I was referred into this company by 2 strong referrals, and though I had strong concerns and warnings because of the reviews, I chose to speak to them anyway hoping that those naysayers were wrong. I had 2 phone calls and an onsite which kept me for most of the day. No breaks and no lunch and an exercise where they wanted me to share work from another company. The team I met with had little experience and had no idea about how to interview someone with real experience. The most senior person they had in my panel had not even looked at my resume before the interview. They played this game of stump the candidate, were almost argumentative vs probing on my experience. Despite the back channel negative feedback specifically about them, I gave them a chance. There's a lot of pomposity here, they're not humble in any way and leadership is super weak. I was so put off of being considered for the role, serious sensitivity training is needed here about how to speak to diversity candidates specifically. They barely pay market rate (had I known that I would not have wasted a day here) and I suspect this job will sit open for a long time. Their behavior and understanding about the market for this job is so out of whack. The use a fixed salary model which is so wrong and does not work at all. I decided based on all of this to remove myself from consideration here. They are in a product and market shift (they have an MVP- and frankly are not sure what path they are taking) they seem to be hitting a moving target on all fronts. Overall it's an interesting concept but if you are considering this company think about joining when the board flips top leadership and gets some adults in here, because the bus is driving itself with a bunch of noobs who are not helping either.

Went through an in-depth interview process that required 2 separate meetings, required me to build a deck, present and burn an entire day to interview onsite. The team of people I met with seemed rather inexperienced and confused on what to index on during the meeting. It was a red flag to start when the CEO/founder wasn't leading the search. It became clear when learning about the role the company was way behind building out HR/recruiting, but had no clue how hindered the execution in the role has been and would be given some of their policies. Still to this day crickets from them. Not a rejection email - nothing. Think twice before wasting your time on this team. Deep dive into their numerous Red flags: The interviewers and leadership seemed completely aloof to their hiring goals being unrealistic. Example: they want to hire 20 experienced engineers by year end with a team of 2 (this director role and a junior recruiter). Yeah, that wasn't a joke and said with a straight face. I learned from my network they pay way below market (including equity - example: 4x less than they should). There's only so many top engineers willing to subsidize a VC backed startup. They explained they have fixed salaries because they "want compensation negotiations to be fair for women and minorities". Sounds fair until you realize this just disproportionately impacts all technical hiring. In fairness, it could work if you're company is working on curing cancer. (When inbound applications are high) Less so when you build a transportation software. The dissonance didn't end there. They literally think it's viable to grow a company filled with "believers" in the company mission. Oh and don't forget "diversity"...the hiring buzzword with zero accountability! Their idea is to wave their low pay magic wand and hire a colorful team. Delusion.com In this market, they are going to get exactly what they want...a rube who will agree with all their bad policies/ideas and then under deliver. Could be a great opportunity in a few years, once all the really junior people leave or are fired.