Employee bad behavior in this economy

[Magyar]

Originally Posted by MatildaGage

Hiring again, for a supervisory position. The latest shining stars:

In response to, "Thank you for coming in today. What interests you about working here": *covers face and cries*

In response to the question, "If you got this job, what would be your strategy in the 1st 90 days": "To be trained to work in other departments"

In response to the question, "If you could have any job in 5 years, what would that be": "I don't know." So I gave her a minute and rephrased the question: "I really don't know what I'm interested in, I just want job security"

In response to the question, "What types of environments or management styles do you prefer to work in": "I don't like sedentary jobs" (while applying for an obviously sedentary job)

All different candidates too.

Another thing--WTH are colleges teaching people about job interviewing and resumes? Most of the resumes are so similar it looks like a template from the same college instructor.

I keep hearing students are told to remove most of their job experience-- even if it explains job gaps or is pertinent to the job they're applying for--just put 1 most recent job. That is terrible advice!

Also the college tells them to put the waste-of-space statement: "References upon request". And an objective statement in which most of them say dumb things that rule them out in the 1st pass.

Just out of curiousity - WHAT would you say would be the ideal answers to thes questions and do you ACTUALLY believe that that even the people who give those answers ACTUALLY believe those answers

[Mark6]

Originally Posted by Magyar

Just out of curiousity - WHAT would you say would be the ideal answers to thes questions and do you ACTUALLY believe that that even the people who give those answers ACTUALLY believe those answers

I concur. Except for the last one ("What types of environments or management styles do you prefer to work in?"), they sound as "gotcha" questions designed to make people squirm.

BTW, my standard answer to "Where do you want to be in 5 years?" is "I want to be an expert to whom people come with questions". Seems to work, and fairly close to truth.

[Rasmus]

Originally Posted by MatildaGage

In response to the question, "If you could have any job in 5 years, what would that be": "I don't know." So I gave her a minute and rephrased the question: "I really don't know what I'm interested in, I just want job security"

"Any job that would make sure that 6 years from now, I won't have to work another day in my life, as long as the work is reasonably safe and healthy."

One of the question I hate, and which here you get to hear in pretty much every interview (my current employer spared me, IIRC) is "What are your weaknesses?" In a discussion the best two answers that we came up with were "I will not tell you that, as it would defeat the purpose of the interview - at least as far as I am concerned." and "Chocolate."

[Fishstick]

Originally Posted by Rasmus

"Any job that would make sure that 6 years from now, I won't have to work another day in my life, as long as the work is reasonably safe and healthy."

One of the question I hate, and which here you get to hear in pretty much every interview (my current employer spared me, IIRC) is "What are your weaknesses?" In a discussion the best two answers that we came up with were "I will not tell you that, as it would defeat the purpose of the interview - at least as far as I am concerned." and "Chocolate."

"Dumb interview questions"

[Spindrift]

Originally Posted by Rasmus

"Any job that would make sure that 6 years from now, I won't have to work another day in my life, as long as the work is reasonably safe and healthy."

One of the question I hate, and which here you get to hear in pretty much every interview (my current employer spared me, IIRC) is "What are your weaknesses?" In a discussion the best two answers that we came up with were "I will not tell you that, as it would defeat the purpose of the interview - at least as far as I am concerned." and "Chocolate."

It was a good question 20 years ago when people weren't expecting it. Now everyone knows it translates to "We are now going to play a game. Tell me something about yourself that is a negative but is really a positive."

[aggle-rithm]

Originally Posted by MatildaGage

And then my other complaint is--why do people make me fire them?

When I worked in distribution, I was astounded at how often this type of scenario played out:

Manager (to employees): If you kick the customer's packages, you will be fired. So don't do it. Don't kick packages, and you won't get fired.

Employee: (drop-kicks package across the warehouse)

Manager: Um...I'm sorry, but we're going to have to let you go.

Employee: What?!!? WHY!?! THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!!

[Mark6]

Originally Posted by Spindrift

It was a good question 20 years ago when people weren't expecting it.

How was it ever a good question?

