Employers: Entry-Level Applicants Are Just About Useless
NEW YORK (TheStreet) -- At perhaps a bad time in U.S. employment, it seems there's a "perception gap" between what workers think they're worth on the job and how employers see them.
Analysis by Bryant & Stratton College with help from Wakefield Research from a survey among U.S. adults age 18 to 34 found that 80% of workers believe they are "job ready and possess all the skills, experience and education needed to advance in their desired career path or obtain their next job."
Yet 40% of U.S. employers say most entry-level job candidates lack even the basic skills needed to fill job openings.
Then there's the issue of so-called "soft" job skills such as critical thinking and sophisticated problem-solving. Only 16% of the 18- to 34-year-olds surveyed see such skills as necessary for career advancement.
But that's a huge swing-and-miss by employees, the college says. In fact, 93% of U.S. employers say soft skills are "weighed more heavily" when vetting job candidates -- much more so than a candidate's college academic credentials.
"Being employable today is all about knowing how to communicate to employers that you have intelligence quotient as well as educational quotient," says Scott Traylor, associate campus director for online education at the online college.
Bryant & Stratton offers a video called Job Ready Or Not? explaining what employers look for in job candidates these days. (Find it at link.)
"Job-seekers need to start marketing themselves based on the skills, competencies and traits employers need and value most," says Beth Tarquino, chief academic officer at Bryant & Stratton. "Too often the background experience and soft-skills attributes needed to successfully look for a job are underestimated, especially by college students and new graduates. Searching for a job can become a full-time job, but putting in the extra work to understand hiring trends and needs of employers is worth it."
'Soft Skills' = finding and fixing your way through the mire of other employees' fuckups, or through the day in a company that's run like shit.
Thank GOD I am miles away from that now. It takes a few years to regain sanity.
It used to be that employers trained job applicants. What happened to that?
Well, a forty-hour paycheck at the minimum wage is just about worthless, so it all evens out. You get what you pay for, right?
"the background experience"
How can they have experience when they are fresh out of high school or college? Bullshit survey results.
They would rather make fun of them now, R2 because there aren't really any jobs and the corporate media also likes to avoid the real issues (all the time, but especially in times of recession).
Maybe at McDonald's, R2. If you're a college graduate looking for work in the field that you studied, however, you should know the absolute basics of the entry-level position you're applying for...otherwise, what did you actually learn in college? Also, if you had read the article you would know it had nothing to do with hands-on knowledge and much more to do with "soft skills" like problem solving and critical thinking.
That's okay, mom will call and get me a job.
It's all about connections anyway and not about experience.
I applied for a job at a new company which was very closed to something I did for five years at a major international corporation. I was contacted for a phone screening which went well. The hiring manager even said "so you've done this before". I was led to believe based on that conversation that I was a shoe-in for an in person interview and they'd be in touch. I didn't hear back from him so I emailed him after a few weeks and received no response.
I checked Linked In regularly to see if someone had been hired at this company for that position and the other day noticed they had. The kid they hired graduated only a few years ago and has only a year and a half post-college work experience---six months out of that was an internship. There was nothing in his Linked In profile that made him a viable candidate for this position so clearly it's nepotism or something close to it that got him the job.
If you don't have connections, you're screwed.
Hate to say I agree with some of this. I've hired several people right out of school in the last few years and they have definitely not been work ready. There's a sense of entitlement as well as resistance to coaching from their manager. I don't know if it's a generational thing or faulty education but they need a lot of retraining, which is a pain.
They hired him because he was young and easily controlled, R8. Of course, the connections helped too.
r8 it is also possible they hired the other person because he or she had little experience and is making about half what you would make. It still sucks but my guess is that they are trying to save money. Be happy you did not get a job someone with such little experience qualified for.
I would have normally thought the same, R11 but when I discussed salary with the hiring manager, he said what I was asking was totally doable and that the company hadn't even come up with a salary for the job because they really just wanted the "right person" more than anything.
If they had hired someone with at least the same experience as me, I'd not be so convinced that this kid got in solely based on his connections. His resume is really that unimpressive.
They're reaping what they've sewn.
What screening process is being used that produces so many unprepared applicants?
