Advice for Job interviewers

The Dude said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
A moot point, Dude.....which changes NOTHING regarding the OP or my correcting your "loser" statement. C'mon Dude, is it that tough for you to publically acknowledge that you were wrong on one point? Jeez.
Click to expand...

I've been wrong 1,000 times, not about blindly looking at a resume'.
Click to expand...

Nothing in the OP suggested that you do, Dude. So again, you're stating a moot point is just a piss in the wind, and the OP stands valid. Your "loser" statement is wrong. Deal with it or just be insipidly stubborn.
 
The Dude said:
No it's actually a Libtard bitching about not being hired.
Click to expand...

For someone who swears he's not some willfully ignorant neocon/teabagger, you sure talk the talk Dude.

The OP applies to ALL, Dude, regardless of political affiliation...or are you stupid enough to think that only liberals go through what I described? On other discussion boards, the response to this has been amazing...people from all over the country, men and women, young and old have corroborated what the OP covers. One woman told me that in Wisconsin it's mandatory that at least 3 applicants must be interviewed REGARDLESS. I'll have to research that one for validity, but it give you an idea of the BS good, honest hard working people have to go through.
 
Taichiliberal said:
For someone who swears he's not some willfully ignorant neocon/teabagger, you sure talk the talk Dude.

The OP applies to ALL, Dude, regardless of political affiliation...or are you stupid enough to think that only liberals go through what I described? On other discussion boards, the response to this has been amazing...people from all over the country, men and women, young and old have corroborated what the OP covers. One woman told me that in Wisconsin it's mandatory that at least 3 applicants must be interviewed REGARDLESS. I'll have to research that one for validity, but it give you an idea of the BS good, honest hard working people have to go through.
Click to expand...

The theory behind that is to try and give multiple candidates the opporunity to get the job. In reality its almost always decided before the fact. Every job I've gotten was that way. You need to 'interview' to say that the guy or gal you picked was the best.
 
Unlike the whiners I have interviewed dozens of people on multiple occasions. Sometime you have a favorite going in, often you find a diamond in the ruff! You can't put confidence on paper.
 
The Dude said:
Unlike the whiners I have interviewed dozens of people on multiple occasions. Sometime you have a favorite going in, often you find a diamond in the ruff! You can't put confidence on paper.
Click to expand...

And if I were to believe your claim of position (which I don't), then I pity those who had to endure your presence, because your insipid stubborness and pre-judgemental attitude shown here regarding this moot point you keep harping on falls right into the category (ies) the OP describes.

Carry on.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Nothing is more annoying than having your time wasted by being interviewed for a job by someone who has no interest in hiring you.

The tip off is when they ask questions like, “why haven’t you achieved your goal by now?” or “this job isn’t what you went to school for, why would apply for it?”

Just once, you would like to answer, “Because people like YOU:

(1) Seem to think that you would never encounter one of those people that are affected by the bad economy you’ve read about all these years.
(2) Only hire those with experience…but if the economy is bad, and hiring is at a stand still, how does one get experience without a job.
(3) Don’t like people of my age, or gender, or race, or ethnicity, or religion, or economic class or political/social views.
(4) Read my resume and liked what you saw, but were put off when you actually met me because of .. (see number 3).

But instead, you go through the humiliating motions of justifying part of your life to some clown looking for any excuse not to hire you because (let’s face it) ain’t nothing going on but the rent!

So, in the interest of lowering stress levels and promoting good will in our society, people in the Human Resource/Personnel business with attitudes like the aforementioned should just stick to the basic Q & A interview. Make sure to finish with, “We’ve other applicants to interview, and will call you if we don’t find a better candidate”. That way, they don’t add insult to injury, the company doesn’t get bad mouthed in the streets, and they avoid a possible discrimination lawsuit.
Click to expand...
I have never once been interviewed by an HR manager for a job application. I have been interviewed by some rather clueless midlevel managers that you find in most corporate environments. My advice is that unless you're really desperate for a job and are willing to accept a position utterly lacking in professional growth and satisfaction for a decent wage and benefits and a modicum of financial security, then you're probably lucky if you don't get a job offer. My best job interviews have always been with professionals who know what the hell they are looking. If the job you are doing matters as much as the compensation those are the types of interviews that usually land you the best jobs that provide the most interesting and rewarding experiences which allow you to grow the most professionally.
 
