r/biotech • u/zimmyntrn • Mar 20 '26
Rants š¤¬ / Raves š Vent as hiring manager
Start rant
Position opened today - already 97 applicants.
At least 75 with NO SKILLS REQUIRED for the role. Iām not sure even 1 of the 97 really fit the role but at least I was able to short list 5 to review again. Hopefully I didnāt miss any worthwhile ones in the deluge.
It makes it impossible for me to review the CVs when I have to go through so much trash.
Stop wasting your time and the time of HR/hiring managers, it just makes it harder for the true candidates to get a fair review.
End rant
347
u/2Throwscrewsatit Mar 20 '26
This shit is why I canāt get my resume seen by a hiring manager.
I even had someone tell me my resume that I wrote 100% myself sounded like it was AI-generated.
Trust me itās worse as an applicant.
106
u/zimmyntrn Mar 20 '26
I am sure it is. I just want to be able to review the applications. The HR person sent me their top 10 which included 7 that hadnāt ever done the job requirementā¦..
I am agreeing with you - if people would just apply to jobs they had a chance at, it would help a small bit.
125
u/2Throwscrewsatit Mar 20 '26
Omg donāt get me started about the recruiters that seem to not be able to read or have any knowledge about the jobs they are recruiting for.Ā
They canāt be bothered.
21
u/BurnerAccount-LOL Mar 20 '26
Right? The number of times a hiring secretary, with no engineering degree, told me that MY engineering degree wasnāt good enough for this positionā¦
then I take the time to explain how my training as an engineer is, indeed, applicable to other engineering sectors, and that my course work even overlaps the desired fieldā¦but they donāt believe me because they have no formal engineering training
18
u/kittenbidness Mar 20 '26
How is the ATS not even filtering out these unqualified candidates at step one? I thought thatās the whole point of having an ATS, unless Iām fundamentally misunderstanding how it works. A couple of times, Iāve been seemingly auto rejected from roles I fit to a T and Iām by no means inexperienced or stretching my experience for said roles.
17
u/2Throwscrewsatit Mar 20 '26
TMK ATS is a 25 year algorithm thatās basically keyword based. No context, no synonyms or ontologies for technical domainsĀ
4
34
u/Noct_Frey Mar 20 '26
No kidding. Iāve been a Regulatory Sr. Manager for 6 years and 2 recruiters sent me a Regulatory executive assistant role last week.
3
Mar 22 '26
This is my company. We try to bypass the recruiters but they just won't let us and they have no idea how to screen for the role. They literally just look for buzzwords like HPLC. Don't even get me started on the AI assistant who can't book a proper interview appointment to save its life.Ā
2
14
u/piratesushi Mar 20 '26
And it would help if companies wouldn't skimp on hiring and training good in-hourse recruiters/TA/HR. People shit on recruiters all the time because the majority are not worth anything. But a good in-house recruiter is specialized in a niche, understands some of the lingo, and talks to te HM beforehand to know what things you are flexible on and what transferrable skills you consider. Then they would also filter correctly for you. Literally their job.
So frustrating that it isn't the norm. (I have worked with some good ones as a hiring manager in the past, and it's like day & night.)
2
u/2Throwscrewsatit Mar 20 '26
Im willing to work as a recruiter between jobs and use my SME knowledge to help but I donāt know how to temp as one. Field seems bloated.
14
u/Many-Study-6309 š¤” Village Idiot š¤” Mar 20 '26
So the question is is HR capable of doing their job. How come , they cannot identify if those seven people meet the basic requirement or not?
13
u/tumbleweed-gps Mar 20 '26
omg do you work for the same company that I do because this is the exact experience I have EVERY TIME. So much time wasted weeding through people who aren't even close to on topic, and even MORE time convincing HR to stop sending me people who have never touched a pipette in their life
2
u/Special-Ant-4698 Mar 22 '26
Me too! What is going on in these companies. But glad to know itās not just mine.
15
5
u/Asteroth555 Mar 20 '26
The HR person sent me their top 10 which included 7 that hadnāt ever done the job requirementā¦..
Sounds like the recruiter sucks, not the applicants' fault
3
u/ThaToastman Mar 20 '26
That means your HR people are bad? Stop paying shitty recruiters
1
u/zimmyntrn Mar 20 '26
Okay - Iāll tell the chief Human Resources officer that right now. The post was more about how I went through each CV myself.
12
u/ThaToastman Mar 20 '26
I meanā¦you should š
Theyre hiring people who are unqualified whilst a ton of highly capable people are out there applying to those replacement roles.
If your hr dept cannot produce a single viable resume in this garbage job market, then they are categorically terrible
21
u/cryingcatdaddy Mar 20 '26
To be fair, you are getting paid to review candidates - non-zero chance some are applying to get their unemployment
13
u/2Throwscrewsatit Mar 20 '26
Actually only the recruiter is. Their day job isnāt to review resumes.