How many of these managers have held a position long enough to train staff?
How many staff members have survived cuts? Would they be willing to train anyone?
[quote]It used to be that employers trained job applicants. What happened to that?
Somebody with no critical-thinking and problem-solving skills is not likely to be very trainable (though r5 also has a point).
And employers these days are just about a useless too.
Colleges today are producing garbage degrees en mass.
The world is awash in self entitled, college graduates with no real world skills.
Yes, R16, it was designed that way so the banksters could get entire generations of young Americans into a state of crippling debt before they even enter the workforce.
Agree with 16.
I agree with R17.
[quote]It used to be that employers trained job applicants. What happened to that?
You can't teach common sense. If these employers claim the skills they're looking for are such traits as critical thinking and problem-solving, those are more likely to be inherent rather than learned. If their own HR people don't possess those skills, they won't recognize them in others, much less view them as attributes.
Employers suck! There so cheap!
The compnay I work for wont spend a nickle on any kind of training.
The introduced a new project tracking software a few months ago. Nobody knows how to use it. You're on your own.
Two months ago my department was reorganized and everybody was made an account manager. The problem was is nobody was ever given any information on how to do the new functions of their job.
I developed and used to be the only person responsible for our most expensive service. Now 5 of my coworkers have to do the service. None of them have any idea and I can't get an hour to train them.
The guys I work for wonder why nobody lasts more than a few month or why we keep loosing customers.
As others have said, I have zero sympathy for employers, who are full of shitty managers and shitty, incompetent HR people, who wouldn't know a good employee if one ran them over in a truck.
Many people with common sense and good business skills are now working for themselves, because working for a company is such hell.
P.S. R22, I believe you are "losing" customers, not "loosing" them.
I don't know, r16--it used to be that liberal arts degrees weren't a handicap because people were trained for jobs when they started work--college wasn't treated like a trade school. Now, basically, you should have studied for a specific job during school, or you're not employable.
It's no wonder we're falling behind in science and technical fields, since college has basically become little more than the training program for young businessmen and stockbrokers.
r24. Was on my ipad at home for lunch. Can't type for shit on it.
Well, they just want to hire the cute, giggly ones, then wonder what went wrong.
[quote]Yet 40% of U.S. employers say most entry-level job candidates lack even the basic skills needed to fill job openings.
Stop. Cutting. Education. And. Training. Budgets.
Everyone on this thread sounds very intelligent!
[quote]It used to be that employers trained job applicants. What happened to that?
College students decided that all they needed was a degree and extracurricular activities and stopped getting jobs in high school and internships in college.
Entry Level jobs "requesting college grads" in SF like the one at the url pays 25,000 to 45,000. How the fuck are you supposed to live on that? The Bay area isn't exactly cheap.
These cheap corporate pricks deserve whatever they get....
Employers are spoiled because the economy is still shit. They want to hire a PhD. to work as a File Clerk. Or a Bachelor's Degree to be a cashier.
I guess the reasoning is that the person will be so enamored of the company that they'll "work their way up" through the ranks. How often does that happen? People move around so much these days- taking their 401k's with them- how often does someone camp out with the same company for 40 years? And what a bore that would be.
Too many graduates.
Getting the few decent jobs today is about attitude, attitude, attitude.
"stopped getting jobs in high school"
Nearly every student I taught this past year had a job. Kids love having disposable income, and they love telling you that they have it. R29's statement is patently untrue.
As far as I'm concerned, anyone under 35 (and maybe even 40) isn't even worth the space they take up.
I just read an article in the Washington Post where someone I would presume is an experienced journalism major wrote that GWU refused to collect "syllabuses" to contribute to an education study.
Gee -- how much is the fare?
Should put the qualifier "American" in front of that, or even Anglo-Saxon, and the Brits aren't much better. I hire globally, and the Chinese, European, Korean, Arab, African, Latin American entry-level applicants are pretty damn good. Work hard, humble, eager to learn, smart.
It's only when we have to get American 20-somethings to do anything that involves opening their minds and working more efficiently that it just becomes a pain in the ass. Fuck 'em...the world is full of others better than them.
