It’s never been harder to fill a job in America (job offers, career)
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.
"Employees won’t move to where the jobs are, and employers won’t pay what is needed to fill open jobs.
And that’s why it’s never taken longer to fill an open job in America."
If you believe that jobs cannot be had for the asking you are wrong, and the post I was answering is a perfect example. The story was about a guy who hid in his house and posted applications and resumes, but didn't get anywhere until he took personal action.
You furthered the point with the story about your wife who scored a zero until she actually started talking to people. The fact that she did not see them face-to-face is inconsequential. She took action; she talked to people; she got the job.
Communicating directly with a potential employer usually worked best for me. Enthusiasm and willingness to learn is best conveyed in person.
There was always someone smarter, with a better education and more experience. All the agonizing over a perfect cover letter & resume helped, but I think my chances were better if I could meet management in person.
A good portion of white people are on drugs and could care less except about their next fix of whatever. The Hispanics that work are supplying the drugs to the pushers and dealers.........and black people keep saying, "you owe me...." while they scarf up a good portion of clerical and midlevel jobs in government, city, county, state and federal.....
White people are stupid and I am white. We have made our own destruction. I know, someone will say that I am being racist, etc, etc, etc. Just being a truthful realist but someone will start squealing, I'm sure......lol.
And I admit that I have only read page one but I have seen these kinds of threads before and MY answer was the same.
Its gotten to the point where any an ALL corporate environments should be avoided. They are just too cutthroat and ruthless these days. Its like going to get a job in Dante's Inferno. If you're a good person, that environment will swallow you up. You have to turn evil to succeed. And throw all your morals/values into a river of fire.
There have been studies that show the place where the most sociopaths exist outside of jail are in the corporate environment. The facts kind of speak for themselves.
You have to look at it from an employers point of view.
The majority of the applicants, will never be qualified for the job that is being advertised. Because the applicant thinks it is something they would like to do, does not mean they are anywhere near qualified to do the job.
Applicants say the company should hire them, and spend a year or two training them to do the job and make them qualified. Today the average younger worker, figures that as soon as they get trained they will look for a higher paid job. The employers know this, and that is exactly why they do not want to train someone to do the job. It costs money, and the untrained trainee is no where near fully productive for maybe a year or more. Training and getting a new employee up to speed where they are really productive is expensive, so if a new employee can be expected to within 2 years look for an even better job, it is not cost effective to train someone.
That is the big reason they only hire trained people, that are really qualified for the job. If you want to get a job and really be trained to do the job, will you be willing to sign a firm 5 year contract that allows the employer to recover most of the training costs before you leave? Most won't, so they are not going to train someone that is completely not qualified for the job, and the employer will not hire you if you would not be willing to do so.
Too many starting workers, look at mid career wage figures for a job, and demand that wage for a starting position where they have to be trained. They do not look at what is starting wages for that particular job, and the two are considerably apart.
There are the reasons, that some jobs are hard to fill. There are simply not enough qualified people for the job, and employers have been burned too many times hiring someone that is not qualified that leave as soon as they can get trained, which costs the employer production, time and costs they have spent training for people to train you, low production while training.
Most people, if they're paid and treated fairly, won't leave a good job.
Once someone is trained and proficient, they should get a raise and a promotion, shouldn't they? Especially if that's in line with the going rate for their skills and experience?
CPA firms (at least, the ones I've worked for) train their new hires extensively, only to see most of them move on within a few years. Those who stay on and get promoted see their wages rise. CPA firms have to train employees because 1) accounting has CPE requirements, 2) not everything accountants need to know is taught in school, and 3) they can't have untrained people trying to do the work. That's the cost of doing business. Accountants understand this; engineering firms do not, IME. The latter try to poach employees from competitors, reject anyone whose experience doesn't precisely fit the job requirements, and then whine and complain about the shortage of qualified workers.
Companies want purple squirrels for garbage wages and garbage benefits, then whine about how they need to bring in more foreigners because of the "skills gap."
It's all a lie.
I have a front row seat for it...I'm in IT.
Some companies also don't seem to realize that if they burn enough recruiters or those recruiters have enough candidates accept a job then boomerang out of a company after less than a year...they develop a reputation. My company is currently fighting that. They're trying desperately to hire but nobody seems to want to work here. I guess other people already knew what I didn't know when I started here.
Former IT also.
Foreign workers are basically indentured slaves getting 1/3 salary and no benefits for the simple reason that companies can get away with it.
I worked with a fellow from China that had a PHD in chemical engineering who made half of my salary as a programmer. when he eventually got his green card he quickly rose to VP at another company at many multiples of his old salary.
A group of Indian programmers all earning $50k all getting double and triple their salary once they get their green cards and move to other companies.
There is a demand for people, but companies prefer the lower cost labor because it affects the bottom line and the stock price.
Jobs are too specialized these days. If you don't have the exact qualifications, you may as well not even apply.
The other thing is, most jobs won't train you anymore. It used to be if you wanted to be a cop, for instance, you could join the department and get on the job training. Nowdays, you have to attend an academy, which you pay for and attend full time, in order to get hired on. Not too many people can do that and police departments around the country are wondering why they can't fill positions.
Add to that, you have to have a perfect credit score and no gaps in your employment history to get hired on anywhere. That leaves out I don't know how many potential applicants that could otherwise be working.
Then there's the useless degrees you're required to have. A BS to to work in an office doing general filing work, things like that. Who can afford to go back to college to get a degree these days - and that's not so you can move up the ladder. That's just to get your foot in the door!
