Advice for Job Interviewers

[taichiliberal]

Actually, it is up to the candidate to impress me. Said candidate has competition that will impress me.

You state moot point, which in on way, shape or form changes the accurate points above in highlighting the flaws of your interview tactics.

Yep, everybody that conducts interviews makes assumptions. We have 30 to 60 minutes to form an opinion about the candidate based upon that limited time with them. I'm sorry you don't like that, but it is a cold hard fact of reality. Calling references is a waste of time, candidates don't list a person as a reference that say anything negative about said candidate, that's another reality. It's not a "preconceived notion", it's an assessment based upon observed facts.

Sorry, but restating your irrelevent, preconceived personal bias based on the condition of a car does NOT justify it. Again, NO ONE IS ASKING YOU TO LIVE WITH THAT PERSON, and unless YOU have CONCRETE EVIDENCE that the applicant is a "slob" at work, then you're essentially and potentially throwing out a perfectly good worker because they have messy car! That's a bias based on a preconceived notion on your part, because last time I checked, one does not drive ones car onto the office floor to work out of. Hell, in the last few years we've seen CEO's and various upper and white collar management types go to jail for all sorts of theft, debauchery, etc. Now the conditions of their cars didn't give them away, did it now? So your "assumptions" based on your LIMITED "observed facts" wouldn't have been worth a piss in the wind, now would it?

I'm not HR/Personal. In the past I've been the hiring supervisor. Today, I am interviewing potential peers. I don't want somebody hired that isn't going to fit into our culture or our team dynamics, it would be a disservice to the company and to the candidate to hire the wrong person.

YOU STILL CANNOT JUSTIFY WHAT YOU PREVIOUSLY STATED, as I've aptly demonstrated above. And if indeed you are not hiring someone for a "job", you're hiring someone to hang out with and play into the pretentious "culture" trappings & games that are required for some upper management/executive type position, then that would explain how out of touch your original response was.

I've been on both sides of the interview. I've been interviewed for jobs and interviewed others for jobs. Your posts sound like you've only been on one side of that equation.

Again, you STILL cannot logically refute or disprove the points I've made. Touting your personal success means NOTHING to those who have been victims of the nonsense I've described in the OP. Once again, you've given an example of PRECISELY what I'm talking about. What's disappointing is that you stubbornly defend your erroneous ways with nothing more than repetition and moot points.

Ok, I'm done with you.

Translation: I called you on two major points that are examples of the BS job seekers have to face. You couldn't logically refute them or defend your stance, so now you're going to try and save face with a bluff and bluster.

We obviously have a difference of opinion about how the real world works.

Translation: I gave "real world" examples of the bullshit perpetraited by people like you, and you don't like it. You couldn't logically or factually prove me wrong, but you're going to try and BS that you're right none-the-less.

I haven't "touted" anything, I've merely mentioned my experience.

That is a lie, as the chronology of the posts shows. And I pointed out how you are WRONG with regards as to how you evaluate an applicant and waste their time, your "experience" none-withstanding.

I'm not trying to "justify" anything, again, merely mentioning real world facts and experiences.

Your interpretation of the "real world" just keeps proving my points in the OP over and over and over. That you're too full of yourself to realize it is all the more to pity....that you are STILL able to affect peoples job careers is truly troubling.

You seem almost as if your entire purpose is merely to pick a fight.

No sweetpea, my purpose was to state a matter of fact that is a constant problem in our society regarding the game of employment opportunities and those who affect job hiring. That a joker like YOU was compelled to give out some "advice" that was easily deconstructed and disproved by me doesn't say much for your vaunted 37 years of experience. Sorry, but no one said life was going to be easy.

You can't seem to respond without making your posts inside my quotes. I don't want people to think I've said what you've posted inside those quotes.

And since I either color code or embolden my response, the reader won't make that mistake unless they're not too bright. Bottom line: YOU can't take criticism, let alone acknowledge that you're wrong on a point or two.

Well, if you're honest about being done with me, then I or the readers won't have to endure more of your insipid stubborness. But if your ego can't take criticism, then do continue to just keep proving my points from our exchanges. I'll just sit back and smile. Carry on.

 

[asterism]

Actually, it is up to the candidate to impress me. Said candidate has competition that will impress me.

You state moot point, which in on way, shape or form changes the accurate points above in highlighting the flaws of your interview tactics.

Yep, everybody that conducts interviews makes assumptions. We have 30 to 60 minutes to form an opinion about the candidate based upon that limited time with them. I'm sorry you don't like that, but it is a cold hard fact of reality. Calling references is a waste of time, candidates don't list a person as a reference that say anything negative about said candidate, that's another reality. It's not a "preconceived notion", it's an assessment based upon observed facts.

Sorry, but restating your irrelevent, preconceived personal bias based on the condition of a car does NOT justify it. Again, NO ONE IS ASKING YOU TO LIVE WITH THAT PERSON, and unless YOU have CONCRETE EVIDENCE that the applicant is a "slob" at work, then you're essentially and potentially throwing out a perfectly good worker because they have messy car! That's a bias based on a preconceived notion on your part, because last time I checked, one does not drive ones car onto the office floor to work out of. Hell, in the last few years we've seen CEO's and various upper and white collar management types go to jail for all sorts of theft, debauchery, etc. Now the conditions of their cars didn't give them away, did it now? So your "assumptions" based on your LIMITED "observed facts" wouldn't have been worth a piss in the wind, now would it?