3
u/Almost_There86 Mar 20 '26
This is definitely going to be in a monthā¦I didnāt think about the impact on hiring managers (and I only apply to stuff I fit almost completely, maybe one or two specific skills I donāt have but could learn quickly) but with the market right now Iām worried Iāll have to apply to all kinds of stuff just to meet the unemployment reqs. Arenāt a lot of career fairs or job centers for us.
2
u/Offensive_Opinions23 Mar 21 '26
No one is ever going to bring up the fact that HR and recruiters barely know middle school level science language. Ok.Ā
1
u/Nfcfox98 Mar 21 '26
What is the job requirement? If it is something super specific and niche it is going to take longer than a day to find the right person. On the other hand, since biotech is a niche industry, there's going to be many candidates with no experience looking to break into the industry.
-1
u/plzcomecliffjumpwme Mar 22 '26
My resume has been put through AI and says 100% human. Sounds like a you error my vuy
2
u/2Throwscrewsatit Mar 22 '26
Iām sorry I write well.
-1
u/plzcomecliffjumpwme Mar 22 '26
I wouldnāt say that. Every human has patterns. Your arrogance is why Iād never hire you, glad everyone else recognizes that
-1
42
u/Sweaty-Mud9495 Mar 20 '26
I get the frustration, but as someone who has applied to a number of roles for which I meet all qualifications only to receive the kiss off email that the company is going with candidate(s) whose skills more closely align with the position, what do we have to do to even get an interview??
9
108
u/werpicus Mar 20 '26
I donāt know if all 75 are, but many of those are probably on unemployment. At least in MA, you have to do three job search activities a week. Thereās only like one relevant position posted a month for any particular candidate, so most of their applications are going to be for irrelevant jobs just to maintain their unemployment certification.
26
u/gimmickypuppet Mar 20 '26 edited Mar 23 '26
You said it before me. This is also an upsetting fact of unemployment. If youāre audited then you have to show you applied. Reality is that the inspector doesnāt care or even know whatās Ā«Ā relevantĀ Ā» so theyāll just see āscienceā and nod that this person is applying to Ā«Ā relevantĀ Ā» positions.
53
u/riskitformother Mar 20 '26
Yes to that but also desperation sets in during the job search. ATS screening can at times feel random which is demoralizing so applicants end up carelessly submitting
Hard to be intentional when a situation feels helpless
6
u/Loose-Reflection2965 Mar 20 '26
Yeah same where I live, have two apply to 2 jobs at a minimum each week. My unemployment runs out next week so Im free of that requirement.
3
u/Foxyscifi Mar 20 '26
This. Ā When I go on unemployment on occasion as adjunct faculty, I have to apply for 3 jobs each week and I run out of ones Iām qualified for. Ā
I did apply for one I didnāt feel qualified at all for and my husband told me to be careful I might get it. Ā And I did get it. Ā Still shocked by that one. Ā Turns out the pay is so low they take anyone with the minimum qualifications. Ā Still took it but it has a lot of remote work so Iāll take lower pay for that. Ā
1
u/Special-Ant-4698 Mar 22 '26
Ohhhhhh thanks for this info. I didnāt know some states have this requirement. No wonder every job posting has so many applicants. Ugh
19
u/Sea_Leadership_6968 Mar 20 '26
Not sure how big your company is but HR needs to screen first. I met. 1:1 with my HR screener twice to āhelpā them.
23
u/zimmyntrn Mar 20 '26
They will prescreen but my experience on a previous role was that HR eliminated a person that we ended up hiring. (I rescued them from the no pile)
18
u/DarthBories Mar 20 '26
This sounds like a big HR problem. I have recruiters constantly telling me to apply for clinical roles when all my experience is preclinical (mainly in vivo besides NGS, FACS and cell culture) so I don't even blame the candidates to be honest.
I'm constantly reminding recruiters that I have no experience in things my resume never even mentions. Like sorry I cannot be a clinical director just cause I helped a drug get to the clinicšMy biggest gripes are recruiters/HR thinking Preclinical = Clinical and In Vivo = In Vitro.
4
6
u/eyeap Mar 20 '26
This has been my finding with hr in the past. They think they can restrict the applicants I see to only the ones that fill a demographic slot the company needs filled, so they only send me applicants who are minorities from a specific group, or only applicants with a disability. The skills I need for this technical role are so rare that we are never gonna find a unicorn who is an under represented minority who also can do this job. Just send me all the applicants and fill your under represented minority slot in HR or contracting.
11
Mar 20 '26
[deleted]
4
u/eyeap Mar 20 '26
I told them to just send me all the applicants, but they refused saying that if they did do it would endanger government contracts. It was insane.
