Are Google actually Hiring??

Kazujo

Just wondering does anyone know if Google are actually hiring or are they just harvesting CV's the same positions are being advertised since Oct last year?

AARRRGH

It is interesting, I agree.

I work in recruitment. I helped my highly educated (2 x Masters, 1 x Postgrad Diploma) French girlfriend write the perfect cover letter and CV for a job she was totally suited for. No response...

I know they have an anal YOUR SUBJECT MATTER MUST BE EXACTLY THIS but somehow I think their automatic filtering process is arse.

She'd be perfect for Google (hardest working, most loyal person I've ever met.) Yet they continuously ignore her perfect applications.

Makes me wonder...

HR people are notoriously lazy though. Maybe they couldn't be arsed reading through the hundreds of apps they get everyday?

whippet

I sent in a CV and got a response the following day.

I have my third interview next week.

They have a very different approach to HR as far as I can make out.

Bluetonic

dublindude wrote:

I work in recruitment.

Maybe they couldn't be arsed reading through the hundreds of apps they get everyday?

Maybe ther just couldn't be arsed dealing with recruitment agencies or dealing with an applicant who doesn't have the ability to apply without the aid of an agency.

WizZard

Bluetonic wrote:

Maybe ther just couldn't be arsed dealing with recruitment agencies or dealing with an applicant who doesn't have the ability to apply without the aid of an agency.

AFAIK they use agencies to fill the lower ranking jobs.

BuffyBot

Maybe ther just couldn't be arsed dealing with recruitment agencies

Mmmm..well their jobs seem to be advertised via agencies enough...I've often wondered about them too. They do seem to be *very* selective about filling their roles considering many of the jobs have been advertised for a long, long time.

Khannie

I applied to them recently. I had, what I considered to be a perfect CV for the position on offer. A friend who works there handed it in. A couple of weeks later I pinged her and she pinged HR. They said that they felt I wasn't suitable. I thought it was VERY odd that I didn't even get a phone screen given the high level of overlap between my CV and the job spec.

Töpher

I went for 4 interviews with them before Christmas for a position. Apparently there was 9 or 10 positions to be filled in this role, and only 3 people got invited to do all 4 interviews, of which I was one. To this date noone that went to all 4 interviews has heard any feedback, positive or negative.

//edit: This was through an agency for a "lower ranked job", being a graduate with not a huge amount of experience and all that...

Tom Dunne

FWIW, I do think they are incredibly selective and probably have a hell of a lot of CV's to pick from.

I did seven interviews with them last Summer for a tech support job (didn't get it in the end), but they were fairly prompt with feedback.

I would read from this that if you don't hear from them fairly quickly, they aren't interested. Terrible way to do business, but hey, they can get away with it.

BuffyBot

Terrible way to do business, but hey, they can get away with it.

I have to agree. For a company which prides itself on it's culture, it doesn't treat those who want to get in (from my own experience, and that of other people I know) all that well it seems.

tbh

http://www.google.ie/intl/en/jobs/index.html

"To all recruitment agencies:
Google does not accept agency resumes. Please do not forward resumes to our jobs alias, Google employees or any other company location. Google is not responsible for any fees related to unsolicited resumes"

Did you send from your agency address?

aaf

tom dunne wrote:

I did seven interviews with them last Summer for a tech support job (didn't get it in the end), but they were fairly prompt with feedback.

:eek: 7 interviews for one job and an entry level role at that! I'm glad I didn't get a call having applied for 2 or 3 jobs in Dec.

AARRRGH

Bluetonic wrote:

Maybe ther just couldn't be arsed dealing with recruitment agencies or dealing with an applicant who doesn't have the ability to apply without the aid of an agency.

WTF?

When did I say I work for a recruitment agency...?

Why do you think getting some professional help writing up a good CV is bad?

Weird...o...

TempestSabre

Sound like they don't know what they are doing..."seven interviews" is a joke for a lower postion.

AARRRGH

TempestSabre wrote:

Sound like they don't know what they are doing..."seven interviews" is a joke for a lower postion.

It is ridiculous alright. I guess it's all part of the Google mystery they're trying so hard to keep...

