Gopnik now in foreign markets or "Why is it so difficult to find a normal programmer?"

Eternal competition

For many of us, it has long been a secret that finding a customer for a project short-term or long-term on Internet resources is a very difficult task. Basically, because there is a lot of competition: you want a maximum of work for a minimum of money. And when you respond to a particular task - you just get in a long line of candidates. The taste, of course, is mostly not very obvious, which is obvious from the posts of many employers / recruiters who write articles here on Habr. However, I am sure that each of us assesses himself more or less objectively, and if he doesn’t imagine himself as a guru of everything and everything, then at least he deserves respect, because every person deserves respect - without exception. But the freelancing market is utterly saturated. Each borrower for one project has 10 candidates per day.

I wonder how exactly the recruiter thinks?

Somewhere recently there was an article about the fact that only 2-3 people out of 100 candidates who were interviewed considered adequate by the borrower, and that a good candidate is a person who believes in your product, believes in you, and in the pasta monster, and in Bitcoin for $ 300k. In other words, the ideal employee is simply an unconscious being, which must for some reason believe in someone else’s business (and in fact it’s someone else’s, because it’s not his property, but his employer, and he only knows him for 2 hours), you, and piously believe in “Our” is a just cause, it is great to code and build architecture, and money here plays far from the main role.

Very comfortable position, is not it? I want to find a senior / team-lead developer who will write a project with zeal, giving all of himself, and not ask for good money for it. What you have just read is a demonstration of the employer's complete disrespect for the future employee. Good quality and competent work should be paid in full.

The top of the statements

"Money should not play a major role for the future candidate" (c)
')


I increasingly read such infantile nonsense in the articles of these same recruiters. And in my own experience and the experience of my colleagues, I can declare with full responsibility: Everyone, absolutely every developer with sufficient experience (3, 5, 10, or 15 years of development, no matter how much) knows how much his time and his skills are worth or minimum threshold. He could solve problems of such complexity that some did not even dream. But in an interview you can ask him about some tricky term, and he will not answer you, because in his tasks it was simply not necessary. Over the years of development, he simply forgot that such a word in his language generally exists. This tool was not used because it was not necessary.

What conclusion does the borrower make? That's right: “Oh, he doesn’t know such elementary things, and I’m just typed in Google:“ The rarest and most unused operator in an obsolete framework. ” Thus, the merchant, whether he is a developer himself or not having any idea about the development at all, is missing the most powerful frame that could strengthen the development team several times. But he did not do it, because to accept the idea “the candidate is too stupid, since he doesn’t know such obvious things” is much easier than “what if he simply forgot, because he didn’t need it in his tasks, and suddenly it wasn’t“ obvious thing, "and just one of the thousands of tools in the development, which does not make sense to memorize by heart"?

Share live examples

Recently, one “PM” with upwork, looking for a senior in the project development team during an interview, asked me a question: “What is screening and boxing?”

Seriously, boxing? Who would have thought that casting can be called “boxing”, I have never heard that word for 5 years of team development. Like “screening,” even though I know what it is.

Another borrower asked the question “what is check?”. Hmm ... I thought, probably the system word that performs the validation of a stack, but did not answer. I did not need to use this tool. At that moment, I realized that I was talking to a person who just wanted to have fun and sink the candidate, thereby humiliating him and setting a minimum price for his work. Of course, in a mild form, I sent him to hell with such questions. Of course, I added that this terminology, as well as this question in general, has nothing to do with full-stack web development, and if I had the desire, I could also fill it with terms and abstruse names, and it wouldn’t have come up either, . Of course, the interlocutor immediately turned on the back and decided to end the conversation.

As it turned out, later, there is no such system word in my language at all. But no man can know everything by heart. Especially in the field of development.

And what are the most ridiculous questions asked at the interviews to you?

Whole point

From my own experience, I will say that not all of them are such. Only half of those who conduct interviews for remote work for developers are: boors, who are trying hard to sink the candidate, maximally underestimating its importance and saving money. He is not interested in how and with what you worked, he is not interested in the essence. He wonders if you will come up when he gives you a ridiculous and rare notions that are rarely spoken aloud in the development environment. Answered? Then yes, you are well done and "so be it we will think." Did not answer? “Well then, there’s nothing to talk to you about, you don’t even know it.”
The second half is the most decent and loyal people, technically savvy, from whom I received sincere pleasure. Few people think about it (although I may be mistaken), but this whole story is only a story about money and about amusing one's ego. How to pay as little as possible, and receive as much as possible. Who wants to work for such a person? A mystery to me.

When you understand that you are asked not at all about what you are going to work with. When you are asked at a technical interview, "How many satellites does the planet Mercury" know that this is not your employer. It's just a rogue, who decided to amuse his self-esteem and make fun of the candidates. If at the same time he has a haughty speech, he constantly interrupts you or is rude - then at that moment you can turn around and leave with a clear conscience.

Such people do not deserve even a second of your attention.

Funny observation

Please note that in interviews very often they are rude and dishonestly behaving - it is potential employers. For some reason, they believe that they “have the right” to be rude, to arrogantly talk, to be late, and to mock the candidate in every way.
But why? The answer is very simple: because the candidate is obviously in a vulnerable position: he came to your office, he was preparing, he spent time and resources. What did HR spend that invited the candidate? Nothing. Often, he simply invited the person for an interview from the general list of respondents on hh or another resource.
And this is more of a psychological moment. Many people are evil in their own right. Seeing that a person is in a state that is obviously losing in terms of resources than you, you can make fun of him in various ways, and get pleasure from it, it's so easy. It's like a free attraction: Hami, whatever you want, do what you want - no responsibility. After all, today you still have a queue of the same candidates from 20 people.

Some say that finding a normal developer is really difficult.
But that’s why it’s difficult that the candidates are deliberately drowned in interviews, giving absolutely no chance of justifying their skills by asking for non-technical competence, but how he can distinguish carp from carp. The borrower laughed his pride, mocked the man, and did not bear absolutely no responsibility for it. Full winnings, and no one is to blame for anything, just “the candidate did not pass according to our criteria.” Here is the current trouble in the labor market. Nobody wants to be loyal, and soberly treat candidates, those who, in general, have also spent time preparing / road and waiting. Of course, this does not negate the fact that you need to fully check the candidate with tests or tasks. But it is necessary to do it adequately, and not as “as it suits me”.

Okay, what's the conclusion?

All that is described above is my personal experience of communication with employers and customers.
The post is written mainly for those who plan or suddenly in the future, just like me, will look for work in a remote format. Do not step on this rake, and remember that among the customers in the same way as in the Gypsy market there are a lot of swindlers, boors who are ready for everything to get more and pay less.

Truth is as old as the world: always put yourself in the place of another person you are in contact with and treat yourself the way you want them to treat you. And then a smile will come back to you more than once :)