I was told at one place I worked - as a temp graphic artist - to slow down as it made people look bad and they had plenty of time. What happened was the whole project was delayed and ignored until the bitter end, when I was handed a list of extensive changes at the last minute. Socializing, cube wandering, back-biting cunts ruled the roost there. Some warm, intelligent, quiet people kept their heads down, stayed in their cubes and ran for the door at the end of the day. Then again, this was an ad agency, which are typically rotten. I lost interest in kissing enough ass to even attempt a long term role.
I'm sitting here listening to one of my 20 something coworkers talk to a client about the service I put together and managed until recently. I've never been given time to train her or the others on this service and she has no idea how it works and is telling the client all kinds of wrong info.
If she had enough sense in her head she'd put the customer on hold and ask me, but she won't. And my manager won't give me the time to train her properly.
My experience with teens is that they act like you're an idiot when you explain simple tasks to them . Then when you dare check behind them and tell them why the task was done wrong they act like you're an asshole. They then sneak off to stare.at their phones. I don't see 4 years of college helping these overgrown toddlers with limited social skills. I was a teen but I exihibited a little more drive and a willingness to at least make eye contact.
Why don't you offer her your advice then, R37? Such an oddly passive-aggressive comment.
R35 has not met the recent wave of Nigerians in nursing.
r39, I just did after she got off the phone.
The problem is my boss has dumped so much on me and I'm picking up the slack for 2 people who are out today that I have a hard time getting crap done.(The more they dump on me the more I waste time here.)
I'm also a bit resentful that my bosses won't let me take the hour to give the 5 others the same info all at the same time so that I don't have to take the extra time to explain stuff to them when I hear them doing it wrong.
Gee, R38 -- I have grad research assistants who act exactly the same way.
I spelled out in considerable detail a task to be done in Excel. My grad assistant follows the directions virtually to the letter and correctly finishes the task. So I ask her to do it again with another file, thinking I can trust her to do it correctly. But no, the second time, she's too smart to follow the instructions, believing she knows all there is to know about the task from doing it right the first time. It was so fucked up that I had to do the entire task over again myself.
I've said many times that I don't want to be alive when this generation of students is running the country. It's going to be like Homer Simpson in the nuclear power plant.
I believe it's generational and I really hope I don't live past 65 or so. In my opinion 38/39 years old is the cut off - those younger that I have encountered in my place of business & partner companies are pretty much useless but oozing entitlement.
It's kind of like this:
Im 24, in a "entry level job" that pays me under $30,000 a year. First of all, the "entry level" is an inaccurate and dated description of the jobs I think we are discussing. Even the low paying desk jobs require some work experience and education today. There are people who have decades of work experience trying to contend for the same "entry level" jobs as people with much less experience. These people are not "entering" the workforce.
Secondly, there are tons of what I like to call legacy workers that are not useless, but their usefulness is declining with each day. I know because I work side by side with some of them. I have seen office arguments that could have been solved if said legacy workers took some time to learn how to operate simple functions of Windows so they can do their jobs more effectively. And these are administrators that cost a fortune to pay and keep happy so they come to the same job they've had for 15 to 20 years.
r24 is right about college turning into trade school. Once enough people figure out that four year degrees aren't specialized enough, then colleges will start creating specialized programs. But not before they rape people of their money and put millions of people into debt. A lot of public school systems are moving towards specialized high school diplomas so teenagers will already have basic workforce skills before they leave high school.
A large part of the problem is that the tweens-twenties kids rule this country and they know it. They are the all important marketing demographic for just about everything. It gives then a sense of invincibility. And, it really doesn't help that school is now all about the kids self esteem.
[quote]If you don't have connections, you're screwed.
I truly hope you're right, R47.
[quote] But that's a huge swing-and-miss by employees, the college says. In fact, 93% of U.S. employers say soft skills are "weighed more heavily" when vetting job candidates -- much more so than a candidate's college academic credentials
That is such bullshit. They may weigh that heavily when they have narrowed down a bunch of candidates, but a College degree, academic credentials/qualifications are what gets a person the interview. If you don't have those things you won't get an interview. And just try putting critical thinking and sophisticated problem-solving on your resume and they will laugh at you
And 93% of U.S. employers did not say any of this. They asked a bunch of employers and 93% of those employers said that. Obviously their critical thinking skills aren't that great
I have had the same experience as R9. There seems to be resistance to starting at the bottom and working up. Hell yes, you start off with the crappy jobs. We all did. It takes time, experience, aptitude and training to move up the ladder. You aren't going to run the company six months after starting. For some reason these kids think that the world owes them something.
