Databricks counts being laid off as “red flag”

Interviewed with databricks this week. Went through the whole SWE loop. I did very well so they move onto reference checks. They check references which I know all went well.

Then my packet goes to hiring committee. They say being laid off is a red flag and reject. Why make me go through the whole loop if my result has nothing to do with my interview performance or references? Why not just reject me from the start when I said I was laid off? What kind of sick twisted shit is this?

#engineering #software #swe

comments

You need to lie about your background from the beginning.
- @ipo2moon that’s tricky. Not all the time the current team members would tell you the whole truth about the culture or way of working.
  
  I had an experience that before joining a company, I asked this from a current employee and he said a lot of good things and that I should definitely join, but when I joined, he was the first person to complain about everything.
- He probably thought why should he suffer alone? 😂
Asking for references after clearing interview was also Dik move tbh

Companies shouldn’t ask for references if they are already doing background check. Why would the current manager support your case of moving out to different company unless you are in a good terms with a manger and manager is chill af.

Many managers will bite you back and try their level best to jeopardize your current position and new position once they know you are planning to leave.

Job search should always be sneaky process. Get offer, submit notice and gtfo
- References don’t have to be from current company/manager. They can go back to your previous employers.
  
  I guess if you have only worked for 1 company that might be tricky
- I asked a friend who works at Databricks about this and he said they never use people still at your current company for back-door references. They only contact someone at your current company if you explicitly give that person as a reference.
exact thing happened to me. If you are in their interview loop and you were laid off ask explicitly if it is ok to your recruiter and don’t waste time with them.
- I’d advice remove the rant lines. Someone probably has your name.
Stripe also does this bullshit

Reference checks gives so much power to managers.

It’s like your new Girlfriend is asking for references from your ex-GF before entering into relationship 🤣

If everything was so good with ex then why would one have the breakup?

Btw people don’t leave only for money but they also leave because of:

– their manager promised them promo but never gave one

– constantly gaslighted them

– got promo after dragging and received peanuts increment

– never appreciated and acknowledged their work

– played favouritism card

– you don’t trust long term vision of the company anymore

– you don’t like the direction team is taking for short term strategy etc

Reference check makes you submissive employee and it’s not 90s anymore. Some bridges are worth burning.
- @6240@ is correct. I’m a hiring manager at Databricks and it’s a strict rule to only call former employers for the back-door references. It would be foolish to jeopardize a strong hire by calling current co-workers and (rightfully so) upsetting them, especially after all the hours invested up until that point. Not to mention, it’s just a dick move.
- That’s complete bullshit, I’ve been asked lots of times about back doors for people I worked with and they’ll happily take them from your current employer. They put more value on those than your interview performance.
Sorry but your claim sounds sus. We are definitely hiring laid off workers, and even on the off chance that your claim is true, there’s no way any sane recruiter would openly admit that (at any company).

Btw there’s also no way to know “all your references went well”. You never know what references are really saying about you. Stop spreading FUD based on an assumption.
- OP not good to put your friends as your references
- Lol at databricks for assuming friends for knowing colleagues personally.