Saw this a number of times at my last job.

Things we encountered:

- candidates that were clearly talking to someone between getting asked a question and answering

- entirely different person interviewing than showed up to the job

- one person on the coderpad, another person on camera (and hiding this fact)

A surprising amount of comments trashing companies for trying to protect themselves from fraudulent candidates —- reality check required. If the person who interviews and the person who shows up for the job are different, companies are well within their right to terminate that employment. The point of the interview is to see if that person should be hired. If you’re unhappy about this, you’re probably in on the scam.

Virtual assistants, greedy programmers: https://www.teamblind.com/post/Working-3-full-time-jobs-for-...

The root of this problem is that technically speaking, most people doing recruiting don't know their head from their ass when it comes to technology. I don't mean having actual programming experience, I just mean having enough basic high-level understanding to have a little intelligent conversation with somebody. This lack of knowledge means that the only method most recruiters have to try and rank people is asking the pointless "How many years of experience do you have with X technology?" questions that are easy to just totally bullshit your way through.

A good technical recruiter ought to be able to have a 5-10 minute conversation with a job-seeker about stuff they can't easily bullshit: going into depth on a past project or asking them a system design question in a particular domain and having enough sense to ask a good followup question or 2 and knowing if their answers are anywhere near reasonable.

> recently we dismissed developer after discovering he was working (also full time) at another company (we coordinated termination on both sides - I'm not even sure if it made him without work or just removed 2 out of N jobs)

Was the person doing their job or not? I can understand firing somebody if he was not performing, and I can almost understand firing somebody if they have more than one job and work with some sensitive/confidential information and might be a risk in some fashion with 2 jobs in a similar industry, but it seems pretty mean-spirited to go after both jobs.

Honestly, I'd be more inclined to fire a manager who couldn't tell their employee wasn't working 1 job than the employee who was industrious enough to perform at 2.

My contract states that I am expected to use my full work time with my employer and can't have another job. I think that this is a pretty common clause. It's not just about the hours but more the focus and energy.

> It's not just about the hours but more the focus and energy.

I understand the ostensible justification, but is that the real one?

Let's say that an employee does all of the work asked of them at a 100K salary and performs well, and still manages to hold down another n jobs.

What's the core issue here?

It feels like the real issue is that a boss is feeling a little butthurt that they didn't get to extract ($100K * n) production out of a $100K salary.

If somebody should be feeling wronged here, it's the person who is capable of doing ($100K * n) work getting paid $100K even though he's n times more productive than his peers who might be getting paid as much or even more than him.

I agree all those other things are annoying/fraudulent, but...

> recently we dismissed developer after discovering he was working (also full time) at another company (we coordinated termination on both sides - I'm not even sure if it made him without work or just removed 2 out of N jobs)

I don't think I've ever heard a reasonable objection to this, assuming 1. the person's second job is not with a competitor, 2. they are not sharing confidential information (keep both jobs air gapped and separate) and 3. the person is performing up to expectations at both jobs.

We applaud low income service workers who bust their butts working multiple jobs (often 40 hours each) to make ends meet, but when it comes to office workers getting a second job, that's taboo. Doesn't make sense.

Yeah kind of scummy to get them fired elsewhere too. CEOs and board members do this all the time but god forbid middle class try to get ahead by working hard.

The difference is in hiding the fact and being transparent/disclosing it. Are you seriously saying you think it's fine to not disclose one or more other full time jobs you're doing at the same time while working remotely as developer?

When I'm not working, sometimes I busk on the street corner. Should I disclose that?

If you're doing it every workday full time during the time that you're suppose to work - yes, you should.

If you expect to busk on the street corner during company time, what do you think?

What is company time when you're +8 hours from an employer, and you complete your work?

And yes, I do busk in lieu of taking lunch sometimes.

When you complete your work - that's a big if - your company probably won't give a crap about the rest and will want to keep you.