In case it seems otherwise I am not a hater of the young, just tired of spending energy and time on training a series of employees who don't want to actually work for a living and leave when it gets too much difficult. Don't even get me started on grammar and spelling............
My firm's policy now is not to recruit school leavers and grads.
This thread makes me glad I'm disabled.
[quote]A large part of the problem is that [twenty-somethings] are the all important marketing demographic for just about everything.
Actually, that's a completely separate problem and has nothing to do with the discussion at hand.
R52, actually it does. These kids enter the workplace thinking the world still revolves around them. It used to be that one sat back, listened and kept ones mouth shut when one started a job. Now these kids expect to participate in everything from the beginning. You can't give them direction, because they know a better way to do it, or the question why it is done that way. And god forbid that they are not listened to. The are so used to participating in classroom discussion and everything that drips out of their mouths being given value in order to support their self esteem that they fall apart if told that their input isn't needed.
Ooh, how exciting! Is this where the elderhomos are meeting to bash the non-decrepits?
[quote]I have seen office arguments that could have been solved if said legacy workers took some time to learn how to operate simple functions of Windows so they can do their jobs more effectively. And these are administrators that cost a fortune to pay and keep happy so they come to the same job they've had for 15 to 20 years.
Absofuckinglutely! I'm 31 and cannot believe how many Boomers, particularly males at the executive level, barely know how to use a fucking computer and don't know how to type! And they get paid a fortune. The COO and CFO at my company, two men in their 50's, can barely do email attachments and cannot type at all.
If people my age could only type with two fingers and had no working knowlege of MSOffice, we would basically be unemployable.
MFer @ R55, you only wish you had the software, statistical, and coding experience I have. And I can write well without a Microsoft "spellcheck" OR grammar check.
You brats have nothing to teach me. Besides, you'll all be getting thumb replacement surgery in a few years anyway -- and without usable opposable thumbs, we'll see who's decrepit.
R53, Actually its the fault of corporations that created this situation.
I worked at a For-Profit college several years ago. They informed all the teachers that the new way of teaching was to stop traditional methods and individualize a different method for every student.
Translation = Treat them like the world revolves around them and we will continue to have high enrollment, which means high profits.
You reap what you sow.
Bitches please, this is such a tired game.
I heard this 10 and 20 years ago. Every time you hear a company complain they cant find "qualified workers" it code for we only pay peanuts but expect PHD with 10 years working experience in that specific job.
CEO types love to say this stuff publicly. A lot of time they will say that more money needs to go to schools for specialized training.
That too is a lie. What they really want is to over saturate the market with a specific skill set. The more people that can do a specific job, the less you have to pay.
R56 needs to put his ancient breasts in the damn freezer.
You know, I think there was also a study done on how people hire. Turns out most people hire the candidate that they think most like them self.
The study showed the decision was made within the first 30 seconds of the interview. This is subconscious level of course. Skills, talent, education were trumped by likability or clicking with the interviewer.
[quote]I was led to believe based on that conversation that I was a shoe-in for an in person interview and they'd be in touch. I didn't hear back from him so I emailed him after a few weeks and received no response.
No offense, but your email should have been in his inbox ten minutes after that interview.
That kind of email should include:
1) a thank-you for the interviewer's time
2) a recap of what you found most interesting about the job
3) how you think you could contribute to the job and what skills you could bring to the table
4) any information which you wish you had conveyed during the interview; and,
5) a clear statement of your desire to proceed to the next step in the process.
I was amazed when I hired two junior people how few followed up after interviews. Only a handful actually told me they wanted the job.
It was easy to spot who was following up because they had their shit together and who was following up out of desperation.
Worst case? You don't get a call back on an interview for which you were never going to get a call back. Best case? You change someone's mind.
