Hacker News Reader

Comment by floating-io | Hacker News Reader

The counter argument is that firing too slowly can be a serious drag on morale. Leaving your team to carry dead weight can really suck for the team.

Ask me how I know... :)

View on HN

Okay, so the original argument is about whether or not it's worth it to fly people out for an on-site. Hotel and airfare: $2000 absolute max. Salary at $100/hr for one month for me to figure out it's not going to work out, then pull the trigger to fire: $24,000.

I mean, being a manager is hard, but putting in the time and money to hire and then putting in the time to make sure your team doesn't have a morale drag, it's worth it.

The catch is that even in-person interviews are no panacea. I agree that it's worth the time to filter -- I wasn't really responding to that bit -- but from what I've seen, you have to be a very good interviewer not to get a bad hire every so often.

I often wonder how many hiring managers are actually good interviewers, in-person or not, but I digress...

Seeing the truly bad hires dragged along to the detriment of the rest of the team is a sore spot for me, though. It happens way too often in my experience.

In person interview, or even coffee, filters out those who don’t actually exist and those who are reading answers from a screen (chatgpt/person)

Seems to be 90% of the problem reported on this post

$17k/month, not $24k?

If you're paying people $290k a year, no kidding you should bring them in for an on-site interview?

Oh geez, I see my math mistake. But even at $5k/mo, the point still stands.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com