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.
It's for a reporting position not programming. I am sure that's average for a reporting analyst for 4-5 years exp not a programmer with 7 yrs exp. It's just a select query. It's a very simple task for $85k. I am sure that a DB programmer starts at 6 figures.
What drives me crazy is that I see jobs online all the time, I qualify in every aspect aspect for like one requirement. I'm a good worker, but because I don't have ONE thing they want they would rather post over and over again than train someone!
^^THIS!
I have watched this repeatedly over the past 6 months in particular.
To me it's indicative of
1. an idiot in HR - too lazy to read anything and relying on software to scan resumes
2. an employer watching too much CNN/ news program of choice and thinking they'll get masters degrees to sling burgers ($$)
3. both 1 & 2
4. the position doesn't really need to be filled, they are just fishing
In my area an additional focus is on "hiring locals" - it's either mentioned in newspaper articles or pretty much acted upon in interviews. I've been in this area 8 years and still get trash-talked about moving here...in phone interviews! I get called to explain why I came here ...(?). In a live interview I was told the people interviewing me were the only area natives in the company (SO WHAT?). I didn't notice that nor did I care.
Talk about employers with "issues" - holy sugar, that's all that seems to be left.
Greatest one liner I have ever heard when it comes to tardiness: "Job starts at 8, if you aren't here to start at that time then we start looking for your replacement"
I am not a smoker but had one last year and I was STUNNED at how much time smoking one cigarette took this guy. Needless to say he didn't make the probabtionary period.
New pet peeve of mine is texting/smart phone usage......some folks have a problem for sure.
Funny to read this because I am right there with you and I do none of these. The only person I have to talk to texting is my mom and she's not allowed to text at work. My husband refuses to learn how. I don't smoke. I actually prefer to get in early (and leave ON TIME) because I like the quiet and solitude and peace of easing into a work day instead of the harried scrambling of all my coworkers getting in 'on time' (hardly) or late on a daily basis, flinging down a coat and running to turn a computer on (and leaving it in a 'password required' status while we futz for the next 2 hours till our early lunch).
However I get looks of astonishment when I am asked at interviews "how do you feel about texting at work?" I don't text, if I do it's a random 1x to say yes or no to my mom. I'm never tardy unless there is a serious problem. Like I'm BSing my way through the interview. NO my dear prospective employers, you many not believe it but I'm OLD SCHOOL. Or maybe now the word school is dropped and it's just called OLD. It's also called professionalism, maybe you little darling employers haven't seen it lately so you are unfamiliar??
I have recently been asked in interviews how I feel about swearing/ vulgar/ foul or disgusting language in the workplace; how do I feel about [overdeveloped] senses of entitlement; how do I feel and field criticism even if it's unfounded; what did I want to be when I grew up (and when the answer was provided I got a laugh, a heavy sigh and "what else???") - WTF. These were IT companies btw, referring to their younger, Google-minded employees and their behavior.
How do I feel about inappropriate language? I think you better stop lowering your behavior and professional standards to accommodate poorly raised children fresh out of college. Let them clean floors at McDonalds and gain some humility. How do I feel about senses of entitlement? See previous answer. Criticism? Well it better be on-target, regarding work issues and not personal ones and it better be relevant an delivered in a professional manner or be prepared to have it returned IN SPADES.
Sorry I have had it with employers acting like Henry VIII holding court in interviews when they are actually the emperor who has no clothes.
Unemployment is at record highs but the companies my wife, brother, sister and I work at all report they can't find enough qualified candidates for both skilled and unskilled jobs.
Do you believe this is true or is this just a way to convince the feds to let in more cheap immigrants?
Finding qualified people and willing to pay for them aren't always inclusive of each other. In addition, just because there is high unemployment doesn't necessarily mean every position has a large pool of 'qualified' candidates. The more specialized the position (and to an extent, the higher the position) the less number of applicants there may be in general. And that number can be even less as the employed may chose to wait out the down economy. So it really depends on the position. Of course, being "qualified" can also be subjective.
As for the original question - we do have a few positions that we've spent a bit more time than we anticipated to fill. But these are also for positions with specific skills sets like a penetration tester with specific exploit development experience.
I have watched this repeatedly over the past 6 months in particular.
