|
If I've published articles as part of my job (but my job isn't being a writer), where should I link to those articles? Is it okay to put it in the body of the job description or should I include it in a separate section?C-Euro posted:I think I asked something like this before, but what's the proper way to refer a friend who's interested in working where you currently work? One of my fiancée's classmates is graduating this summer and wants to come work for my company, and my department specifically. Ignoring the fact that I wouldn't recommend anyone come work for us right now, to whom should I pass his resume material? I was thinking of passing it to the heads of my department and our HR director, with a quick message along the lines of "Hey I know this guy who wants to come work in our department, here's his stuff in case we have an opening in the near future" (which we will). Does that sound about right? Ask your boss, your idea sounds fine, but this is going to be company dependent.
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 22:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:42 |
|
|
Xandu posted:If I've published articles as part of my job (but my job isn't being a writer), where should I link to those articles? Is it okay to put it in the body of the job description or should I include it in a separate section?
|
|
#
?
Apr 15, 2015 23:37
|
|
|
Richard Noggin posted:You shouldn't give a range. You state what you want. You may have a hard time pulling them up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 18:02
|
|
|
Captain Cool posted:All right, I have to ask the dumb question. How do I figure out what I want? Start here and filter according to your details: http://www.salary.com/ http://www.payscale.com/
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 19:45
|
|
|
Richard Noggin posted:I've been in the interview process for a few weeks now and am now starting to get these questions. I did a lot of research and I cannot find one compelling reason to EVER disclose your salary history. See this thread's first page, for example. Your current salary has absolutely no bearing on a new position - none, zero, zilch nada. The company I work for requires you put down your salary in your application (can't submit otherwise) and HR actually will ask you to confirm that number in the very first call they make to you. Is there really anyway around it? They also do a background check so I assume you can't just make up something. The question isn't really relevant to me anymore since I already work at the company but I was wondering if there was a feasible way to avoid disclosing your salary. bamhand fucked around with this message at 21:57 on Apr 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
Background checks don't reveal past wage rates, at least not in America.
|
|
#
?
Apr 16, 2015 23:09
|
|
|
Do employers disclose that info if they get contacted? I know they usually do the standard "this person has worked here since x date", do they also disclose salary? I feel like they have no reason not to right?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
bamhand posted:The company I work for requires you put down your salary in your application (can't submit otherwise) and HR actually will ask you to confirm that number in the very first call they make to you. Is there really anyway around it? They also do a background check so I assume you can't just make up something. The question isn't really relevant to me anymore since I already work at the company but I was wondering if there was a feasible way to avoid disclosing your salary. Enter 0 or 1, it'll be clear that's not the actual number and you can discuss it when HR calls you. There's no reason to tell a computer your entire bargaining position.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
bamhand posted:Do employers disclose that info if they get contacted? I know they usually do the standard "this person has worked here since x date", do they also disclose salary? I feel like they have no reason not to right? Generally, companies don't disclose salary and are not asked to by prospective employers. Anything above the bare minimum is a waste of time for the ex employer and they have no incentive to disclose. Fun game - call a friends old company and say you are with X company and checking dates/salary/comments. See how much info you get.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 03:36
|
|
|
I just submitted an online application for a position that would be perfect for me; however about 2 minutes after I submitted it, I got an auto-reply telling me that, based on my answer to the supplemental questions on the online app, I don't meet requirements (four+ years of supervising multiple part-time staffs as opposed to two years of a full time staff like they wanted, my undergraduate degree was not in information systems). I've already sent the contact person a well-thought-out email explaining my answers and how it wouldn't be an issue...should I have just lied and selected yes to those questions? I didn't want to lie but I definitely knew what answers they wanted, it just sucks not even getting the opportunity to interview because of something that's outweighed by all of my positive attributes and experience.
