And if they “have to be in person” is that because you are doing programming with specialized equipment?
I can’t imagine hiring a bunch of new grads can actually end up being productive. Back in the day you would open an office in a place where you can get relatively cheap experienced devs like the suburbs of Atlanta (where I use to live).
Yes, specialized equipment, and also restrictions on what systems we can do some of our work on.
My organization isn't a run-of-the-mill software shop. We're an FFRDC (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federally_funded_research_and_...) that does applied research for the US government. As such, our culture is to bring people in who we can develop and retain for a long time. A junior staff member's tasking and skill set may be limited to software development. But eventually they grow into technical experts on whole systems and use-cases, or team leads with established relationships with external stakeholders.
I'm in the latter position, and I'm pretty good at identifying, recruiting, and developing people right out of school. To go back to the original topic, resume-spamming isn't the way you end up in an organization like mine.
But then we get into the whole “salary compression and inversion” where because of HR dynamics vs market dynamics, you’re almost always better jumping ship after the first 2-3 years.
As a hiring manager, that’s out of your control. So you know that you usually can’t get more than 2-3 years out of an employee. If they are spending the first year doing “negative work”, is ur worth it?
I can’t imagine hiring a bunch of new grads can actually end up being productive. Back in the day you would open an office in a place where you can get relatively cheap experienced devs like the suburbs of Atlanta (where I use to live).