- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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
Over qualified need not apply
Posted on 4/26/09 at 6:39 am
Posted on 4/26/09 at 6:39 am
Was reading this article last week about a guy from Harvard who graduated with a degree in economics and for whatever reason applied for a job as a barrista at Starbucks. He was rejected as being overqualified. The idea was "why should we bother training you when you're just gonna quit in a few weeks?"
It reminded me of another article from 10 years ago about the intelligence tests administered by the NYC fire dept. Let's say the perfect score was 100.
If you got below 60 you were rejected. Too stupid to be a fireman. If you got above 90 you were rejected. Too smart to hang around.
Anyone ever encountered this business practice? Sounds like IQ discrimination.
It reminded me of another article from 10 years ago about the intelligence tests administered by the NYC fire dept. Let's say the perfect score was 100.
If you got below 60 you were rejected. Too stupid to be a fireman. If you got above 90 you were rejected. Too smart to hang around.
Anyone ever encountered this business practice? Sounds like IQ discrimination.
8
Posted on 4/26/09 at 7:50 am to Zach
quote:
Anyone ever encountered this business practice? Sounds like IQ discrimination.
Absolutely. Why hire and train someone who is just looking for a check until something better comes along?
Posted on 4/26/09 at 8:47 am to dawgorama
But what about that 1 out of 10 genius who just really really wants to be a fireman for the rest of his life? You're squashing his dream.
Posted on 4/26/09 at 9:26 am to Zach
quote:
But what about that 1 out of 10 genius who just really really wants to be a fireman for the rest of his life? You're squashing his dream.
I'm not a fireman. You asked about experience with this sorta thing. The people I'm talking about are in the same field, but have previously held jobs that paid better or had more responsibility. It is obvious they are just looking for something to tide them over.
Posted on 4/26/09 at 10:33 am to Zach
quote:
Sounds like IQ discrimination.
right you are
Posted on 4/26/09 at 11:00 am to dawgorama
well the harvard guy is a dipshit. If you are applying for a job, I certainly doubt that starbucks requires a resume, you should only put relevant experience.
Posted on 4/26/09 at 11:32 am to MileHigh
Leaves a 4 year gap though.
Honestly I'm sure if you said "oh I was in jail for beating my common law wife" they'd hire you. But the Harvard diploma = ding!
Edit:Hey MileHigh when you were at the retail level did you guy have a list of OK felonies and not OK felonies? Like: hire a car thief or a wife-beater, don't hire an embezzler or a crack dealer.
Honestly I'm sure if you said "oh I was in jail for beating my common law wife" they'd hire you. But the Harvard diploma = ding!
Edit:Hey MileHigh when you were at the retail level did you guy have a list of OK felonies and not OK felonies? Like: hire a car thief or a wife-beater, don't hire an embezzler or a crack dealer.
This post was edited on 4/26/09 at 11:43 am
Posted on 4/26/09 at 11:40 am to Cold Cous Cous
Reminds for of that old joke:
Human Resources Interviewer: "So, where have you been the last few years?"
Job Seeker: "Yale."
HR: "Oh, very impressive. What did you say your name was?"
Job Seeker: "Yonathon Yohansson".
Human Resources Interviewer: "So, where have you been the last few years?"
Job Seeker: "Yale."
HR: "Oh, very impressive. What did you say your name was?"
Job Seeker: "Yonathon Yohansson".
Posted on 4/26/09 at 12:15 pm to Zach
quote:
It reminded me of another article from 10 years ago about the intelligence tests administered by the NYC fire dept. Let's say the perfect score was 100.
If you got below 60 you were rejected. Too stupid to be a fireman. If you got above 90 you were rejected. Too smart to hang around.
Anyone ever encountered this business practice? Sounds like IQ discrimination.
I've also heard that Bill Parcells won't draft a defensive lineman who scores too highly on the Wonderlic test. Apparently he found a correlation between low scores and ability to play DL.
Posted on 4/26/09 at 1:01 pm to dawgorama
yeah, hire some snot nosed kid who quits in three weeks cuz you expected him to do his job instead of some guy who will be gone at some point but while here will do the job right and be a true asset to the company.