I'm not HR/Personal. In the past I've been the hiring supervisor. Today, I am interviewing potential peers. I don't want somebody hired that isn't going to fit into our culture or our team dynamics, it would be a disservice to the company and to the candidate to hire the wrong person.

YOU STILL CANNOT JUSTIFY WHAT YOU PREVIOUSLY STATED, as I've aptly demonstrated above. And if indeed you are not hiring someone for a "job", you're hiring someone to hang out with and play into the pretentious "culture" trappings & games that are required for some upper management/executive type position, then that would explain how out of touch your original response was.

I've been on both sides of the interview. I've been interviewed for jobs and interviewed others for jobs. Your posts sound like you've only been on one side of that equation.

Again, you STILL cannot logically refute or disprove the points I've made. Touting your personal success means NOTHING to those who have been victims of the nonsense I've described in the OP. Once again, you've given an example of PRECISELY what I'm talking about. What's disappointing is that you stubbornly defend your erroneous ways with nothing more than repetition and moot points.

Ok, I'm done with you.
We obviously have a difference of opinion about how the real world works.
I haven't "touted" anything, I've merely mentioned my experience.
I'm not trying to "justify" anything, again, merely mentioning real world facts and experiences.
You seem almost as if your entire purpose is merely to pick a fight.
You can't seem to respond without making your posts inside my quotes. I don't want people to think I've said what you've posted inside those quotes.

Why do I get the feeling you'e not the only one hiring who has this impression of him?

 

[taichiliberal]

Again, you STILL cannot logically refute or disprove the points I've made. Touting your personal success means NOTHING to those who have been victims of the nonsense I've described in the OP. Once again, you've given an example of PRECISELY what I'm talking about. What's disappointing is that you stubbornly defend your erroneous ways with nothing more than repetition and moot points.

Ok, I'm done with you.
We obviously have a difference of opinion about how the real world works.
I haven't "touted" anything, I've merely mentioned my experience.
I'm not trying to "justify" anything, again, merely mentioning real world facts and experiences.
You seem almost as if your entire purpose is merely to pick a fight.
You can't seem to respond without making your posts inside my quotes. I don't want people to think I've said what you've posted inside those quotes.

Why do I get the feeling you'e not the only one hiring who has this impression of him?

Because you're full of it as well?

 

[itfitzme]

Nothing is more annoying than having your time wasted by being interviewed for a job by someone who has no interest in hiring you.

The interviewing process is not one of selecting the best candidate. They (we) believe it is, but study after study has shown that it isn't. We try, but the reality is that a) life isn't a controlled laboratory experiment b) we can't repeat the experiment enough times to really refine it.

When it comes to the actual interviewing, either a) they don't really know what the best candidate skills actually are or b) most candidates are perfectly qualified given the known skills. The interview process then comes down to finding faults, eliminating people based on what ever random faults the interviewer can come up with until they are left with the least objectionable candidate. In essence, it's a biased test.

I once got totally trounced on because I wore a white shirt and red tie to an interview for a manufacturing engineering position. The fundamental reason I lost it was because it simply pissed me off, having this a-hole making such a big deal out of something so f'in stupid. It was just a f'in clean shirt and tie, it didn't mean anything. I generally find that, when I get pissed off at the interviewer, it doesn't work out well from then on. I realized how much I really hate car salesman when I was just antagonistic going into an interview.

What it truly is about, except for the HR folk who see so many people that they are pretty much detached and objective, is ego stroking the interviewer, the department hiring manager. Half of the whole thing is simply if they like you.

I would suggest, for practice, go to the mall or just door to door and meet people, start up conversations. For really good training, find the local Kirby dealer and go through their training to sell door to door. It's all about feeling comfortable just making friends in the first couple of minutes. Smile, get them to talk, find out what they like, get them to smile. It's not the whole thing, not the technical jobs skill part, but it's a significant thing.

The Kirby thing is great because it trains you to not give a crap about the negative. In truth, we never know what the negative was. What we know is what we do to keep them interested. I smile, they smile. I laugh, they laugh. I mention something specific, they add more details. I've seek Kirby guys spend ten minutes at the door, for no good reason then just to see how long they could keep the person from closing it. Heck, just challenge yourself by picking some busy area and talking people into giving you a dollar.

Volunteer work. Volunteer work will provide references, contacts, and some kinds of experience.

Some experience, we just can't get. I gave up on some skills because I simply cannot compete in the market place where the next job, the new experience, goes to the guy with the most experience. He just keeps moving ahead. Better to find something that you can sell more off.

Don't underestimate the federal pell grants and technical schools. Medical is big and will continue to be big. Phlebotomy, medical coding, pharmacy tech are all good. The best thing to do is got to the pharmacy, to the hospital, and ask people working where they got their training and education. That's all you need to know, if they did it, you can do it.

