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.
I do wish though that my wife could do more.
She currently drives a YWCA bus for kid pickup...and also works as a low-end receptionist.
(Both min. wage)...... but she too used to do major dataentry work at $9-$20 / hr.
But per medical issues I dont mind her working easy stuff.
But one thing, she is a excellent artist (pencil, charcoal)... and wish I could figure out how to movitate her to do more of that. because she is good and has won awards in the past.
Problem is that for her she says it takes too long.
I've left stuff off of my before. It's not being dishonest, it's customizing the resume for the job. At this job I needed X and Y skills, so I stressed those on there. The other bits and pieces I didn't stress but casually mentioned in the interview. I've also learned as an interviewer that it's better to talk on the same level as the people you're interviewing with instead of trying to impress them with your vocabulary. I interviewed someone once who threw out every big word in the dictionary, I couldn't get around that and passed on her. I figured if I was going to work with someone I'd rather not have to walk around with a dictionary.
Don't employers understand sometimes you have to take a 'lesser' job to feed the family or just because you need the flexible hours (due to childcare or family responsibilities?).
Yes, they do. And that is why they will not hire those who are over-qualified. It costs a company money to hire and train a new employee and those new hires who are worth more than their new job will always have an eye out for a better position. While you have bills to pay and a family to feed, once you get hired you will immediately began to think to yourself that this is only temporary, you'll find a better paying job soon. It is just not worth it to the company to waste their time and money hiring someone who is only going to be gone in six months.
You got to keep in mind that there are many people who are not-as-qualified as you are who are applying to these jobs, so why should an employer take pity and understand your plight?
It costs a company money to hire and train a new employee and those new hires who are worth more than their new job will always have an eye out for a better position.
IMHO, more often than not, the ones who are over qualified can be trained at a much faster rate than the ones who are not.
In my experience online, some people will resent you if you're educated, especially if they're not. Sometimes there is a deep hatred engendered, which is really scary sometimes.
I had an incident where I was just sharing my experience (I've been a music teacher for 50 years), and some lurker came into this YahooGroup and called me "arrogant, pretentious and condescending." I was really hurt and upset; I just wasn't expecting this. Several people defended me, but I unsubbed from the list.
I really didn't deserve that.
So yes; like a lot of musicians (and teachers), I've worked as a temp, summers, in major law firms and all kinds of businesses, and more than once, someone has just hated me, based on resentment.
I'm not going to put the URL to it because it has very bad language, but this person called me a lesbian (as if that were an insult, which it is not!!), a B--word, said that I had no class, that I was crazy. Ask me privately and I'll send you the URL.
And I promise you, I'm none of those things, though accusing someone of being a lesbian like that is incredibly bigoted of this person; he had a fit, really. It was really hurtful.
My first throught when I hear that somebody was rejected for being "overqualified" is if they were so smart and well educated how come they can't come up with a better strategy for conducting their life than trying to get hired for some flunky job?
My first throught when I hear that somebody was rejected for being "overqualified" is if they were so smart and well educated how come they can't come up with a better strategy for conducting their life than trying to get hired for some flunky job?
Well, you're right; and that may in some instances have to do with the distinction between emotional intelligence and IQ. There *are* a lot of people who may be using this as an excuse, too.
My first throught when I hear that somebody was rejected for being "overqualified" is if they were so smart and well educated how come they can't come up with a better strategy for conducting their life than trying to get hired for some flunky job?
At least where I live, there's a lot of competition for every job, and there does seem to be a bias against people who are better educated (since there is a lower degree of average educational attainment here). Most of the people who have college degrees end up having to leave the state to find anything better than a 'flunky job' - and maybe there are other extenuating reasons that they can't move. Sometimes well educated smart people are going for flunky jobs because they need to work and there just aren't the better jobs available.
My first throught when I hear that somebody was rejected for being "overqualified" is if they were so smart and well educated how come they can't come up with a better strategy for conducting their life than trying to get hired for some flunky job?
In this recessions, sometimes beggars don't want or can't be choosy.
My math teacher from high school told me recently (we kind of keep in touch) that she met a waitress at Waffle House who had a degree in Physics. The woman said she was very happy with her life.
Just like those who are not all that educated, the very educated might find their true calling late in life and maybe what may be considered a "flunky job" to most of us is their calling.
I think the other issue is a lot of employers want employees who will stay with the firm. If they think you are lowering your job status by working there they are probably more concerned about have you leave too soon after finally adjusting to the workplace/procedures/etc. And then they have to interview again.
I've also noticed some people who are big on finding employees who 'fit' or have the right 'attitude' often are looking for people who are not going to rock the boat. They especially do not want someone who might point out deficiencies (even if it means the opportunity to improve) or someone who might be too candid with other co-workers or supervisiors about the way the hirer actually manages their job. The valid side to this is that you can't run a business if the secretary is trying to reorganize the bookkeepers accounting practices or if a new hire decides to overdeliver on all their work to impress everyone (while killing profits or taking too much time for tasks.) Too many chiefs...
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.
