Quote:
Originally Posted by goofyballer
From that list, I think everything seems reasonable except 1, 7, 10. Most good companies, probably because the job market is hot, seem to be fairly quick in their decision making process these days, certainly more so than they used to. Also, if he got just two onsites and one offer, I don't know how he can make a statement like this - recruiters can be much worse about following up with rejections, especially if they aren't 100% sure. They may want to leave you hanging just in case their preferred candidate declines their offer.
Also employers seem much more reluctant to ask salary numbers than before. A lot of companies nowadays offer constructive feedback, maybe not at the level of detail that you'd want, but certainly more so than they used to in the past.
I will add that those numbers (82/25/15/2/1) are bad enough that I don't think he's aware enough of how he's coming across during interviews for me to take seriously comments like this: "I got all the way to the end, nailed everything perfectly and then never found out why I didn’t get it." It's far more likely that he's unaware of what he's doing poorly (relative to other candidates) than that he's nailing everything and mysteriously getting rejected. Age discrimination is a factor but if he got past just 2 out of 15 tech screens, it's just about impossible for him to nail everything perfectly in any onsite.
It's also a bit strange that he's spent years as "VP of Engineering" at various companies and managed 35-45 people at some point but can't seem to empathize with how hard it is to hire people and why things are the way they are from that end.