You will be surprised what happens when you no longer give a crap, when it becomes just a game of making friends and seeing what BS you can come up with.

“why haven’t you achieved your goal by now?” is a bating question. My first thought is, "what makes you think I haven't" I wouldn't say. The answer is, "I have achieve by goals. I've achieved dozens of goals....." “this job isn’t what you went to school for, why would apply for it?” is just a bating question. The answer is, "School was an opportunity to demonstrate intelligence and commitment. The choice of subjects wasn't necessarily for my eventual career path. I couldn't possibly predict the future with that much accuracy. If it happened to work out that way, great. If not, nothing lost because, whatever the subject, what I really learned and demonstrated is project oriented commitment. What I gained is a record, a history, documented proof of my capability to achieve excellence." Or, you can go with, "I had to pick something when I decided to get a degree. The important part was picking something and committing to it. And, frankly, right now I just need to work. I can't sit around waiting for the perfect job. And the important thing is that I can commit to a goal and see it to the end."

If you happen to be interviewing for a job where you have the experience, great, that adds the upper cut to the one-two punch. If the job is not down your ally, down your line of experience, then you still have the one-two punch. What you gotta believe, gotta get across, is that the technicalities aren't that important, not as important as the fact that your smarter, more dedicated, and pay attention. Every manner of individual with experience has ended up just sucking at a job. Every business, every job, has it's details that no manner of training will prepare you for. The important thing is that you have a history of stepping up to the plate and hitting that home run.

Oh, and, this is the job you really want. Sure, you've interviewed for other jobs, but when you read this job description, it just spoke to you.

I swear, there are two types of interviewers and they ask the same questions. The HR interviewers have asked the same question a hundred times. They are expecting to be bull shitted. If they aren't expecting to be bull shitted, simply looking to see if you can sustain good bs, then they simply can be bs'ed. They either expect good bs or they don't know better.

Someone in HR said that they are there to answer three basic questions, 1) can you do the job, 2) do you want to do the job, and 3) can they stand working with you while you do the job.

At some point, it's all a bit random. You never know why you didn't get the job. And, like the Kirby salesman, if your dependent on the sale every time, you'll go nuts. The interview has to be an end, in an of itself. Success in each step has to be a reward, in an of itself. Just getting the interview, just getting a smile, a laugh, a good feeling about it when you leave, has to be a reward on it's own accord. Each step has to be because, in the end, landing that job is the result of a string of successes of all the successive steps.

In the end, half of it is just random dumb luck. You just don't know what the other person really wants. Some actually want specific skills. Others want to feel in control, that they have power. Some just want a Mini-me, someone just like them. If they start talking about their last fishing trip, instead of the job position, that's someone looking for a "Mini-me". Always leave the interviewer feeling smart, just a little smarter then you.

Sometimes, they actually don't want to hire someone. It was their boss that told them to hire someone. Some stuff, we just can't do anything about.

 

[koshergrl]

Here are some tips for interviewers:

Don't go into long rambling stories about how your broke your wrist.

Don't make us have to shoo you out the door after the interview.

Don't tell the people interviewing you that your daughter is completely freaked out because you used the word *piss* once. (Fuck no! You're shitting me!)

Don't mention when you're answering each 8 questions you are asked during round two that you are sometimes mean, that you don't like running into people in the store after you've been nasty to them at work, that you have bad days, etc...

Don't giggle more than once. Especially if you're 50 years old.

Don't lose it because you can't figure out the spread sheet part of the test, and don't hole up in the test room for 2 hours obsessing over it.

Don't ask your interviewers a series of questions after the interview. One or two is enough.

Don't be too smooth in your answers and your demeanor, we recognize professional interviewers.

Don't give out too much information (like the lady who convinced us that she has a reputation for being nuts based on the way she treats people at work) but don't be too reticent, either. The things we are supposed to be looking for aren't necessarily covered by the questions...for example, we had to grade on "greets customers" and "multi tasks" but none of the questions actually asked about those things.

Just got done interviewing 72 or so people for a position...then 16 of those for round 2.

Oh, and don't act like you're doing us a favor by showing up. We've seen a different person every 15 minutes for 2 days. We like it when people don't show.

 

[jillian]

Your situation is NOT only unique, but extra-ordinary. You're a career/self employed person making a change. And God bless ya, kid...for making that change and getting that position.

The VAST majority of job interviews do NOT go on for two weeks, and are for people doing service, customer or administrative work that are NOT considered middle or upper management or executive level . So they usually cannot afford two weeks analytical time on one candidate. And don't forget the questions I related, "“why haven’t you achieved your goal by now?” This is a somewhat silly question when you have the type of up and down economy we've had for the last 30 years, and the position you are applying for has most certainly felt that pinch. If your resume is describing your employment history properly, one can easily deduce that things didn't work out, but the applicant adapted. Apropo, the question, “this job isn’t what you went to school for, why would apply for it?” is absurd when the applicant graduated from college 30 years ago.