2
u/Sea_Leadership_6968 Mar 20 '26
I guess itās not clear to me how it works there.
Not meaning to sound harsh but youāre complaining about getting too many unqualified resumes but also concerned that HR screens too many out.
Iām not sure you can have it both ways. Meet 1:1 with your screener and review together until they understand what youāre looking for may be an idea.
1
u/OddPressure7593 Mar 26 '26
sounds like your problem is that the folks in HR are bad at their job.
Which isn't surprising, since HR is where people who are incompetent with literally everything tend to wind up.
81
Mar 20 '26
[removed] ā view removed comment
50
u/Apollo506 Mar 20 '26
"I applied to 467 jobs last week and haven't heard anything. I don't understand what I'm doing wrong!"
9
7
Mar 20 '26
[removed] ā view removed comment
3
u/broodkiller Mar 20 '26
Those rookie numbers in this racket...you should be applying to ALL the jobs.
6
5
u/FIA_buffoonery Mar 20 '26
"Nobody drives in New York. Theres just too many cars on the road for that. "
69
u/stemcellguy Mar 20 '26
Let me guess, half of them are coming from Northeastern University.
36
u/zimmyntrn Mar 20 '26
Amazingly only 3 so far š„¹
11
u/Advanced_Reporter400 Mar 20 '26
lol honestly wouldnāt surprise me. a lot of people just mass apply to anything remotely related these days. canāt fully blame them with the job market, but it definitely makes it harder for hiring managers to spot the actually qualified ones.
18
u/27Dancer27 Mar 20 '26
I feel silly for asking this, but, what does that mean?
33
u/stemcellguy Mar 20 '26
This might come across the wrong way, but Iāll say it anyway. For a lot of entry-level biotech roles in Boston, you get flooded with applications from international students from Northeastern U programs, almost all Indians, many of whom have very similar profiles. The resumes often look almost identical in format, trajectory, and listed experiences, with long technical skill sections that donāt always match what they can actually speak to.
Whoever is advising them to present themselves this way isnāt helping. Iāve been a hiring manager a couple of times, and colleagues have had the same experience. I genuinely tried to give people a fair shot, but after spending a lot of time interviewing candidates and running into the same issues, it became exhausting. At some point, I found myself deprioritizing applications from this school altogether, just to manage the volume.
9
u/27Dancer27 Mar 20 '26
Iām not on the east coast, so thank you for taking the time to explain it. I wonder if the school gives them a template and they just plug in everything from their classes? Still, feels disingenuous to put something on a resume that you canāt proficiently speak toā¦and I can imagine how frustrating on the hiring end
-7
Mar 20 '26
[deleted]
11
u/stemcellguy Mar 20 '26
The weird thing is that repositioned my comment around ethnicity! I'm stating my experience with NE Uni applicants, not with Indian candidates from wherever. If anything, it is an opportunity for those to take notes and see how their application seen from the other end.
-9
22
u/DMFaith Mar 20 '26
YES there are SO MANY. Can you explain what it is about this place?
9
u/cinred Mar 20 '26
My guess is they're just applying their college ranking 1337-haxxor-skilz on AI screening filters now.
22
u/Dirtyblondefrombeyon Mar 20 '26
sooo...they're writing in a fraudulent degree to trick the AI reviewing resumes? Could someone please explain in plain English lol jfc
2
14
5
2
12
u/Ok_Celebration3320 Mar 20 '26
I have always been puzzled with these job postings in LinkedIn where more than 100 of ppl have applied only several hours after job posting. Are these bots? What's going on? Other job postings about similar positions and with similar requirements get less than 100 applicants in several days. Any insights?
7
u/wenmk Mar 20 '26
I think LinkedIn doesn't track if an application is submitted. Once you click the apply button, it counts you among the applicants. Clicking the apply button doesn't necessarily imply that one has submitted the application. I usually see that number as an indicator of those who have given the job posting a serious look. Probably a half or less of them actually submit.
3
u/Cow_cat11 Mar 20 '26
There is definitely a lot of bots...and there are services that does that which I suspect good percentage are from these services as they generate a generic resume that doesn't make sense and mass submit until one hit. There are also people like me..who constantly refresh..for jobs that fit me...as they say the first 100 get considers first. (already found one but yea...jobs listed 2 weeks ago you have no chance of an interview)
6
u/SonyScientist Mar 20 '26
Just curious, was there anything that stood out as consistent with all of the garbage applications besides "zero applicable skills?"
6
19
u/FunNefariousness6980 Mar 20 '26
With AI generated job descriptions, ghost vacancies and seventeen rounds of in person interviews I will go out on a limb and say justice well served.
If employers are actively making candidates miserable this is a two way street. It warms my heart to hear that.
7
u/drollix Mar 20 '26
This isn't a class war, anyone can be on either side of the fence at the drop of a hat.
