Remix.run Logo
Aurornis 3 hours ago

> “There is a growing gap between the candidate’s written persona and their live presence. I’ll see a cover letter that is poetic and a résumé that is flawlessly structured, but then the person on the video call struggles to explain their own bullet points.

This has always been a problem: Candidate applies with an amazing resume but then flails when you ask them questions or “can’t remember”.

I can remember a few interviews where I asked candidates about something I read on their resume (which I study before every call) and they corrected me to explain that they did something different. Then I held up their resume and pointed to their exact words and they turned bright red while they tried to come up with a new explanation.

That was rare, though. You could catch a lot of little cases of stretching the truth, but it wasn’t common to feel like you were reading a resume that didn’t match the candidate.

What has changed in the age of AI is that more people are feeling more brazen about letting the AI speak for them. These situations are happening more frequently. You get the feeling that people are less shy about trying to cheat and manipulate because it feels like the AI is doing the cheating and writing the words, so it’s done at arm’s length.

I spend some time helping with resume reviews occasionally. It’s getting sad to see in the general discussion of the group when people go from elated that they got an interview for their dream job to embarrassed when the interviewers saw right through their AI written resume and ended the hiring cycle. I wonder if we’re seeing a peak in AI resume junk while everyone tries it out, but before it becomes common knowledge that an AI junk resume is a way to shoot yourself in the foot when applying to companies you actually want to work for.

somenameforme 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It goes the other way as well though. Companies are increasingly filtering resumes/candidates in a sufficiently aggressive fashion to the point that they're strongly incentivizing, if not actively selecting for, people that are gaming the system in some way or another. Quite odd this is all happening when ostensibly the unemployment rate is very low, which should make it an employee's market.

II2II 26 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> Companies are increasingly filtering resumes/candidates in a sufficiently aggressive fashion to the point that they're strongly incentivizing, if not actively selecting for, people that are gaming the system in some way or another.

The gaming of the system has been happening for a very long time. When I was a teen looking for my first job, companies were being flooded by resumes due to cheap laser printing (either custom to the employer, or simply duplicated en mass). A few years after that, it was being flooded by online applications or applications via email. Each time businesses had to take a more aggressive stance at filtering since they had more applicants per opening than before.

I suspect that we are going to have to go back to the bad old days of relying on real social networks (not the imaginary ones people create build around finding work) or applicants walking door to do with printed resumes in hand (simply because it is going to be easier to vet someone who walk in the door than false positives from software that filters applicants out).

ipaddr 13 minutes ago | parent [-]

People don't trust people they just met anymore. The person who walked up could be a murderer. They would rather filter them through ai first or common networks.

Aurornis 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Companies are increasingly filtering resumes/candidates in a sufficiently aggressive fashion to the point that they're strongly incentivizing, if not actively selecting for, people that are gaming the system in some way or another.

Which itself is a symptom of companies getting drowned in AI generated resumes. It's becoming more common for people to use AI tools that will operate browsers to mass-submit resumes for them. When you receive 1000 resumes you have to start filtering somewhere.

What I'm worried about now is that we're moving to a situation where some level of proof-of-work that an AI can't easily do is going to become necessary to have some filtering. I don't know what that looks like, but I don't like it.

> Quite odd this is all happening when ostensibly the unemployment rate is very low, which should make it an employee's market.

Unemployment rate is not evenly distributed. If you were a licensed electrician or qualified as a home healthcare aid then you could walk from one job to another in many cities.

If you're trying to get a $200K or more tech job, then you're competing with everyone else for a shrinking pool of openings.

NooneAtAll3 26 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

I'm pretty sure filtering resume by beauty was a problem long before ai, and stems from hiring people rushing this part of the job as "useless" or smth

KaiShips an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

bee_rider 43 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I have one project on my resume that I have trouble remembering some details of. It feels weird to drop it off (it was an internship at a sort of well known company), but it was a while ago. Is “can’t remember details” still a huge red flag from the employer’s point of view, even if the explanation is legitimate?

It’s not exactly the crown jewel of my resume anyway, so I guess I could cut it, it just adds to my backstory.

jghn 39 minutes ago | parent [-]

People understand that memories get foggy over time. Well, at least most people will.

As an interviewer I allow for a sliding scale of inability to drill in on details based on how much time elapsed. Also, you'll find that people are typically pretty consistent in what they retain. Like they'll remember the big picture, key challenges, and outcomes. but they may not remember a specific technique used or other day to day decisions.