Posted on 4/26/09 at 1:57 pm to dawgorama
quote:
Why hire and train someone who is just looking for a check until something better comes along?
It isn't a terribly unreasonable argument, but I've noticed that public libraries have volunteers who aren't exactly dummies but work just to stay busy. I could see a Yale grad wanted to hang around a coffee shop and make a little extra dough.
Posted on 4/26/09 at 2:14 pm to foshizzle
its the Dinardo way of thinking. i better not hire anyone too good, someone else might want to hire them, never mind my customer sales and service might be better.
Posted on 4/26/09 at 3:19 pm to foshizzle
quote:
It isn't a terribly unreasonable argument, but I've noticed that public libraries have volunteers who aren't exactly dummies but work just to stay busy. I could see a Yale grad wanted to hang around a coffee shop and make a little extra dough.
Depends on the job. I've been burned by the "over-qualified" candidate twice now. By the time they learned the enviroment, started becoming truly productive, and could be relied upon they were turning in their resignation letters because something that paid better came along.
Posted on 4/26/09 at 3:35 pm to dawgorama
Unfortunately, that's pretty much how I expect my career to play out early on. The internship I started in August was pretty laid back (gov job) and they didn't give me a lot of specific accounting work. They gave me one specific project to work on [budget for FY2009] and that was essentially the purpose of my internship. After about 4 months, they were starting to give me more accounting stuff to do, but I had just been given the opportunity to take an internship with an accounting firm [same pay], so I took it, but I felt bad leaving because they had been talking about giving me a semi-permanent job. I didn't want it, but it's kind of hard to tell someone that you don't want to work there while you're still working there. 
I have been working at this new place since December, and I am finally really getting a firm grasp of everything I am supposed to be doing, but I am quitting at the end of the month to focus on the CPA. The same thing really applies though. I realize these are different because they are just college internships and not meant to be long-term commitments to begin with, but the same idea holds. Even when I take my first full-time job next fall, I don't think I will stay there longer than 3 or 4 years before I try and go back for an MBA or use the experience/name to leverage a new opportunity.
I have been working at this new place since December, and I am finally really getting a firm grasp of everything I am supposed to be doing, but I am quitting at the end of the month to focus on the CPA. The same thing really applies though. I realize these are different because they are just college internships and not meant to be long-term commitments to begin with, but the same idea holds. Even when I take my first full-time job next fall, I don't think I will stay there longer than 3 or 4 years before I try and go back for an MBA or use the experience/name to leverage a new opportunity.
Posted on 4/26/09 at 3:38 pm to dawgorama
quote:This sounds like a completely different issue.
something that paid better came along.
Posted on 4/26/09 at 5:53 pm to Zach
quote:
Anyone ever encountered this business practice?
this is big in the NFL
Posted on 4/26/09 at 5:54 pm to Zach
quote:
But what about that 1 out of 10 genius who just really really wants to be a fireman for the rest of his life? You're squashing his dream.
after you fail the first time, somebody that smart should figure out how to test dumb to get the job
Posted on 4/26/09 at 6:47 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
this is big in the NFL
Actually, it's the opposite. Why don't you try to explain?
Posted on 4/26/09 at 7:04 pm to Cold Cous Cous
quote:
MileHigh when you were at the retail level did you guy have a list of OK felonies and not OK felonies? Like: hire a car thief or a wife-beater, don't hire an embezzler or a crack dealer
if they wrote a felony on their application, no fricking way in hell we would hire them. If they omitted it, well, how could we find out? 95% of all the jobs don't require a background check or drug test. Some regional managers like to do that, but why drop $100 on someone that won't make $100 in a week? If they sucked, we would just fire them.
Posted on 4/26/09 at 8:56 pm to MileHigh
quote:+1
well the harvard guy is a dipshit. If you are applying for a job, I certainly doubt that starbucks requires a resume, you should only put relevant experience.
And any job you are "over qualified" for, should also be one you can bullshite your way into getting if you aren't a dunce.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News