• Steeldragon (cs)
    Op:
    The upshot of this is that this meant that if you were qualified but not referred by someone in HR, you didn't get hired. The upshot of this is that a lot of unqualified boobs got hired.
    shouldnt that be downshot...and 1st finally good story btw
  • Kernschatten (unregistered)

    They're both downshots

  • zip (unregistered) in reply to Kernschatten
    Kernschatten:
    They're both downshots

    sarcasm is tricky!

  • Steeldragon (cs) in reply to Kernschatten
    Kernschatten:
    They're both downshots
    thats what i meant
  • DeLos (cs)
    The Article:
    They hire before, during, and after periods of massive layouts.

    They must be a publishing company if they are doing such big layouts.

  • gabba (cs)

    Gotta respect CommQuack. Not every company has the expertise to interview a philosopher intelligently.

  • tsr (unregistered)

    I never really understood commissions, I mean on one hand it seems like a highly capilistic system, yet it always seems to fail in practice. What you end up with is people trying to get the "most" of anyting that's comissioned (sales, referrals whatever) instead of the best. Salary should be hte way to recruit and retain employees. Then if they aren't doing their job well, you fire them.

  • Leak (cs) in reply to DeLos
    DeLos:
    The Article:
    They hire before, during, and after periods of massive layouts.
    They must be a publishing company if they are doing such big layouts.
    Almost exactly what I was thinking... or maybe it really should have said "massive playoffs"...

    Also - Mr. Buttle? Or is that "Mr. Tuttle" with a flyspeck on it?

    np: 808 State - Open Your Mind (Sound Garden Mix) (808 Archives Part II)

  • Mike Aukherts (unregistered) in reply to tsr
    I mean on one hand it seems like a highly capilistic system
    I don't think that word means what you think it means.
  • NSCoder (cs) in reply to Mike Aukherts
    Mike Aukherts:
    I mean on one hand it seems like a highly capilistic system
    I don't think that word means what you think it means.
    Do you mean to imply that it's a word, and means something, or are you being sarcastic?
  • sibtrag (cs) in reply to Leak
    Leak:
    Also - Mr. Buttle? Or is that "Mr. Tuttle" with a flyspeck on it?

    I just thought that Mr. Buttle had been Mr. Assle before he was censored.

  • HR (unregistered)

    Qualcomm?

  • BobB (cs)

    Had one person apply for an assistant admin job saying in their resume they had experience with MS2k and MS2k3 server tech. Upon coming in for the interview, we asked several questions (I thought the questions were very basic: You have to add new user Sally Mustang to the LawUsers user group on the local machine, how would you go about this?) but we kept getting either blank stares or for some odd reason references to the MS Office suite of software.

    Before he left he gave us photocopies certifying his completion of the MS Word and MS Excel (2000 and 2003 versions) courses from the local VoTech. Suddenly things started making sense about the interview.

  • jspenguin (cs) in reply to HR
    HR:
    Qualcomm?

    The first company I thought of was Comcast... I've heard horror stories from people dealing with them. I haven't dealt with them since they're not the cable provider around here.

  • Chalito (unregistered) in reply to tsr
    I never really understood commissions, I mean on one hand it seems like a highly capilistic system, yet it always seems to fail in practice. What you end up with is people trying to get the "most" of anyting that's comissioned (sales, referrals whatever) instead of the best.

    Congratulations, you've just realised the main problem with capitalism :)

  • KenW (cs) in reply to Chalito
    Chalito:
    I mean on one hand it seems like a highly capilistic system,

    Congratulations, you've just realised the main problem with capitalism :)

    What's that? Learning how to spell it correctly?

  • Reggie (unregistered) in reply to DeLos

    Maybe they make maps. These often require big layouts.

  • RBoy (unregistered) in reply to Chalito
    Chalito:
    I never really understood commissions, I mean on one hand it seems like a highly capilistic system, yet it always seems to fail in practice. What you end up with is people trying to get the "most" of anyting that's comissioned (sales, referrals whatever) instead of the best.

    Congratulations, you've just realised the main problem with capitalism :)

    I thought that it was the main problem with a capilistic society.