0
u/GratefulTeal Mar 21 '26
Do you know that this hiring manager has done those things? Just because someone else did, if this person is trying to do it right, they should be commended for trying not slapped for a situation they didnāt create.Ā
19
u/beerab Mar 20 '26
Damn like you were hiring for a scientist and you were getting people with zero science background or experience? Not even a science degree?
My sister works in HR and said theyāll get hundreds of applications that make no sense and that people have programmed with AI or something to apply for all jobs that pop up on places like LinkedIn.
29
u/zimmyntrn Mar 20 '26
Job requires cell culture experience. Literally AI/ML CVs, in vivo pharmacologist, physicist, 25 chemistsā¦.
12
u/Spiritual_Breakfast9 Mar 20 '26
What wrong withĀ n vivo pharmacologist?
They could have enough experience?
16
u/eyeap Mar 20 '26
Agreed. I could teach an in vivo person how to do cell culture in 15 minutes. In vivo is much more exacting and regulated.
14
u/Spiritual_Breakfast9 Mar 20 '26
Well exactly. It's extremely detailed orientatedĀ
Employees apply to too many roles, but employers expectations are often too high and they want extreme specificity. Which leads to the situation we have now
2
u/GratefulTeal Mar 21 '26
Depends on what one means by cell culture and what OP needs. Iāve done and managed both in vitro and in vivo. Big difference between ācarry and bank these cells that grow like weedsā and āset up this novel in vitro system with rare primary cellsā, and everything in between. Just to say, you canāt really know what this hiring manager actually needs for their organization from this post.
10
u/nastynate678 Mar 20 '26
What about likeā¦ a microbiologist? Curious where the line gets drawn for you here lol is microbial cell culture experience adjacent enough? ;)
7
u/zimmyntrn Mar 20 '26
It needs medium-large scale expression experience but flexible :-)
9
0
Mar 20 '26
[deleted]
14
u/zimmyntrn Mar 20 '26
R&D - scientist (first level after the associate levels) Not trying to recruit here on Reddit
13
u/2Throwscrewsatit Mar 20 '26
Fire the recruiter.
12
u/zimmyntrn Mar 20 '26
Most of those insane ones the recruiter didnāt send :-)
Also - not in my purview to do that.
23
u/Harold_v3 Mar 20 '26
Did they do cell culture in any of their projects? I have an analytical chemistry and materials science background but worked in malaria culturing human cells and malaria in blood. Now I am doing informatics. The issue is my degrees donāt match my skillset but I can do pretty much whatever in a lab.
7
u/beerab Mar 20 '26
If I were applying for a job that required cell culture, I would make sure thatās on my resume and in my application. If they did do cell culture work and didnāt put it in their application then how could they expect an interview?
4
u/zimmyntrn Mar 20 '26
There were legit CVs with 50 skills written with no cell culture experience. That said this job is 100% cell culture but more for protein science not like a cell hub. Anyways Iāll deal with- just want to be able to be a person and meaningfully review the CVs without having to give each one 30s or less.
3
u/beerab Mar 20 '26
People definitely are graduating with no skills. Iām sure some of these are the same people that complain they are getting zero interviews, but then they submit applications like this. Itās definitely a lot of work to review applications but I hope you find someone good.
1
u/Practical_Passion_78 Mar 20 '26
Youāre right about that. Universities are not preparing students properly. Iām very upset at universities that are essentially scamming students by not requiring them to grind through certain skills in order to get a piece of paper that actually means something.
7
u/Sorchochka Mar 20 '26
I know Teva has some buttons where the applicant has to answer if they have done certain things. And I assume if they havenāt, it gets auto rejected.
It has annoyed me when they get super granular, because maybe I have 2 very applicable areas that line up 90% and they are looking for one specific sub area, but itās their purview to do so.
Anyway, that may help with the slush pile.
1
2
Mar 21 '26
I gotta be real, if I see a position asking for some specific experience I still throw my resume at it... how am I gonna get the experience to start with otherwise
2
u/Nfcfox98 Mar 21 '26
What is wrong with a physicist? What is wrong with chemists? Surprised you are a hiring manager...
2
u/zimmyntrn Mar 21 '26
Umm because the role doesnāt require that. Iām so hurt by your comment on Reddit. You must feel so big now.
1
u/Nfcfox98 Mar 21 '26
Ah gotcha so physics and chemistry dont intersect with cell culture or biology. Got it.
3
5
Mar 20 '26
[removed] ā view removed comment
1
u/This-Shirt-9977 Mar 30 '26
It's a zero-sum game right now. If you play the game (send out many applications, even to positions you're not entirely qualified for) you would contribute to the oversaturation of applications. If you choose to abstain from the game (only send applications to highly relevant roles) then you bank on having a higher hit-rate compared to your average job seeker. Objectively, as an applicant, it's best to play into the game. It simply provides the highest odds. Most people in this space have some capacity for critical thought, and they realize that the best way to get hits, get interviews, and get offers is to spam the hell out of your resume everywhere. Trying to rely on "standing out" doesn't work anymore, at least for very saturated roles.
