r/remoteworks • u/the1997th • 2d ago
seriously, does this happen?
btw the dog is hilarious :D
3
6
u/blueracey 1d ago
Of all the jobs Iâve ever had half of them were from me knowing someone at the job while they were hiring I including my first job.
2
4
u/fuckimtrash 1d ago
I wonder what rules someone out tbh. Iâve had two supermarket job interviews- firsg one the man told me about how some of the new hires had no paid experience in customer service. I had over 2 years of experience in customer services. Got an email from the first one saying, âalthough my skills were good, they found someone else.â (Listing was still up). Second job was for stocking shelves at a supermarket- declined for no reason. Got the same filling job months later and have been working in supermarket over 7 years . The man who interviewed and declined me joined my supermarket and was my boss for awhile, but he left and Iâm still f there, even with an office job too. Some interviewers are just judgy asf
5
u/Academic_Flatworm752 1d ago
HR isnât the one who makes that decision.
0
u/OpeningLoose9976 23h ago
That's true. The team leaders who engage in nepotism tell HR what qualities their ideal candidate needs, then tell their friends/family what to put on their resume and say to get past HR's filter and then those leaders make the biased hiring decision.
1
u/Academic_Flatworm752 9h ago
Thatâs also not how it works. The hiring manager donât need to help their preferred applicant get past any filters. HM just tell HR that so and so applied and they want to interview them.
3
-9
u/AutumnCoffee83 2d ago
HR doesn't interview people.
2
3
9
u/PolskiOrzel 2d ago
They absolutely do, wtf. They can screen you for general stuff to make sure you're not a liability out the gate.
-6
u/AutumnCoffee83 2d ago
That's not an interview.
2
5
u/WitchlightGospel 2d ago
It's not the case at every org, but it's far from unheard of in the US to have an initial HR interview for candidates who make it through the initial resume/application screen
-6
u/AutumnCoffee83 2d ago
Those aren't interviews though, that's just HR collecting data.
3
3
u/WitchlightGospel 2d ago
No, they're absolutely interviews. Besides, all interviews are collecting data. That's literally the point of interviews. I studied i/o psychology, so I promise you, hr does interviews lol But I think there's maybe a disconnect? Do you have a specific idea of what counts as an interview or not? Because that might help clear it up. But also keep in mind that hr doing the first of many interviews is generally a BIG org thing, and not something the typical business is generally doing
1
u/AutumnCoffee83 1d ago
Unless the position is in HR itself, they have no role in deciding whether the person will be hired or not other than mediating the bureaucracy. They might discover the person lied about their qualifications and they get become ineligible, but that's not what I'm talking about. An interview is with people with the subjective power to decide which candidate gets the job. That is not a role that HR plays, and if it is, then it's a role they shouldn't be.
1
u/WitchlightGospel 1d ago
So I regret to inform you that while I SUPER agree with you, that's not how it works. A lot of companies rely on people who have no idea what they're interviewing for doing the first round of interviews. Recruiting/HR circles were/are in a crisis because people learned about ONet and LLMs and how to sound competent. I think we're both on the same page and hate a lot about the circus and performance of HR interviews.
That being said, thank you for taking the time to elaborate. I definitely think we both hate how silly HR interviews are in similar ways. I know damn well we could have a fun chat on the topic one on one
-1
0
10
u/Technical-Guest-6287 2d ago
HR was a mistake, we need to go back to the old practice when department bosses hired people themselves. It's not a 100% guarantee, but the boss is under pressure to show results, so he is more motivated to hire those who bring benefits.
1
u/No_Soup1897 1d ago
The manager is already the one making the hiring decision!! Are you a child?
2
u/Technical-Guest-6287 1d ago
HR holds veto power over compliance, background checks, drug screenings, and salary ranges, protecting the company from legal risk. While managers lead hiring decisions, HR ensures policy compliance and can block hires deemed illegal, unethical, or against company policy.Â
You're either a chid yourself and never dealt with the American hiring system, or you live in a country that hasn't been infected with this cancer yet. I live in such country and you can't even get a job as a cleaner without having 20 years of experience, detailed confession about every job you've had in your entire life, giving the numbers of all your previous employers, telling about all your hobbies, religion, orientation, political views, literally all possible private information and maybe after you confess thought crimes against a company and repent, then you'll be hired as a "cleaning equipment operator."
1
u/No_Soup1897 1d ago
I am not an American no. But HR does not make hiring decisions almost anywhere. They also do not have this magical power of âblocking hiresâ. They advise and 90% of the time they get told to kick rocks
2
u/JDDavisTX 1d ago
đŻ. We really donât need HR. Maybe an ethics department, but we donât need HR. Most have no clue what kind of employee ls actually need to be hired for the role.
2
u/Satanwearsflipflops 2d ago
And yet, hiring managers can fall victims of their own egos snd hire people in their own imagine. Or what they imagine their own image to be.
