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.
That's such an old trope... and largely untrue, in my observations.
Hows it untrue? It happens with regularity in tons of places now. Ive seen companies instituting supposed "hiring freezes" while at the same time hiring an executives nephew/niece. You have job security for life if you got some relative big wig.
Promotions/Hiring are often based on nepotism/cronyism and almost NOTHING to do with value/experience etc.
Hows it untrue? It happens with regularity in tons of places now. Ive seen companies instituting supposed "hiring freezes" while at the same time hiring an executives nephew/niece. You have job security for life if you got some relative big wig.
Promotions/Hiring are often based on nepotism/cronyism and almost NOTHING to do with value/experience etc.
It doesn't always happen this way, but I've seen it happen enough to know that "who you know" is the most important issue.
As one former boss told me: "I'm in the business to make money, not spend money."
I know quite a few people who believe that the only thing separating profitability from unprofitability is the ability to minimize labor costs (by pushing wages down, reducing staff, or both).
Me, I'm more sympathetic to some of the high tech firms; I believe it's absolutely necessary to spend money to make money. And the more money spent, the more money made. So I'm clearly not in the "frugality" column. I wonder if that's holding me back!
At any rate I imagine the accountants have all of this down to a science.
That's such an old trope... and largely untrue, in my observations.
That boggles the mind. I can't help but think that it's possible to have been immersed in it to such an extent that cronyism simply became a commonly-accepted norm not worth a second thought.
Then again...counter-intuitively, some types of government work might be the only meritocracy left.
Aside from STEM degrees is anyone very disappointed or even angered that their bachelor's or master's degree from a public university did not open doorways to great workplaces?
In general, a non-stem Batcherlor's gets you an entry level position in an industry where you can learn and advance if you're productive - at the job and company - and this requires a low unemployment rate for recent grads to get in the door.
After the Great Recession of 2008, I met (and still know) a recent university grad who was literally mopping floors. He was not lazy or dim. He got out of it but it was not easy. He's doing well today.
Uni is just the foundation.
I know many Uni grads that are working in non-university required jobs.
Bachelor's degree is worth less and master's degree worth about the same today as a high school diploma 50-60 years ago.
You believed the liars who told you to expect differently?
The following course should be mandatory for a high school diploma: "Expectations Management: how to detect lies and junk news, and measure reality by your own measuring stick."
With no unions we're in a full slide to developing world status. You now need two professional incomes to scrape by in my area when it used to be a union tradesman could buy a house for and take care of a family of 5. Most who aren't C-level executives would benefit from union representation. That includes janitors, senior scientists and engineers. Without representation from both sides, a fair agreement will never be reached. As we have it now productivity per employee is rising but wages are stagnant.
Also overpopulation is a problem with a difficult solution. A simple issue of too many people and too few overall resources is a problem.
Hows it untrue? It happens with regularity in tons of places now. Ive seen companies instituting supposed "hiring freezes" while at the same time hiring an executives nephew/niece. You have job security for life if you got some relative big wig.
Promotions/Hiring are often based on nepotism/cronyism and almost NOTHING to do with value/experience etc.
It's a mixed bag. Sometimes cronyism wins out, sometimes seniority, sometimes value add, sometimes dumb luck, usually a jumbled mix of those things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by logical10x
That boggles the mind. I can't help but think that it's possible to have been immersed in it to such an extent that cronyism simply became a commonly-accepted norm not worth a second thought.
Then again...counter-intuitively, some types of government work might be the only meritocracy left.
Bolded where I did a double-take. In my experience this is the exact opposite of the case - the closer you get to politics and the further from a practical need to keep the lights on the less meritocratic both hiring and contracting decisions get.
Bolded where I did a double-take. In my experience this is the exact opposite of the case - the closer you get to politics and the further from a practical need to keep the lights on the less meritocratic both hiring and contracting decisions get.
At least the Civil Service requires an exam. And there are tiers of seniority inside the Fed gov with deterministic pay according to tier.
Would that not be a far, far cry from the realities of the modern-day working world (aside from the actuarial universe)?
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.
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.