And of course, if businesses are going to offer low wages, no benefits, and no pensions, have schedules that change at the drop of a hat, cut hours to 25 or less in a week sometimes, fire their employee for any infraction, and treat their employees like a piece of crap, why would they think anyone would work for them? Companies should know the word goes around. If you have a crappy company with low pay, no benefits and lousy bosses, job seekers in an economy like this will know who you are and avoid you.
The majority of the applicants, will never be qualified for the job that is being advertised. Because the applicant thinks it is something they would like to do, does not mean they are anywhere near qualified to do the job.
I like this POV. You've got to look at things from the employers' perception. Due to a rising population, a more multi-skilled workforce who can go wherever they please, and less prejudice in the workplace, employers are pretty much swamped with applications for each job.
For instance: when my company hires, there are hundreds of applicants. Here is how they deal.
As soon as the advert goes out, an employment agency is tasked to deal with the obvious morons- poorly written resumes, clearly different work backgrounds, desperate candidates "OH GOD HELP I JUST WANT A JOB", under-qualified candidates with no relevant experience and over-qualified candidates who are inappropriate for the role.
Then after that, the best candidates are filtered through HR. A bureaucrat in our department will receive these and sift through them. After that, there is a general meeting about those remains, filtering out the good from the bad, what could best work. After that, the phone interviews start, which are general, informal conversations. For the people who pass that, the second interviews start.
The second interview requires people to actually show up to the workplace at an agreed time. This is generally hit-or-miss. Those who show up must prove that they are actually able to accomplish the tasks relevant to the application as well as being generally human, and be somewhat likable.
After that, there is a third interview. It requires that you actually travel to the workplace, on time, are presentable, and prove again that you can perform basic tasks. This filters out more no-shows.
If you survive this, you are probably going to be hired, on a provisional basis in which you actually show up for work. By this point we're not talking about on time, or how appallingly bad you may be at your job: you will survive if you can turn up. Of course, it will be hit or miss if you perform well, regularly go sick for inexplicable reasons, or just go plain AWOL whenever you feel like.
The reason why there are so many layers of crap to go through to get hired is because companies are tired of the flakes and no-shows. This barrier of reason is a sensible and logical response to a workforce which is comfortable with an environment of new choice and competition.
If you believe that jobs cannot be had for the asking you are wrong, and the post I was answering is a perfect example. The story was about a guy who hid in his house and posted applications and resumes, but didn't get anywhere until he took personal action.
You furthered the point with the story about your wife who scored a zero until she actually started talking to people. The fact that she did not see them face-to-face is inconsequential. She took action; she talked to people; she got the job.
That was in 2002, when the "onlining" of the job application process had just started. If you try to pick up the phone and call that same school district today, guess what they're going to tell you?
"We only accept online applications."
I HAVE gone out and tried to talk to people. I used to do it all the time before the hiring process got insanely stupid because that's how it used to be done. For the last several years however, the answer was the same Every. Single Time: "Our application process is online, go apply at X site." There's nobody to talk to any more unless you already know them or know someone else who knows them. And even then sometimes the hiring process has become so bureaucratized that the HR manager him/herself who has known you for 10+ years can't even move you to the front of the line. (Yes, I've had this very experience.) The days of walking through a prospective employer's door unsolicited with a printed copy of your resume and walking out with a job or at least a scheduled interview are over.
I have zero sympathy for companies that solicit hundreds of resumes for a single job posting and then can't figure out how to pick a single one out of that hundreds. None. They've created this massive clusterfk of a hiring process, and if they want to hire actual people again instead of trying to hire a resume they'll go back to taking applications and resumes face-to-face.
I like this POV. You've got to look at things from the employers' perception. Due to a rising population, a more multi-skilled workforce who can go wherever they please, and less prejudice in the workplace, employers are pretty much swamped with applications for each job.
For instance: when my company hires, there are hundreds of applicants. Here is how they deal.
As soon as the advert goes out, an employment agency is tasked to deal with the obvious morons- poorly written resumes, clearly different work backgrounds, desperate candidates "OH GOD HELP I JUST WANT A JOB", under-qualified candidates with no relevant experience and over-qualified candidates who are inappropriate for the role.
Then after that, the best candidates are filtered through HR. A bureaucrat in our department will receive these and sift through them. After that, there is a general meeting about those remains, filtering out the good from the bad, what could best work. After that, the phone interviews start, which are general, informal conversations. For the people who pass that, the second interviews start.
The second interview requires people to actually show up to the workplace at an agreed time. This is generally hit-or-miss. Those who show up must prove that they are actually able to accomplish the tasks relevant to the application as well as being generally human, and be somewhat likable.
After that, there is a third interview. It requires that you actually travel to the workplace, on time, are presentable, and prove again that you can perform basic tasks. This filters out more no-shows.
If you survive this, you are probably going to be hired, on a provisional basis in which you actually show up for work. By this point we're not talking about on time, or how appallingly bad you may be at your job: you will survive if you can turn up. Of course, it will be hit or miss if you perform well, regularly go sick for inexplicable reasons, or just go plain AWOL whenever you feel like.
The reason why there are so many layers of crap to go through to get hired is because companies are tired of the flakes and no-shows. This barrier of reason is a sensible and logical response to a workforce which is comfortable with an environment of new choice and competition.
Hmm. Seems to me that all you really need is the employment agency to weed out the obvious rejects and the in-person interview. Maybe two in-person interviews.
The phone interview isn't doing anything for you that the first in-person interview won't do, and that interview--forcing candidates to show up at the workplace properly dressed--will do more than the phone interview does. Only if that first in-person interview results in ties would you need a second in-person interview.
If you get too many people showing up in-person who aren't qualified, then have the employment agency tighten up.
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.