    At the very least, I know that in capitalist system, it costs way too much for poor people to be able to afford their eros.

  • JR (unregistered)

    Wow, these people get exactly what they deserve - crap candidates and a high turnover rate. I don't see it could be any other way when you're hiring your candidates based on who can earn a commission for some greedy HR nobody. Damn I hate HR.

    This was a nice collection of shorts, I'll have to remember to avoid "CommQuack" (nice anonymisation!).

  • Inigo Montoya (unregistered) in reply to NSCoder
    NSCoder:
    Mike Aukherts:
    I mean on one hand it seems like a highly capilistic system
    I don't think that word means what you think it means.
    Do you mean to imply that it's a word, and means something, or are you being sarcastic?
    You killed my joke. Prepare to die.
  • pitchingchris (cs) in reply to Steeldragon

    They just neeed to deduct 5000 from the person referring unqualified people. With all rewards and no consequence, some people will have their whole family working there before long.

  • SeekerDarksteel (cs) in reply to Chalito
    Chalito:
    I never really understood commissions, I mean on one hand it seems like a highly capilistic system, yet it always seems to fail in practice. What you end up with is people trying to get the "most" of anyting that's comissioned (sales, referrals whatever) instead of the best.

    Congratulations, you've just realised the main problem with improperly executed capitalism :)

    FTFY.

    In a properly functioning capitalist system, producers are rewarded for producing the highest quality product for the lowest cost by selling an increased volume of product. The problem in the commission system described in this story is that it fails to reward quality properly. This is a fault in the commission system, rather than the idea of capitalism.

  • notme (unregistered) in reply to Chalito
    Chalito:
    I never really understood commissions, I mean on one hand it seems like a highly capilistic system, yet it always seems to fail in practice. What you end up with is people trying to get the "most" of anyting that's comissioned (sales, referrals whatever) instead of the best.

    Congratulations, you've just realised the main problem with capitalism :)

    No, he didn't. There are some inherent problems with capitalism, but this is just "capitalism done wrong".

  • themagni (cs) in reply to Leak
    Leak:

    Also - Mr. Buttle? Or is that "Mr. Tuttle" with a flyspeck on it?

    His real name is Mr. Assle.

  • Yep (unregistered)

    Clbuttic.

  • Glazius (unregistered)

    So HR was practicing Kant's Categorial Hiring Imperative, then: act as though the person you would hire for some job could be hired for any job.

    There's a reason why Kant didn't last long in HR.

  • immitto (unregistered) in reply to tsr
    tsr:
    I never really understood commissions, I mean on one hand it seems like a highly capilistic system
    So what capital (means of production) do the people getting the commissions have?
  • Frenchier than thou (unregistered) in reply to immitto
    immitto:
    tsr:
    I never really understood commissions, I mean on one hand it seems like a highly capilistic system
    So what capital (means of production) do the people getting the commissions have?
    Whatever they pull the candidates out of....
  • Benanov (cs)

    If I were on the interviewing team, I'd collude with an HR rep at that company. Go in for some very attractive split (say,80/20 in their favor) for that $5000 referral fee.

    The referral doesn't go to me, it's put under the HR rep. Their incentive is that I hire the person citing some obscure resume line item that actually looks attractive--but we know that the hiree is actually no good. When it "doesn't pan out," we let the new employee go a few months later when it's clear they lied.

    Collect $1000, repeat every 3-4 months.

    Since every other HR person is making sure there's some name on the referral, it won't be too obvious if you spread it out enough.

  • Addison (unregistered) in reply to themagni
    themagni:
    Leak:

    Also - Mr. Buttle? Or is that "Mr. Tuttle" with a flyspeck on it?

    His real name is Mr. Assle.

    I am at work. STOP MAKING ME LAUGH.

  • spejic (unregistered) in reply to Glazius
    Glazius :
    So HR was practicing Kant's Categorial Hiring Imperative, then: act as though the person you would hire for some job could be hired for any job.

    There's a reason why Kant didn't last long in HR.

    Dude, your comment is, like, ok an all, but it would be soooooo much more rockin' on a Mac. I mean, like, ROCKIN'!

    I hope that wasn't to technical for you, bro.