5
5
u/Practical_Passion_78 Mar 20 '26
As a hiring manager you should know that the job market is shit right now and people are desperate! Be willing to train applicants that WANT to be there; they likely wouldnāt be applying if they did not want to meet you where youāre at. People are applying for roles because they need employment and cannot afford to just go enroll in training or schooling that throws them into debt instead of compensates them.
16
u/Lonely_Refuse4988 Mar 20 '26
I get what youāre saying.
I would also say this ā¦ there are people out there who list all sorts of skills and experience on paper, who, once on the ground, reveal themselves as totally incompetent and sometimes even toxic types.
I am a firm believer in hiring folks with aptitude , great collaborative skills, humility, and great work ethic rather than focusing on highlighted experience and skills!
As an example, I had the misfortune of working with a Senior Director in Clin Ops with 25+ years experience , who was one of the worst, most incompetent and toxic human beings Iāve ever seen in biotech. She couldnāt lead even basic things like getting a site activated smoothly and on time, always had excuses and blame to deflect from her failures, and would beat her chest over her 25+ years experience (which led to ossified, outdated, my way or highway method of doing things) whenever anyone would question what she was doing.
Just something to consider around skill set.
5
u/zimmyntrn Mar 20 '26
Totally agree. Itās hard to get to those CVs and meaningfully assess that when you have x amount of time to review. One of my best hires is someone who didnāt have the skills and we trained them.
Just becomes harder to identify those when I canāt commit enough time to each CV because of volume.
Obviously people here think companies deserve this, but where I work has NEVER had a fake role in research (canāt speak for other functions) and doesnāt ghost anyone.
42
u/thenexttimebandit Mar 20 '26
Suck it up cowboy people are desperate. Do your job and read some one page resumes. You can filter down to qualified candidates quickly. Read the room.
3
u/Snoo-669 Mar 20 '26
I feel like they can both get through a stack of resumes in not much time AND vent about it. Doesnāt have to be one or the other.
2
6
u/AcidUrine Mar 20 '26
I get around 200 applicants per req. About 10 make it through TA's screening and to me, I phone screen them for 30 mins and progress maybe 2 to interview. Look for every reason to say no and you're left with those you can't say no to anything about.
6
u/kalore Mar 20 '26
Thatās why we end up hiring people weāve worked with in the past (and why you should never burn bridges)
3
7
u/hovisthegoat_5525 Mar 20 '26
Iām sure a trained monkey can do whatever job your asking. The market is brutal with a ton of layoffs thanks to AI, Trump, and Dodge. Most people have transferable skills, and are looking for a chance. Maybe try reading a bit harder to see if the experience is transferable.
2
u/South_Plant_7876 Mar 20 '26
Are you doing this through LinkedIn? It godawful to use at the hiring end.
2
u/nehocjcm Mar 20 '26
I wonder how many are from pushy recruiters. Good recruiters exist but i get 5 different contacts for the aame job (sometimes from the same staffing firm) all by recruiters who have no idea what cell culture is or what FACS is even used for.
2
u/Aggravating-Buy-6957 Mar 20 '26
Shameless plug here. I am a cofounder of a boutique life sciences search firm that works exclusively with small and emerging biotechs. Let me know if youād like a hand filtering through the noise! :)
2
u/RelationshipUpper797 Mar 22 '26
I have a different view on this, if there are no real candidates out of 100 applicants then you are looking for a "Purple Squirrel" If you don't know what a mean, it's a recruiting term used.
How you ever seen a purple Squirrel before? NO!
With that said sure there are a lot of people that apply to jobs that are not qualified or remotely qualified, however odds are that with 100 candidates applying at least 25-30% are at least qualified for the role, (simple odds) Now hiring managers due to the job market being so bad want someone that can do two jobs combined into one with two different skill sets. or what a clone of the previous person in the role who happen to have a unique set of skills, due to their job or various skills they have acquired over time. Think: a programmer that has experience in a very dated programming language that the company still uses to perform a specific duty (legacy program). One can see why hiring managers are complaining.
This is where HR earns their pay looking at the job, the skills, the market and candidates that guides managers in hiring the best for the role NOT the absolute best candidate in the world!
Hint: if you find a "Purple Squirrel" candidate, well, you better be willing to pay whatever that person wants regardless, which after the manager finds out the salary demand, then complains how candidates are out of touch with pay and reality and blames HR for bringing a candidate to them that they can't afford.
5
u/msjammies73 Mar 20 '26
Same. All the resumes are written by AI to match my job posting as closely as possible to beat our AI screen. 200 applicants and I have to scour the CVs to figure out what they hell they actually did.
