I hate wasting my time applying for jobs that are there just for...I don't even know what, but certainly not to be filled. What's the point?
7 replies (most recent on top)
My org has hired at least 5 in the last 90 days. Hiring isn’t frozen, just in roles that don’t have a certain future within Broadcom.
Here’s the thing. I moved on last month and a hiring manager explained it. Depending on location you have either a very short notice or none at all. So just like a company can fire you, candidates can leave at a moments notice.
The average of SEs need about 6-9 months before they start knowing the product, procedures, command of the message, metppicc, you name it.
So if said SE, or AE, BDR, SDR or whatever abbreviation you hire, doesn’t perform, you potentially cannot afford sacking them as no contact talking to the account is worse than a bad contact.
So you keep the ball rolling just a candidate throws his CV / Resume out even though that person isn’t necessarily looking.
In my department someone took his two weeks notice but because the manager had a hot iron in the fire, new guy started within two weeks.
Just simple headcount economics
A long time back, my manager told me that they were required to list jobs in the U.S. for a period of time, even if they already had someone they wanted to hire from India. It was how they "proved" there was nobody qualified in the U.S., so they could get the work visa approved.
For my org, the broad rule is "Hiring is frozen unless you find a unicorn. Then we will move money to hire them."
So, we continue to interview.
This is exactly why nobody graduated from school saying "I want to work in HR"
The organization where "people of flexible morals" go to work and follow CEO orders
Or, they are posting just because they need to satisfy an HR policy even if they already know who they want to have the job.
Data harvesting.