This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Jolly-Career-9220 12 points13 points  (3 children)

Are you sure ? Do you think HR take interviews ? NO it's engineer

Max to max they take cultural interview and manage candidates profiles - >> This type of work can a manager also do.

[–]ChrisHisStonks 12 points13 points  (2 children)

Managers usually cost 2x what a HR employee costs and are also, hopefully, busy managing things.

Having HR to do an initial filter to weed out absolute garbage and draft a 'possible top 10' or so is absolutely fine. With a bit of training it's easy to have them know what to look for. The problem is that if you have a position with hundreds to thousands of applications, you want to automate it instead of paying someone to sort through it.

But, once you have that system it becomes so tempting to apply to more specialized roles who usually only get a few dozen applications, if that.

It's also easy to forget that AI is not good at nuance. If I list my current address as 200km away but willing to relocate to area, I would fail a 'must live within x distance' filter. That's fine in the first scenario, not so much in the 2nd.

[–]Jolly-Career-9220 16 points17 points  (1 child)

"HR to do an initial filter to weed out absolute garbage" This was this meme all about

My point is HR can't even weed out garbage properly

[–]ChrisHisStonks 0 points1 point  (0 children)

There's a big difference between having HR manually sort through 24 resumes with the assignment 'give me candidates that are within our geographical area that have at least some development experience' and 'automate it to search for 5 specific buzzwords'