It CAN be, if employer is really trying to determine where a particular person will or will not fit. Someone with bad back should not be lifting boxes. Someone who is uncomfortable around people should not be doing customer service. But you will only get an honest answer if the person you are asking knows you are trying to fit them in. Before they are hired, they cannot know this -- in fact, they know it is not the case. You are not trying to fit them in, you are trying to decide if they fit in at all, anywhere. And easiest person to fit in anywhere is someone who has a good back AND is comfortable around people. Any weakness at all is a minus in hiring, and candidates always knew that. I do not see how anyone ever answered that question honestly, unless they already had the contract signed.

Quote:

Now everyone knows it translates to "We are now going to play a game. Tell me something about yourself that is a negative but is really a positive."

I was only asked this particular quesiton once or twice, but my answer (too long to actually type here) boiled down to this: "Unlike most people, things like tests and deadlines do not make me work harder. Pressure is supposed to focus people -- somehow it has no such effect on me. I continue working at same pace regardless of pressure." Yes, a "negative" which is actually positive -- I am calm under pressure!

[Mr. Scott]

Originally Posted by devnull

Oh, and dont forget:

* If you are a young asian girl, do not include a bikini shot with your CV

!?!?!??!?!?!?

Not kidding, it seems to be the norm??????

Haha sex sells.

[Rasmus]

Originally Posted by Mark6

How was it ever a good question?

It CAN be, if employer is really trying to determine where a particular person will or will not fit. Someone with bad back should not be lifting boxes. Someone who is uncomfortable around people should not be doing customer service.

But those are specific things that you can ask direct questions about. You should ask direct questions about it, and my experience, that is what happens.

Quote:

But you will only get an honest answer if the person you are asking knows you are trying to fit them in. Before they are hired, they cannot know this -- in fact, they know it is not the case. You are not trying to fit them in, you are trying to decide if they fit in at all, anywhere. And easiest person to fit in anywhere is someone who has a good back AND is comfortable around people. Any weakness at all is a minus in hiring, and candidates always knew that. I do not see how anyone ever answered that question honestly, unless they already had the contract signed.

If you'd get a signed contract and had to work out your position, it would still be a lousy way of doing that. Why not debate it directly?

Quote:

I was only asked this particular quesiton once or twice, but my answer (too long to actually type here) boiled down to this: "Unlike most people, things like tests and deadlines do not make me work harder. Pressure is supposed to focus people -- somehow it has no such effect on me. I continue working at same pace regardless of pressure." Yes, a "negative" which is actually positive -- I am calm under pressure!

... or it's seen as a negative. Calm might be good, but sometimes, we might simply need "quick". And what an employee wants is both, anyway.

[lionking]

Originally Posted by Spindrift

It was a good question 20 years ago when people weren't expecting it. Now everyone knows it translates to "We are now going to play a game. Tell me something about yourself that is a negative but is really a positive."

The last time I was asked that question I said "I tend to work long hours, which effects my work/life balance" or something quite similar. I knew those interviewing thought it was BS, but I also knew they got an answer the question deserved. I got the job BTW.

[Elaedith]

Originally Posted by Rasmus

"Any job that would make sure that 6 years from now, I won't have to work another day in my life, as long as the work is reasonably safe and healthy."

One of the question I hate, and which here you get to hear in pretty much every interview (my current employer spared me, IIRC) is "What are your weaknesses?" In a discussion the best two answers that we came up with were "I will not tell you that, as it would defeat the purpose of the interview - at least as far as I am concerned." and "Chocolate."

My biggest weakness is that I can never think of the right answers for stupid questions.

[MatildaGage]

Originally Posted by lionking

I might have said this up thread, but I hate hypothetical questions, and the sample you have given includes this type of question Matilda. I have a particular hate for the "where will you be in 5 years time?" question. The honest answer, which is rarely given, is "in your job bozo".

Actually I had abandoned that question because I thought it was corny. I resurrected it and omg people are saying the absolute dumbest answers. All I want to know is if their long-term career goals are in line with what this company and position can provide. Turnover has very disruptive and expensive so I want to know if the person sees this as just some job they get until they find something more to their liking. So I'm keeping the question!

Quote:

All research and literature in this field shows that questions which get the candidate to relate and verify past behavior to the requirements of the job are the only useful questions. Without doing this, you may as well toss a coin. Sadly, we all like to think we can judge people on the basis of an interview. We can't. And when people try to throw in "body language" I just want to scream.

What research and literature? I've spent lots of time trying to find some (Google scholars and professional association websites) and came up totally empty.