To me it's indicative of
1. an idiot in HR - too lazy to read anything and relying on software to scan resumes
2. an employer watching too much CNN/ news program of choice and thinking they'll get masters degrees to sling burgers ($$)
3. both 1 & 2
4. the position doesn't really need to be filled, they are just fishing
In my area an additional focus is on "hiring locals" - it's either mentioned in newspaper articles or pretty much acted upon in interviews. I've been in this area 8 years and still get trash-talked about moving here...in phone interviews! I get called to explain why I came here ...(?). In a live interview I was told the people interviewing me were the only area natives in the company (SO WHAT?). I didn't notice that nor did I care.
Talk about employers with "issues" - holy sugar, that's all that seems to be left.
Or it is indicative of the fact that hiring a single wrong person is extremely costly. A person costs a company roughly 3x their salary in total expenses. If a person is hired for $50k and doesn't bring back at least $150k to the company in additional revenue or lowering costs, that person isn't worth their job. Additionally, given the excessive legal landscape in which we live, it takes at LEAST a year of documented poor performance to fire someone without risking a lawsuit (which will tarnish your company's image regardless of how legitimate it is). So the real question is do I risk losing $150k in making a poor hiring decision on that $50k job, or do I wait an extra 2-3 months so that I can find the right candidate and lose substantially less than that?
I understand your pain, but please look at it from the other side of the table. The numbers behind the various scenarios do not align with what you are saying.
There is no psychology of business or high end economics going on here.
Why did you move here? (I moved here 8 years ago...who cares?)
We got 791 applications for this position. (oh? What was the deciding factor?) Whether they knew our internal software. (Since your software is customized for you, then this is code for 'we hired from within.' Then why publish the job on an external website?) Oh -oops.
That salary range was posted by accident. The "HIRING RANGE" is this - (absurdly low number)
Stupid question #1 - a locally owned landscaping company
Stupid question #2 - a town govt
Stupid question #3 - a state job
Funny from the other side of the table it appears that the people currently occupying their jobs are the ones "not worth their job."
Oh and P.S. - the landscaping company - see they thought they'd pay nothing I guess, and give the job to someone who was not "from away."
Job goes up in June, stays up a few weeks, goes down.
Job is re-posted in the same form.
Job is taken down again after 2 weeks.
Job is posted with less hours and less 'technical' requirements, thereby bringing down the $$ expectations is my only guess because the place isn't big enough for 2 of this person. Job comes down again.
Job is up again in mid-November with original wording.
I think the person that needs to be replaced might beeee...HR.
There is no psychology of business or high end economics going on here.
Why did you move here? (I moved here 8 years ago...who cares?)
We got 791 applications for this position. (oh? What was the deciding factor?) Whether they knew our internal software. (Since your software is customized for you, then this is code for 'we hired from within.' Then why publish the job on an external website?) Oh -oops.
That salary range was posted by accident. The "HIRING RANGE" is this - (absurdly low number)
Stupid question #1 - a locally owned landscaping company
Stupid question #2 - a town govt
Stupid question #3 - a state job
Funny from the other side of the table it appears that the people currently occupying their jobs are the ones "not worth their job."
If 791 people thought they were qualified for it, then the salary was not an 'absurdly low number'. If it is a job that nearly 800 people believe they can do, then I would say chances are the salary that was posted was probably too high.
Are you reading what I'm writing or just looking to be argumentative? These are the results of 3 different workplaces.
The one you are attempting to badger me about was an internal posting "accidentally" posted publicly. Technically no one wouldqualify for the job unless they knew the town's customized software...i.e. it was an internal posting that wasted the time of ohhh...probably 790 people.
Are you reading what I'm writing or just looking to be argumentative? These are the results of 3 different workplaces.
The one you are attempting to badger me about was an internal posting "accidentally" posted publicly. Technically no one wouldqualify for the job unless they knew the town's customized software...i.e. it was an internal posting that wasted the time of ohhh...probably 790 people.
I am sorry, do you seriously think that only people within an organization know 'customized software'? I have been involved in hiring many people who can prove that the software and systems they used in previous jobs was 80-90% similar to a customized software solution, and hired them because of that.
You seem to enjoy blaming employers for everything. Are you going to continue completely ignoring the financial risk I posted of hiring the wrong candidate? Convenient that you ignore the numbers and facts I posted, isn't it?
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.
I don't smoke. I actually prefer to get in early (and leave ON TIME) because I like the quiet and solitude and peace of easing into a work day instead of the harried scrambling of all my coworkers getting in 'on time' (hardly) or late on a daily basis, flinging down a coat and running to turn a computer on (and leaving it in a 'password required' status while we futz for the next 2 hours till our early lunch).
