• Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    30 days ago

    If the salary is wrong they will move, but having additional skills doesn’t interfere with one skill being employed.

    • qevlarr
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      30 days ago

      Hiring is about more than just “can they do it”. That’s the issue. HR isn’t trying to fuck you over. They want the best fit and that isn’t necessarily the most qualified candidate.

      • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        30 days ago

        Now you are changing the criteria to add in more things to “fit”.

        Imagine we have the perfect candidate for a job under all measures, except they have a masters (or PHD) instead of a bachelors. A rejection in that case is stupid.

        Overqualified is just code for “too expensive”.

        • qevlarr
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          30 days ago

          That’s not how it goes. You’d hire the perfect candidate under all measures. So that’s a silly hypothetical. But maybe they have another candidate where the risk is much lower of them leaving after investing training effort, or of them getting bored or finding a job elsewhere more suited to their capabilities, then it makes sense not to hire the overqualified candidate. It’s not usually this one thing, unless early on in the process and they have loads of candidates. And again, “too expensive” is also a legitimate reason not to hire someone.