For my own resume I do a similar adjustment. As things start to age out a bit I intentionally provide fewer specifics. Again, people understand what signals like this mean.

uberdru an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Honestly the problem is hiring teams -- they have created this whole issue. They ask for a resume and cover letter. Fine. But don't make applicants put in the work if you're not even going to provide a response, or any sort of feedback -- even when the position stays open for months. The result is that people looking for jobs have to submit huge numbers of custom cover letters, and tweaked resumes, with no feedback, all within a vacuum. Hence the feeling that they need to "pump up" their resume, just to get over the initial gate.

maccard an hour ago | parent [-]

Hiring manager here - the last job I posted was open for 6 weeks. We waited 2 weeks for initial applications, and it took 4 weeks to schedule interviews with our shortlist and get to an offer, including a very unfortunate 2 week holiday from someone that allowed us down.

We got 350 applications for it. We listed in the JD that remote was ok but needed to be in specific countries for us to hire. I’d guess 90% of the applicants were outside those countries. Of the remained the problem is that most of them all have the skills we’re looking for. One thing is for sure, I read every single cover letter that came through, and I’d say that the vast majority of ones that made an actual effort we interviewed.

atoav 25 minutes ago | parent [-]

I once casted volunteer actors for short movies. It costed me literally nothing to write: "Deadline for application is $DATE, you will hear from us within X days. You will either get a rejection or an invitation to a casting on $CASTINGDATE1 or $CASTINGDATE2."

And on the casting I personally guaranteed for a date when they will get a result. Rejections included feedback that helped candidates understand our decision and improve their craft.

This is in my opinion how you do things when you have a shred of respect for the people on the other side. Actors greatly valued how we did things.

If you can't live with the insecurity of knowing whether you're able to keep those dates, just make a pessimistic guess and add a few days on top. It is really not that hard.

tayo42 39 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Resumes are written for hr

Ideally we submit 2 resumes one for the non technical people that need to be involved and one for managers.

Instead were attempting to write for two audiences (or 3?automated filters) and the less knowledgeable one will reject without talking to you

binary132 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The bigger issue is the screening filters are flooded now (and also largely AI “enhanced”) so getting real signal through the noise is becoming basically impossible.

sivalus 3 hours ago | parent [-]

I think we'll just end up going back to referrals. It might generate more nepotism, but at least the company will feel like it's doing a better job and not cause it to overly focus on hiring to the detriment of its current employees.

CuriouslyC 44 minutes ago | parent [-]

Companies will open source software just for the express purpose of finding people and having a place to screen hires securely via contract work.

oblio 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> This has always been a problem: Candidate applies with an amazing resume but then flails when you ask them questions or “can’t remember”.

Yeah, but it's now 1000x worse. Before you needed actual skill (or luck) to create a good looking CV, especially for niche positions.

Now you take their job description, the company's "About us" webpage, your old CV and have LLMs generate a CV with pretty solid grammar and most of the verbiage they expect.

In the past the average unqualified person wouldn't even know the right words for a specific niche domain, let alone how to use them.

Oh, and single LLMs are kind of inherently multilingual, this makes it even worse, because you can have people that barely understand the target language generate a reasonable CV in that language.

The CV quality floor has been raised but the candidate floor has fallen through the pits of hell.

NooneAtAll3 23 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

> Before you needed actual skill (or luck) to create a good looking CV, especially for niche positions.

so useless skill that says nothing about your actual fit for the job was changed for automatic half-skill that still says nothing about your actual fit for the job

oh no, where are my tears?

oblio 6 minutes ago | parent [-]

It's astonishing how many people working in tech don't realize the impact of automation in this regard.

This basically kills any "cold job application". Now it's all back to references and nepotism. I've gotten almost all my past jobs by applying to a job I liked, someone figuring out my CV was decent and then passing interviews.

Now the same people filtering CVs have to wade through so much crap that it's almost impossible to even pass that stage.

> oh no, where are my tears?

Very likely, waiting for you in line in front of the unemployment office, 10 years from now.

toast0 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Before you needed actual skill (or luck) to create a good looking CV, especially for niche positions.

Sure, resume writting is a skill, but it's probably not relevant for the position unless the position involves a lot of grant writing or enterprise sales.

oblio 24 minutes ago | parent [-]

Ummm.. my point was that before LLMs an utterly unqualified person would not even be able to write a decent CV.

They wouldn't be in the candidate pool because they would fail at step 0.

Now the village idiot can generate a reasonable CV for very complex jobs.

zulux an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

We ask for something stupid like "3 years of Pascal experience." If the resume has it, it goes straight to the trash unless it has specific real-world Pascal experience.

vkou an hour ago | parent [-]

You'll also filter out people smart enough to know that this is a bullshit keyword matching game and the only way to win it is to put the keywords on their resume.

Because they assume that the job posting was written by a non-technical idiot, and 95% of the time, they'd be correct, and they are just playing the game as the game expects to be played.

Look. If you're looking for 100% integrity and honesty from everyone in their communication, you shouldn't expect find it in a corporation's hiring and HR process. Everyone white-lies (or black-lies) all the time, both up and down the chain. The bones of this interaction do not value, reward, or even want honesty.

Ozzie-D 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]