The Dude said:
Good jobs have tons of candidates, nothing more annoying than losers who think they are owed.
Click to expand...
That's not what I hear. There are a lot of good jobs out there that go unfilled cause of a lack of people with the proper qualifications. It appears people do not want to study math, science or technical trades. I don't have a citation but I do remember an article that someting like only 10% of college graduates (BA/BS) earn their degrees in math/science/technology. I know in my department if we have any turnover it typicall takess 90 to 120 days or longer to find a qualified candidate to fill the position but it usually only takes about 30 days or less to find someone for customer support or sales. There have been times where it's taken up to a year to find a person for a technical position that pays 70 kpy. We get a tons of applications from people with social science and liberal art degrees that promptly get file thirteened.
 
Taichiliberal said:
And if I were to believe your claim of position (which I don't), then I pity those who had to endure your presence, because your insipid stubborness and pre-judgemental attitude shown here regarding this moot point you keep harping on falls right into the category (ies) the OP describes.

Carry on.
Click to expand...
Well I'm not shocked you were not the interviewer, you scope is significantly limited. U turbo-lib
 
Derp Derp said:
That's not what I hear. There are a lot of good jobs out there that go unfilled cause of a lack of people with the proper qualifications. It appears people do not want to study math, science or technical trades. I don't have a citation but I do remember an article that someting like only 10% of college graduates (BA/BS) earn their degrees in math/science/technology. I know in my department if we have any turnover it typicall takess 90 to 120 days or longer to find a qualified candidate to fill the position but it usually only takes about 30 days or less to find someone for customer support or sales. There have been times where it's taken up to a year to find a person for a technical position that pays 70 kpy. We get a tons of applications from people with social science and liberal art degrees that promptly get file thirteened.
Click to expand...
Well your outlook is limited, most jobs aren't what you described
 
Derp Derp said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Nothing is more annoying than having your time wasted by being interviewed for a job by someone who has no interest in hiring you.

The tip off is when they ask questions like, “why haven’t you achieved your goal by now?” or “this job isn’t what you went to school for, why would apply for it?”

Just once, you would like to answer, “Because people like YOU:

(1) Seem to think that you would never encounter one of those people that are affected by the bad economy you’ve read about all these years.
(2) Only hire those with experience…but if the economy is bad, and hiring is at a stand still, how does one get experience without a job.
(3) Don’t like people of my age, or gender, or race, or ethnicity, or religion, or economic class or political/social views.
(4) Read my resume and liked what you saw, but were put off when you actually met me because of .. (see number 3).

But instead, you go through the humiliating motions of justifying part of your life to some clown looking for any excuse not to hire you because (let’s face it) ain’t nothing going on but the rent!

So, in the interest of lowering stress levels and promoting good will in our society, people in the Human Resource/Personnel business with attitudes like the aforementioned should just stick to the basic Q & A interview. Make sure to finish with, “We’ve other applicants to interview, and will call you if we don’t find a better candidate”. That way, they don’t add insult to injury, the company doesn’t get bad mouthed in the streets, and they avoid a possible discrimination lawsuit.
Click to expand...

I have never once been interviewed by an HR manager for a job application. I have been interviewed by some rather clueless midlevel managers that you find in most corporate environments. My advice is that unless you're really desperate for a job and are willing to accept a position utterly lacking in professional growth and satisfaction for a decent wage and benefits and a modicum of financial security, then you're probably lucky if you don't get a job offer. My best job interviews have always been with professionals who know what the hell they are looking. If the job you are doing matters as much as the compensation those are the types of interviews that usually land you the best jobs that provide the most interesting and rewarding experiences which allow you to grow the most professionally.
Click to expand...

Here's the thing, Derp: I've been given the business by "professionals" as well as middle management. And I'm not alone....friends, acquaintences, THEIR friends and acquaintences, have gone through the same deal on EVERY level of the job search situation. No matter what the stature, if you've been one of those numbers of unemployed talked about in the newspapers at one time or another in the last 30 years, you would most likely come across the attitude I described.
 
