DON'T MERGE: add job posting rules to the member handbook #6
Conversation
content/member-handbook.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| The STL Tech Slack is concerned with helping people who are in St. Louis find | ||
| jobs. To that extent, we ask that all jobs that are posted be jobs that can be | ||
| carried out by people in St. Louis. This means local on-sight, local remote, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I believe the correct term in this context is: on-site
content/member-handbook.md
Outdated
| aggregate job postings must also disclose that the poster is an external | ||
| recruiter, as well as the type(s) of roles that are avilable (contract, direct | ||
| hire, contract to hire). Additionally, for anyone posting aggregate listings, | ||
| we ask that the job post be available via the STL Tech Slack to answer any |
content/member-handbook.md
Outdated
| recruiter, as well as the type(s) of roles that are avilable (contract, direct | ||
| hire, contract to hire). Additionally, for anyone posting aggregate listings, | ||
| we ask that the job post be available via the STL Tech Slack to answer any | ||
| questions. Any postings aggregate postings that are answered with a requirement |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
postings is here twice
content/member-handbook.md
Outdated
| to For Hire postings. They should be short, inclusive of the types of work | ||
| available, and limited to being posted weekly. For external recruiters, | ||
| aggregate job postings must also disclose that the poster is an external | ||
| recruiter, as well as the type(s) of roles that are avilable (contract, direct |
content/member-handbook.md
Outdated
| rough geographic area of the work site. Examples would include: | ||
| "Chesterfield", "Near Forest Park" or "At T-Rex". | ||
| - Your Relationship to the Role: Job postings MUST disclose the relationship | ||
| of the post to the company or role. This includes explicity diclosure if |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Explicity? Shouldn't it be explicit?
content/member-handbook.md
Outdated
| The STL Tech Slack is concerned with helping people who are in St. Louis find | ||
| jobs. To that extent, we ask that all jobs that are posted be jobs that can be | ||
| carried out by people in St. Louis. This means local on-sight, local remote, | ||
| and full-time remote jobs are all okay. There are no strict geographical bounds |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What's the difference between local remote vs full-time remote?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was using "local remote" for things where the company is in St. Louis and you can commute to the office, but can typically work from home. I'll add a clarification
| - Participate in the community, don't just stop by to dump a job listing and | ||
| then go silent. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do you think we could loop in some of the folks actively engaged in hiring (recruiters or otherwise) to collaborate on an example of what a good posting looks like so we can share that here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
�As much as we pay lip service to some of the recruiters not being total dumpster fires, I've not really seen good postings coming from them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In my experience, you start noticing the lack of dumpster fireness when you start working with them. The posts themselves still kinda suck.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Lisa explained this well: when she's recruiting, she's often not recruiting for a single job but multiple. Plus, she'll recommend applying different places after talking with someone. So is the solution a job board? 🤷♂️
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I was hoping to cover that use case with the big on aggregate job postings, but we could clarify it more if necessary I guess
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think it's appropriate to list margins within the job postings. That's something that a good recruiter would share once speaking with the individual.
|
|
||
| Pinned messages more than 90 days old will be periodically cleared out by | ||
| administrators. If you have fulfilled the pinned request (filled the role, | ||
| gotten a job) then we would request that you unpin the message yourself. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🔀 "please unpin the message yourself."
| administrators. If you have fulfilled the pinned request (filled the role, | ||
| gotten a job) then we would request that you unpin the message yourself. | ||
|
|
||
| #### Pinned Message Eligiability |
| the current one. No hard restrictions are placed on how often you may unpin old | ||
| posts and re-pin new ones, although moderators may request that you reduce | ||
| the frequency of pinning our our discression if it appears to be interfering | ||
| with the normal functioning of the `#jobs` channel. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Better to make a guideline. How about not posting the same job more often than every two weeks?
(also: "discretion")
|
|
||
| ### Pinning Posting Durations | ||
|
|
||
| #### About Pinning |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
pinning is like the least important part of all of this. It should go at the end.
|
|
||
| In order to encourage maximum transparency in our job postings, we place more | ||
| stringent requirements for pinned job postings than unpinned postings. | ||
| Aggregate job listings are not eligible for pinning. Furthermore, a pinned job |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The talk about "eligibility" makes this all sound very formal, when this is really just setting some expectations around a loose community practice that already exists. The tone could be more peer-to-peer than grantor-to-grantee.
| least 3 of the 6 recommended fields. | ||
|
|
||
| For-hire postings are always eligible for pinning as long as the person seeking | ||
| employment is a member in good standing of the community. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this paragraph should move to the next section.
| ### When You're Looking for Work | ||
|
|
||
| The `#jobs` channel is available for anyone to use if they are looking for | ||
| technical work. If you're looking for work, feel free to post a link to your |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
only technical? What about PMs, designers, DBAs, QA people? Students and teachers?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, I do agree here, only thing is finding the right wording for the whole umbrella. It isn't all just IT, or dev, or design. Lots of different loosely related roles.
"tech related work". is the best I can come up with so far.
| posting, but we encourage members of the STL Tech community go personalize the | ||
| message for the audience. In particular: | ||
|
|
||
| - Leverage tools like [joblint](http://joblint.org) to ensure your job posting |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"leverage"… how about "use"?
|
|
||
| - Leverage tools like [joblint](http://joblint.org) to ensure your job posting | ||
| does not contain language that would exclude marginalized people. | ||
| - Avoid terms like "rockstar" and "ninja". |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this is covered in joblint, isn't it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It does, but further iteration, so people are totally clear. Plus Joblint sometimes misses some things you'd really expect to get covered.
| hire, contract to hire). Additionally, for anyone posting aggregate listings, | ||
| we ask that the job poster be available via the STL Tech Slack to answer any | ||
| questions. Anyone creating aggregate postings then responding to questions | ||
| with a request for a phonecall / email will be banned. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a little harsh. This is not an one-and-done bannable thing. People tend to learn what's acceptable over time. If someone does it once, warn them. If they do it again, a ban is fine. But this is a longish document with a few cliffs to fall off already.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'd suggest tweaking to "may be banned" or "may be punished, up to and including banning" or something like that.
No description provided.