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.
^This is great I agree with some others...people unemployed for some time are most likely unemployable. It is not the job of the hiring companies to give people a "break" and hire them. It is their job to get qualified employees and make a profit.
This statement is no more true that it would be to say that because someone is employed,they are likely the most employable. You are confusing correlation with causation, TXred.
I currently work in a place (a contract position) where I cannot believe the number of permanent (and often long-term) employees who barely have a pulse on the job, let alone display desirable qualities like a strong work ethic; good client service skills; a pleasant, collegial attitude; motivation, or any sense of the big picture.
I don't think I would be exaggerating to say that at least 1/3 of the employees there are, imo, barely employable, if not unemployable (they are, nonetheless, employed. wth?). I've seen plenty of other "workers" like this in other places I've worked, too.
I have yet to come across actual situations where this happened, or have yet to hear stories about this happening. It appears to me people are allowing their imaginations to get the best of them and are inventing the worst possible case scenarios. And people think I'm a pessimist...
The reality us, no employer is expecting you to do "great things." They just want to see you made an effort to be productive while you looked for jobs. No employer is expecting you to devote lots of time to volunteering if you choose to do so, nor do they expect people to place job hunting on the back-burner.
What employer in their right mind would change the wage like that? Do employers like to be sued for misrepresenting wage advertisements? Quite frankly if an employer is willing to lowball like that then why would anyone want to work for them? At that rate you are better off looking elsewhere if they can't offer
you the wage advertised.
You are wrong. I've heard HR people like seeing if you are unemployed do something besides dedicate it to finding work. Most don't understand how the interview process takes weeks to months now. 30 years ago it was a quick process in which a company had a need, they filled it. Now they have become super picky and have bogged the process down with personality tests, skills tests, multiple rounds of interviews with multiple people to compare notes, brain teaser questions, BS crap like describe three weakness and three strengths, and so forth. The days of asking questions related to the job itself, or seeing what your skills are and how you have worked in teams is a small fraction now. It's now setup to find crazy ways to disqualify people for the job as they rated their teamwork 4 out of 5. It's a load of crap.
On top of that I've seen hiring managers and HR people say it's bad that you are just looking for work. I understand about getting more classes and so forth, but it doesn't apply for every position or field someone is in. I mention the costs earlier, and volunteering doesn't apply to every industry. Then when you describe them how long it takes to find work, it goes over their head while they ask you to come in for a 4th interview with some global leader who will be in the office during these two days only, and is only available at 2 pm and you are disqualified if you can't make it.
I'm exaggerating a bit, but I've had interviews with people in other departments who I'll never work with. Why? On top of that, I've had entry level job interviews with a COO who doesn't even work in my office. Why? The process is out of hand.
You are wrong. I've heard HR people like seeing if you are unemployed do something besides dedicate it to finding work.
Okay, I'm confused here. Are you disagreeing with me? I believe in my earlier post in response to this, I pointed out how volunteering could be a way to show what else you did during unemployment time. I was disagreeing with the above poster on the idea that an employer would make a wage change like that based on volunteer work.
Although abusing government programs is bad there is nothing wrong with not working if you have other sources of income. I'll let you in on a dirty little secret. The vast majority of your employees are working because they need money. If you want to test that stop paying them and see how long they stick around.
People work because they need or want more money? Really?
People work because they need or want more money? Really?
I know it is like that stupid why do you want to work here interview question. Because I need a job and you posted one that I am qualified for but I'll just give you a long winded BS answer that strokes your ego because that is what you want.
I know it is like that stupid why do you want to work here interview question. Because I need a job and you posted one that I am qualified for but I'll just give you a long winded BS answer that strokes your ego because that is what you want.
It all goes back to employers wanting to find "the right fit." Somehow a person unemployed for a long time is automatically a poor fit.
It never occurred to me how the workplace really functions like a puzzle...
All this bull excrement shallowness that HR and managers describe as fit ends up turning the hiring process into a BSing contest that picks a candidate that is not only not the best qualified but also often not the best fit. In other-words a total epic fail.
Are you an employer or an employee of a company for whom you hire?
I am an employee at my company, but I also partake in hiring, hired 1 full time and 1 temp person this month, neither were currently working, although both had work experience.
I know it is like that stupid why do you want to work here interview question. Because I need a job and you posted one that I am qualified for but I'll just give you a long winded BS answer that strokes your ego because that is what you want.
Oh yeah? Why don't you tell me how you're going to add value to our organization?
I'm a great, motivated worker, up for any task.
What did you do during your time off?
I woke up at 10 to 11 AM. Had a lavish breakfast--carbed up, high protein, so I can kill it in the gym. Actually hit some PR's in the gym and bulked up a bit from the adequate rest I got. Called friends. Surfed the net. Watched TV shows and every B movie horror flick on Netflix. Maybe sent out a resume or two. Frittered away hours in Barnes & Nobles. Posted on internet forums.
Oh yeah? Why don't you tell me how you're going to add value to our organization?
I'm going to do my job well, maximize my usefulness, as long as those "great fit" employees you hired don't constantly bother me with useless gossip and chatter about sports and stuff nor impede me with their incompetence.
What did you do during your time off?
The answer to this question is always and only none of your bleeping business.
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 agree with some others...people unemployed for some time are most likely unemployable. It is not the job of the hiring companies to give people a "break" and hire them. It is their job to get qualified employees and make a profit.
This statement is no more true that it would be to say that because someone is employed,they are likely the most employable. You are confusing correlation with causation, TXred. 
