Hacker News Reader

Comment by jiry | Hacker News Reader

The #1 job of HR is to make sure they don't get their asses sued or fined for violating hiring and employment law. The #2 job is to help hire and retain good people. What raganwald's fictional letter shows is that inspecting private Facebook posts means that both job functions are compromised far more than helped. It's the kind of argument that gets the attention of people who may not be moved by ethical arguments.

View on HN

If they focused on #2, #1 wouldn't be so much of an issue. Instead they hire on meaningless metrics and utter BS like what you have on your Facebook profile instead of your ability to do the job.

One of my friends who is an awesome salesman and was recommended by the person hiring for the job was not hired for the position by HR because he doesn't have his GED. The guy is super smart and doesn't have his GED because of some unfortunate circumstances regarding his classes being on the 2nd floor of the school and having broken both legs.

Now he's going and finishing up his GED in a couple weeks and will continue the search.

"If they focused on #2, #1 wouldn't be so much of an issue."

You do not really believe this do you?

I am very sorry for your friend. Rigid interpretation of the rules can lead to some terrible decisions. However I do not think that requiring a GED increases the likelihood that the employee is going to be the cause of a lawsuit. Humans nature is an odd beast and the list of lawsuit inducing character flaws goes on for miles. If people were able to easily screen for these character flaws during the recruiting process elections would be so much easier...

I do agree with you that it's an over simplification, there is certainly a balance to be struck but I don't think the one that's currently struck is the best one.

I definitely think that there is significant room for improvement when it comes to hiring. However I think that significant progress towards #1 through preventative screening is next to impossible.

If they focused first on #2 - finding the right people for the job - where "right" meant the proper skill set for the job, that would go a long way to solving #1 - following the law on hiring practices. For if they are truly hiring on skill alone then they have already passed the biggest hurdle HR has in #1 - discriminatory hiring practices - because skill set does not look at sex or gender or race or age or any of that.

> doesn't have his GED because of some unfortunate circumstances regarding his classes being on the 2nd floor of the school and having broken both legs.

His school is exempt from the Americans with Disabilities Act?

Like a guy giving career advice for engineers in Germany always says (I'm citing indirectly here, so there maybe is a certain spin to it): Nobody is blamed for following the "rules",so if HR doesn't get good people or any people at all they won't be blamed as long as they followed the rules. On the other they WILL get blamed if they hire the wrong or too troublesome people.

Maybe they think stalking prospective employees via facebook helps them somehow there...

This guy isn't based in Nuremberg, by any chance?

It Heiko Mell from the VDI (Verband deutscher Ingenieure). And it's possible I completely got him wrong.

frobozz is likely referring to this: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Nuremberg_defense in response to this: 'Nobody is blamed for following the "rules"'

Yeah well, that took me some time some time to get, I mean like in "I needed you comment to get it".

:-)

Reply on news.ycombinator.com