If you keep barely completing fraction of your work, say 5% what you'd normally expect, it's a problem and looking at contract agreement where you agreed to work certain amount of hours for exchange of salary - that is not full-filled starts to matter.

Same way from PoV of employee it would not be fair if company would start to wire you fraction of agreed salary because they're also working with other developers at the same time and you just have to deal with it.

> but god forbid middle class try to get ahead by working hard.

It only works as long as it's a niche behavior, because if not the system will adjust and it'll inflate the supply of labor

You can't have 2 full time jobs at the same time and be for real.

You can say you'd like to perform work for two different companies and negotiate your working hours and conditions with both.

I don't personally have a dog in this race because I'm happy working a single job, but I think you might be making assumptions that don't necessarily apply to all full-time jobs.

If at your company, "duration of time someone's butt is in their seat" is a meaningful business measurement, then by all means, insist your employees spend the required amount of time in their chair. Most full-time jobs I've had did not specify hours with such rigidity, and the best ones were very flexible about other things we need to do during the day (even, gasp, during business hours). Your business might not be willing to provide such flexibility. Definitely ask candidates about side projects and other jobs during the interview process and make your policy clear so they know it's important. Disclosure goes both ways.

I would find it distasteful if I got fired (and then the firer reached out to another, unrelated party to continue the damage), over something that was glossed over (or never asked about) during the interview, and simply written somewhere on page 13 of the employment agreement.

Some CEOs manage multiple companies and their work hours can add up to 80 per week

Are they hiding this fact? Do you think their compensation is unrelated to how many other jobs they're performing at the same time?

Just to add to it, looking from time perspective you feel like a fool, there were many occasions in span of several months when SU/meeting couldn't be attended; already constrainted due to timezone difference, you'd think he'd make an effort to at least be available during short overlap hours, but couldn't because:

- had to pick up mom from airport

- had doctor's appointment

- electricity was cut off the building

- mom is out of medicines

- traveling back to my hometown

- still at airport going back home

- checkup with my mom

- at hospital

- my mom is getting gallstones removed (she was fine after operation!)

- have dental appointment

- i have follow up checkup

- have problems peeing for last days, decided to check at it at hospital

- wasn't able to check in yesterday sorry

- not feeling good today

- can't attend

- driving back from pharmacy

- had some headache this morning

- can't join accompanying my mom for her monthly checkup

- can't attend bought some meds for mom and got stuck in traffic going home

- power interruption in my area

- picking up my sister at the airport

- had fever

- still not feeling well hopefully my tonsils will heal tomorrow

- internet today is on/off in my area maybe due to weather

- my internet is off restarting my router

- i'm on m1

- dropping my brother at airport

- having connection issues

- there was line cut off near our area

- having issues due to upgrade in our area

- currently travelling to my province

- heavy traffic on friday

- can't join will be driving my brother to the airport and there can be traffic

- having some connection issues atm

- sorry can't attend today

- having some connection issues

- having issues connecting

- may be late sorry (not joining)

...

I had this happen too. I started a spreadsheet to keep track just to show my bosses that I wasn't crazy, something seemed very off. The excuses I got were more questionable than these. I got very lucky when they were let go as part of a layoff, never had to really confront them about it.

>- i'm on m1

I assume that's a mac, can't blame the poor fella :D

I was thinking the same thing. Unless you know the situation of the employee, working to get them fired from both jobs can seriously put them in a bad financial position + loss of benefits, especially medical benefits. If they aren't happy with that just terminate employment. To go after them to get terminated from both jobs is just being an asshole.

> We applaud low income service workers who bust their butts working multiple jobs (often 40 hours each) to make ends meet, but when it comes to office workers getting a second job, that's taboo. Doesn't make sense.

Hit the nail on the head!

I mean, good.

My employment contract has right on there that all outside employment will be disclosed. And because I pay salary, I am expecting that all of your efforts will go towards my job.

