[melbourne-pug] Question re job ads from recruiters

[N6151H]

Well said.
On 27/01/2016 11:35 PM, <javier at candeira.com> wrote:

> On 2016-01-27 16:07, Andrew Stuart wrote:
>
>> I’m curious to know why the limitations on job postings from recruiters?
>>
>
> Hi, Andrew.
>
> Thanks for asking. Also thanks for engaging the Python community as a
> member, not as an outsider. I liked your Pycon Au presentation last year,
> hope to see more from you in the future.
>
> Since I wrote the policy, and it's a bit ambiguous despite many voices
> agreeing on its main thrust, here's my rationale for writing it:
>
> The Python Users Group is for the benefit of its members. Traffic on the
> list has to have perceived benefits to them.
>
> Others have already spoken to the frustration of mismatched expectations
> between posting and interview. But it's also true good recruiters can help
> in matching jobs to candidates, if the candidates feel they have control
> over their job search, by having enough information as they go in. Cloaked
> posts are almost information free.
>
> Job postings that don't mention the employer nor the salary aren't useful
> to MPUG members on the list for the following reasons:
>
> - people who are already looking for work can already find those same job
> postings on seek, monster, etc. [1]
>
> - people who aren't already looking for work get no benefit, there's very
> little incentive to ask about it.
>
> The only benefit of job postings with no stated employer/salary is to the
> recruiters that can get a leg over other recruiters if people apply through
> them instead of going through other people. If we said yes to this type of
> cloaked postings, we'd get more of them, without any benefit for the
> community.
>
> So really, recruiters per se are not the target of this policy. Postings
> with no added value to our constituency are. Nobody has complained when
> Planet Innovation, the BOM, Biarri or Medibank (recent examples I remember)
> posted help wanted ads, not because they were not via recruiter, but
> because posting was informational.
>
> These are useful help-wanted notices, both to those looking for work and
> to those who aren't. We welcome this kind of postings by anyone. In fact,
> these are the ones that stick enough that I have told people in my circles
> to go talk to these companies if they were looking for work. I don't do
> that with cloaked postings.
>
> I understand this may not have been clear enough, so I will find a better
> redaction for the policy and link it to this email message for future
> reference.
>
>> Perhaps if there was a jobs mailing list address then people could
>> tune out of the noise by moving the job postings off the main list.
>>
>
> Anybody who wants to start a melbourne-python-jobs mailing list can do it.
> Many here might even subscribe to it, or send notices to it if they ever
> need someone. Someone has to take on the job.
>
> Regards,
> Javier
>
> [1] To be fair, search engines are spammier than recruiter emails, which
> at least usually write to the mailing list for the programming language and
> city fitting the position, while job postings on search engines are often
> fishing expeditions mentioning languages that will never be used on the
> job, cities that they hope the candidate will move from, etc. Still, the
> consensus is that cloaked job postings are not good enough for a community
> mailing list. We expect better.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> melbourne-pug mailing list
> melbourne-pug at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/melbourne-pug
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/melbourne-pug/attachments/20160128/83977665/attachment.html>