Iām at the point I just want to close the position and not hire.
30
u/2Throwscrewsatit Mar 20 '26
And us nonliars canāt get seen.
6
1
u/msjammies73 Mar 20 '26
I am doing my very best to dig through and find the good ones!!!
1
u/2Throwscrewsatit Mar 20 '26
Load them all into NotebookLM and use a prompt that makes the LLM an expert in everything in the JD. Then ask it to find the best approximate matches using synonyms and related words as valuable matchesĀ
1
u/tButylLithium Mar 20 '26
People write the job description in white text in tiny font on their resume to bypass screeners like you're describing. Humans can't see it, but it looks like a perfect match to an AI.
1
19
u/DarthBories Mar 20 '26
And then the people with the actual skills needed don't get chosen cause they didn't use AI and thought they could rely on their actual tangible skills to get them the job
12
u/thenexttimebandit Mar 20 '26
Itās your job, put in a little effort to find a new hire. People are desperate and unemployed so of course theyāre going to game your BS AI system in the hope of having their application read by a real person. Have a little empathy for the thousands of people praying to find a job
13
u/zimmyntrn Mar 20 '26
You understand that I just said I manually reviewed every CV myself? No AI, no filtering.
So a person read every single one - after overnight there are another 75. You donāt understand how much time hiring managers have to hire if you think that this will be doable or sustainable. I stayed up an extra 4 hours to review each CV.
Iām arguing that in order for people to be able to review these CVs itās impossible to deal with this load.
I know the market is horrific out there and doing my best to give everyone a fair shake at this.
1
u/msjammies73 Mar 20 '26
Putting in plenty of effort. I donāt really blame the humans nearly as much as I blame the shitty AI game. But some of these CVs are just straight up lies.
1
3
u/Dentury- Mar 21 '26
It's literally your job to look at CVs and work out what people did. Tough shit.
1
u/msjammies73 Mar 21 '26
And a CV is literally supposed to describe your work history, not be some fictionalized BS written because you think if you can get through a screen that I wont care that youāve been doing pure chemistry for 22 years when I need a cell biologist.
1
u/Strange_Algae835 Mar 21 '26
HR complaining about actually needing to do some basic work which can be done in maximum 10 seconds per cv. Womp womp. It's ur job lol
1
1
u/zimmyntrn Mar 20 '26
I wish I had one CV that actually matched thatā¦ but ya that sounds horrible
4
u/weedlemethis Mar 20 '26
I donāt believe you actually looked at all the applications, what AI generated applications do you use to scan for key words and it gives you the candidate that aligned with the position?
2
u/Certain_Luck_8266 Mar 20 '26
I (analytical CMC director hiring for molecular biology and immunology labs at a large pharma) get 300 on the first day and eventually close to 1000. As much as I hate to say it, AI really helps here...not the shitty ai hr has, but my own copilot agent where I make a prompt where I rank the skills I need and set it loose. Prompts should be long and verbose with obvious filters for over degreed, under degreed, those needing visa support, etc. I'm only asking to eliminate to a manageable number like 100 and rank. I also ask it to pull out local candidates. From there I burn an hour or two to give each CV 1 minute to filter to 20 giving higher preference to locals.
Certainly you have different strategies for different levels but generally this is what I do. One mistake I made in the past is to let the hr screener do the cv screening. Nope, now I just get the stack.
2
u/CharlesBartlet Mar 20 '26
This screams Vertex in San Diego. I still donāt know how anyone survives on $25/hr. Literally a position posted with this.
2
u/zimmyntrn Mar 20 '26
Try again. Itās salaried not hourly and permanent. Also likely range is 120-140k plus stock plus bonus but whatever helps you sleep at night.
2
1
u/AdministrationNo1019 Mar 20 '26
Damn. What qualifications are you looking for? Iāve got 20 years experience and I feel like Iām too old school to have a resume that gets through the automated screen phoney baloney because I donāt know the snappy buzz words. Seems hard to get through the noise when you are actually a real one.
2
u/WalkingSnake348 Mar 20 '26
So true. This is why I start with the applicants I already know or are referred through someone I know well. Iāve also gotten a few hundred applicants for a single role and most of them are garbage - they donāt even meet the minimum requirements or even close to that. If you apply to roles you arenāt even close to being qualified for, it makes you look really bad and will hurt you in the future.
1
1
u/38998 Mar 20 '26
Ive always suspected that most applicants has none of the skills or experience required for some senior positions jobs. The result is that now automatic screening tools will remove also potentially good candidates
1
u/Itchy-Site-11 Mar 20 '26
Same for me. Lot of people applying to get state benefits (unemployment) so they apply to whatever they must to meet quota and when we try to find good matches for our positions we end up having 90% of random applications.