0utshined

Khannie wrote:

I applied to them recently. I had, what I considered to be a perfect CV for the position on offer. A friend who works there handed it in. A couple of weeks later I pinged her and she pinged HR. They said that they felt I wasn't suitable. I thought it was VERY odd that I didn't even get a phone screen given the high level of overlap between my CV and the job spec.

Actually I don't find this entirely surprising. Google strike me as a company that have grown quite rapidly and having gone public, now find themselves having to satisfy investors by being a "proper corporation" with all the middle management layers that seems to require. This has meant they've hired a vast number of people over the past few years and have had to create a large corporation from scratch and, by not growing organically, haven't had the chance to develop recruitment policies that work for their company but instead have had to rely on the HR people they've hired at the top.

To answer the original question, yes they are hiring. I know a couple of people working there but I find it ridiculous the number of interviews they went through to get the job. They are missing out on a lot of very talented people with their current recruitment process.

Tom Dunne

TempestSabre wrote:

Sound like they don't know what they are doing..."seven interviews" is a joke for a lower postion.

I should point out that the interviews were performed by the team the successful applicant would be joining, not a single HR person was involved. You were being interviewed by your prospective co-workers.

Also, it wasn't really an entry-level position, it was internal technical support for, well basically anything techy Google employees use (phone/PC/laptop/network/video conferencing gear/servers/etc.). So it wasn't a mind-numbing call center job (with no offence intended to any call center staff - I use to be one myself).

0utshined

But why seven though?

It's great that it was the hiring team doing the interviews, it's important that they have an input to the hiring process, very important. Saying that though I think seven interviews is overkill and having no HR people involved is a big mistake. Interviews give you an indication of the way a person thinks and how they solve some problems but you only know how someone works by seeing them work. Two to three interviews should give them an indication of your character. Interviews 4-7 allow people who aren't suited to the job to continue to give shít hot interviews while a person who is suited messes interview 6 and gets rejected.

Actually, how long did the interviews last? I'm guessing in the 45 minute to 1 hour range. So that was ~6 staff hours to interview a candidate who didn't get the job in the end. How many man hours did that particular team spend getting the person they did hire. Were I the manager of that team my staff would have spent upwards of 1-2 weeks hiring people for one position and I'd be píssed at that. HR should be screening flakiness and unsuitable candidates before the team get involved.

TempestSabre

People like Pilots, surgeons, MD's of corporations don't have that many interviews.

mada999

not a fan of HR..mostly because i put my foot in it at an interview when asked about how I would prioritise help desk jobs (in a hospital), i said I would attend to the most critical calls first .i.e fixing a pc that was needed in a dept to that was running an important medical application, which directly affected a customer (patient) at the moment in time, instead of fixing a pc so someone in HR could type a letter....didn't go down well with the HR person seemed like the HR person was disgusted that they were not the most critical thing on an IT persons to do list!

also had to do HR as a subject in my degree and thought it was the most pointless and most common sensed subject...

AARRRGH

mada999: when I worked in Oracle, next to the HR office, everyday I walked by their window and saw them playing games. I wondered: this is strange. As I've gotten older and worked for many large organisations: Microsoft, AOL, Eircom, Irishjobs, McDonalds - something is very very very clear. HR do nothing. They use every opportunity to prove they have some kind of supreme knowledge. In reality, their job is a part-time, nonsense profession.

It's just a part of life. Nonsense opinions and nonsense people controlling the sheep majority.

mada999

dublindude wrote:

something is very very very clear. HR do nothing. They use every opportunity to prove they have some kind of supreme knowledge. In reality, their job is a part-time, nonsense profession.

couldnt have said it better myself

AARRRGH

dublindude wrote:

mada999: when I worked in Oracle, next to the HR office, everyday I walked by their window and saw them playing games. I wondered: this is strange. As I've gotten older and worked for many large organisations: Microsoft, AOL, Eircom, Irishjobs, McDonalds - something is very very very clear. HR do nothing. They use every opportunity to prove they have some kind of supreme knowledge. In reality, their job is a part-time, nonsense profession.

It's just a part of life. Nonsense opinions and nonsense people controlling the sheep majority.

I wrote that when extremely drunk, in case anyones wondering!!