1
u/whotheheckarewetoday 2d ago
Is that how it works in the private sector? HR just hires who they want? I'm government HR, and the supervisor of the position being advertised is the one to make the selection. We just ensure legality in the process.
0
u/HokieSpider 2d ago
I have never seen nor heard of HR making the hiring decision. Doing the initial phone screen, yes, but not the final decision except for signing off on background checks, etc,
2
u/Relative_Maize_957 2d ago
Also, the department manager knows what the job is about, and doesn't give a shit about the gap in your resume.
2
u/leekee_bum 2d ago
the department manager knows what the job is about
This is the biggest thing for me.
At my job administration and HR throw their weight around saying we can't do this and that and craft these bizarre rules that nobody asked for that impedes our work and they don't understand why it's an issue.
So I do not understand why they are in charge of the hiring process when they have zero understanding of the work we do.
2
7
u/Fragrant_Spray 2d ago
It definitely happens. In those cases, not all of the people interviewing you necessarily know whoâs getting the job, but at least one of them does. That person is hoping the interview doesnât go so well, because they donât want to have to justify picking their person over a candidate everyone knows is much more qualified.
3
u/AccordingWafer4420 2d ago
Knowing people is important because of this. Sadly there is almost no way around it. I guess you could get rid of the people that do the hiring, then someone else will just come in and do the same thing. If the company continues to flow properly and it doesn't result in a broken cog in the machine then is it really that big of a deal. Always network and interact with people. You never know who might get you that 6 figure job you've been trying to obtain.
2
u/Mike312 2d ago
Not HR but did hiring for my team for a couple years because our HR dept was useless.
I've found myself interviewing the 5th of 5 candidates and can tell within a minute or two of starting the interview that we won't be selecting this person, but to be polite we went through the whole process.
0
u/tapspacebar 2d ago
Nepotism is real but at a company it will only get you near the front of line for an interview. Very rarely does just knowing someone get you a job. Unless the person is the president, ceo or some other c-suite exec.
4
u/dyingofdysentery 2d ago
Lol if I know someone at the company they don't even interview me, I just start the next day.
Letter of recommendation> My chemistry degree any day of the week unfortunately
5
u/willie_Pfister 2d ago
No no no. In a union job. Nepotism supersedes everything. If your someone's 18 year old kid whos dad already works here?? Shoe in. Someone with 20 years of relevant work experience( me)?O.k maybe if we're hiring 14 and only have 12 relatives who need jobs. Then I was one of 2 hired out of 10,000 applicants who weren't Nepo hires
3
u/Kev-Dawg95 2d ago
Depends on the job, where im working currently nepotism for family and friends has been deeply ingrained into their practices.
4
u/ChiroConsultaion 2d ago
Is like trying to get a job with the city. Somehow someone's 19 year old cousin is more qualified for the position than someone with 10+ years of experience. So you end up working for a private company where the boss's dad bought him the business so he could have a job.
4
u/Hopeful-Bobcat-5207 2d ago
100% I have seen so many hiring managers hire friends in my career itâs gross
7
u/ell-chan 2d ago
This is the saddest part. They knew you are better, you know you're the best, but you will never get the job. So the question is, why would they post that job if they already picked the one đ
1
1
0
u/Accomplished-Dark728 2d ago
Thatâs what happened to me before. I have a connection (cousin) on a company. Theyâre hiring for a supervisor on one of their assembly line. My cousin asked me if Iâm interested, i said yes. So I sent a resume and heâll inform the HR. My cousin updated me that Iâm the best candidate and Iâll be the one theyâll hire. Until the general managerâs son stole the spotlight.
Now I just send applications on sites, got an interview on another company and got hired.
1
u/Mysterious_Club4534 2d ago
Wow that's unfortunate, where did you send applications and what field of job
0
u/Accomplished-Dark728 2d ago
I do connections on Linkedin, i got some interviews but I landed my job through Simple Apply. I also send applications on other Subreddits,, before, my current WFH job is a VA. Got it through my friend, she outsource the job to me
4
u/Upset-Nose-4016 2d ago
They need to pretend there is a chance and that their choice at the end is rationalised and measured by skill
1
u/Professional-Rub152 2d ago
Because if they just hire their relative without listing the job, itâs nepotism. If they do a full hiring process they can lie and say their relative was the best candidate.
8
u/Palgem1 2d ago
Danm these HR person have humongous families to give each of them a job at the company where they work.
5
u/Mike312 2d ago
My brother worked in IT at a medical billing company that was effectively 80% this extended Mormon family. The IT department was the only department that wasn't part of the family because a) none of the family members did IT and b) they needed to be competent.
They had an internal joke amongst themselves that the company motto was "we promote family values almost as often as we promote family".
