Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-25-2012, 11:27 AM
 
47,525 posts, read 69,672,493 times
Reputation: 22474

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by WantToHaveALife View Post
we just want constructive criticism, we want to know what it takes to get hired for your employer, company, business, that way we can comeback some other day and know what qualifications, skills, type of experience we need in order to get hired next time
One thing I think you have to do is put yourself in the position of the one that is doing the hiring.

First you have to realize the one doing the hiring is being paid to do a particular job and that is to find new employees who will work out. It's very costly to hire, orient an employee, train the employee and then have nothing but problems with that employee.

Coworkers want someone who can share the work burden, not add to it. Customers need to be happy with the employee. You have to have an employee who actually wants to work, is happy working, knows how to work, can do the work.

The one who hires has a one or two page paper that he or she must use to decide who to call for an interview. Calling too many for an interview is a waste of everyone's time.

So if you were having to find a good employee who would fit in well with the other employees and who will do a good or at least adequate job -- how would you go about looking through the stack of resumes and applications? How would your job applicants get you to pick them out -- maybe you want to select 3 or 4 out of 100 resumes to follow up on and you can only choose but one from them. What would you do? What would you look for?

So when you write your resume, you have to look at it that way. Why would YOU hire you. What makes you better for a particular job than 99 other applicants? Or even 49 other applicants, or 9.

Now think for example you've got a pile of applications and resumes. One person has a solid job history, it's clear they can hold a job and must want or need to work. Another has only a few sporadic jobs that didn't last long. Maybe another makes it clear that he'd rather be doing anything else other than work. How can they rewrite their resumes to make you at least want to check them out further?

Even if there are problems with your job history, you at least have to make it seem that you really can work out for this employer, that you are somehow better than the others for this job.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-26-2012, 10:32 AM
 
47,525 posts, read 69,672,493 times
Reputation: 22474
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordvader44 View Post
I agree with some of that assesment but I don't veiw jobs as charity to provide me with money.I do think we put WAY too much focus on work as a be all end all in our lives at the expense of our happiness.Alot of that is our fault for becoming debt slaves.A big mortgage,school and credit card debt plus other run away spending is like a huge anchor that leaves people with few options for their lives.By the time alot of people pay off that debt(50s and 60s) they've wasted the prime of their lives worrying about bills,debt and work.
That's true.

One reason I never look down on what some people call "trailer-trash" is that a lot of those people did just what you said --- they refused to be debt slaves. Like one guy I know bought an older mobile home to live in and paid $3000 cash for it. Then he only needed to come up with lot rent which was very low, and utilities which were also very low.

And people will spend $1000 cash for a car while others will spend almost that much a month making payments on some luxury car.

There are jobs that allow one to combine adventure and travel with the job, sometimes they pay better. Not everyone wants to travel most of the time, but those jobs are out there for those who do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2012, 10:37 AM
 
26,585 posts, read 62,020,627 times
Reputation: 13166
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
That's true.

One reason I never look down on what some people call "trailer-trash" is that a lot of those people did just what you said --- they refused to be debt slaves. Like one guy I know bought an older mobile home to live in and paid $3000 cash for it. Then he only needed to come up with lot rent which was very low, and utilities which were also very low.

And people will spend $1000 cash for a car while others will spend almost that much a month making payments on some luxury car.

There are jobs that allow one to combine adventure and travel with the job, sometimes they pay better. Not everyone wants to travel most of the time, but those jobs are out there for those who do.
There are people who live in trailers, there is trailer trash. The two can be but are not always mutually exclusive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2012, 12:01 PM
 
7,237 posts, read 12,737,180 times
Reputation: 5669
Quote:
Originally Posted by annerk View Post
There are people who live in trailers, there is trailer trash. The two can be but are not always mutually exclusive.
Just like there are people who live in the ghetto, then ghetto people.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2012, 12:12 PM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
3,879 posts, read 8,380,095 times
Reputation: 5184
Quote:
Originally Posted by statisticsnerd View Post
Why is it considered so awful by American society today to be out of work for any length of time? What if you have a nice nest egg accumulated and you just want a break? After all, the measly one or two weeks most people get off per year really doesn't cut it.

It is almost as if relaxing and taking some time away from the working world to enjoy yourself is a crime. After all, you don't want to be accused of being the dreaded "L" word.

I'm saving money hand over fist for retirement and investing it wisely so I won't have to work anymore one day. However, why does retirement have to happen all at once and when you are in your 50s/60s?

At that point, one foot is in the grave. Wouldn't it be better to maybe work five years, take off a year, work another five years, take off a year.. instead?
Its because here is America if you are not working your ass off to climb the corporate ladder than you must be some of loser. Work here is valued over anything else.

You're not suppose to want or need:
- time off
- to want to take vacations
- to want more than a week off a year
- to have a baby
- to want to receive income while on maternity leave
- to receive money when you retire
- to have time off if a family or loved one becomes ill long-term

In America, they expect that workers put work ahead of everything else and do this until you are no longer usable which is when they will replace you with someone younger and faster.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2012, 12:17 PM
 
3,739 posts, read 4,633,514 times
Reputation: 3430
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miss Crabcakes View Post
Its because here is America if you are not working your ass off to climb the corporate ladder than you must be some of loser. Work here is valued over anything else.

You're not suppose to want or need:
- time off
- to want to take vacations
- to want more than a week off a year
- to have a baby
- to want to receive income while on maternity leave
- to receive money when you retire
- to have time off if a family or loved one becomes ill long-term

In America, they expect that workers put work ahead of everything else and do this until you are no longer usable which is when they will replace you with someone younger and faster.
you got it!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2012, 12:31 PM
 
1,369 posts, read 2,134,928 times
Reputation: 1649
My mom took some time off after working over twenty-one years at a large corporation. She had been an actuary and VP. During the few years she was off, she volunteered at my brothers' school board and for a woman's organization. After four years of "retirement", she returned to work at the women's organization she volunteered for, and she still gets multiple offers for her. No problem....but she also had very marketable skills.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2012, 12:35 PM
 
Location: NJ
18,665 posts, read 19,962,294 times
Reputation: 7315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miss Crabcakes View Post
Work here is valued over anything else.
To an employer, it is, and it should be. Life is about choices, and accepting consequences for actions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2012, 12:38 PM
 
26,585 posts, read 62,020,627 times
Reputation: 13166
Quote:
Originally Posted by TiltheEndofTime View Post
My mom took some time off after working over twenty-one years at a large corporation. She had been an actuary and VP. During the few years she was off, she volunteered at my brothers' school board and for a woman's organization. After four years of "retirement", she returned to work at the women's organization she volunteered for, and she still gets multiple offers for her. No problem....but she also had very marketable skills.
Exactly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-26-2012, 12:38 PM
 
1,266 posts, read 1,606,224 times
Reputation: 334
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
One thing I think you have to do is put yourself in the position of the one that is doing the hiring.

First you have to realize the one doing the hiring is being paid to do a particular job and that is to find new employees who will work out. It's very costly to hire, orient an employee, train the employee and then have nothing but problems with that employee.

Coworkers want someone who can share the work burden, not add to it. Customers need to be happy with the employee. You have to have an employee who actually wants to work, is happy working, knows how to work, can do the work.

The one who hires has a one or two page paper that he or she must use to decide who to call for an interview. Calling too many for an interview is a waste of everyone's time.

So if you were having to find a good employee who would fit in well with the other employees and who will do a good or at least adequate job -- how would you go about looking through the stack of resumes and applications? How would your job applicants get you to pick them out -- maybe you want to select 3 or 4 out of 100 resumes to follow up on and you can only choose but one from them. What would you do? What would you look for?

So when you write your resume, you have to look at it that way. Why would YOU hire you. What makes you better for a particular job than 99 other applicants? Or even 49 other applicants, or 9.

Now think for example you've got a pile of applications and resumes. One person has a solid job history, it's clear they can hold a job and must want or need to work. Another has only a few sporadic jobs that didn't last long. Maybe another makes it clear that he'd rather be doing anything else other than work. How can they rewrite their resumes to make you at least want to check them out further?

Even if there are problems with your job history, you at least have to make it seem that you really can work out for this employer, that you are somehow better than the others for this job.
it's back to the Catch-22 regarding job experience, you need experience to get a job, but you can't experience if nobody will hire you, the way to get experience is by having the job, and we always hear the main reason why employers are extremely reluctant to hire inexperienced people is because training costs money, i was having a discussion with someone about this, when i mentioned if it is because they are lazy to train the person, and this is what she said:

"I don't believe it is because the trainer, employer is lazy, experience shows a hiring-manager, job-recruiter that the person has held a job in good standings"

is that the main reason?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:01 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top