So many cliches about the process but they are true at almost any level.
And as a headhunter told me years ago, listing proficiency in various software packages is no longer viewed with derision on executive resumes.
(And, incidentally, if you made it to the phone interview stage, you basically had the same shot as someone with connections...)
"It was easy to spot who was following up because they had their shit together and who was following up out of desperation."
I'm really curious about this. Could you elaborate?
More bogus whining by employers when in reality their money is being spent overseas and they never intended to hire anyone.
That swings both ways R61.
Companies have also lost their skill at participating in the process. At least their manners anyway.
Traditionally working for a company was considered a two way street.
After receiving a resume, it is considered proper form to acknowledge that it has been revived and will be reviewed.
After an interview, it is also customary to send a thank you letter to the interviewees for taking time to come in for an interview and also to inform them they selected someone else.
These days, its like a black hole, most companies never even let you know if they got your information. When they pass on you, they don't even bother to send out a rejection letter. Some go as far as hiding their real names in the job add so you don't even know who you are sending your resume to.
I have heard the "we just get too many to respond excuse" but give me a break, form letter are not typed by hand anymore.
Employer don't respect employees anymore, they just want it all one way and they cant understand where the loyalty went.
This is like the CEO of Papa john's Pizza who claimed if Obama care won, he would have to lay off thousands of employees.
As it turns out, most of 4000 establishments have less then 25 employees each. Which means he was exempt for any new health care laws. Even as a 3 billion dollar corporation.
Schnatter, 51, makes no apologies for the 24,000-square-foot residence on 15 acres in this Louisville, Ky
I think the larger problem is that management are generally incompetent and unable to evaluate talent.
Management, how about HR? Biggest waste of faux manpower a company can have.
They place the job adds and screen applicants that they have no clue as to the exact qualifications they are even asking for. It's boiled down to a stupid game of buzz words.
Most just drift into that position without ANY training. Corporate car salesman at best. Dose any kid ever say "when I grow up I want to be a Human Resource Director" Even in college I never heard anyone say that.
R67 speaks the truth. HR is like Soviet clown performance art.
Let's spread the blame around. Corporations receive no loyalty and deserve none either. Layoffs loom in the distance; people are overworked; and training is nonexistent. Many recent college grads are technologically adept and work well in teams but fail in every other respect-writing, problem solving, strategic thinking, etc. For their older counterparts, the reverse is often true and the two groups are incompatible in the workplace. It is possible to make your way through college and have the equivalent of an eighth grade education plus a bunch of software skills. I teach college as an adjunct and received a syllabus today for a new course and wanted to throw up. No writing assignment was longer than 400 words and readings were almost nonexistent. I'm not in a position to offer criticism but this is the last thing in the world I'd want to take if I were a student. And, yes, I will pump myself up and simulate enthusiasm for the class but I think we're both wasting our time.
Lets not spread the blame equally. I think workers by the most part take most of the fall and get most of the blame with most of the pain.
Employers have taken advantage of this economy, no one will dispute that. When was the last time you could say that workers have had the upper hand?
Getting paid too much, month long vacations, 35 hour work weeks....NEVER. At least not in this country. AKA USA
R70, I would submit that the reason college grads are not workplace-ready is because of the intervention of groups such as the US Chamber of Commerce and the Corporate Roundtable in education. By emphasizing accountability, they ushered in an era of "teach-to-the-test," which means that students are spoonfed and endlessly rehearsed to perform a limited set of tasks. The emphasis on small-group dynamics and teamwork means that many can't operate independently. The reliance on gadgetry means that they often can't retain information. The survey results are accurate but the corporations are the source of the problem. And while workers are treated terribly, that issue has nothing to do with the competence of new grads.
There are just as many useless boomers- desperately clinging to their jobs and benefits until retirement, whose skills have long since been eclipsed by technology and the current economy- as there are useless college grads.
"The reliance on gadgetry means that they often can't retain information"
I think R71 makes a number of excellent observations / points - however, those 'gadgets' are not going anywhere. The older employees must adapt to them, as they'll only become more ubiquitous in the decades to come.
Agree with R68.