Fortunately, I'm looking to upgrade and have something to fall back on....but I pity those that don't . Employers need to stop playing games just because it's a buyer's market in a bad economy. This is NOT a personal match game (I think this person should have done better in life, so despite being perfectly qualified for this job, I won't give it to them), it's to see if the applicant has the qualifications and is NOT an idiot. The job can be for you, but if the HR person interviewing you does NOT like you for some inane reason, you will not get that job. And that's annoying and sad.

But as the old song goes, "...we just keep on push'in!"

Thanks. I was lucky. knock wood and all that stuff.

the answer to the question 'why haven't you achieved your goal by now" is... I have. My goals have now changed and grown as I have matured ... along with my skill set.

about the job not being what you went to school for... "this job would be an incredible opportunity for me and i look forward to having the opportunity to prove myself". (you don't get into a discussion about shattered dreams).

as for them not liking you... you wouldn't hire someone you didn't like either and don't want to work with someone YOU don't like.

oh... and if you want entree into a new field... do pro bono in that field...as much as you can find time for.

good luck making your change.

 

[koshergrl]

Don't say "I can't find a job in my hometown, so I need something until I can".

 

[alan1]

And since I either color code or embolden my response, the reader won't make that mistake unless they're not too bright. Bottom line: YOU can't take criticism, let alone acknowledge that you're wrong on a point or two.

Well, if you're honest about being done with me, then I or the readers won't have to endure more of your insipid stubborness. But if your ego can't take criticism, then do continue to just keep proving my points from our exchanges. I'll just sit back and smile. Carry on.

Whatever you say, Ace.

 

[taichiliberal]

Nothing is more annoying than having your time wasted by being interviewed for a job by someone who has no interest in hiring you.

The interviewing process is not one of selecting the best candidate. They (we) believe it is, but study after study has shown that it isn't. We try, but the reality is that a) life isn't a controlled laboratory experiment b) we can't repeat the experiment enough times to really refine it.

When it comes to the actual interviewing, either a) they don't really know what the best candidate skills actually are or b) most candidates are perfectly qualified given the known skills. The interview process then comes down to finding faults, eliminating people based on what ever random faults the interviewer can come up with until they are left with the least objectionable candidate. In essence, it's a biased test.

I once got totally trounced on because I wore a white shirt and red tie to an interview for a manufacturing engineering position. The fundamental reason I lost it was because it simply pissed me off, having this a-hole making such a big deal out of something so f'in stupid. It was just a f'in clean shirt and tie, it didn't mean anything. I generally find that, when I get pissed off at the interviewer, it doesn't work out well from then on. I realized how much I really hate car salesman when I was just antagonistic going into an interview.

What it truly is about, except for the HR folk who see so many people that they are pretty much detached and objective, is ego stroking the interviewer, the department hiring manager. Half of the whole thing is simply if they like you.

I would suggest, for practice, go to the mall or just door to door and meet people, start up conversations. For really good training, find the local Kirby dealer and go through their training to sell door to door. It's all about feeling comfortable just making friends in the first couple of minutes. Smile, get them to talk, find out what they like, get them to smile. It's not the whole thing, not the technical jobs skill part, but it's a significant thing.

The Kirby thing is great because it trains you to not give a crap about the negative. In truth, we never know what the negative was. What we know is what we do to keep them interested. I smile, they smile. I laugh, they laugh. I mention something specific, they add more details. I've seek Kirby guys spend ten minutes at the door, for no good reason then just to see how long they could keep the person from closing it. Heck, just challenge yourself by picking some busy area and talking people into giving you a dollar.

Volunteer work. Volunteer work will provide references, contacts, and some kinds of experience.

Some experience, we just can't get. I gave up on some skills because I simply cannot compete in the market place where the next job, the new experience, goes to the guy with the most experience. He just keeps moving ahead. Better to find something that you can sell more off.

Don't underestimate the federal pell grants and technical schools. Medical is big and will continue to be big. Phlebotomy, medical coding, pharmacy tech are all good. The best thing to do is got to the pharmacy, to the hospital, and ask people working where they got their training and education. That's all you need to know, if they did it, you can do it.

You will be surprised what happens when you no longer give a crap, when it becomes just a game of making friends and seeing what BS you can come up with.

“why haven’t you achieved your goal by now?” is a bating question. My first thought is, "what makes you think I haven't" I wouldn't say. The answer is, "I have achieve by goals. I've achieved dozens of goals....." “this job isn’t what you went to school for, why would apply for it?” is just a bating question. The answer is, "School was an opportunity to demonstrate intelligence and commitment. The choice of subjects wasn't necessarily for my eventual career path. I couldn't possibly predict the future with that much accuracy. If it happened to work out that way, great. If not, nothing lost because, whatever the subject, what I really learned and demonstrated is project oriented commitment. What I gained is a record, a history, documented proof of my capability to achieve excellence." Or, you can go with, "I had to pick something when I decided to get a degree. The important part was picking something and committing to it. And, frankly, right now I just need to work. I can't sit around waiting for the perfect job. And the important thing is that I can commit to a goal and see it to the end."