TempestSabre

dublindude wrote:

I wrote that when extremely drunk, in case anyones wondering!!

Made perfect sense to me.

lomb

dublindude wrote:

I wrote that when extremely drunk, in case anyones wondering!!

many people think best when drunk, couldnt have said it better tbh:)

Töpher

When I went in for interviews in Google the 1st one was with someone from HR. When I got called back for more I had 3 in a row which were all with people from the department I was appling to; manager, assistant manager, and a senior team member.

So they do seemingly sometimes use HR? Otherwise why employ them?

Tom Dunne

What job were you applying for?

I actually felt old at my interviews - one or two of the kids that interviewed me couldn't have been more than 23.

Our man in Havana

So they do seemingly sometimes use HR? Otherwise why employ them?:)

But is HR not used as the disciplinarians of a company, the issuer of warnings and what not?

eth0_

I think really HR are there as impartial observers, in interviews, disciplinary hearings etc.

But it really is a profession which requires no skill whatsoever.

Drexl Spivey

Khannie wrote:

I applied to them recently. I had, what I considered to be a perfect CV for the position on offer. A friend who works there handed it in. A couple of weeks later I pinged her and she pinged HR. They said that they felt I wasn't suitable. I thought it was VERY odd that I didn't even get a phone screen given the high level of overlap between my CV and the job spec.

A friend of mine handed over my cv, I then received a test (by email)
Following the test, I had a first phone interview. Then a second.

No news for 10 days ....I decided to call the HR: "oooh hem it's you hem...ok, I'll follow up on your application soon"

I received a 3 lines email:"Sorry xxxx, your cv doesn't suit our requirements"

It was obvious that the hr has forgotten about me, and she sent me a template for non succesful cvs (which wasn't appropriate).

Google is like other companies here in Dublin: they have too many resources. So many candidates, who cares about a cv...

Also, it has to be said that appart from this dreadful HR experience, Google has to be a nice place to work, according to my mate anyway.
And, customer care doesn't handle phone calls (yet) which is brilliant.

mountainyman

Google have eight to ten rounds of interviews. Because you would work closely with the states they are closely involved in the interview process. This makes it very longwinded.

You need something special 'googlism'. They are choosy and it takes them a long time to decide.

It takes months to fill positions with google. They definitely do use agencies, however agencies don't work for this kind of process because good candidates (and 'googlist' candidates are good) who are looking to change jobs will have a better paying job offer before an offer can be made from google. Also even though google is a fantastic/fanatic place to work they only pay industry average (or a bit below) and therefore agencies won't encourage people to wait.

Effectively google get people who want google and don't mind shopping dissidents to the chinese secret police and stealing from the American people.

The whole thing is a big racket.

AARRRGH

Well, when the click fraud scam properly hits the airwaves, Google is ****ed. Microsoft will be laughing their ass off.

I'm not disappointed by Googles arrogance, I'm disappointed by the retards who put up with this 9 interview thing. If someone said to me, "We need to give you 9 interviews", I'd tell them, "Go **** yourself."

whippet

dublindude wrote:

I'm not disappointed by Googles arrogance, I'm disappointed by the retards who put up with this 9 interview thing. If someone said to me, "We need to give you 9 interviews", I'd tell them, "Go **** yourself."

I am suprised by level of hostility by everyone towards Google. I believe that google get an average of 2000 applicants for each position worldwide, just 'cos your mate thought they were perfect for the job does not mean that they are even in the top 10% of applicants. Google don't spend this much on resourcing a recruitment drive and turn away the best applicants.

I am currently at interview number 4, taking about 2 months so far and I am more than happy to wait for the position offered. I have a few friends working in Google and they say that the 'peer' interviewing system is great as it tends to improve the chances that the different teams and departments work closely together.

irishguy

dublindude wrote:

mada999: when I worked in Oracle, next to the HR office, everyday I walked by their window and saw them playing games. I wondered: this is strange. As I've gotten older and worked for many large organisations: Microsoft, AOL, Eircom, Irishjobs, McDonalds - something is very very very clear. HR do nothing. They use every opportunity to prove they have some kind of supreme knowledge. In reality, their job is a part-time, nonsense profession.

