Hacker News Reader

Comment by snotrockets | Hacker News Reader

The problem is favoring candidates based on non-professional features, like their families, as you admitted to doing.

That's not what was said ...

Some positions require a degree of intelligence, there are many things that can demonstrate levels and types of intelligence.

Some positions demand a certain amount of physical endurance, there are many things that can indicate physical ability.

Some positions demand a level of stability and commitment to time scale, there are many different factors that can indicate that.

Some comments require a certain ability to read qualifiers and nuance in the English language, there are many that breeze right past such things and imagine things unwritten.

What rubbish, the only commitment for employees is to work to professional standards in lieu of money. If you need such long term commitments then hire like executives with retention, i.e. if you let go the employee before the term (except for misconduct/fraud etc.) then agreed compensation must be paid as per written contract, but you won't do it.

> ie maybe kids, perhaps a new house, maybe family in the area, etc.

None are in any way indicators of professional capabilities.

They are indicators of time commitments to the area. Re-read the thread slowly because you’re incorrectly equating “having kids means they are more likely to be stable” with “they must have kids to be stable”.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com