Try to lie and hold two jobs? I will 100% fire you, and get the other place to fire you. In fact I have done this once myself as well.

> And because I pay salary, I am expecting that all of your efforts will go towards my job.

Why? Most (even salaried) full-time contracts require something like 38-40 hours per week. So long as what your staff are doing outside of those hours is not representing the company in a bad light, it should not be your concern. Trying to control what your staff do in their own time is toxic.

Why: because 40 hours is a minimum and not a maximum, I am hiring for salary not contract.

You can choose to hire double dippers then, when you start your own business. I am sure you will get a lot of quality work.

I really don’t think this view is out of the ordinary in the US. How many YV startups would allow someone to work for salary at a second job, if being paid a salary? I have seen many employment agreements, and it’s not very common.

It’s one extreme to own someone’s work output outside of work hours. It’s another to allow someone to collect two salaries.

I know someone who's getting a 20% cut for any US-only remote jobs he secures for an offshore team of developers who otherwise can't get such jobs.

All he does is interview and get gigs for these people he doesn't even know, they do all the work.

Probably something you're experiencing the other side of?

AIUI they found him on LinkedIn just based on his skills overlapping theirs while being in the US, no prior connection - it's likely they didn't stop at him. From his POV it's nearly free money while getting tons of interview practice.

I have been contacted multiple times on LinkedIn to be that guy. They disappear pretty quickly once I start asking a lot of questions and raise ethical concerns. So weird.

Hard to feel much sympathy with the remote (but only in the US) crowd.

I worked for a New York based company once, and I was moving to Washington State and planned to continue to work remotely. I told my manager, he told his manager, everything was approved...until I sent out my goodbye email - turns out they never told HR. They had just assumed it would be fine since another employee was working remotely from Montana. However WA requires companies to pay WA taxes if they have any employees there (or something like that, I forget the exact details).

The solution was to make me a contractor and it more or less worked out in the end.

The point is, hiring remote workers can have all sorts of legal and financial hurdles, even when the remote workers are in the same country. Larger companies often have global employees and are used to and capable of handling these issues but smaller companies may not be so well equipped.

Why?

Because I like US working hours and working remotely and live in Europe.

I do the same. It's infinitely more difficult to find work, which is why I always try to be 150% employed. It's not about stealing secrets, or focus, or whatever, it's because it is foolish to put all of one's eggs in one basket, especially when it can take up to 6 months to find a good remote job from this timezone.

I don’t know what that would do with feeling no sympathy? It’s a pain to hire internationally. Not like a huge one, but for non-enterprise if really is a burden.

So as a European you have a right to all American jobs? I just want to make sure that is what you are after.

Last time I checked as an American I did not have a right to all German or England jobs..

Weird way to express it. I work for a US company today, but so do lots of people from other countries. That doesn't mean I'm depriving an American of an opportunity.

Remote jobs that specify a country always seem to be US. Everywhere else has a timezone range where you're expected to work. So if as an American you'd like to work in remote GMT+/-3, you go for it.

You have a right to job??

No I don’t. But OP seemed to feel that way.

Very aggressive screening at the outset, with all the submissions in an easy to read list.

At my last job, we would ignore every single submission that didn't have a cover letter. If the cover letter has even the slightest red flag; for example if it doesn't mention anything specific about the company, then onto the next one. The next step would be an equally aggressive phone screen.

It's ruthless and you might miss out on some great candidates, but the time wasted by interviewing the wrong people is a killer.

A lot of people have stopped writing cover letters because they don't seem to have any impact.

Yeah. I don't write those.

> At my last job, we would ignore every single submission that didn't have a cover letter.

It's funny because I automatically drop a job prospect if they mention cover letter. If they request it right in the job ad and the job description is interesting, I send my updated CV and my contacts, but leave out anything resembling a cover letter.

If you care about getting to know me, set up a meeting. I already sent you a doc with what I did and where I did it. I'm not going to waste significant amounts of time on a document that I'm not even sure anyone will read. If your rationale is that it saves up your time, well it wastes mine, and mine is more valuable.