It's just a part of life. Nonsense opinions and nonsense people controlling the sheep majority.

I know i am off topic, but what was it like to work for AOL? As i am going for an interview with AOL technologies in citywest tomorrow

Civilian_Target

whippet wrote:

I am suprised by level of hostility by everyone towards Google. I believe that google get an average of 2000 applicants for each position worldwide, just 'cos your mate thought they were perfect for the job does not mean that they are even in the top 10% of applicants. Google don't spend this much on resourcing a recruitment drive and turn away the best applicants.

I am currently at interview number 4, taking about 2 months so far and I am more than happy to wait for the position offered. I have a few friends working in Google and they say that the 'peer' interviewing system is great as it tends to improve the chances that the different teams and departments work closely together.

Hmmm - yeah, would be nice if they at least said yes or no though...

BuffyBot

whippet wrote:

I am suprised by level of hostility by everyone towards Google. I believe that google get an average of 2000 applicants for each position worldwide, just 'cos your mate thought they were perfect for the job does not mean that they are even in the top 10% of applicants.

I highly doubt the Dublin jobs are getting 2000 applications a time.

Google don't spend this much on resourcing a recruitment drive and turn away the best applicants.

Perhaps not, but part of any good recruitment process is to give even unsuccessful candidates a good impression of the company.

AARRRGH

whippet wrote:

I am suprised by level of hostility by everyone towards Google. I believe that google get an average of 2000 applicants for each position worldwide...

I remember when I worked for a large online recruiter who Google used to advertise on - they got very few applications.

So it really wouldn't be difficult to communicate better with the applicants.

9 interviews makes no sense. The only way to justify it is if you're the kind of person who wants to join a cult, so it's great. You feel really wanted if you get in, and for some reason feel the need to belong to something.

...

To the guy asking about AOL, they're a nice company to work for. Relaxed, good money. Typical multinational!

TempestSabre

Google has money to burn and time to waste or they wouldn't be doing this.

AARRRGH

TempestSabre wrote:

Google has money to burn and time to waste or they wouldn't be doing this.

I agree.

I think it bothers me so much because I really like Google, I really like their products, and I've really hoped they are actually "different", not just arrogant/pretending to be different.

I just feel their hiring process (note: I've never applied) and their attitude to jobseekers is poor. It disappoints me that they are like this. I expected, hoped, for something different...

(sorry if I'm not making much sense)

whippet

dublindude wrote:

I just feel their hiring process (note: I've never applied) and their attitude to jobseekers is poor. It disappoints me that they are like this. I expected, hoped, for something different...

QUOTE]

From my experience I have found them to be more than professional in the recruitment process. I have had constant contact with HR regarding each step of the process. I have been contacted immediatly with any updates as opposed to hanging around for weeks for 'yes' or 'no' type letters that I have gotten from other companies.

eth0_

dublindude wrote:

I helped my highly educated (2 x Masters, 1 x Postgrad Diploma) French girlfriend write the perfect cover letter and CV for a job she was totally suited for. No response...

tbh, someone who's spent that much time getting 2 masters and a grad dip, how much work experience does she have? I'm guessing not a lot. She was probably 'over qualified' for the job. Personally i'd rather hire someone who's got lots of work experience over someone who's (some might say) wasted years doing an excessive amount of post graduate study.

madramor

dublindude wrote:

9 interviews makes no sense. The only way to justify it is if you're the kind of person who wants to join a cult, so it's great. You feel really wanted if you get in, and for some reason feel the need to belong to something.

the secret to beomming very wealthy is not to work your every hour you can but to get other people to do it for you.

the 2 google bosses are very smart and know how to achive above very well and this process is gromming the applicants for a life of obediance

this whole big process is to make the applicants feel important and special and if they do get a job they will think "i work for google i'm great" and forget about other important things salary advancement etc..