I don't like to think I can judge people solely on the basis of an interview, but I do know I can make some judgments. I give people lots of leeway if they can't think of an answer to a question, need time to think about it or even give 1-2 dumb-ish answers. But I can't just hire people sight unseen--the interview is one of the few sources of information about a candidate that is available to me.

Body language? I expect people to be nervous and disregard most body language because of it.

[MatildaGage]

Originally Posted by Spindrift

It was a good question 20 years ago when people weren't expecting it. Now everyone knows it translates to "We are now going to play a game. Tell me something about yourself that is a negative but is really a positive."

I love it when people play that game. What that means he/she knows how to convert his/her potential faults into positive things in the workplace.

[Cainkane1]

Maybe less than moral employees feel that their efforts aren't appreciated. In my case i was let go after perfect attendence, numerous awards for good performance and befriending to one extent or another every employee I associated with.

My job helped a lot of people and I got a lot of work done to the benefit of every employee in the building.

I was downsized because they said they couldn't afford me. This to me is strange as I made every dime of $8.50 an hour and the company got a lot of bng for this measly amount of buck.

The person who gave me the bad news made a six figure salary.

[MatildaGage]

Originally Posted by Magyar

Just out of curiousity - WHAT would you say would be the ideal answers to thes questions and do you ACTUALLY believe that that even the people who give those answers ACTUALLY believe those answers

In response to, "Thank you for coming in today. What interests you about working here": Something that suggests you are actually interested in working here, preferably not something that makes you appear mentally unstable [like bursting into tears during the first 2 minutes of the interview].

In response to the question, "If you got this job, what would be your strategy in the 1st 90 days": Something that makes it appear as though you have a clue as to how to learn your job so you can lead the department. This woman kept talking about how many different jobs she had within the same company, in short fire, and how she wanted to work in multiple different departments in my company. I want someone who is interested in leading this department and who will stay, instead of disrupting my dept by leaving in a few months and costing me lots of $ in turnover. Also, the fact that she wants to use her initial training period as a manager learning other departments' jobs instead of her own means she lacks an understanding of what a manager does.

In response to the question, "If you could have any job in 5 years, what would that be": Something that suggests you have pondered your future, you have goals and are interested in working in this department in this company.

In response to the question, "What types of environments or management styles do you prefer to work in": Something that suggests you will be able to work productively with me.

[Mark6]

Originally Posted by MatildaGage

In response to, "Thank you for coming in today. What interests you about working here": Something that suggests you are actually interested in working here, preferably not something that makes you appear mentally unstable [like bursting into tears during the first 2 minutes of the interview].

In response to the question, "If you got this job, what would be your strategy in the 1st 90 days": Something that makes it appear as though you have a clue as to how to learn your job so you can lead the department. This woman kept talking about how many different jobs she had within the same company, in short fire, and how she wanted to work in multiple different departments in my company. I want someone who is interested in leading this department and who will stay, instead of disrupting my dept by leaving in a few months and costing me lots of $ in turnover. Also, the fact that she wants to use her initial training period as a manager learning other departments' jobs instead of her own means she lacks an understanding of what a manager does.

In response to the question, "If you could have any job in 5 years, what would that be": Something that suggests you have pondered your future, you have goals and are interested in working in this department in this company.

In response to the question, "What types of environments or management styles do you prefer to work in": Something that suggests you will be able to work productively with me.

Unless you are being deliberately evasive, it sounds like you do not actually have definite answers to these questions.

[Mark6]

Originally Posted by MatildaGage

I love it when people play that game. What that means he/she knows how to convert his/her potential faults into positive things in the workplace.

"What are your weaknesses?"

"I am not good at BS. Does this job involve talking to reporters who often ask 'gotcha!' questions?"

[aggle-rithm]

Originally Posted by Cainkane1

Maybe less than moral employees feel that their efforts aren't appreciated. In my case i was let go after perfect attendence, numerous awards for good performance and befriending to one extent or another every employee I associated with.

My job helped a lot of people and I got a lot of work done to the benefit of every employee in the building.

I was downsized because they said they couldn't afford me. This to me is strange as I made every dime of $8.50 an hour and the company got a lot of bng for this measly amount of buck.

The person who gave me the bad news made a six figure salary.

People often don't seem to think these things through. My wife once got laid off from a part-time job where she was getting a tiny hourly wage. Since the amount of work wasn't going away, her hours were going to have to be picked up by a senior employee who was getting paid more per hour.

[lionking]

Matilda, do you have well set selection criteria for the jobs you are interviewing for? I don't want to sound like a smart arse, but I have post graduate qualifications in HR (not particurlarly proud of that ) and have worked in this field for decades (not now though). The only worthwhile questions are those directly related to the selection criteria and which get candidates to prove their experience match the requirements of the job. Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. I wouldn't ask any of the questions you have just highlighted.

[Fishstick]

Originally Posted by MatildaGage

In response to, "Thank you for coming in today. What interests you about working here": Something that suggests you are actually interested in working here, preferably not something that makes you appear mentally unstable [like bursting into tears during the first 2 minutes of the interview].

"The paycheck" is a valid answer here, yes?

[TragicMonkey]

Originally Posted by lionking

Matilda, do you have well set selection criteria for the jobs you are interviewing for? I don't want to sound like a smart arse, but I have post graduate qualifications in HR (not particurlarly proud of that ) and have worked in this field for decades (not now though). The only worthwhile questions are those directly related to the selection criteria and which get candidates to prove their experience match the requirements of the job. Past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. I wouldn't ask any of the questions you have just highlighted.

If you're going to be working on a team, you have to be able to get along with them. Most companies would prefer an averagely-qualified, averagely-able employee who can work peaceably and productively on a team to a brilliant but disruptive employee who is always causing arguments and fuss.

[Mark6]

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

If you're going to be working on a team, you have to be able to get along with them. Most companies would prefer an averagely-qualified, averagely-able employee who can work peaceably and productively on a team to a brilliant but disruptive employee who is always causing arguments and fuss.

While that makes sense, I do not see how any of Matilda's questions would reveal a "brilliant but disruptive" person.

Unless of course they are so unstable as to break into tears, or start abusing the interviewer.

Once I showed up for interview on time, and was told the interview was scheduled an hour (or maybe it wasd three hours) later, and the person I was supposed to see is unavailable. I shrugged and said "OK, I will wait." Now, the interview was arranged by a consulting firm, and after I conveyed this to them, they swore my timing was correct. Both me and consulting firm agent guessed that the employer was deliberately pulling my leg to see if I would react badly to unexpected change. But 99% of people would pass this "test". It would only weed out the totally unstable.

[mediocrity511]

Originally Posted by Mark6

While that makes sense, I do not see how any of Matilda's questions would reveal a "brilliant but disruptive" person.

Unless of course they are so unstable as to break into tears, or start abusing the interviewer.

Once I showed up for interview on time, and was told the interview was scheduled an hour (or maybe it wasd three hours) later, and the person I was supposed to see is unavailable. I shrugged and said "OK, I will wait." Now, the interview was arranged by a consulting firm, and after I conveyed this to them, they swore my timing was correct. Both me and consulting firm agent guessed that the employer was deliberately pulling my leg to see if I would react badly to unexpected change. But 99% of people would pass this "test". It would only weed out the totally unstable.

Honestly if that happened to me my response would be to say "Oh well, never mind. Goodbye" and then to leave. Not because I'm unstable, but because I wouldn't want to work for a company so disorganised that they couldnt arrange an interview. I also wouldn't want to work for a company that would play silly games with it's interviewees, I think it shows a lack of respect for the effort people make for job interviews.

[Spindrift]

Originally Posted by Mark6

While that makes sense, I do not see how any of Matilda's questions would reveal a "brilliant but disruptive" person.

Unless of course they are so unstable as to break into tears, or start abusing the interviewer.

Once I showed up for interview on time, and was told the interview was scheduled an hour (or maybe it wasd three hours) later, and the person I was supposed to see is unavailable. I shrugged and said "OK, I will wait." Now, the interview was arranged by a consulting firm, and after I conveyed this to them, they swore my timing was correct. Both me and consulting firm agent guessed that the employer was deliberately pulling my leg to see if I would react badly to unexpected change. But 99% of people would pass this "test". It would only weed out the totally unstable.

I would fail that test.

The employer would fail the douche bag employer test for pulling a stupid stunt like that. If they want to play games like that, then maybe on a second interview, but even then it's a silly game and I don't think I'd want to work there.

[TragicMonkey]

Originally Posted by Mark6

While that makes sense, I do not see how any of Matilda's questions would reveal a "brilliant but disruptive" person.

Unless of course they are so unstable as to break into tears, or start abusing the interviewer.

Or react with scorn or disdain for the harmless, stupid, typical-interview questions. Everybody expects the "what is your weakness?" question, and everybody knows to answer it is to make yourself look like a jerk or an idiot. The best response is to smile, tell them you hate that question as much as they must hate hearing the crazy answers, and responding with an evasion so charming they mistake it for frankess. The question isn't about the question, the question is how you respond to the question--sweating bullets, losing your temper, coming up with a smarmy answer, being a jerk are the wrong responses. Finding humor in it, being cheerful about your inability to answer such a question, and being friendly are the correct responses.

The person interviewing you is presumably a human being. They've been asked that question also, and they didn't like it, either. Show them you're a human being, too, and understand completely. It's called building a rapport, and it's one of the many ways psychotic sociopaths like me manage to fake empathy for other human beings and convince them we're suitable hires, coworkers, and lovers.

Quote:

Once I showed up for interview on time, and was told the interview was scheduled an hour (or maybe it wasd three hours) later, and the person I was supposed to see is unavailable. I shrugged and said "OK, I will wait." Now, the interview was arranged by a consulting firm, and after I conveyed this to them, they swore my timing was correct. Both me and consulting firm agent guessed that the employer was deliberately pulling my leg to see if I would react badly to unexpected change. But 99% of people would pass this "test". It would only weed out the totally unstable.

Hmm. I'd have waited there if they said "one hour", but if they'd said "three hours" I'd have felt stupid sitting there that long so I'd have said "okay, I'll return then" and go kill time somewhere else for a couple of hours before returning two-and-a-half hours later so as to be half an hour early for the new time. Waiting in their building for three hours would make me feel conspicuous, and that I was disrupting their work.

[Mark6]

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Or react with scorn or disdain for the harmless, stupid, typical-interview questions. Everybody expects the "what is your weakness?" question, and everybody knows to answer it is to make yourself look like a jerk or an idiot. The best response is to smile, tell them you hate that question as much as they must hate hearing the crazy answers, and responding with an evasion so charming they mistake it for frankess. The question isn't about the question, the question is how you respond to the question--sweating bullets, losing your temper, coming up with a smarmy answer, being a jerk are the wrong responses. Finding humor in it, being cheerful about your inability to answer such a question, and being friendly are the correct responses.

I disagree. What you described may be the best use of "what is your weakness?" question, but I do not believe most employers actually use it that way. MatildaGage already said she does not -- she loves when candidates "play this game" because it shows her how creative they can be. Which is very very different from "being cheerful about your inability to answer such a question".

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Hmm. I'd have waited there if they said "one hour", but if they'd said "three hours" I'd have felt stupid sitting there that long so I'd have said "okay, I'll return then" and go kill time somewhere else for a couple of hours before returning two-and-a-half hours later so as to be half an hour early for the new time. Waiting in their building for three hours would make me feel conspicuous, and that I was disrupting their work.

I really do not remember if they said I was early by one hour or by three, but in any case the inerviewing manager showed up after about 30 minutes. In the end, I did not get the job.

[Garrison]

If companies ask that 'where do you see yourself in 5 years?' question they should be prepared to answer 'where do you see the company in five years?'

[respect]

Originally Posted by Rasmus

One of the question I hate, and which here you get to hear in pretty much every interview (my current employer spared me, IIRC) is "What are your weaknesses?" In a discussion the best two answers that we came up with were "I will not tell you that, as it would defeat the purpose of the interview - at least as far as I am concerned." and "Chocolate."

The opportunities for great answers are endless.

I am a serial killer, but don't worry, I only target people who deny me jobs that I want so you don't have anything to worry about, do you?

My enormous penis can be uncomfortable for women and intimidating to other men.

I like big butts and I can not lie.

Whenever I have a few chilli dogs and a couple of glasses of apple juice it seems like no one will come within a hundred yards of me.

[John Albert]

Originally Posted by Mark6

I concur. Except for the last one ("What types of environments or management styles do you prefer to work in?"), they sound as "gotcha" questions designed to make people squirm.

Those kinds of questions are easy. I usually just answer honestly:

"I prefer less hierarchical, more horizontal environments. No offense, but elaborate executive structures represent a major source of frustration I've felt in many large corporate workplaces.

"See, I've found that more 'agile' shops allow me the freedom to work on a number of different projects, exercise a variety of disciplines and make better use of my diverse skill set. Even more important is the ability to reach out directly to co-workers in other departments as needed to solve problems, instead of having to traverse a labyrinthine chain of command to avoid some middle managers feeling that their toes have been stepped on."

I was interviewing with 4 people and they all nodded in agreement. One of them added, "Yeah, we don't know anything about that around here," then rolled his eyes and smiled.

So I ended up landing the job in the big, Fortune 100 company with the rigid, hierarchical corporate environment. Go figure.

[geni]

Originally Posted by MatildaGage

In response to, "Thank you for coming in today. What interests you about working here": Something that suggests you are actually interested in working here, preferably not something that makes you appear mentally unstable [like bursting into tears during the first 2 minutes of the interview].

Problem you face is that the question is so standard that anyone who has been job seaking will be able to fake interest in a job double checking form 4B. You might be able to get a hint from how much they appear to know about the company but even that won't help you much.

So possibly worth asking as a basic screening question but don't think you are getting anything more out of it.

Quote:

In response to the question, "If you could have any job in 5 years, what would that be": Something that suggests you have pondered your future, you have goals and are interested in working in this department in this company.

So you want your interviewies to dirrectly lie to you. Unless you are something like CERN or NASA your company is not going to have much relationship to people's ideal job. The other problem is that in this economy having a 5 year plan while unemployed is pretty pointless. Plans have to be short term because you pretty much want to be in a possition to start a job the next day. At a new job at least for the first 6 months or so people focus on survival. Only after that is planning for multi year periods anything other than a waste of time.

Quote:

In response to the question, "What types of environments or management styles do you prefer to work in": Something that suggests you will be able to work productively with me.

So basicaly you are asking interviewies to guess your management style. I'm not sure why you think that is a useful skill in an employee.

[geni]

Originally Posted by MatildaGage

Hiring again, for a supervisory position. The latest shining stars:

In response to, "Thank you for coming in today. What interests you about working here": *covers face and cries*

In fairness that suggests short term issues that had nothing to do with the candidate's general suitability.

Quote:

Another thing--WTH are colleges teaching people about job interviewing and resumes? Most of the resumes are so similar it looks like a template from the same college instructor.

With only a few seconds per resume on the first pass making a non standard resume where the person doesn't instantly know where to look isn't a great idea.

Quote:

I keep hearing students are told to remove most of their job experience-- even if it explains job gaps or is pertinent to the job they're applying for--just put 1 most recent job. That is terrible advice!

It is but its probably a reaction to the current unemployment situation. People have more gaps than used to be typical and employers don't like that so more attempts are made to hide them.

Quote:

Also the college tells them to put the waste-of-space statement: "References upon request".

Its the accepted compromise between saying that yes you do have references and not giving out your previous company's contact info to everyone.

[Mark6]

Originally Posted by John Albert

Those kinds of questions are easy. I usually just answer honestly:

"I prefer less hierarchical, more horizontal environments. No offense, but elaborate executive structures represent a major source of frustration I've felt in many large corporate workplaces.

"See, I've found that more 'agile' shops allow me the freedom to work on a number of different projects, exercise a variety of disciplines and make better use of my diverse skill set. Even more important is the ability to reach out directly to co-workers in other departments as needed to solve problems, instead of having to traverse a labyrinthine chain of command to avoid some middle managers feeling that their toes have been stepped on."

Maybe I am lucky, but I never worked in a place where this would be a problem. Hence I can't honestly say I dislike such environment!

And in fact, I might not necessarily dislike it. I am quite comfortable with following rules and regulations. As long as everyone in "chain of command" is actually responsive and does their job, I should be fine with that.

If demand to "follow the procedure" means submitting my request to someone who shelves it and forgets about it is a different story. But that's an bad individual, not bad environment.

[Mark6]

Originally Posted by geni

So you want your interviewies to dirrectly lie to you. Unless you are something like CERN or NASA your company is not going to have much relationship to people's ideal job.

Ironically, one time in my life I was interviewing for a job which really did fit my "ideal" description, I was rejected because manager thought I would soon leave for a "better" position! (It was in the middle of 90's dot-com bubble.) Few things are as frustrating as having your dream job denied not because there is someone better, not because you are unqualified, but because employer is convinced your "dreams" lie elsewhere!

