I don’t consider that’s the case. Each potential employer I’ve ever interviewed with (that I didn’t personally know beforehand) has at all times been extraordinarily imprecise about why they handed on my candidacy. The most typical causes given had been “not senior sufficient”, “not a superb match”, or “went with a unique candidate”. I don’t assume that this can be a authorized motive to not rent somebody, however then once more I’m a sport designer and never a lawyer. My understanding of the legislation is extraordinarily restricted.
I actually don’t know why it’s the means it’s – it’s been this manner for longer than my profession on the very least. My guess is that placing such a excessive bar of {qualifications} on the job description serves as an preliminary check to weed out these candidates who don’t care very a lot in regards to the work, don’t know a lot about sport dev, or don’t really feel assured sufficient of their abilities to use. We lose out on some good candidates because of this coverage, however we already get (and should reject) extra candidates than we are able to rent by a number of orders of magnitude.
[Join us on Discord] and/or [Support us on Patreon]
Obtained a burning query you need answered?