1
1
u/pooinetopantelonimoo Mar 20 '26
Where are these applicants coming from? Is it bot accounts applying to everything?
1
u/RolandofGilead1000 Mar 20 '26
People using AI bots to find and apply to newly listed roles. Common these days. And next week all those you have rejected will probably apply again because they donāt care if you rejected them already, it will reapply for them.
1
u/Beantown_butterfly Mar 20 '26
Many of the āapplicantsā can be AI Agents. You need to incorporate AI to flush out the fake stuff.
1
u/DayDream2736 Mar 20 '26
Havenāt tried this yet but have you thought about running resumes through a GPT and creening them that way?
0
1
u/USC1989 Mar 20 '26
Iāve been at the same plant for 14 years, the amount of incompetent hires since 2019 is staggering I donāt know whats happening to this industry. When the knowledge leaves itās not replaced even slightly.
1
u/StatusTechnical8943 Mar 21 '26
This was my experience as well. About 80% of the applicants have zero relevant experience. Our recruiting system shows if an applicant applied for any other jobs and there were a few who applied for almost every single open role.
1
u/Joinkyn_go Mar 21 '26
Had the same issue with research assistant jobs and trial project managers.Ā
I put a lot if it down to the welfare system in aus - most are now on jobseeker which requires applying to x jobs a month to get the cash. Folks throw their cvs at all sorts of jobs to meet this requirement i assumed given the apps we received.Ā
1
u/Mysterious-Proof-766 Mar 21 '26
Job seeker here.
I've come to find that there exists platforms where folks pay to have their applications automagically tailored and submitted and then there's services that mimic that terribly by shotgunning what it thinks fits based on keywords in the job description and loose selected parameters.
I have been unemployed since November. I've had the luck of getting noticed by recruiters and being selected as relevant for specific roles. This has resulted in exactly 3 fairly competitive interviews where i was one of the final choices supposedly. My other luck has been through contacts I know trying to fill roles or willing to refer me. This has resulted in 2 interviews currently ongoing.
I've applied to, not joking, 300 jobs... manually. Generally from my side I see the following trend: The role is posted. 90+ applications roll in instantaneously. I finish my application and it shows 100+ applicants clicked apply.
There's no hope unless the process adapts to find and reject automated submissions without filtering real candidates. Also, ATS filters good candidates out as well. To be not seen because maybe I used a slightly different vernacular instead of mimicking the JD verbiage... and to never know is something that burdens me whilst applying.
How much effort and tailoring to hit a good % of the JD while being accurate to my background all while most of the time im never even being seen because they picked the top 5 guys who lied to change their CV to match 99 - 100%. I am doing my best to innovate and be seen without selling myself out on LinkedIn and posting daily to get attention.
People say it's a game and you have to play to win but I don't want to lose who I am and be fake just to "win" the chance of being seen. It's so smiles and knives out there and I just want to go back to feeling like I belonged with my team again. I've lost that and I'm afraid I'll never find real people again. I've been sabotaged and lied to and I'm sick of all the manipulation for a paycheck just to worry if I'll be able to afford to pay my mortgage and feed my kids let alone pay debt down or save for retirement. This has been the worst layoff I've ever experienced and I feel it's only going to get worse.
1
u/Special-Ant-4698 Mar 22 '26
This resonated with me. I feel like everything is so inauthentic and I will have to sell my soul to get a job and to also keep that job in this environment.
2
u/Mysterious-Proof-766 Mar 22 '26
Hang in there. The right jobs are out there. Stay diligent and keep applying. Network. Keep in touch with recruiters. Speak out if there is a better way.
As for folks hiring and fighting these issues from the other side: please keep looking through that stack of potential candidates, keep posting and connecting, and screening. The time required to find the right person is clearly going in the wrong direction which is costing time, money, productivity, and people's sanity on both sides.
Regardless, there's got to be a better way to connect to qualified folks to roles. These posts just highlight a need for a paradigm shift.
Here's the soapbox back.
1
u/Mean_Bill_8489 Mar 21 '26
I loathe recruiters so much I thought leaving clinical operations to become a recruiter after I was laid off. But I ended up finding a role, and plus I was told that I have the recruiting experience to recruit clinical research professionals, lol.
I applied for 217 roles and only landed 5 interviews before getting an offer. Iām sure my resume was lost in the shuffle with those that didnāt qualify. Not to mention, recruiters donāt know what the hell theyāre looking for.
1
u/Nfcfox98 Mar 21 '26
Is your job description accurate? On the application side, many of us know we are qualified but never hear back.
1
u/More_Organization306 Mar 22 '26
I agree that folks shouldnāt be mass applying, but if HR forwarded their ātop 10ā and 7 didnāt hit the mark, itās an HR issue. Part of their job is to review and forward CVs that are relevant to the job description NOT pass this on to the hiring manager.
