Yes. I think if you have a nice portfolio and attitude the Who's Hiring and Who wants to be hired are top resources for finding a job in tech (dev/sales/design/etc). Even if you don't get hired, you find a lot of interesting companies and meet a lot of genuine people
Not entirely answering your question, but from the other side. About a year ago, I made a post, we hired somebody, and then after like 3 months they decided it wasn't a good fit and moved on. Since then we haven't really looked for new hires, so we haven't tried again
Just wondering, do you think it would have helped your situation if it were the cultural norm to "try before you buy" for both parties? Obviously it takes time to get up to speed and productivity, but it seems better and more productive for you not to have an unhappy employee in the long-term.
I get that any kind of turnover is tough to manage especially if you're a small team. But if we all (employers, employees, customers/clients/users) were to became a little more prepared for a certain amount (within a short period of time after hiring), it would simply become the expectation. As it stands, companies are now afraid to hire and employees are afraid to seek due to the ever more byzantine hiring process.
It may not exactly seem intuitive, but I believe if either firing or quitting (at least within some type of trial period) became a little less stigmatized on both sides, we would all live in less fear and end up much more productive in the longer term.
Exactly and IMO we would all be better served if F/T employees were treated more as "temp to hire". Contractors would still be contractors in terms of taxes, benefits, expectation of where/how services are rendered, etc.
Yes, I do post in these hiring threads as well as freelancer threads on my personal account every month. I have been working with two companies, and have invoiced them for nearly $200k in the past ~2 years for development and consulting work. One of them is a startup, the other a software shop for startups. All web-dev & api work. In both cases, they reached out to me. I have had no luck reaching out to companies in those threads.
Absolutely, it changed the trajectory of my career into the world of startups and smaller companies. It was somewhat indirect though, I got curious about what the company I read about was doing so contacted them just to talk about their tech. It was a Rails/Ruby shop and I ended up there some time later--accidentally because another job I had lined up had a hiring freeze right after I got through their process.
Not that these are prevalent in here, but here are a few reasons:
1. A company already has a candidate in mind for the role, and they want "plausible deniability" that they didn't try to fill the role through a competitive process. This is especially true with H1B-focused roles, where they have to justify hiring non-U.S. workers. Your resume serves that purpose.
2. They have an image to present. Shareholders have more valuable stock when the company appears to be doing well (dozens of unfilled positions) vs. not hiring at a given point in time. HN would be way less effective for this purpose than a company's own corporate website, but it's still part of the company image.
3. Workers are flaky as hell, and your rock star dev you snagged at 2x market rate just got an offer for 4x at a FAANG, and now you're left flat-footed.. OR.. you list their position as open, collect resumes, and as soon as they send you their two weeks you have a deep bench of eager recruits to interview. An unfortunate side effect is that you the applicant are highly unlikely to luck into the heir apparent role.
Although it's a big world, at the very same time it's a very small world. When I see that a company has an unfilled position which interests me, and I have applied, and I am qualified, and I haven't heard of them, then I will go to my LinkedIn account, ask around and speak my mind to people. A company that does it a lot won't get far. There are also some websites (I use GlassDoor) where you can comment on companies' 'attitudes'.