If you happen to be interviewing for a job where you have the experience, great, that adds the upper cut to the one-two punch. If the job is not down your ally, down your line of experience, then you still have the one-two punch. What you gotta believe, gotta get across, is that the technicalities aren't that important, not as important as the fact that your smarter, more dedicated, and pay attention. Every manner of individual with experience has ended up just sucking at a job. Every business, every job, has it's details that no manner of training will prepare you for. The important thing is that you have a history of stepping up to the plate and hitting that home run.

Oh, and, this is the job you really want. Sure, you've interviewed for other jobs, but when you read this job description, it just spoke to you.

I swear, there are two types of interviewers and they ask the same questions. The HR interviewers have asked the same question a hundred times. They are expecting to be bull shitted. If they aren't expecting to be bull shitted, simply looking to see if you can sustain good bs, then they simply can be bs'ed. They either expect good bs or they don't know better.

Someone in HR said that they are there to answer three basic questions, 1) can you do the job, 2) do you want to do the job, and 3) can they stand working with you while you do the job.

At some point, it's all a bit random. You never know why you didn't get the job. And, like the Kirby salesman, if your dependent on the sale every time, you'll go nuts. The interview has to be an end, in an of itself. Success in each step has to be a reward, in an of itself. Just getting the interview, just getting a smile, a laugh, a good feeling about it when you leave, has to be a reward on it's own accord. Each step has to be because, in the end, landing that job is the result of a string of successes of all the successive steps.

In the end, half of it is just random dumb luck. You just don't know what the other person really wants. Some actually want specific skills. Others want to feel in control, that they have power. Some just want a Mini-me, someone just like them. If they start talking about their last fishing trip, instead of the job position, that's someone looking for a "Mini-me". Always leave the interviewer feeling smart, just a little smarter then you.

Sometimes, they actually don't want to hire someone. It was their boss that told them to hire someone. Some stuff, we just can't do anything about.

Wow man, sounds like you've been through the ringer! Kudos for keeping your sanity and formulating a plan to deal. I hope some kids read this so they have some idea of how to deal after they've gone the traditional route.

 

[taichiliberal]

Here are some tips for interviewers:

Don't go into long rambling stories about how your broke your wrist.

Don't make us have to shoo you out the door after the interview.

Don't tell the people interviewing you that your daughter is completely freaked out because you used the word *piss* once. (Fuck no! You're shitting me!)

Don't mention when you're answering each 8 questions you are asked during round two that you are sometimes mean, that you don't like running into people in the store after you've been nasty to them at work, that you have bad days, etc...

Don't giggle more than once. Especially if you're 50 years old.

Don't lose it because you can't figure out the spread sheet part of the test, and don't hole up in the test room for 2 hours obsessing over it.

Don't ask your interviewers a series of questions after the interview. One or two is enough.

Don't be too smooth in your answers and your demeanor, we recognize professional interviewers.

Don't give out too much information (like the lady who convinced us that she has a reputation for being nuts based on the way she treats people at work) but don't be too reticent, either. The things we are supposed to be looking for aren't necessarily covered by the questions...for example, we had to grade on "greets customers" and "multi tasks" but none of the questions actually asked about those things.

Just got done interviewing 72 or so people for a position...then 16 of those for round 2.

Oh, and don't act like you're doing us a favor by showing up. We've seen a different person every 15 minutes for 2 days. We like it when people don't show.

Sounds like you need to change jobs, as I detect some serious resentment towards your applicants (who are INTERVIEWEE'S, by the way....NOT the "interviewer"....YOU are the interviewer). But then again, I feel sorry for you having to interview the numbskulls and nut jobs....comes with the territory, I guess.

There's a one or two of "damned if you, damned if you don't" stipulations that you've placed on the applicant here.....pretty much what I alluded to in the OP.

 

[taichiliberal]

Your situation is NOT only unique, but extra-ordinary. You're a career/self employed person making a change. And God bless ya, kid...for making that change and getting that position.

The VAST majority of job interviews do NOT go on for two weeks, and are for people doing service, customer or administrative work that are NOT considered middle or upper management or executive level . So they usually cannot afford two weeks analytical time on one candidate. And don't forget the questions I related, "“why haven’t you achieved your goal by now?” This is a somewhat silly question when you have the type of up and down economy we've had for the last 30 years, and the position you are applying for has most certainly felt that pinch. If your resume is describing your employment history properly, one can easily deduce that things didn't work out, but the applicant adapted. Apropo, the question, “this job isn’t what you went to school for, why would apply for it?” is absurd when the applicant graduated from college 30 years ago.

Fortunately, I'm looking to upgrade and have something to fall back on....but I pity those that don't . Employers need to stop playing games just because it's a buyer's market in a bad economy. This is NOT a personal match game (I think this person should have done better in life, so despite being perfectly qualified for this job, I won't give it to them), it's to see if the applicant has the qualifications and is NOT an idiot. The job can be for you, but if the HR person interviewing you does NOT like you for some inane reason, you will not get that job. And that's annoying and sad.

But as the old song goes, "...we just keep on push'in!"

Thanks. I was lucky. knock wood and all that stuff.

the answer to the question 'why haven't you achieved your goal by now" is... I have. My goals have now changed and grown as I have matured ... along with my skill set.

about the job not being what you went to school for... "this job would be an incredible opportunity for me and i look forward to having the opportunity to prove myself". (you don't get into a discussion about shattered dreams).

as for them not liking you... you wouldn't hire someone you didn't like either and don't want to work with someone YOU don't like.

oh... and if you want entree into a new field... do pro bono in that field...as much as you can find time for.

good luck making your change.