But not replying to applicants emails in unprofessional.
Try contacting a director or VP in google and complain about your treatment, I know its hard because you want a job and don't what to make a fuss(part of the cult mentality before you even have a job) but you have the right to be treated with respect.
See if you could get something in the media about it(google would hate that)
ie
google are ment to be employing X number of people yet they don't even reply to job applicants emails.
So much for the creators of Gmail.
try and rollin the constant government reports about shortage of IT workers

whippet

madramor wrote:

the secret to beomming very wealthy is not to work your every hour you can but to get other people to do it for you.

the 2 google bosses are very smart and know how to achive above very well and this process is gromming the applicants for a life of obediance

this whole big process is to make the applicants feel important and special and if they do get a job they will think "i work for google i'm great" and forget about other important things salary advancement etc..

But not replying to applicants emails in unprofessional.
Try contacting a director or VP in google and complain about your treatment, I know its hard because you want a job and don't what to make a fuss(part of the cult mentality before you even have a job) but you have the right to be treated with respect.
See if you could get something in the media about it(google would hate that)
ie
google are ment to be employing X number of people yet they don't even reply to job applicants emails.
So much for the creators of Gmail.
try and rollin the constant government reports about shortage of IT workers

rubbish.

I have applied for a job with Google, and you are saying that the selection process is designed to make me 'feel important' and to make me submissive to the two CEO's? you obviously have no idea how hard it is to recruit staff. I have been recruiting for a few years in my current job and if I always try to have at least 2 or 3 people meet a candidate before making a decision.

You think that there is any CEO of a Billion dollar multinational who does not delagate non strategic tasks? you must have a very naive and sheltered view of the ways of the business world.

TempestSabre

I've heard it great place to work for and they are very picky about who they take. But obviously from the replies here theres no consistency in their approach.

madramor

whippet wrote:

I have applied for a job with Google, and you are saying that the selection process is designed to make me 'feel important' and to make me submissive to the two CEO's?

yes

Will you work harder in google than you would in your current job?
(extra hours, less sickdays, etc..)

whippet wrote:

you obviously have no idea how hard it is to recruit staff. I have been recruiting for a few years in my current job and if I always try to have at least 2 or 3 people meet a candidate before making a decision.

I work in the software sector and every new software role in my company is oversubscribed by about 10,000%.
recruiting process:
CV -> Test -> Interview -> Final Interview
I find it very easy to recruit good staff on the above forumla.

whippet wrote:

You think that there is any CEO of a Billion dollar multinational who does not delagate non strategic tasks? you must have a very naive and sheltered view of the ways of the business world.

The 2 google ceos control every aspect of google, they would hire a global HR manager and that person would be instructed by ceos how to develop the recruitment policy.
The Global HR manager -> Area HR manager -> Country\Location HR manger -> HR administrator

Google also promote themselves as a great fun palce to work, because happy workers work harder, if work is fun, you will want to miss less of it.
This policy would also have been initiated by the ceos

Recruitment and staffing is one of the most important factors in a successful company(you even argue that yourself) so why do you thing ceos would not take a very active role in this process?

srdb20

Not meaning to Hijack this thread or anything.

Apologies in advance!

Ive been thinking of applying to google, Ive got some certifications, comptia and Microsoft and two - three years experience.

The only thing is i dont have a 3rd level degree!

Should i still apply or will they even bother to consider me without a degree?

Cheers

MontgomeryClift

Google - A Worker's Nirvana. The Promised Land! Sure you'd have to slit some-one's throat to get in there! LOL

eth0_

srdb20 wrote:

Apologies in advan
Should i still apply or will they even bother to consider me without a degree?

Cheers

Did you not read the job descriptions? Most of them say BS degree 'or equivalent experience'.

kdouglas

Im not sure about these 7,8,9,10 interviews people are talking about...

i applied for a position (as an intern), did 4 interviews back to back in the space of 2 hours with people in the relevant department (i think one might have been hr), and then they rang me and asked me to do a telephone interview just 10 mins after i left, did the phone interview the next day, from here i was told all the information and recommendations etc.. heads back to their headquarters in the US and then i would hear back from them.

Took them maybe a week to get back to me, and this was during the christmas period, so i considered that very quick.

AARRRGH

kdouglas wrote:

Im not sure about these 7,8,9,10 interviews people are talking about...

i applied for a position (as an intern).

As an intern though

whippet

I had 5 back to back interviews on friday with people from a few departments.

I was told I should hear by the end of the week.