What's with this ridiculous experience requirements these days?

Decoding job descriptions shouldn't be so hard, you'll get better at it:

1) experienced = I want someone who won't need training.

2) n years experience = I want someone who is about 20 + n years old, to fit the team culture, but we aren't allowed to advertise age restrictions

3) n years at experience at a F100 company = we are speaking to someone from a pool of about 20 people from our immediate competitors but we cannot name them

Maybe some other commenters will add more suggestions.

To get past 1, take a short specific on-prem vocational training course with a high level of practical hands-on material. While it seems like "education" a lot of hirers will treat it as "experience" .

Also, "experience" doesn't say what you gained from it, so be prepared to talk about specific take-aways. Your experience will be different than others. When interviewing I always ask that question. Good luck.

It's worse when the requirements are impossible. I was told recently that one reason I wasn't shortlisted was because I didn't have 10+ years of experience with Angular 12+.

For those who don't realize, Angular 12 was released in mid-2021, less than three years ago. Even if the company meant Angular2+, that was still only released in 2016, less than eight years ago. I asked if they meant AngularJS (originally from 2010), but no, their requirement was 10 years with "new" Angular. I informed them they would be looking for at least two more years, but good luck anyways :)

I've seen the same type of request for React as well, with one company somewhat ridiculously asking for 15+ years of React experience (it's less than eleven years old).

I think the quality of technical recruiters has taken a hit in the last half-decade or so.

Typically, only 1-2 of the 'requirements' are actually required (generally the ones that sound most applicable to the actual job..)

The rest are usually added by various levels of management that feel they need to 'contribute' something.

However, it makes it a PITA to get past all the databases/HR/etc. to actually get to someone that knows the 'real' requirements

> How about giving a fresher a chance?

This is the source of a lot of misunderstandings in the eng recruitment space. There's no "chances" - you can either do the job or you can't. Your CV, in most cases, will paint the picture, and if not, the technical interview will. For certain positions, not having the experience means not being able to do the job - there are certain skills that can only be acquired with time.

The requirements evolve to match the market. At the moment there are so many people available that you don't really need to spend resources training people up.

i just hung up on an interview over video call this morning. wanted me to write some obfuscated algorithm shit. I have 25 years experience and could certainly do this when I have the time and a low stress environment, but I wasn't going to waste my time with this way of interviewing. Also he asked me to turn my video on which is always a red flag for me.

I remember a position advertised in 1995 for a Java programmer with 6 years experience in Enterprise Class Java development.

asking for experienced people and then asking for leetcode interviews haha