Tech CEOs Want Every Worker to Have a Permanent, Public Job Performance File

<i>Charlie Youakim, the CEO of buy now pay later (BNPL) firm Sezzle</i><p>so a loan shark, I mean thats pretty much the lowest of the low ...<p><i>Auren Hoffman, the CEO of Safegraph, a large location data broker</i><p>oh shit, spoke too soon.

So a CEO hires a VP who hires a senior director who hires a director who hires a manager who changes specs and deadlines in the middle of projects all the time, and all the rank and file have that follow them as a black mark when they try to leave for a more sane company? No thanks.

The title is a bit sensationalist. Looks like two CEOs of smaller tech companies talked about this casually on a podcast, while the title implies a _much_ larger number of people.

Sounds great. They can go first by providing every candidate with a CEO profile detailing average turn over, NPS score, compensation management strategy, etc

And I would like to have a public file on each tech HR organization, complaint log, lawsuits and arbitration, feedback to CEO from investors and C suite payments and contract details.

As someone doing interviews now, I would actually prefer a &#x27;bar&#x27; type test that employees can take every so often to show their technical skills.<p>It could have all kinds of algorithmic questions, system design, practical application building and whatever else. It would be administered in person to prevent cheating (as much as possible), and companies could choose which scores to pay attention to.<p>Meta doesn&#x27;t find dynamic programming questions useful for hiring but likes all the other algo questions.<p>Stripe doesn&#x27;t like algo questions but wants to see people bootstrap stuff. So let me just do that <i>once</i> (or per decade or what) so I can get over answering the same damn algorithm question at four different companies.<p>Conversely, this would save me from having to &#x27;fail&#x27; the same type of DP questions I keep getting stumped on. Let&#x27;s just save everyone time.

I think if you get a bad performance review, they should probably just send you to prison.

Can this really work though? You can&#x27;t crowdsource the data anonymously, because anonymous data is useless. You can&#x27;t crowdsource it with verified profiles, because no one wants to make an enemy by publicly giving a coworker a bad rating. Lastly, you can&#x27;t get the data from an impartial source (like company HR departments) because they have no reason to share which of their employees are valuable.

Could we stop posting clickbait garbage like Vice? The CEOs of &quot;Sezzle&quot; and &quot;Safegraph&quot; said something on a podcast, and the headline loudly proclaims that &quot;Tech CEOs&quot; desire this.<p>Two CEOs, one of whom has 500 employees and one who has 100,said something on a podcast, and through the magic of strategically leaving off qualifiers for plural nouns, it&#x27;s been transmuted into a newsworthy report with a headline that implies something broader than two relative nobodies throwing an idea out.<p>I get that there are too many wannabe journalists and not enough news, so in some sense I don&#x27;t blame the author; he&#x27;s grinding out a living in a morally-questionable field like many, many people do. But why do we have to infect HN with this nonsense?

Makes sense from a CEO perspective. If you have the power to blacklist your employees, they&#x27;re going to work harder, for less and never dissent.

That&#x27;s essentially what GitHub is doing. You have your entire contribution history and they have a product to help managers analyze contributions across teams. I worked at a couple startups that used this to evaluate their employees in manager-only meeting.

Many companies already use third party platforms to manage performance reviews. Who&#x27;s to say that this isn&#x27;t already happening?

Maybe update the title in light of this subhed?<p>&gt; <i>Two CEOs on a podcast casually proposed a shareable database of worker performance that would follow them between companies, forever, and encouraged listeners to create one.</i><p>It&#x27;s two tech CEOs, not tech CEOs in general.

People are missing the point here. No one is seriously advocating for this. It&#x27;s just Vice rage baiting because that&#x27;s what Vice does.<p>It&#x27;s two people with very little influence discussing a scenario on a podcast.

I want a permanent, public job performance profile on every tech CEO.

This sort of stuff screams, &quot;misdirection&quot; to me. Whats the real trick?

Including themselves I hope. After all, they are just a “worker” to equity holders.

Sounds like a no, with regard to GDPR.