And finally, anyone can write anything about anything in a cover letter. It boggles the mind why anyone would think this sort of document has a critical role in figuring out anyone is a decent hire.

All very fair points, I suppose it just comes down to whatever the particular company is looking for. At the time it was important to find people that showed enthusiasm and would fit well with the rest of the engineers. Taking the time to show that enthusiasm in a personalised way was a good start.

It's interesting though that there are such large differences in approaches out there.

> anyone can write anything about anything in a cover letter.

I could say the same thing about a CV.

"we coordinated termination on both sides"

It's one thing to ask if they currently work there and provide the same info, but coordinating to terminate them from both companies seems like an antitrust issue.

You reach another company to try to understand what is happening and you discover whole thing rides on lies on both sides.

That's fine. I assume each side would independently come to the conclusion to terminate. But actually coordinating those terminations between the companies seems like a problem.

Maybe wrong use of words on my side.

I have a suspicion an engineer/developer I worked with was secretly working two or more full time jobs. I didn't mention it to our boss as I had no evidence - only a gut feeling. He was eventually let go anyway after being given far too many second chances to produce any sort of output. He had graduated college and started work just a couple months before everyone went to work from home due to the pandemic, so it was always ambiguous whether he failed to adjust, had crippling social anxiety, or was actually just sandbagging us & doing other things with his time.

A couple reasons I thought this was: weird timing of IM replies and un/availability, repeatedly getting caught and warned against using his personal laptop instead of his issued laptop for work (when we were in the office), an impression everything was a game to him, and the aforementioned lack of any output. After he got fired he changed his FB profile to say he worked at a different company in the same general discipline as we do, which could have innocent explanation he was just quickly hired, but maybe that was his other job or one of them.

Also weirdly his social media story posts mostly consist(ed) of trading app screenshots showing "line go up" equity gains in 4x leveraged ETFs even during weeks I know the market was doing poorly. Again just a gut feeling but my spidey sense is these app screenshots might be recruitment bait for some kind of scam.

yeah we had people join with different person interviewing for them. We now have a policy to take a screenshot of person's face during interview and compare them to person who joins. We've busted a bunch but a whole lot have slipped through the cracks.

> busted a bunch but a whole lot

Would you mind sharing rough figures and %s? Just curious on what sort of scale and environment would attract/hire a bunch of impostors.

Companies save your image without your permission and then companies are simply baffled why people don’t want to be in video calls!

I don’t think you have a reasonable expectation here.

Companies have to do something to fight this kind of fraud

It's not unreasonable to ask the candidate permission to either record the video interview, or at least have their camera on for 20s while a screenshot is taken.

> then companies are simply baffled why people don’t want to be in video calls!

never had an interviewee decline to be on video call for an interview. Are you trolling ?

> How do you work with people without being an asshole to ensure they also play fair?

Too late.

> * recently we dismissed developer after discovering he was working (also full time) at another company (we coordinated termination on both sides - I'm not even sure if it made him without work or just removed 2 out of N jobs)

You should expect a lawsuit for this. If you give me his contact, I know a few good lawyers.

Really, who cares? If they're getting their job done, who are you to tell another man what he can do with his body?

> Really, who cares?

Apparently, both companies cared. Cared deeply. Hence the coordinated firing.

> If they're getting their job done, who are you to tell another man what he can do with his body?

Quite literally, employment contracts stipulate Basic requirements such as working hours and availability.

If an employee says he's pulling 40h/week but he's actually pulling around 20h/week, if that, then the question of fraud is up.

If this was supposed to be a non-issue, why go through so much trouble to hide it?

> Apparently, both companies cared. Cared deeply. Hence the coordinated firing.

Seems like collusion, wage suppression, interference with business and interference with employment. I hope this guy sues the crap out of OP's company.

