All the interviews were entirely subjective and conversational, except for one trivial coding problem, including 3 video interviews before the onsite and 4 of the 5 interviews at the onsite. That leaves the interviewers abundant latitude to lie in their evaluations without any accountability, verifiability, or reproducibility. Several interviewers had a demeaning attitude, acting superior while obviously having no substantive basis for it. They often dismissed substantial quality and extent of work as if it were insignificant. Management is far more concerned about office politics, being brown-nosed and receiving unquestioned compliance with arbitrary orders than about quality. Unlike most San Francisco software companies at which work from home one day per week or more is accepted, they do not allow work from home except when unavoidable circumstances demand it. They say it is because they pay a lot for the office and there is more communication when people are in the office, but it really is because they are indifferent to the pain of commuting from outside San Francisco that almost everyone else at the company experiences. When I asked if waiting at a bus stop for 12 minutes and walking the 12 minutes from Montgomery BART down to Harrison St. each way through heavy rains in 40 degree F temperature with 17 mph winds would be sufficient justification to work from home, the manager interviewing me expressed concern that "this may not be a good cultural fit." This seems like a painful and degrading place to work.
