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 that the best answer is simply "We hired the person best qualified for the job", and wish them good luck on their job search. Nobody wants to invite a lawsuit or worse.
But when I was a hiring supervisor, I was impressed by the applicants who called back and wanted feedback. Since we hired mostly students, I often recommended that they go to their career counsellor for some interviewing tips...unbelIEVable how many times we had folks show up in running shoes, or chewing gum, or staring out a window while we spoke. A lot of people were completely clueless as to interview etiquette---it may seem like an unfair way to screen people out, but really it isn't. We needed people who could get along with our big staff, who paid attention to directions and fit in as far as dress code and behaviour went. So, the person who was polite and likeable and had prepared for the interview was FAR more likely to get the job than someone who wasn't those things, other qualifications being equal.
I guess it doesn't seem fair, especially if you really need the job. But most of us have seen for ourselves that life ISN'T fair. You move on, and try harder next time.
Location: Oklahoma(formerly SoCalif) Originally Mich,
13,387 posts, read 19,429,775 times
Reputation: 4611
Quote:
Originally Posted by LilyLaLa
I agree that the best answer is simply "We hired the person best qualified for the job", and wish them good luck on their job search. Nobody wants to invite a lawsuit or worse.
But when I was a hiring supervisor, I was impressed by the applicants who called back and wanted feedback. Since we hired mostly students, I often recommended that they go to their career counsellor for some interviewing tips...unbelIEVable how many times we had folks show up in running shoes, or chewing gum, or staring out a window while we spoke. A lot of people were completely clueless as to interview etiquette---it may seem like an unfair way to screen people out, but really it isn't. We needed people who could get along with our big staff, who paid attention to directions and fit in as far as dress code and behaviour went. So, the person who was polite and likeable and had prepared for the interview was FAR more likely to get the job than someone who wasn't those things, other qualifications being equal.
I guess it doesn't seem fair,
Quote:
especially if you really need the job
. But most of us have seen for ourselves that life ISN'T fair. You move on, and try harder next time.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, IMO, wouldn't you think that those who need the job the most are the ones who put in the most effort of preparing for the interview?
wouldn't you think that those who need the job the most are the ones who put in the most effort of preparing for the interview?
By logic, yes.
By experience, no. You're right if you're implying they SHOULD.
I'd have people calling me AFTER the job was filled explaining why they needed it so badly. Why, I don't know, because nobody hires based on need, we hire based on qualifications and how well an applicant would fit into our staff.
By experience, no. You're right if you're implying they SHOULD.
I'd have people calling me AFTER the job was filled explaining why they needed it so badly. Why, I don't know, because nobody hires based on need, we hire based on qualifications and how well an applicant would fit into our staff.
Not always true Lily. I've worked as a Generalist and assistant and I 've had people in my dept. hire them based on looks or likeability.
Not always true Lily. I've worked as a Generalist and assistant and I 've had people in my dept. hire them based on looks or likeability.
I said "WE" you know, I didn't say "everyone".
I believe what you say about your department---God knows there are plenty of people who only hire their own relatives, or people they think they can bully easily, or people who will look nice in company brochures, or a demographic that's currently missing from their payroll, or whatever stupid reasons.
Hiring is never completely objective, not when human beings are making the decision. Some are better than others.
Equal opportunity?? I think maybe you mean affirmative action?? What a croc that is..and yes it amounts to reverse discrimination, some thing the politically correct crowd won't own up to
kate your too damn smart and correct!!!!
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.