Derp Derp said:
Originally Posted by The Dude
Good jobs have tons of candidates, nothing more annoying than losers who think they are owed.
Click to expand...
That's not what I hear. There are a lot of good jobs out there that go unfilled cause of a lack of people with the proper qualifications. It appears people do not want to study math, science or technical trades. I don't have a citation but I do remember an article that someting like only 10% of college graduates (BA/BS) earn their degrees in math/science/technology. I know in my department if we have any turnover it typicall takess 90 to 120 days or longer to find a qualified candidate to fill the position but it usually only takes about 30 days or less to find someone for customer support or sales. There have been times where it's taken up to a year to find a person for a technical position that pays 70 kpy. We get a tons of applications from people with social science and liberal art degrees that promptly get file thirteened.
Click to expand...

Derp, I've been hearing stories like yours since the Reagan recession. One of the reasons why I find them dubious is this:

During high unemployment due to a bad economy, instead of having 80 people apply for one position as usual during good times, you now have 200 people applying for that position. Not only are the personnel people over whelmed, but now you have a buyer's market....employers can get people whose skills and experience normally commanded a salary of $70K for $40K now. If an advertisment specifies EXACTLY the crucial skills and experience required for a position, then that greatly limits the people with Liberal Arts only experiences applying.

I'm not saying that there are not shortages here and there in highly specified technical fields sometimes, but if it were indeed chronic, you would NEVER have had the "Dot.com" boom and bust, or all these "start-ups" springing up over the last 20 years.

But when all is said and done, the stuff that the OP describes STILL GOES ON TO THIS DAY. If they follow my advice, you would at least have less stress and wasted time/money on both sides.
 
The Dude said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
And if I were to believe your claim of position (which I don't), then I pity those who had to endure your presence, because your insipid stubborness and pre-judgemental attitude shown here regarding this moot point you keep harping on falls right into the category (ies) the OP describes.

Carry on.
Click to expand...

Well I'm not shocked you were not the interviewer, you scope is significantly limited. U turbo-lib
Click to expand...

Again, for someone who swore he is NOT a neocon or teabagger, you sure as hell mouth the platitudes of the most willfully ignorant of those groups. How on Earth does a grown man/woman with an 8th of the brain God gave them come to the conclusion that liberals are the only people affected by the situation the OP describes, or that there are no "liberal" HR managers or personnel interviewers?

Dude, just gain saying of whatever I post here is no badge of honor for you, and you don't come off as superior acting aloof. I don't know exactly what axe you have to grind against me, but I guess "groans" are what you're best at instead of honestly discussing the issue. Carry on.
 
Taichiliberal said:
Again, for someone who swore he is NOT a neocon or teabagger, you sure as hell mouth the platitudes of the most willfully ignorant of those groups. How on Earth does a grown man/woman with an 8th of the brain God gave them come to the conclusion that liberals are the only people affected by the situation the OP describes, or that there are no "liberal" HR managers or personnel interviewers?

Dude, just gain saying of whatever I post here is no badge of honor for you, and you don't come off as superior acting aloof. I don't know exactly what axe you have to grind against me, but I guess "groans" are what you're best at instead of honestly discussing the issue. Carry on.
Click to expand...
No ax at all, I agree exactly with your statement before this one.
 
Taichimoron, sorry you are unemployed. At one time when I was interviewing texaco had us do ridiculous scripted questions that they probably paid some firm way too much for. As the experienced business people have pointed out, in bad times you get exponentially more candidates. Character comes through in person, no way you can go solely or even mostly on resume.
 
The Dude said:
Originally Posted by Taichiliberal
Again, for someone who swore he is NOT a neocon or teabagger, you sure as hell mouth the platitudes of the most willfully ignorant of those groups. How on Earth does a grown man/woman with an 8th of the brain God gave them come to the conclusion that liberals are the only people affected by the situation the OP describes, or that there are no "liberal" HR managers or personnel interviewers?

Dude, just gain saying of whatever I post here is no badge of honor for you, and you don't come off as superior acting aloof. I don't know exactly what axe you have to grind against me, but I guess "groans" are what you're best at instead of honestly discussing the issue. Carry on.
Click to expand...
No ax at all, I agree exactly with your statement before this one.
Click to expand...

Again, you're not making sense, as you stated that ONLY liberals are affected by the situation the OP describes, or that there are no "liberal" HR managers or personnnel interviewers?

C'mon Dude, you can't have it both ways.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top