- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Are younger people applying less often to jobs?
Posted on 8/26/16 at 8:38 pm to RazorBroncs
Posted on 8/26/16 at 8:38 pm to RazorBroncs
I kind of feel like if you are putting "3-5 years experience" as a requirement, but you really want someone that has no experience and wants to learn...well, you're kind of backasswards.
Why even have job requirements if you are just going to ignore them?
Why even have job requirements if you are just going to ignore them?
2
Posted on 8/26/16 at 8:39 pm to RazorBroncs
So if I read this thread correctly. I should "fudge" my resume to make me look better and I should also apply for jobs that I don't meet the requirements for.
So if I fudge my resume I should actually make it to where I don't meet the requirements because you'll me over someone that meets the requirements.
So how dumb this sounds?
So if I fudge my resume I should actually make it to where I don't meet the requirements because you'll me over someone that meets the requirements.
So how dumb this sounds?
This post was edited on 8/26/16 at 8:41 pm
Posted on 8/26/16 at 8:43 pm to RazorBroncs
And you expect people to apply for a position that requires something, even though they don't meet those requirements? That's ridiculous. I can't even grasp that line of thinking
Posted on 8/26/16 at 8:56 pm to goldennugget
I'm sure I'm breaking some sort of SJW law here, but I'll hire whoever the best candidate is regardless of sex, skin color, sexual orientation, etc. Huge companies care about "diversity" way more than they should (thanks, gov't), while small to mid-sized companies can usually skirt around it a bit. The advice posted above saying to stick with smaller or midsize firms is damn good advice, for numerous reasons.
I try to speak to the candidate over the phone as a sort of mini-interview before ever bringing them in, and that way I can weed some out while still claiming no kind of prejudices. It seems to have worked out thus far and we do have enough minority employees to not worry about anything, but I'm also part of a mid-sized company with 250-ish employees. Avoid the big conglomerate as much as possible.
I'll admit, I've definitely had some surprises when the face that comes in doesn't match the voice AT ALL, but that's about the only drawback I've experienced from doing it that way.
I try to speak to the candidate over the phone as a sort of mini-interview before ever bringing them in, and that way I can weed some out while still claiming no kind of prejudices. It seems to have worked out thus far and we do have enough minority employees to not worry about anything, but I'm also part of a mid-sized company with 250-ish employees. Avoid the big conglomerate as much as possible.
I'll admit, I've definitely had some surprises when the face that comes in doesn't match the voice AT ALL, but that's about the only drawback I've experienced from doing it that way.
Posted on 8/26/16 at 9:01 pm to Cowboyfan89
Apparently everyone missed where I said that I do not list it as a requirement. However, I do say experience is a preference because it's a win/win and weeds out the people that see it and don't believe they can do it. Basically, it weeds out the ones just looking for a paycheck and brings in the ones that are legitimately wanting to learn the position, regardless of experience. It's really not backwards, y'all are just blowing this way out of proportion.
Posted on 8/26/16 at 9:04 pm to RazorBroncs
Yeah, tell that shite to the countless companies that told me I didn't have the "experience" they wanted for an entry level position.
Maybe you operate that way, but most companies actually mean that stupid shite when they put it, whether required or preferred. Doesn't matter how much you want to learn.
Maybe you operate that way, but most companies actually mean that stupid shite when they put it, whether required or preferred. Doesn't matter how much you want to learn.
Posted on 8/26/16 at 9:05 pm to kengel2
quote:
So if I read this thread correctly. I should "fudge" my resume to make me look better and I should also apply for jobs that I don't meet the requirements for.
Either I'm being trolled or the reading comprehension here is lacking. Re-read the post about the résumé and point out where I said that you need to fudge it. I said to maximize your accomplishments, even if your current/previous employer didn't treat them as huge deals. Making yourself sound as good as possible is like résumé 101.
Posted on 8/26/16 at 9:11 pm to Cowboyfan89
quote:
Yeah, tell that shite to the countless companies that told me I didn't have the "experience" they wanted for an entry level position. Maybe you operate that way, but most companies actually mean that stupid shite when they put it, whether required or preferred. Doesn't matter how much you want to learn.
And I 100% agree that it's bullshite. They don't realize that it's a catch-22 when they list an entry level position that requires experience, and really it's an oxymoron. All I'm telling you is to not steer 100% clear of those that list it that way, because it's more of a "wish list" than anything. Big companies feel like they can do that, be picky, and get away with it with the current unemployment rate. I'm trying to tell you that there ARE exceptions out there, you just have to find them.
Posted on 8/26/16 at 9:17 pm to RazorBroncs
You didn't say it. My reading comprehension is fine, yours is lacking. Reread what you quoted, a thread is this entire 4 late discussion, it includes everything discussed.
Posted on 8/26/16 at 9:19 pm to RazorBroncs
Oh, believe me, that never deterred me. I made things work, and when someone took me seriously, it paid off for them.
It's been a while since I worried about that. Now I'm the guy people seek out because I have experience.
Doesn't change the fact that it's a busted system. To me, just saying "experience preferred" is less of a deterant than when a specific amount of experience is listed.
It's been a while since I worried about that. Now I'm the guy people seek out because I have experience.
Doesn't change the fact that it's a busted system. To me, just saying "experience preferred" is less of a deterant than when a specific amount of experience is listed.
Posted on 8/26/16 at 9:30 pm to kengel2
quote:
You didn't say it. My reading comprehension is fine, yours is lacking. Reread what you quoted
I'm not trying to argue with you, in fact quite the opposite. You replied to me so I assumed you'd be replying to my posts. The entire point of my posts is to tell you, and anyone else having trouble, not to give up because of a few bad experiences. There are exceptions to the rule out there and you'll find one eventually, but you have to put the anger that those others caused behind you and just keep plugging away.
And yes, you should definitely apply for jobs you want but aren't 100% qualified for. The worst they're going to tell you is no, or not call you. Who knows, you may find an employer with someone like me doing the hiring where you thought you'd never have a chance.
Posted on 8/26/16 at 9:51 pm to Cowboyfan89
quote:
Why even have job requirements if you are just going to ignore them?
Kind of like the old personal ads in the AOL days of the internet when women always wanted to take things slow, find someone they can talk to and weren't looking for a one night stand.
Yeah....right.
You set semi high standards to weed out the losers but if you find a right person, you don't pass on it.
Page 4 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News