Here's the thing, Jillian...the HR or personnel manager is NOT the person with home you'll be working with! THAT'S what is frustrating.....one time I got interviewed by the HR guy, who sent me to a section director that thought I was great! But HIS supervisor wanted to check me over to "make sure that just wasn't a lot of male bonding crap going on". Fortunately, the director stood up for me and I got the job.

Oh well, life goes on. Keep the faith, baby.

 

[taichiliberal]

And since I either color code or embolden my response, the reader won't make that mistake unless they're not too bright. Bottom line: YOU can't take criticism, let alone acknowledge that you're wrong on a point or two.

Well, if you're honest about being done with me, then I or the readers won't have to endure more of your insipid stubborness. But if your ego can't take criticism, then do continue to just keep proving my points from our exchanges. I'll just sit back and smile. Carry on.

Whatever you say, Ace.

 

[Defiant1]

Nothing is more annoying than having your time wasted by being interviewed for a job by someone who has no interest in hiring you.

The tip off is when they ask questions like, “why haven’t you achieved your goal by now?” or “this job isn’t what you went to school for, why would apply for it?”

Just once, you would like to answer, “Because people like YOU:

(1) Seem to think that you would never encounter one of those people that are affected by the bad economy you’ve read about all these years.
(2) Only hire those with experience…but if the economy is bad, and hiring is at a stand still, how does one get experience without a job.
(3) Don’t like people of my age, or gender, or race, or ethnicity, or religion, or economic class or political/social views.
(4) Read my resume and liked what you saw, but were put off when you actually met me because of .. (see number 3).

But instead, you go through the humiliating motions of justifying part of your life to some clown looking for any excuse not to hire you because (let’s face it) ain’t nothing going on but the rent!

So, in the interest of lowering stress levels and promoting good will in our society, people in the Human Resource/Personnel business with attitudes like the aforementioned should just stick to the basic Q & A interview. Make sure to finish with, “We’ve other applicants to interview, and will call you if we don’t find a better candidate”. That way, they don’t add insult to injury, the company doesn’t get bad mouthed in the streets, and they avoid a possible discrimination lawsuit.

Hey, interviewing applicant after applicant gets pretty boring. So when you get a democrat/liberal fucking with them breaks up the monotony. They're not going to get hired anyway.

 

[hortysir]

Nothing is more annoying than having your time wasted by being interviewed for a job by someone who has no interest in hiring you.

The tip off is when they ask questions like, “why haven’t you achieved your goal by now?” or “this job isn’t what you went to school for, why would apply for it?”

Just once, you would like to answer, “Because people like YOU:

(1) Seem to think that you would never encounter one of those people that are affected by the bad economy you’ve read about all these years.
(2) Only hire those with experience…but if the economy is bad, and hiring is at a stand still, how does one get experience without a job.
(3) Don’t like people of my age, or gender, or race, or ethnicity, or religion, or economic class or political/social views.
(4) Read my resume and liked what you saw, but were put off when you actually met me because of .. (see number 3).

But instead, you go through the humiliating motions of justifying part of your life to some clown looking for any excuse not to hire you because (let’s face it) ain’t nothing going on but the rent!

So, in the interest of lowering stress levels and promoting good will in our society, people in the Human Resource/Personnel business with attitudes like the aforementioned should just stick to the basic Q & A interview. Make sure to finish with, “We’ve other applicants to interview, and will call you if we don’t find a better candidate”. That way, they don’t add insult to injury, the company doesn’t get bad mouthed in the streets, and they avoid a possible discrimination lawsuit.

I only bolded that section because it is the most telling.

The first question is asked to see who you hold accountable for your success or lack thereof.
Your statement, "because of people like you" answers that.

The second question goes to motivation and helps me determine your retention.

The rest of your post is more whining and blaming.

 

[taichiliberal]

Nothing is more annoying than having your time wasted by being interviewed for a job by someone who has no interest in hiring you.

The tip off is when they ask questions like, “why haven’t you achieved your goal by now?” or “this job isn’t what you went to school for, why would apply for it?”

Just once, you would like to answer, “Because people like YOU:

(1) Seem to think that you would never encounter one of those people that are affected by the bad economy you’ve read about all these years.
(2) Only hire those with experience…but if the economy is bad, and hiring is at a stand still, how does one get experience without a job.
(3) Don’t like people of my age, or gender, or race, or ethnicity, or religion, or economic class or political/social views.
(4) Read my resume and liked what you saw, but were put off when you actually met me because of .. (see number 3).

But instead, you go through the humiliating motions of justifying part of your life to some clown looking for any excuse not to hire you because (let’s face it) ain’t nothing going on but the rent!

So, in the interest of lowering stress levels and promoting good will in our society, people in the Human Resource/Personnel business with attitudes like the aforementioned should just stick to the basic Q & A interview. Make sure to finish with, “We’ve other applicants to interview, and will call you if we don’t find a better candidate”. That way, they don’t add insult to injury, the company doesn’t get bad mouthed in the streets, and they avoid a possible discrimination lawsuit.

