undefined | Better HN

0 pointsfreyr13y ago0 comments

The process may span 8 or 9 weeks, but you'd probably actively spend about 8 or 9 hours. That's a couple hours on the phone, and 5-6 hours on site.

Presumably, you expect to hold the job for next few years of your life, at a minimum. If you can't budget 10 hours of your time, and you can't wait for a few weeks for an answer, it just doesn't sound like you really want to work there. Unless you're in desperate need for a job sooner... then I'd understand better.

0 comments

3 comments · 3 top-level

Nursie13y ago

I was unemployed at the time (I'd just moved back to the UK and was looking for work) and didn't fancy hanging around for 2 months, so there is that.

But even if I was employed I'd be looking for an out much faster. I work with 4 week notice periods (max). A two month decision process is just messing you about.

--edit-- I'll add that the work sounded uninspiring, the location wasn't ideal and I was trying to go freelance/contract at the time (successful within a couple of weeks) so their goals and mine were completely misaligned...

jacalata13y ago

I only have details for two people going through their interviews, but one of them took about 16 hours of in person time, and the other involved flying out to a different city for a day of interviews after ~6 hours of phone screening + a clusterfuckload of email time (partly due to some monumental incompetence on behalf of their HR department: when the recruiter involved left they said they had to restart the entire process).

sopooneo13y ago

Except you're effectively budgeting ten hours divided by the probability you get hired.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse