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 05-14-2019, 03:19 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
8,662 posts, read 3,067,747 times
Reputation: 12965

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Serious Conversation View Post
There are plenty of large companies that are not going through third-party screening or recruiting firms.
No, they use their own.

I have not applied for a job in nearly two years that did not eventually direct me to an online portal for info entry and all that diversity disclaimer. Most larger companies have their own portal (although I suspect it's a leased or SaaS setup with their branding). Very, very few companies of any size down to 5-person shops don't use a rented portal through ADP or a half dozen other providers.

I think I've sent maybe ten applications total to a company email address, with no other steps.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-14-2019, 04:33 PM
 
Location: Ohio
19,938 posts, read 14,249,679 times
Reputation: 16115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kthnry View Post
But they're using software in-house to screen for keywords and filter out people who don't meet all the requirements, right? Or are you saying that all resumes go directly from the applicant to the hiring manager?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kthnry View Post
It's hopeless. All this talk about the skills gap is because good candidates get screened out by useless HR drones and resume filtering software for bizarre reasons like this. Then HR tells the hiring manager that there are no qualified applicants.
What I'm hearing is: "I'm too damn dumb or lazy to figure out who my boss would be and send my resume directly to that person."

Losers mess around with HR and on-line resumes and other nonsense.

Winners send they're resumes directly to their future boss.

It's not rocket science. It's called "the internet." You use the internet to find the company's website and then you look at the company's organization chart.

See?

If you're a pharmaceutical sales rep and you want a job, you go to the company's website, look at the organizational chart, find out who is the regional sales manager for the region where you want to work, and then send your resume directly to them.

See?

If the regional sales manager is not impressed, then your resume goes into the circular file, no harm, no foul. But, if they are impressed, they'll contact you directly with instructions, or they'll give your resume to HR with instructions to contact you.

Doh!

If their website doesn't have an organizational chart, then search the web to find one, and if you still can't, then call using a pretext.

And, why, no, you don't call HR.

And, why, no you don't tell them you're looking for a job.

The operand here is "pretext."

You: May I make a sales appointment with the regional sales manager?
Secretary: [sort of lying] No, they're rarely in the office.
You: Then may I mail some brochures?
Secretary: Sure.
You: What's the address and to whom should I address it?

See how easy that was? And, gosh, it took a whole 60 seconds of your time.

Apparently, some of you people have a Creative Capital of exactly ZERO, so it's no wonder you can't find jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-14-2019, 04:37 PM
 
Location: Ohio
19,938 posts, read 14,249,679 times
Reputation: 16115
Quote:
Originally Posted by 87112 View Post
Underemployed # is more important. I know a lot of people with jobs that never get enough hours.
Well, thank you for that worthless anecdotal evidence that has no value whatsoever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
Well.

The lead article in today's NYT addresses the issue of flat wages across the last decade (until their very recent and modest rise) and presents the very well supported conclusion that (among other things) wages did not rise with the supposedly booming job market for a couple of very simple reasons: the job market wasn't really that hot, and the entire picture of unemployment may be misrepresented.
Wages aren't flat and the entire article is a misrepresentation, but that's par for the course for New York Times.

The government’s official definition of unemployment is relatively narrow. It counts only people actively looking for work, which means it leaves out many students, stay-at-home parents or others who might like jobs if they were available.

That's a gross misrepresentation.

The government's definition of unemployed uses a three-prong test:

1) Do you want to work?; and
2) Are you available to work?; and
3) Have you sought work in the last 30 days [prior to the survey]?

If you answer "No" to any one of those three questions, then you are not counted as unemployed, and rightly so.

People who do not want to work should never be counted as unemployed.

People who are not available to work, because they are doing other things like going to school or caring for children or other family members, should never be counted as unemployed.

People can go to school and work. I certainly did. If students aren't working, it's only because they don't want to work, not because there's no jobs.

People who have done nothing to look for work in the 30 days prior to the survey should not be counted as unemployed, either. If they really wanted a job, then they would have looked for work in that period.

The only issue I have is that thanks to Liberal policies, it now takes 6-8 weeks to vet a candidate for a job, so extending the period from 30 days to 90 days might give a more accurate picture of unemployment.

Only a tiny 454,000 people are "discouraged."