I have never met a HR person that was not inherently evil. That holds true even for my gay brothers and sisters.
Fake smiles, fake knowledge of a field, fake care for you as an employee, fake understanding of human behavior, fake degrees unrelated to their work. Fake spew about being fair and balanced.
They are essentially an unskilled corporate spy paid to protect the employer, not help the employee. Never forget that.
Please hatchlings, if you take no other advice from and old daddy type, please never let your guard down with anyone in HR. They are not there to protect you no matter how chummy and friendly they may appear.
So let me get this straight...
-Graduates with liberal arts degrees don't perform well at entry level jobs because they lack basic job skills.
-Graduates with technical skills don't perform well at entry level jobs because they lack critical thinking skills.
-Those with entry level jobs resent those who have worked 20+ years because they may lack technical skills.
-Those with managerial jobs resent those who work at entry level jobs because they feel entittled and have expectations beyond their skill levels.
-Instructors of all types feel that the educational system panders and fails.
-Employers of all types treat employees as despensible tools and only care about their personal bottom line.
Actually, I think a lot of MALE boomers are terrified to retire - even when they are well past their shelf life . Their egos are so wrapped up intheir jobs they won't leave.
And I do agree that some younger people have been so coddled by their parents that they are unable to cope with real life and a job.
But these overpaid CEOs need to be shot. Most of them are functionally useless.
I am a boomer. I have no fear of technology, no fear of gadgets, no fear of losing my job. In fact, I most likely have greater job security because I have education + technical skills + critical thinking skills + experience.
I won't say entry-level applicants are useless, but no one comes out of school knowing everything they need to succeed. Learning doesn't stop when you get a degree.
R71 I agree to some extent, but the "teaching to the test" theory I used to hear a lot about is mostly in relation to high school, not college.
College is usually where the wake up call comes. Most professors I know want independent thinkers who can challenge them on their theories.
I guess it also depends on what kind of school. Most of the online schools, for-profit or trade schools seem to turn out more junk with less spunk. They are basically diploma mills. Corporations discussed as education. Phoenix University, Devry, The Art Institutes etc.
In fact, those schools are being sued by the US government right now for 11 Billion in fraud.
R47, yes you are correct. Education dose not stop when school lets out but the difference is today, employers don't train anymore. Part of that education needs to be on the job not in the classroom.
When I graduated in the late 80's, training by the employers was expected for all entry level jobs. I got that training in trade for very low starting salary and long hours. That was the agreement. The agreement between worker and employer has been broken for a very long time.
I think the Baby Boomers caused most of this. It was the Me Generation after all.
They were the first group to default on their loans in mass because they never had to pay them back. Which F-ed up the educational system big time.
They ushered in the era of self gratification and narcissism and emphasis on personal wealth.
They will also be the first group to bankrupt the Social Security system.
So is it really a surprise their kids who are now graduating from college any different?
Well when you go to those for-profit schools its crap in crap out.
So boomer parents send their kids there with low grades, ability, talent, intellect and eat up the marketing hook, line and sinker.
What they get is a bill for $100,000 and a worthless degree. This is why they are unqualified.
This video is funny and explains all:
r80 never heard of this:
They were the first group to default on their loans in mass because they never had to pay them back. Which F-ed up the educational system big time.
is there a link? I googled but no luck
"education dose not stop"
"11 Billion in fraud"
"Papa john's Pizza"
These are indicators of the lack of learning skills of people ALREADY IN the workforce. Oh, I know it's just an online forum and the participants shouldn't adhere to basic rules of capitalization, punctuation, spelling, or proofreading.
Garbage in, garbage out.
R61, I did send him a thank you email the following morning and included all of the points you suggested. He didn't respond to that either but then I didn't expect him to since most employers don't respond to thank you emails. (I've been at this a long time hence my immense frustration)
I did, however, expect him to respond to the follow up email I sent two weeks after the interview. But when I saw who they hired, I realized that the hiring manager couldn't go with the cookie cutter response of "we went with a candidate whose qualifications better matched..." because they didn't. They hired someone grossly under-qualified and inexperienced.
Colleges today are basically Corporate training facilities. The Grads are obsolete within 5 years and dumped back into the job market in favor of the new grads.