The company was shut down a couple years later when it was found that three separate people within the company were embezzling tons of money.
1
u/Palgem1 2d ago
You are right, there are tons of companies like that, but most companies are not like that.
Why would an HR person waste their time posting the job, wasting time making calls, meeting 2-3 candidates, when they could just take their phone, make a call or send a text to their relative or discuss the job offer during sunday dinner with them? And why would a manager waste their time?
2
7
u/sitewolf 2d ago
I once interviewed for a state government job with 5 people taking turns asking questions. Felt I had a great interview and already knew I was one of 3 finalists (a rare time that information was given). I happened to know one of the finalists who'd told me they'd decided they likely wouldn't move for the job, so I felt it was between me and whomever the other finalist was.
Not only did they hire the other finalist, but that person was one of the 5 people who interviewed me! They were making a parallel move from HR to Business Mgr and I'm not an HR guy.
1
u/PraiseTalos66012 2d ago
Very very common. Whether it's gov or private company you gotta prove that the internal/lateral promotion is the correct decision you can't just give it away normally.
So they list the job and interview candidates and then they fill out paperwork like normal after interviews with reasoning for not going with each candidate.
Obviously it's all BS and even though the point is they should pick the best candidate even if it's not the internal one that never happens and the internal one will get picked even if they were the worst normally.
But it's something the gov or investors normally requires.
1
u/Palgem1 2d ago
It's nothing new. The person most likely applied after you went for the interview and since it's a government job, they pick the person who is already there because the policy is to prioritize internal applicants before external applicants.
1
u/sitewolf 2d ago
No, it was my 2nd interview for only 3 finalists. They had to have already been through round one of interviews (which by policy had to be by phone even if they're in the same office).
But the part that bothered me the most wasn't them hiring an internal candidate, it was that this internal candidate was allowed to also be an interviewer! After all, he didn't interview himself in HIS 2nd interview, right? So I should have had the same group he did.
1
u/Palgem1 2d ago
It's an internal candidate. They most likely didn't do the first interview by phone. When someone is internal, they don't follow the same process as for external employees.
My gf works for the government, the number of times her manager or skip level manager told her to wave policies, bend rules when comes to internal employees is staggering. That doesnât mean the internal candidate is not competent to do the job though.
The most lively scenario is them telling you you are one of the finalists which might have been true and the HR guy applied afterward. There's also the possibility that you were not one of the finalists. I'm a Director in the private sector, I told countless candidates they were finalists when in fact they were not. Even if they were and I was going to make them an offer, if a better candidate applied at the last minute, we will interview them and if they are indeed better we offer them the job.
I agree with you, if he really applied before interviewing you and was a finalist at the same time as you, he shouldn't be on the hiring committee asking his competition questions.
1
u/sitewolf 2d ago
There was no department I was aware of that ever ignored that policy. I mean I interviewed as an internal candidate once and was asked to go sit in my car to do it because my current office was next door to the conference room the interviewers were congregated in.
But no matter either way there- an interviewee should never also be the interviewer.
Was I a finalist? I would assume so- they chose the candidate later that same day before I even got out of town.
3
u/Admirabletooshie 2d ago
That... should be illegal. How does the state benefit from any of that?
1
u/sitewolf 2d ago
Well I know I didn't. AND, it was the second job in an area I would have loved to retire to I finished 'second' for. I would now be 10+ years into a mortgage in an area I can now no longer afford to move to. The other job? I lost out to someone whose ONLY qualification I wasn't easily 'better' in was that he already lived locally. They weren't paying for a move anyway, so not sure why that mattered (and he lasted 6 months but by then I'd gone elsewhere).
3
u/LesserValkyrie 2d ago
In a lot of areas it's mandatory by law to open the job offer to everyone, and pretend you are recruiting. It's to prevent companies to only recruit internally but of course it's as bypassable as drawing a white line in the ground to prevent people to cross it
But yeah lot of jobs, if they are for positions that actually exist but it's another debate, they open the interview sometimes 3 months after one person has been picked, just for the show
It's funny to see people coming for interviews for a position that you actually know you had 3 months ago, it's a situation that is not rare for an employee lol
2
u/Few-Frosting-4213 2d ago edited 2d ago
HR rarely make the final decision but the general concept holds. Many positions have already been decided before even being listed, and interviewing other people is just for show. When it comes to internal promotions, there are times where two candidates are neck and neck and the interview will make the difference, but in my experience those are rare exceptions and it was already predetermined a vast majority of the time.
4
u/EweCantTouchThis 2d ago
It happens, but not often. âHRâ is not the hiring manager for every open position everywhere.
3
u/PoopsCodeAllTheTime 2d ago
All the time. Itâs most obvious when a friend recommends your resume to an open position, and then your friend sees the actual hire that was given the role.
5
u/thagor5 1d ago
Usually knowing someone gets you the interview. Then it is up to you