and broader level.
So I'm not asking this to be pedantic or anything. I love to read, so anything a recruiter responds with I would 100% take the time to read.
So far, nobody has ever written me back.
I haven't yet formed a theory on what that means, but I can't help but find it disappointing nonetheless. I'm literally asking the teacher for more homework.
That's a comedic throwaway line you shouldn't take too seriously. The joke is about me being the kind of dork who asks for more homework.
| They should not be expected to understand the company well
I fully don't expect the recruiter to be the one who determines the answer to that question. All they have to do is ask someone higher up though.
On the line about the book, I would also read it. It's good for me, it's good for them.
It sounds like you really want to learn about roles at Chewy, why not just send another email or directly contact a recruiter on LinkedIn?
I'm fine with templated/boilerplate emails. However, I just would have an expectation that a human will be on the other side if information is actually sent. In the late 90s my father, a car salesman, would send out thousands of form letters in the late 90s to prospective customers. Maybe I have brain damage from helping him lick so many envelopes :) but I think the key difference between his operation and what I see in general now(not just recruiting) is that the human element is getting increasingly pushed further back in the process or was never going to be there in the first place. Maybe I'll dig into the recruiter to see if they're even a real person at all If they're not then this just makes me question even more the fundamental value of these processes from a company that's not some fly by night operation.
One that allows you to specify all the search parameters the candidate cares about, and severely punish bad faith actors.
I get dozens of recruiting emails per week, and they seem unable to comprehend why I'd want to stay at a company that pays me 2x their Total Comp... (Also my current company has a hard time comprehending why I'd consider leaving for a 50% raise btw).
Second type are professional recruiters. Their salary is by commissions will often be a percentage of your salary. They are knowledgeable about programming and tech (often former engineers who wanted a break from coding!). They typically are looking to match specific profiles to specific jobs at client companies. This goes all the way to recruiters specialized in C-Suite executives (and you can picture the commission finding a CEO will bring in). Their messages will be personalized and you shouldn't hesitate to reply back even if you aren't looking for a job. They know that most great software engineers are almost never openly looking for a job so their goal is to be on good terms with a large number of talented developers so that the minute they start looking for a job they can match them with positions. You'll know when you encounter one.
Third type is basically referrals. A players attract A players, smart companies know it. Make sure your referral bonus is a percentage of total comp. It's probably the most effective way of recruiting (it has an insane signal to noise ratio). But you only get access to that type of network by... bringing value and being part of it in the first place!
You somehow ended up on the former's spam list. Sorry.
I think what's worrisome to me is that the first type you described. I fully expect it from job board scouring 3rd party "recruiting" agencies and my spam box does too. What I don't expect is for the first type to increasingly be representatives directly from the company themselves. And this isn't exactly some no-name company looking to add you to their cubicle farm. (Or maybe they have a name and ALSO a cubicle farm). My personal feelings aside, I get that they need "volume" but I don't think these types of tactics are the way to go about it. And no I don't have a solution for it, it is indeed a hard problem :)
Interestingly from some of my academic days there might be something to draw some inspiration from for a solution. Social scientists trying to sample either hard to reach populations (due to social stigma) or hard to find populations (small overall number of members) use Chain Referral sampling. It's an interesting topic. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/004912418101000205 For hard to reach research papers.. there's at least a solid solution for that!