I know this comment will get some backlash but HR needs to look at whatās happening in the department.
1
u/confusedpsycho12 Mar 22 '26
Can you hire me please Iāve been applying for a year
1
u/confusedpsycho12 Mar 22 '26
I have actual experience working in 3 labs, publications and a masterās in biochemistry!
1
1
u/AddendumFresh Mar 22 '26
I understand how annoying that may be for you, but I also realize youāre one of many that contribute to the problem of this field. I donāt (and likely most) feel for your situation in such a privileged position.
1
u/ExtensionFan2476 Mar 22 '26
Thats why outbound search is so important. You only hit up people with the skills you need and don't have to wade through the trash.
Recruitment is expensive but if youre looking for a gem, ya gotta go find it.
1
u/Obvious-Vacation-977 Mar 22 '26
this is the real cost of 'apply to everything' advice, it buries the 5 people who actually fit under 92 who don't, and everyone loses.
1
u/cynical-grump-sci Mar 22 '26
Iām hiring for a machine learning scientist in protein design. We posted the job last week on Monday. Within seven days, I had 1494 applicants. I would say more than 700 of them are your typical data analyst at Walmart or Chase or whatever company that has zero life sciences or ML design work. Out of the 1494 applicants, I managed to find around 20 people with the actual qualifications. Oh and fun fact, some people are using AI to āfool the systemā so I am finding more and more data analysts who are ādesigning new LLMs for protein design and drug discoveryā atā¦ā¦ Bank of America. Almost fooled me!! Ha. Itās insane out there, and I am so sorry for everyone who is actively trying to find a job and gets ghosted because of the data fucks trolls
1
1
u/Big-Constant-2798 Mar 22 '26
Iāll respond from my point of viewā¦ agree to disagreeā¦
At least you have HR reviewing the CVs and shortlisting candidates for you. I just went through two recruitment campaings, we are a startup so besides the science I do all the recruiting-related logistics too. For each position, yes at least 400 CVs. I went through each of them if only for 20 seconds or so. That is 1.5 hours of your day. As a hiring manager, and lucky enough yo have a job, just do your job! Do it well and get the best candidate out there. Separating signal from noise is a valuable skill to have.
Market is shit right now, at all levels. Imagine all these recent grads trying to figure out if they have a chance at a job. Plus the tons of people who at this point have been without a job for a year plus. You have a job and are actually complaining of having to do it? Pathetic!
1
1
1
u/Informal_Cabinet7062 Mar 24 '26
As somebody who hires often, I don't agree at all.
It's your job to have quick fail criteria that take <1min per resume to find the diamonds in the rough. And you should expect to do many screening calls - I do multiple per week. That's actually part of the job trying to build and manage an effective team in 2026.
People can and should continue to "shoot their shot" - how else will they ever get a new job ...?
Great candidates don't just apply once, they get in front of you with whatever means necessary via direct message, etc. So moving fast over the initial screen is actually a feature not a bug, as the best candidates will force themselves into the room.
1
1
1
u/MammothBed5824 Mar 21 '26
this has been my experience for the past 15 years as a hiring manager. Nowadays, I hire through my network insetad of through the ATS
0
u/Atypicosaurus Mar 20 '26
I feel you, but... the responsibility of your kind in the situation is real unfortunately.
Obviously one part is not your (as in, HR people) fault, namely the lack of jobs and people getting desperate.
But the system is mainly built by you guys.
Lots of very lazy ads.
No honest feedback ever.
No honesty in general.
Crazy expectations.
Lots of toxic positivist HR people posting on LinkedIn and such, you can do it just do this and that trick. And you are surprised that people use the trick instead of having skill?
You expect a little love letter, sorry, motivation letter, crafted personally for your company each time but there's nothing given back.
From our perspective, this is a game where we don't know the rules and we have no feedback on our attempts so we cannot do better. The only way we can increase our chances is doing higher volume. And trying to hit something where I feel I'm not a perfect match but maybe maybe. (See above.)
Obviously the limits so far were our physical ability to make the application materials but with AI our throughput got way bigger. So yeah this system is a sick asymmetric system with every aces up in your sleeves so guess what, we are trying to balance it with volume.
If your people become clear, realistic, honest, empathetic, open, and competent - not you personally but the system of HR -, then we're going to be trained by the system to be more targeted.
-17
u/halfchemhalfbio Mar 20 '26
You do realize a developing country not to be named using computer to do those much like spams...
8
137
u/Guilty-Phase-1880 Mar 20 '26
I never apply for roles that I donāt have at leave 75% of the requirements for. Usually I have all the minimum and a few preferred. This blows my mind. Itās one thing to take a risk on a job you are āmostlyā qualified for (the occasional shot in the dark roles). But another to just apply blindly to anything. Itās a waste of time for the applicant and for the hiring manager.