Re:Tell HN: Recruiters are lying about remote positions
by noasaservice on Thursday April 07, 2022 @01:47PM
(#30947940)
As much as it pains me to say it... In my experiences if the recruiter email has an Indian name, it's going to be an uttar shitshow.
They will lie to you, blatantly.
They'll use non-standard English that will have tons of ambiguities and brokenness. I believe this is a benefit to them, to provide ambiguity.
The remote/hybrid/in-person status is whatever you ask, and will be updated to the real answer when talking to the client.
The job will flip/flop from to w2 and c2c by whatever you seem to express.
Pay is whatever they think you will like.
There's "benefits" until it flips to contract with no benefits.
Now, that's not to say that a standard American recruiter is somehow good. They're also pretty sketch as well. But so far, in 2y of looking for a new job, 100% of the Indian recruiters have not "did the needful" for me.
Someone deserves to be named and shamed, with the caveat of, there must be an agreement to actually accept the results of further digging.
If the recruiter said yes to a remote position that wasn't, the fault is rightly on the recruiter. If the recruiter was told remote was fine only for eventual reneg when ink was being put to paper... That is absolutely a reputation hit the client of said recruiter needs to take.
Fixing a fault requires identification, localization & characterization, and remediation.
This fault has been identified, but not localized and characterized.
Ergo, if remediation is the goal, naming and shaming absolutely needs to happen.
And everyone involved, up to the company execs making the decision themselves should understand the importance of this dynamic unless they've all been playing games to get to where they are, in which case, the callout is doubly needed.