Ask HN: Who is hiring? (January 2025)
The January 2025 “Who is hiring?” thread on Hacker News showcases hundreds of openings across startups and established firms, with heavy demand for senior software engineers, AI/ML specialists, data and DevOps roles, and a noticeable focus on developer tools, healthcare, fintech, and security. Many companies now offer fully remote or hybrid arrangements, but applicants frequently encounter geographic and visa restrictions, as well as opaque or highly selective hiring funnels. Commenters also highlight concerns about keyword-based resume screening, offshoring versus local pay expectations, and the lack of basic candidate communication such as rejection emails.
Hiring processes & candidate experience
- Several commenters report frustration with perceived automated screening and keyword-based rejection, despite employers asserting that humans review all resumes and auto-reject only on gating questions (e.g., visa, background checks).
- Ghosting is a recurring complaint: candidates mention never hearing back after multiple applications; one company explains volume makes individual rejections difficult, others are urged to at least send rejections if they brand themselves as “lovable.”
- Some positive notes appear too: a few applicants praise particularly transparent, respectful, or well-run interview processes, citing clear communication and realistic work-sample–style assessments instead of heavy LeetCode rounds.
- A quant trading firm outlines its interview process (take-home coding, technical phone screens, onsite rounds) and clarifies differences between math-heavy and purely engineering roles.
Remote work, visas, and geography limits
- Many roles are remote but constrained by geography (US-only, EU-only, Canada-only, LatAm-only); several commenters question why companies can’t hire outside those regions when work is fully remote.
- Some employers cite tax, labor law, and HR complexity across states or countries as the main reason; others say they’re simply “not set up” for visas or non‑US payroll.
- There’s nuanced discussion around EU hiring: restrictions based on current residence vs citizenship can be misleading and may conflict with some movement rights; wording in some job posts is criticized as confusing.
- A few companies leave the door open to exceptions for standout candidates or to explore hiring Canadians (sometimes via TN visas), but most emphasize current limitations.
Compensation, offshoring, and fairness
- Pay transparency varies: some give clear salary ranges, others avoid disclosing numbers, prompting questions and mild pushback.
- A junior India-based backend role at a compensation-transparency site sparks debate: the employer calls it “top tier in India,” while commenters highlight the irony of a US-focused salary-transparency brand offshoring engineering to lower-cost markets.
- Senior leadership roles with relatively modest salary bands draw skepticism, with one commenter interpreting them as signals that the company may not truly be hiring at that level.
- There’s recognition that cost of living differences matter (e.g., between Tennessee and the US coasts), but some still argue principal-level ranges look low compared to big-tech standards.
Logistics & job-posting quality
- Multiple people point out broken application links, misconfigured CAPTCHAs, or unclear contact info, and occasionally get quick fixes or clarifications.
- Some criticize opaque email puzzles or vague instructions, preferring straightforward application paths.
- A few long‑time recurring posters are questioned about constantly open roles; in response, at least one explains consistent hiring growth and very low voluntary turnover.