> If an employee says he's pulling 40h/week but he's actually pulling around 20h/week, if that, then the question of fraud is up.

If an employee is getting 40 hours of work done per week, then I don't see the problem.

> If this was supposed to be a non-issue, why go through so much trouble to hide it?

Because it's none of their business.

> Seems like collusion (...)

It's as much collusion as it would be if two victims of fraud agreed to go together to the police to press charges.

> If an employee is getting 40 hours of work done per week, then I don't see the problem.

You're not.

> Because it's none of their business.

What they put in the contract is unequivocally their business, don't you think?

> You're not.

I'm the most productive engineer on both of my teams and have been for the 4 years I've been working at both companies. I don't tell them. Nor do I tell them about my sexual proclivities, my rental income, my residuals on several albums I produced nor my stock, crypto and portfolio income. I manage all of that a little bit of "company time", whatever that means.

> What they put in the contract is unequivocally their business, don't you think?

No. We are forced to sign a ton of unfair contracts just for the privilege of working our asses off to make other people rich.

In this case it evolved to more like 0-3h max per week.

No, he was not doing job well at all, was on the way out really when we found out; after maybe a month or two after staring missing majority of meetings due to long list of random personal issues started paired with extremely low output.

Working full time means working full time, not fraction of a time maybe while I also work for N other companies.

agreed. You have no right to coordinate with the other employer. Just plain cowardly.

I spent 20 years having 2 jobs. Obviously, full disclosed to the employer. I was in the Marine reserves. Employers don't like sharing, even if it's for the good of the country.

Reminds me of this insane story from Ask A Manager:

https://www.askamanager.org/2022/01/the-new-hire-who-showed-...

I figured it had to be rare - how many people are brave enough to pull that off? Can't believe this is something people running into more.

I don't know if this is good news or bad for someone like me that's actively looking and not having much luck. Disappointing that fake people can get further.

We hired someone once who was only superficially competent in a niche technology that we didn't understand well. This person had a contact with someone who was competent and was coaching them. It took us a while to figure out what was happening. It was a huge PITA because they had to wait for their contact to be available to get anything done.

That's one of the main differences between being "contractor" and "full time employee". As contractor you can sub-contract your work (unless contract clearly specifies otherwise, maybe not enforceable in some jurisdictions?), as employee you can't.

A lot of this typically stems from Indian recruiters who harvest peoples' resumes. Sorry to sound harsh, but all the WITCH companies do this and are based in India [1]

[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27571707

I think if you stop offering remote positions you'll get rid of 100% of these, just saying.

Of the ones you interviewed, they managed to pass the interview didn't they? What's wrong then? Were they not making an effort to perform? Having a fake github doesn't matter if they perform well imo.

Aren't they implying the interview was with an entirely different person? That's who they thought they were hiring, not the guy who showed up.

Yes, that's what we're doing for positions we have open in timezones where we have offices. We have to cover different timezones as well where we don't have offices setup for some projects.

What law stops me from calling up a company and providing them with demonstrably factual information about one of their employees?

Neither of you can confirm the person is the same without violating privacy laws.

You’d have to go to court.

Ironically, in my last job hunt I encountered several fake jobs/companies

I learned to filter out indian hiring people because 100% of them started a conversation demanding “updated resume”. I noticed even if I said the one I submitted was most recent they would still demand I send another. Clearly trying to get more data from me.

Other than that we’re several positions at companies which couldn’t be validated, interviewers who were so clueless they had to be faking, and numerous other issues.

And of course that’s after already weeding out all the bot generated job postings.

> Ironically, in my last job hunt I encountered several fake jobs/companies

I'm under the impression that most job ads out there are actually fake job ads, or ads from companies who have no job and/or no immediate plan to offer one to any candidate. We have HR types trawling candidates for their CVs to build up impressive-looking portfolios to showcase as who they have in store for candidates, and use that to catch potential customers.

Have you tried paying them? One guy was so desparate for cash he apparently needed a second job.