  • Glow-in-the-dark (unregistered) in reply to Benanov
    Benanov:
    If I were on the interviewing team, I'd collude with an HR rep at that company. Go in for some very attractive split (say,80/20 in their favor) for that $5000 referral fee.

    The referral doesn't go to me, it's put under the HR rep. Their incentive is that I hire the person citing some obscure resume line item that actually looks attractive--but we know that the hiree is actually no good. When it "doesn't pan out," we let the new employee go a few months later when it's clear they lied.

    Collect $1000, repeat every 3-4 months.

    Since every other HR person is making sure there's some name on the referral, it won't be too obvious if you spread it out enough.

    OK, now do tell: do you think you have discovered something new here, or do you think you have just unearthed why a lot of the larger companies employ crap staff?

  • Technical Thug (cs) in reply to HR
    HR:
    Qualcomm?
    No, dummy, the story explicitly said "CommQuack."

    Jeeze!

  • Dazed (unregistered)

    Another gentleman's résumé was two pages long.

    A couple of years ago we needed someone who was fairly experienced for a consultancy position. One of the CV's submitted was indeed just two pages long, with everything described so briefly that one really couldn't tell what he'd done. But another one was - wait for it - forty-eight pages long! It's the only time I've rejected a candidate without reading his CV.

  • realmerlyn (cs)
    even right clicking (take that, Mac applicant)

    Hey, stop dissing on the Mac, using your decade-old view of what a Mac does. OS9 and OS X have had completely integrated support for multi-button mice from the beginning. Be nice.

  • Bob (unregistered)

    Was it Mr. Buttle, in the server room with the candlestick er... I mean mouse?

  • Pedantic (unregistered)
    TFA:
    Each referred employee that turned into a hire netted the referrer a cool $5,000.00.

    TRWTF is that someone keeps referring employees to be hired when they presumably already work there.

  • 5|i(3_x (unregistered) in reply to SeekerDarksteel
    SeekerDarksteel:
    Chalito:
    I never really understood commissions, I mean on one hand it seems like a highly capilistic system, yet it always seems to fail in practice. What you end up with is people trying to get the "most" of anyting that's comissioned (sales, referrals whatever) instead of the best.

    Congratulations, you've just realised the main problem with improperly executed capitalism :)

    FTFY.

    In a properly functioning capitalist system, producers are rewarded for producing the highest quality product for the lowest cost by selling an increased volume of product. The problem in the commission system described in this story is that it fails to reward quality properly. This is a fault in the commission system, rather than the idea of capitalism.

    +1

    There is still a profit motive for the company as a whole to waste as little time as possible in the hiring process. A shrewd executive would realize this and adjust the compensation process accordingly. All else being equal, this company is going to be punished by the market until they figure things out. That's not to say that they won't prosper--they employ Grig afterall... Just not as much as they could with sane hiring practices.

    And if they never have a shrewd exec at the helm, it's all the easier for them to be surpassed in the market by somebody with a little competency.

  • Vizzini (unregistered) in reply to Mike Aukherts
    Mike Aukherts:
    I mean on one hand it seems like a highly capilistic system
    I don't think that word means what you think it means.

    Inconceivable!

  • jordanwb (cs) in reply to realmerlyn
    realmerlyn:
    even right clicking (take that, Mac applicant)

    Hey, stop dissing on the Mac, using your decade-old view of what a Mac does. OS9 and OS X have had completely integrated support for multi-button mice from the beginning. Be nice.

    Certainly took them long enough. Windows had multibutton mouses in Windows 3.1 (possibly earlier)

  • Kiss me I'm Polish (cs) in reply to jordanwb
    jordanwb:
    realmerlyn:
    even right clicking (take that, Mac applicant)

    Hey, stop dissing on the Mac, using your decade-old view of what a Mac does. OS9 and OS X have had completely integrated support for multi-button mice from the beginning. Be nice.

