Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

On the one hand, this sounds like a fantastic idea.

On the other, I get sort of a bullshit-job vibe on this, in the sense that it would an entirely new type of professional invented just to paper over inefficiencies in an existing system.

Is there a way we could improve recruiting across the industry that would make this sort of specialised PA unnecessary?

(Asking not just hypothetically -- it could help me design sensible recruiting processes.)




It might surprise a lot of us here on HN but there are people who absolutely love this type of work. The trick is finding someone who also has the discipline to record notes and track all of the details.


If everyone did this, recruiters would get no advantage over sending an email with the same information, since they wouldn't be able to "persuade" an assistant of anything.

So using assistants would be one way to make using assistants unnecessary.


I don't get the reasoning, when a recruiter contacts me they tell me we think you would be fantastic for this job, and then they describe the job, sometimes no match, sometimes match. The assistant takes care of this step, should the recruiter that has a bad job be able to convince you to take the meetings even though you are a bad match?

The recruiter with good matches asks for meeting time, salary, you figure it out reply. In this scenario assistant does that. Do you think recruiter is supposed to talk people into meeting at inconvenient times, interviewing for jobs with salaries below what they require? I think none of these things make a difference to the recruiter whether you provide the information or the digital job filtering agent does it.




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: