Posted on 07/20/2004 9:28:43 AM PDT by Mini-14
Doesn't necessarily mean that the job (or other) data on the site is that old. Many sites work from a database that is constantly updated, but the basic code for the site itself is not changed very often.
I don't hear too many companies bemoaning the fact that they can't find good help. Therefore, I think it is overstated to say that Employers are doing a lousy job at hiring. It is more accurate to say that Employers are getting what they require.
I think what this whiner is really saying is: "I wanted a high-paying job as a web-designer, but no one would hire me. So now I write articles for Computerworld telling everyone how foolish companies are in their hiring practices."
My daughter's boyfriend was told after a phone interview to have his paperwork in by Saturday (on a Monday I believe). He had to work two 12 hour shifts on Tuesday and Wednsday, but sent the stuff in via email, as requested, on Thursday. On Friday the job was filled, and he was told that "we thought you weren't interested when we didn't get your paperwork". As it turns out the lady didn't read her email!.
But the good news is that he did find another job with a small IT company, which he loves.
"Norris is a freelance writer and adviser specializing in recruitment and career issues. He's based in Stamford, Conn."
This is simply the worst article I've ever read concerning finding a job, hiring practices, and life in general I have ever read.
What a loser.
The major objective is to avoid hiring any one over or approaching age 50, from the federal government on down, NO OLD TIMERS NEED APPLY!! Sure, Walmart hires a few, but jobs where you'd use a life time of skills, no way!
All the structure Norris describes is to make the HR folks lives easier by ensuring that no geezers can get past. If the don't exclude older applicants by these mechanisms, they'll have no other means of doing so.
This is only because you have allowed carreer mean that much to you. You are the one who promoted your job to god status.
My number one complaint - HR person contacts you and sets up an interview. You get there and the person you actually have to work for wants to know if you know this, done that, etc. Basically wants to know if you have done stuff that is not on your resume. A waste of everyone's time. HR people - IMO - are extremely ignorant bordering on stupidity people.
Ya know, about the time Detroit started making cars, the horse carriage business went south. The author needs to quit whinning. Job hunting has never been easy. Twenty-five years ago I was told I was a woman so couldn't be a mail carrier, never mind I had the highest test score. Along about that same time I was hired at a state park but two hours after I filled out all the paperwork I got a call from a very upset supervisor who said he'd been hauled over the coals because I was white and where was his token black employee. That job stayed open for several years and was finally pulled because there had never been a black applicant. Job hunting stinks, always has, always will so shut up and get over it.
While there are many, many things I've hated about job search, this article is written by someone who has obviously never done any hiring. Many of the so-called abuses he speaks of, one being the no-call, are necessary. If the company is looking to add staff, they are too busy to answer the telephone.
Companies either have the mindset that it is easier and less costly to go through 2 or 3 employees, firing one or two that do not work out, than it is to conduct a thorough and professional job search. I think to a certain extent, that is true.
The bottom line is is YOU don't get the job, there is something wrong with the process or the company. If YOU do get the job, everything is OK. We need more perspective here that the writer of this article doesn't offer.
The worst part was that when I carefully considered what the headhunter had to offer and gave them permission to submit my resume for the position, I made it painfully clear that no matter what the response was, I wanted to hear back from him/her so I can digest any critique that may have been offered by the hiring manager. I can say that to a person, each headhunter assured me that they would call me back no matter what the response was. And to a person, not one headhunter ever took the time to call me back. It was up to me to track them down, leave messages, etc. before I could get them to tell me that the company "filled the position".
Also, I worked for a smaller company for a few years and was privy to the hiring process. They were looking for programmers last fall and put a listing on Monster.com. That was around 9am. By the end of the day they had over 300 resumes. After two days they had about 450. Obviously, one or two people can not read every resume so they took the top 50 resumes to review and tossed the rest.
What stopped your wife's colleague from asking the question? Nothing. The colleague needs to be better prepared by asking the questions that matter. Especially if it's not specifically stated on the job posting.
BTW, I'm an HR recruiter for a 6500 person organization.
"MUST SPEAK SPANISH"
I went to a job interview and when the interviewer saw my salary requirements on the application, he said the guy who set up the interview should have told me what the job was paying. D'oh. I drove 100 miles RT and spent an hour filling out application. Needless to say, there was no interview.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.