    Certainly took them long enough. Windows had multibutton mouses in Windows 3.1 (possibly earlier)

    Using an Apple notebook, where you get to use only one button and not even a touchpad tapping to simulate clicks, I always feel like somebody just cut my fingers. I've just recently discovered they had some cryptic multitouch, which involves putting your TWO hands on the touchpad. I'm sorry, it's difficult to be nice ;,(

  • Vechni (cs) in reply to notme
    notme:
    Chalito:
    I never really understood commissions, I mean on one hand it seems like a highly capilistic system, yet it always seems to fail in practice. What you end up with is people trying to get the "most" of anyting that's comissioned (sales, referrals whatever) instead of the best.

    Congratulations, you've just realised the main problem with capitalism :)

    No, he didn't. There are some inherent problems with capitalism, but this is just "capitalism done wrong".

    Which is what our civilized world has currently.

  • Spectere (cs) in reply to Kiss me I'm Polish
    Kiss me I'm Polish:
    Using an Apple notebook, where you get to use only one button and not even a touchpad tapping to simulate clicks, I always feel like somebody just cut my fingers. I've just recently discovered they had some cryptic multitouch, which involves putting your TWO hands on the touchpad. I'm sorry, it's difficult to be nice ;,(
    Oh, that's okay. You could always try using the Mighty Mouse, where the simple act of clicking while your middle finger is resting surface of the mouse counts as a right-click. I'm sorry, Apple, but I doubt I'd be able to give up my 18-year-long habit of resting my fingers on the mouse while I work just to suit a silly gimmick like touch-sensitive "buttons."

    Apple's still all about the single-button mouse, but at least OS X finally supports higher-end mice. Actually, it might even support them a little too well in some ways. Let's just say, I hope that they finally fixed that thing with Exposé (and possibly other features, I don't really know) that allows you to bind a certain function to one of 64 mouse buttons. Yikes.

  • Smash King (cs) in reply to Kiss me I'm Polish
    Kiss me I'm Polish:
    jordanwb:
    Certainly took them long enough. Windows had multibutton mouses in Windows 3.1 (possibly earlier)
    Using an Apple notebook, where you get to use only one button and not even a touchpad tapping to simulate clicks, I always feel like somebody just cut my fingers. I've just recently discovered they had some cryptic multitouch, which involves putting your TWO hands on the touchpad. I'm sorry, it's difficult to be nice ;,(
    I don't know why you all are bashing Mac's lack of a second button. I even heard they thought of adding support to a console joystick long before any other system. [image]
  • Jimbob (unregistered) in reply to Kiss me I'm Polish
    Kiss me I'm Polish :
    Using an Apple notebook, where you get to use only one button and not even a touchpad tapping to simulate clicks, I always feel like somebody just cut my fingers. I've just recently discovered they had some cryptic multitouch, which involves putting your TWO hands on the touchpad.

    MacBooks have had tap-to-click for a long time and the new MacBooks come with mulit-touch which allows the following:

    1. Place two fingers on the touchpad & click the button - right click.
    2. Tap two fingers on the touchpad - also right click.
    3. Place two fingers on the touchpad & drag - scroll in any direction.

    While this isn't as good as a 2+ button mouse this is far better than any other touchpad on the market. Whenever I switch to a different laptop it takes me 5-10mins to get used to the crude touchpad.

    BTW - I'm not a Mac fanboi but I do credit them when they deserve it.

  • BottomCod3r (unregistered)

    At my company, we make sure to hire competent engeneers by using a process with no less than 12 interviews. Sometimes, they would do multiple interviews the same day with a math test in the end of the day.

    PS: I am a TopCod3r biggest fan !

  • bloodclot (cs)

    I'd really be interested in knowing where the author of this story got it from. I actually work with the "Grig L" referred to in the story and he states that this entire story is rather embellished and some is wholly untrue.

  • ohnoes! (unregistered) in reply to bloodclot

    but i read it on the interwebs, they must be (TRUE)!

  • Mr. Cisco (unregistered)

    Sounds like another company I know (Cisco)

  • Jay (unregistered) in reply to gabba
    gabba:
    Gotta respect CommQuack. Not every company has the expertise to interview a philosopher intelligently.

    True. My company once hired a philosophy major to be a software engineer after an inadequate interview, only later to discover that he was completely unable to implement Anselm's Ontological Argument in Java.

Leave a comment on “Routers, Routers, Everywhere”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article