Only 1,473,000 are working part-time, because they're unable to find a full-time job.

Contrary to the NYT's gross misrepresentations and false statements, wage stagnation is nothing but a Liberal myth.

Average wages in 2016 were $48,642 and $50,321 in 2017.

The percent change is 3.45%, while Monetary Inflation, Cost-push Inflation and Demand-pull Inflation increased only 2.18% over the same period, leaving a net gain of 1.27%

Average wage in 2010 was $41,673, so there has been a 20.75% increase through 2017.

Monetary Inflation, Cost-push Inflation and Demand-pull Inflation increased 11.73% over the same period, so that results in a net wage increase of 9.02%

Average wage in 2000 was $32,154 so that is a 56.49% increase, while Monetary Inflation, Cost-push Inflation and Demand-pull Inflation increased 40.9% so that represents a 15.59% net increase in wages since 2000.

Average wage in 1990 was $21,027 so wages have increased 139.31% since then, while Monetary Inflation, Cost-push Inflation and Demand-pull Inflation increased increased 81.94% giving a net increase of 57.37%.

That debunks the whole wage stagnation myth. Wages have been out-pacing all forms of Inflation for decades.

Another falsehood proffered by the NYT is that low unemployment should drive wages up.

That might have been true in 1940, when there were only 80-100 skill-sets and 90% of your population was employed in agriculture, but today your government recognizes 800+ skill-sets and only 2% of the population are engaged in agriculture.

Wages are determined by the Supply & Demand for a given skill-set in a specific labor market.

There are several thousand labor markets in the US, not just one.

You, as an unemployed person, are not competing against all 5.3 Million unemployed persons, you're only competing against those persons in your labor market who have your skill-set. Note that in some markets, certain skill-sets tend to be concentrated because of the companies headquartered or based there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-14-2019, 04:45 PM
 
1,866 posts, read 720,300 times
Reputation: 3983
Quote:
Originally Posted by buenos View Post
Actually it is legitimate to complain about issues that are ruining the lives or careers of innocent people and destroying businesses. But it is not legitimate to complain about people who complain about these damaging issues. If we want to label someone as a "complainer" then it is the people who complain about people who did not cause the damaging problems. This reminds me of the tech (Facebook, twitter) censorship of people who complain about increased crime and other issues. I have to suspect that people who complain about those who complain about real issues, don't see the issues big, or even benefit from the status-quo, and want to keep these issues in place.
That is exactly my point that I have been trying to make. Complaining about people who "complain" in my view is bad etiquette and rude, even though the person has the right to express that view. When people post, they should be aware that others are reading their posts, so while they can say anything that they want within the City-Data parameters, it is best to be polite and respectful of other posters and not try to be dismissive just because a person doesn't like what the poster said and to try to impose personal viewpoints such as having the poster discuss trying to solve the problem even though a solution may not exist.

A person's reputation and credibility is at stake. I respect other people's viewpoints, and even if I don't agree with them, I would never label them as complainers. I care too much what people think of me and my posts. Respect and politeness is the way to go.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-14-2019, 05:44 PM
 
1,613 posts, read 1,126,372 times
Reputation: 2429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
What I'm hearing is: "I'm too damn dumb or lazy to figure out who my boss would be and send my resume directly to that person."

Losers mess around with HR and on-line resumes and other nonsense.

Winners send they're resumes directly to their future boss.
Thanks for the helpful hint! Can you help me out? I'd like to get a job with the Prudential insurance company in their downtown Newark office. I've heard they manage some software development out of that office. I have a solid background in QA/testing and would like to talk to someone about career opportunities. Can you please find the person I should contact? Here's their web site. Appreciate the assistance!

https://www.prudential.com/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-14-2019, 07:02 PM
 
1,227 posts, read 1,498,219 times
Reputation: 822
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
What I'm hearing is: "I'm too damn dumb or lazy to figure out who my boss would be and send my resume directly to that person."

Losers mess around with HR and on-line resumes and other nonsense.

Winners send they're resumes directly to their future boss.

It's not rocket science. It's called "the internet." You use the internet to find the company's website and then you look at the company's organization chart.

See?

If you're a pharmaceutical sales rep and you want a job, you go to the company's website, look at the organizational chart, find out who is the regional sales manager for the region where you want to work, and then send your resume directly to them.

See?
.
see? see? see? see? see?
Such a useless advice. Corporations carefully hide the identity of their managers for that reason. Most managers were at the company for 20+ years, so they dont even have a Linkedin profile, or have some vague one or out of network. Org charts are not posted on company websites. One of the responsibilities of IT and all employees is to protect the org charts from being "stolen" by hackers. The CEOs name is posted for promo purposes, but each department head and team managers identities are not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by BusinessManIT View Post
That is exactly my point that I have been trying to make. Complaining about people who "complain" in my view is bad etiquette and rude,
Exactly. The purpose of human speech and language (and internet forums) is to resolve problems that hurt people. Resolution of problems start with bringing the problems to attention, and discussing why and how it is a damaging problem.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-14-2019, 08:01 PM
 
7,602 posts, read 9,459,597 times
Reputation: 8967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
What I'm hearing is: "I'm too damn dumb or lazy to figure out who my boss would be and send my resume directly to that person."

Losers mess around with HR and on-line resumes and other nonsense.

Winners send they're resumes directly to their future boss.

It's not rocket science. It's called "the internet." You use the internet to find the company's website and then you look at the company's organization chart.

See?

If you're a pharmaceutical sales rep and you want a job, you go to the company's website, look at the organizational chart, find out who is the regional sales manager for the region where you want to work, and then send your resume directly to them.

See?

If the regional sales manager is not impressed, then your resume goes into the circular file, no harm, no foul. But, if they are impressed, they'll contact you directly with instructions, or they'll give your resume to HR with instructions to contact you.

Doh!

If their website doesn't have an organizational chart, then search the web to find one, and if you still can't, then call using a pretext.

And, why, no, you don't call HR.

And, why, no you don't tell them you're looking for a job.

The operand here is "pretext."

You: May I make a sales appointment with the regional sales manager?
Secretary: [sort of lying] No, they're rarely in the office.
You: Then may I mail some brochures?
Secretary: Sure.
You: What's the address and to whom should I address it?

See how easy that was? And, gosh, it took a whole 60 seconds of your time.

Apparently, some of you people have a Creative Capital of exactly ZERO, so it's no wonder you can't find jobs.

.."Winners send they're resumes directly to the boss"...

No, winners use appropriate grammar, and know how to spell, and they don't use words like "boss", either.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2019, 04:13 PM
 
724 posts, read 617,902 times
Reputation: 642
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
Average wages in 2016 were $48,642 and $50,321 in 2017.

The percent change is 3.45%, while Monetary Inflation, Cost-push Inflation and Demand-pull Inflation increased only 2.18% over the same period, leaving a net gain of 1.27%

Average wage in 2010 was $41,673, so there has been a 20.75% increase through 2017.
Sure, but the numbers are skewed higher due to high earners. Median wage for 2010 was $26,363.55.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-15-2019, 04:47 PM
 
619 posts, read 270,086 times
Reputation: 1479
Quote:
Originally Posted by concept_fusion View Post
Sure, but the numbers are skewed higher due to high earners. Median wage for 2010 was $26,363.55.
Here is an inflation adjusted MEDIAN household income.

https://www.multpl.com/us-median-rea.../table/by-year

People can come to their own conclusions.

Last edited by Liar_Liar; 05-15-2019 at 04:57 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-16-2019, 07:55 AM
 
85 posts, read 61,781 times
Reputation: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
What I'm hearing is: "I'm too damn dumb or lazy to figure out who my boss would be and send my resume directly to that person."

Losers mess around with HR and on-line resumes and other nonsense.

Winners send they're resumes directly to their future boss.

It's not rocket science. It's called "the internet." You use the internet to find the company's website and then you look at the company's organization chart.
Are you trolling? You can't be serious. I've worked inside large corporations and even while on the inside, I would sometimes have trouble finding who the manger of "Insert Name" Department was. Sometimes I would have to talk to 3 or 4 different people before getting close to the right person.

I couldn't imagine someone having success doing the same thing on the outside without knowing someone in the company that was willing to find them for you and even then, there is no guarantee that the manager wouldn't just send you resume straight to HR anyway.
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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top