logoalt Hacker News

stackskiptontoday at 12:30 AM3 repliesview on HN

After seeing the flood of resumes for application, I do think a small cost to apply wouldn't be a bad thing for either applicants or companies. I also realize that if someone is unemployed, getting them to pay money they don't have to find a new job is counterproductive.

However, when we wanted to hire a new Ops person at work, the flood of obviously not qualified at all applicants we got was insane.


Replies

vulcan01today at 1:00 AM

> the flood of obviously not qualified at all applicants we got was insane

From speaking to folks looking for jobs in tech over the past few years, this is a natural result.

1. Companies write requirements on the job posting that are a little beyond reasonable for the role and salary.

2. Applicants learn over time, and start applying to jobs for which they only meet most of the qualifications.

3. Companies adjust and write even more ridiculous requirements.

4. Applicants start applying to jobs for which they only meet some requirements.

5. Repeat.

As evidence that the applicants are, at every stage, correctly reacting to the situation: I have received positive responses (and, later, job offers) by applying to roles for which I am only mostly qualified, and I know many people for whom this is true of jobs they are only barely qualified for.

show 6 replies
PolygonSheeptoday at 12:35 AM

I'd gladly pay the 78 cents for a stamp if it meant my application was opened and read by an actual human.

show 1 reply
chipgap98today at 1:01 AM

I do think this is going to be part of the solution to a lot of AI slop is adding small fees to do a thing