I was not asked the "5 year from now question", but if I were, honest answer would have been "Right here!" Trouble is, they would not have believed me.

[Almo]

Wow, Mark6, that sucks bad!

[wheunis]

Originally Posted by MatildaGage

Allegedly we are in a huge recession.

Employers are not a whole lot better in this regard...

We're in a recession, but you think its perfectly reasonable to offer minimum wage on top of requiring that employee to have his own car and to use it to company goals/needs.
A lot of the time without maintenance coverage.

Sure, I will just pick some fresh tires off this tree growing right over nyah!

[Xulld]

I am a supervisor at a Radiology Software Development company. I handle QA, installations and tier 3 application support. I have worked hard to get where I am.

At least once a week I run into an overqualified (from an education stand point) IT person who is working at a major hospital who lacks even basic troubleshooting skills. (and probably makes twice my salary.)

In fact it happens so often that I make a big deal out of the times I run into a competent IT person.

I do not have a college degree in computer science, or really any technical field. I have an AA in physics, and an AS in Theater performance. Yep that is right, arts school.

I do have some basic certs, most are expired now, I attained my MCSE in Exchange servers (email), and a A+, and Net + from CompTia eons ago.

This makes me look very poor on paper if you ignore my job experience and ignore how quickly once I get the job that I am then subsequently promoted.

Now clearly I am biased, everyone is, however from my perspective I see so many people who get good paying jobs based on nothing more than the paper hanging on the wall, and the game playing that is interviews. Now don't get me wrong, I do fairly well in an interview, but I imagine my application has been tossed into the basket plenty of times before even getting into the room. (I was a contractor for about 5 years and had about 12 jobs in that time, 3-6 month contracts being the norm)

Twice in my 20 years of work experience I have been given a chance at a job where I was considered under-qualified based solely on certs, and or college experience at a significantly reduced salary from the standard. Both jobs doubled my salary within the first year due to performance and competence. (the only reason I am not still at the first one was that it was sold to a much larger company who then let go 50% of the work force)

It is my opinion that there exists other people out there such as myself that are extremely good at what we do, who never really got a chance to get an undergraduate degree, but are far better than most with one.

I still make less than what I could if I had such a degree despite having a higher performance efficiency and better interpersonal skills than my contemporaries. I have found that small start-up companies will give you a chance, especially if you seem like a bargain. Large companies seem jaded by the volumes of individuals they must hire.

Just my .02

[MatildaGage]

More interviewing lately.

No call/no shows=40%. Why bother setting up the interview?

Many apply but don't respond to requests for interviews.

2 candidates spent a great deal of time during the interview explaining why they don't want to do this type of job or work in this industry.

1 had neon glitter on her face. Not a little shimmery--I mean full-on Vegas showgirl.

[John Albert]

Originally Posted by MatildaGage

More interviewing lately.

No call/no shows=40%. Why bother setting up the interview?

Many apply but don't respond to requests for interviews.

Maybe the job market really is improving.

Originally Posted by MatildaGage

2 candidates spent a great deal of time during the interview explaining why they don't want to do this type of job or work in this industry.

Did you ask them why, then, did they apply for the job?

Originally Posted by MatildaGage

1 had neon glitter on her face. Not a little shimmery--I mean full-on Vegas showgirl.

Awesome.

[Delscottio]

I've never understood why hiring managers don't like the answer to "why do you want to work here" being "because of the good money".

Surely offering good money (compared to your competitors) is a strategy to recruit the best out there, therefore a candidate would be validating the strategy?

In my industry we rarely have interviews, it's generally a "chat" in which the recruiter is generally a director who therefore enjoys the sound of their own voice. It can be a bit of a monologue at times where if you can keep up with the BS you've got a job really - obviously your CV is the bit that gets them interested and because of the close knit in my area someone will know you somewhere for a check-up (collegues, boss, even university lecturer).

[Delscottio]

Originally Posted by MatildaGage

More interviewing lately.

No call/no shows=40%. Why bother setting up the interview?

Many apply but don't respond to requests for interviews.

I'd hazard a guess now may be the right time to start thinking of looking at pay rates / benefits. The market looks to be changing where you are. Hopefully my area follows suit soon!