Hey, interviewing applicant after applicant gets pretty boring. So when you get a democrat/liberal fucking with them breaks up the monotony. They're not going to get hired anyway.

Thanks for proving my point, genius. Just follow my advice and society will benefit.

 

[taichiliberal]

Nothing is more annoying than having your time wasted by being interviewed for a job by someone who has no interest in hiring you.

The tip off is when they ask questions like, “why haven’t you achieved your goal by now?” or “this job isn’t what you went to school for, why would apply for it?”

Just once, you would like to answer, “Because people like YOU:

(1) Seem to think that you would never encounter one of those people that are affected by the bad economy you’ve read about all these years.
(2) Only hire those with experience…but if the economy is bad, and hiring is at a stand still, how does one get experience without a job.
(3) Don’t like people of my age, or gender, or race, or ethnicity, or religion, or economic class or political/social views.
(4) Read my resume and liked what you saw, but were put off when you actually met me because of .. (see number 3).

But instead, you go through the humiliating motions of justifying part of your life to some clown looking for any excuse not to hire you because (let’s face it) ain’t nothing going on but the rent!

So, in the interest of lowering stress levels and promoting good will in our society, people in the Human Resource/Personnel business with attitudes like the aforementioned should just stick to the basic Q & A interview. Make sure to finish with, “We’ve other applicants to interview, and will call you if we don’t find a better candidate”. That way, they don’t add insult to injury, the company doesn’t get bad mouthed in the streets, and they avoid a possible discrimination lawsuit.

I only bolded that section because it is the most telling.

The first question is asked to see who you hold accountable for your success or lack thereof.
Your statement, "because of people like you" answers that.

The second question goes to motivation and helps me determine your retention.

The rest of your post is more whining and blaming.

And as usual, YOU IGNORE the rest of the post in order to just make your assertions seem more palatable when you attach them to out of context quotes.

But in the interest of sparing us all more of your BS, let me straighten you out:

If the interviewer is seeing you, that means that the credentials they have seen on your resume fit the criteria necessary for the job his company needs filled. Why should they be put off that your original college degree was in a generic or unrelated field? Especially in the last 30 years with an economy that's seen more downsizing and out sourcing since the Great Depression, or that an applicant may have accured over 20 years of practical real life job experience? If the interviewer is of the mindset that one must ONLY achieve in the field of their original study, then that pretty much eliminates a good portion of potential candidates. Best to tell the personnel agency this or limit his recruitment to that criteria instead of WASTING PEOPLE'S TIME!

Got that, bunky?

 

[Rozman]

Things are brutal in this tough Obama economy.
Good luck to all of you out there.
I ran into a guy I used to work with
He is now out of work 4 years.
I have someone close to me out of work almost 2 years now.

So I get a little fed up with Obama and his ass kissers like Valerie Jarret
who always tells those that interview her that the President is doing great job
with the economy...

 

[koshergrl]

We interviewed a guy with years of experience in the automotive industry, including Honda...he can't get a job. A lot of the people I interviewed had been out for years.

 

[asterism]

Nothing is more annoying than having your time wasted by being interviewed for a job by someone who has no interest in hiring you.

The interviewing process is not one of selecting the best candidate. They (we) believe it is, but study after study has shown that it isn't. We try, but the reality is that a) life isn't a controlled laboratory experiment b) we can't repeat the experiment enough times to really refine it.

When it comes to the actual interviewing, either a) they don't really know what the best candidate skills actually are or b) most candidates are perfectly qualified given the known skills. The interview process then comes down to finding faults, eliminating people based on what ever random faults the interviewer can come up with until they are left with the least objectionable candidate. In essence, it's a biased test.

I once got totally trounced on because I wore a white shirt and red tie to an interview for a manufacturing engineering position. The fundamental reason I lost it was because it simply pissed me off, having this a-hole making such a big deal out of something so f'in stupid. It was just a f'in clean shirt and tie, it didn't mean anything. I generally find that, when I get pissed off at the interviewer, it doesn't work out well from then on. I realized how much I really hate car salesman when I was just antagonistic going into an interview.

What it truly is about, except for the HR folk who see so many people that they are pretty much detached and objective, is ego stroking the interviewer, the department hiring manager. Half of the whole thing is simply if they like you.

I would suggest, for practice, go to the mall or just door to door and meet people, start up conversations. For really good training, find the local Kirby dealer and go through their training to sell door to door. It's all about feeling comfortable just making friends in the first couple of minutes. Smile, get them to talk, find out what they like, get them to smile. It's not the whole thing, not the technical jobs skill part, but it's a significant thing.

The Kirby thing is great because it trains you to not give a crap about the negative. In truth, we never know what the negative was. What we know is what we do to keep them interested. I smile, they smile. I laugh, they laugh. I mention something specific, they add more details. I've seek Kirby guys spend ten minutes at the door, for no good reason then just to see how long they could keep the person from closing it. Heck, just challenge yourself by picking some busy area and talking people into giving you a dollar.

Volunteer work. Volunteer work will provide references, contacts, and some kinds of experience.

Some experience, we just can't get. I gave up on some skills because I simply cannot compete in the market place where the next job, the new experience, goes to the guy with the most experience. He just keeps moving ahead. Better to find something that you can sell more off.

Don't underestimate the federal pell grants and technical schools. Medical is big and will continue to be big. Phlebotomy, medical coding, pharmacy tech are all good. The best thing to do is got to the pharmacy, to the hospital, and ask people working where they got their training and education. That's all you need to know, if they did it, you can do it.

You will be surprised what happens when you no longer give a crap, when it becomes just a game of making friends and seeing what BS you can come up with.

“why haven’t you achieved your goal by now?” is a bating question. My first thought is, "what makes you think I haven't" I wouldn't say. The answer is, "I have achieve by goals. I've achieved dozens of goals....." “this job isn’t what you went to school for, why would apply for it?” is just a bating question. The answer is, "School was an opportunity to demonstrate intelligence and commitment. The choice of subjects wasn't necessarily for my eventual career path. I couldn't possibly predict the future with that much accuracy. If it happened to work out that way, great. If not, nothing lost because, whatever the subject, what I really learned and demonstrated is project oriented commitment. What I gained is a record, a history, documented proof of my capability to achieve excellence." Or, you can go with, "I had to pick something when I decided to get a degree. The important part was picking something and committing to it. And, frankly, right now I just need to work. I can't sit around waiting for the perfect job. And the important thing is that I can commit to a goal and see it to the end."

If you happen to be interviewing for a job where you have the experience, great, that adds the upper cut to the one-two punch. If the job is not down your ally, down your line of experience, then you still have the one-two punch. What you gotta believe, gotta get across, is that the technicalities aren't that important, not as important as the fact that your smarter, more dedicated, and pay attention. Every manner of individual with experience has ended up just sucking at a job. Every business, every job, has it's details that no manner of training will prepare you for. The important thing is that you have a history of stepping up to the plate and hitting that home run.

Oh, and, this is the job you really want. Sure, you've interviewed for other jobs, but when you read this job description, it just spoke to you.

I swear, there are two types of interviewers and they ask the same questions. The HR interviewers have asked the same question a hundred times. They are expecting to be bull shitted. If they aren't expecting to be bull shitted, simply looking to see if you can sustain good bs, then they simply can be bs'ed. They either expect good bs or they don't know better.

Someone in HR said that they are there to answer three basic questions, 1) can you do the job, 2) do you want to do the job, and 3) can they stand working with you while you do the job.

At some point, it's all a bit random. You never know why you didn't get the job. And, like the Kirby salesman, if your dependent on the sale every time, you'll go nuts. The interview has to be an end, in an of itself. Success in each step has to be a reward, in an of itself. Just getting the interview, just getting a smile, a laugh, a good feeling about it when you leave, has to be a reward on it's own accord. Each step has to be because, in the end, landing that job is the result of a string of successes of all the successive steps.

In the end, half of it is just random dumb luck. You just don't know what the other person really wants. Some actually want specific skills. Others want to feel in control, that they have power. Some just want a Mini-me, someone just like them. If they start talking about their last fishing trip, instead of the job position, that's someone looking for a "Mini-me". Always leave the interviewer feeling smart, just a little smarter then you.

Sometimes, they actually don't want to hire someone. It was their boss that told them to hire someone. Some stuff, we just can't do anything about.

Your correct in most situations. Basic qualifications are check boxes, then it's all up to whether the person hiring you wants to be around you.

 

[Defiant1]

Nothing is more annoying than having your time wasted by being interviewed for a job by someone who has no interest in hiring you.

The tip off is when they ask questions like, “why haven’t you achieved your goal by now?” or “this job isn’t what you went to school for, why would apply for it?”

Just once, you would like to answer, “Because people like YOU:

(1) Seem to think that you would never encounter one of those people that are affected by the bad economy you’ve read about all these years.
(2) Only hire those with experience…but if the economy is bad, and hiring is at a stand still, how does one get experience without a job.
(3) Don’t like people of my age, or gender, or race, or ethnicity, or religion, or economic class or political/social views.
(4) Read my resume and liked what you saw, but were put off when you actually met me because of .. (see number 3).

But instead, you go through the humiliating motions of justifying part of your life to some clown looking for any excuse not to hire you because (let’s face it) ain’t nothing going on but the rent!

So, in the interest of lowering stress levels and promoting good will in our society, people in the Human Resource/Personnel business with attitudes like the aforementioned should just stick to the basic Q & A interview. Make sure to finish with, “We’ve other applicants to interview, and will call you if we don’t find a better candidate”. That way, they don’t add insult to injury, the company doesn’t get bad mouthed in the streets, and they avoid a possible discrimination lawsuit.

Hey, interviewing applicant after applicant gets pretty boring. So when you get a democrat/liberal fucking with them breaks up the monotony. They're not going to get hired anyway.

Thanks for proving my point, genius. Just follow my advice and society will benefit.

I'm not working to help society. I work to provide for my wife and I.
My boss does well, I do well.