[quote]They hired someone grossly under-qualified and inexperienced.
And they think that person has potential.
It's not just experience.
R44 We hope you die, too. The sooner the better in fact. Die or retire or both to make room for someone who would be grateful for your six-figure, two-finger-typing job and actually do it with some ethics rather than just laying off people and sending our children's jobs to China when our CEO doesn't make a record bonus every year.
If your generation is so great, well, you're running the country now, right? That didn't turn out so well, did it? You were handed the greatest economic boom in the history of the world and turned it into the greatest recession since the Great Depression. There is NO doubt in my mind my generation will do things MUCH better once you all die and we finally get the opportunity.
We played by your rules and got nothing in return but worthless advanced degrees, tons of debt we can't file bankruptcy on because it's loans to the government, and un- or underemployment.
If we're so entitled and spoiled, well, guess who raised us to be that way? If we are useless it's because you are preventing us from improving anything with your antique restrictions, which only serve the purpose of keeping anyone from finding out how truly worthless you are and give you someone to blame and/or fire when you fuck up.
Your precious little ego would absolutely hate to take responsibility for destroying an entire generation, wouldn't it? Well, guess what? You did. Millions of people have been laid off and evicted from the homes they never should have been approved for in the first place all because of YOUR greed.
All the politicians of your generation can't lead, they just gridlock on every single issue to keep the system as corrupt as possible because that's how the rich corporations want it. Do us all a favor and get the fuck out of the way and let someone who's competent and gives a shit about the future take over from here.
Sorry. I know the truth hurts sometimes. Hope your fragile ego can take it.
I don't believe anyone is hired from an interview anymore. Sure, they go through the motions. But there are so many unemployed people these days that everyone has a niece or grandson that needs a job. And they really put the pressure on HR to hire them.
Most likely the new hire will be a promotion from within, or the relative of a current employee.
R86, I can only hope that you know what it feels to be me one day.
I wish I could have a six-figure job with just a Bachelors' degree (unrelated to the field I'm working in), two-fingered typing and not even an intermediate knowledge of Windows.
The Boomers didn't just CLOSE that fucking door behind them, they padlocked it.
Seriously, what is it with the fortysomethings and fiftysomethings consistently doing that? Most of the Boomers I know are actually very nice, but so few of them know how to type at a decent pace.
Let me tell you why I can't type, li'l pup @ R93. [Although I have taught myself to type 40 wpm, looking at the keys all the while.]
When I was in high school, the girls were all supposed to learn typing, because some day they would be some man's secretary. Being the budding young feminist (and already out lesbian) that I was, I vowed I would never learn to type because I never wanted to be anyone's secretary. Of course, when I went into the Army and trained as a truck driver (yeah, I know), as soon as I got to my permanent duty station in Germany, they saw I had tits and a vagina and put me behind a typewriter.
And of course, the boys in my high school would all HAVE secretaries, so they went to wood or metal shop. They were never encouraged to learn to type.
Get it now?
By the way, you should probably be thinking me and not disparaging me. I was out for 35 years before you were even born.
Sorry -- I meant "thanking."
R87 is a good example of why the Unemployable Generation is unemployable: Reacts to criticism by lashing out instead of learning, and focusing on finding someone else to blame rather than on finding a way out of his dilemma.
I don't consider 22 year olds worth of much until they're in their job for 2 years.
R87 is an embarrassment. I'm entitled and it's all your fault. Wahh. And then a bunch of unsupported generalizations and mangled logic.
You're an overly defensive, self-important cunt, R96. Now I finally see why all the other generations hate you.
"By the way, you should probably be thanking me and not disparaging me. I was out for 35 years before you were even born."
R96 is an embarrassment. She reflects so well the entitlement complex of the Boomers.
R13, ..."They're reaping what they've "sewn"."
Eeek! And a stitch in tyme saves nine.
Bosses suck. If it wasn't that full bottle of gin in the third filing cabinet, I'd be out of here by now.
R61 gave the most valuable information on this thread. You should all go back and read it, print it, and hang on to it to give to your children. Oh wait, I forgot we are gay here.