GobiasIndustries fucked around with this message at 04:01 on Apr 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 03:40
|
|
|
bamhand posted:Do employers disclose that info if they get contacted? I know they usually do the standard "this person has worked here since x date", do they also disclose salary? I feel like they have no reason not to right? Smart ones don't, they will just confirm your employment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 03:56
|
|
|
http://www.cleveland.com/tipoff/index.ssf/2015/04/sexism_or_lack_of_professional.html#incart_2box Wow.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 16:23
|
|
|
I have had a ton of interviews this week, and yesterday one of them made an offer ( )Of the places I've interviewed, it's maybe not my top choice, but it's the only one so far to give me a job (though another should get back to me very shortly and I have a good feeling that they will make an offer as well.) The offer from the first job wasn't an actual offer, it was just them letting me know that I got the job and they were waiting on HR to make me a final offer. What's the most tactful way to respond to say thank you and express my appreciation but let them know I am still waiting on another company to potentially make me an offer? Is it better to just not say anything and wait until they send me the concrete offer?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 18:41
|
|
|
Omne posted:http://www.cleveland.com/tipoff/index.ssf/2015/04/sexism_or_lack_of_professional.html#incart_2box Without even touching the sexism part, don't ever be late even if they know you're going to be. If you think you might not make your scheduled time, call to have it bumped back 30 minutes or some discrete amount of time. In my mind being late is a great way to make a bad first impression before you even make a first impression. As for me, I allegedly have an interview next week with my boss and probably his boss (and maybe even the next boss up) for a promotion they're trying to organize for me within our department. Any advice for that particular scenario? They want me to submit a resume and everything like it's my first time there. My boss also loves me (in work terms) and knows how valuable I am to the company, so I don't have to go out of my way to impress him but I may need to do so with the others.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 19:27
|
|
|
C-Euro posted:Without even touching the sexism part, don't ever be late even if they know you're going to be. If you think you might not make your scheduled time, call to have it bumped back 30 minutes or some discrete amount of time. In my mind being late is a great way to make a bad first impression before you even make a first impression. I had a guy show up 45 minutes late for an interview without calling ahead. We had paid over $1500 for a last minute plane ticket, hotel, and rental car to interview him. Nobody would meet with him when they found out he was 45 minutes late so it was the most awkward interview ever. I tore into the recruiter a bit about that one, so now everyone she sends me shows up 30 minutes early. Although not a deal breaker, it is annoying because when I schedule an 8:30 am Monday interview, it should send a pretty clear message that I want to respond to immediate needs before babysitting a candidate for 3 hours. C-Euro posted:As for me, I allegedly have an interview next week with my boss and probably his boss (and maybe even the next boss up) for a promotion they're trying to organize for me within our department. Any advice for that particular scenario? They want me to submit a resume and everything like it's my first time there. My boss also loves me (in work terms) and knows how valuable I am to the company, so I don't have to go out of my way to impress him but I may need to do so with the others.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 23:41
|
|
|
Dik Hz posted:I had a guy show up 45 minutes late for an interview without calling ahead. We had paid over $1500 for a last minute plane ticket, hotel, and rental car to interview him. Nobody would meet with him when they found out he was 45 minutes late so it was the most awkward interview ever. I tore into the recruiter a bit about that one, so now everyone she sends me shows up 30 minutes early. Although not a deal breaker, it is annoying because when I schedule an 8:30 am Monday interview, it should send a pretty clear message that I want to respond to immediate needs before babysitting a candidate for 3 hours. The bolded is silly. No job candidate can read your mind as to why you want to do something at some given time, they haven't worked with you or at your workplace before. That is not to say that being late is acceptable without good reason (and no regular traffic doesn't count), since you agreed to the time at the very least it is rude to not be on time. But you should never expect an outsider to divine why a certain time was chosen for their interview.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 01:22
|
|
|
MickeyFinn posted:The bolded is silly. No job candidate can read your mind as to why you want to do something at some given time, they haven't worked with you or at your workplace before. That is not to say that being late is acceptable without good reason (and no regular traffic doesn't count), since you agreed to the time at the very least it is rude to not be on time. But you should never expect an outsider to divine why a certain time was chosen for their interview. To make this crystal clear, if I schedule an interview for 8:30, I want you there at 8:30. Not 7:45, not 9:15, not 8:01. 8:30. This is not unreasonable. Dik Hz fucked around with this message at 01:38 on Apr 18, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 01:34
|
|
|
MickeyFinn posted:The bolded is silly. No job candidate can read your mind as to why you want to do something at some given time, they haven't worked with you or at your workplace before. That is not to say that being late is acceptable without good reason (and no regular traffic doesn't count), since you agreed to the time at the very least it is rude to not be on time. But you should never expect an outsider to divine why a certain time was chosen for their interview. hmm yes that's a very cool opinion... but I think if someone sets an appointing for 8:30 it does not, actually, take mind reading to understand that they want you there at 8:30, yes.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
Dik Hz posted:How about they just show up at the time of the interview? Showing up half an hour early is rude. Doubly so when they ambush me in the parking lot as I'm walking up to the front door of the building 45 minutes before the interview is scheduled to start. Zo posted:hmm yes that's a very cool opinion... but I think if someone sets an appointing for 8:30 it does not, actually, take mind reading to understand that they want you there at 8:30, yes. Wow, I bolded, underlined and italicized the key word in that post and you both still missed it. Too bad, I guess. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 03:01
|
|
|
MickeyFinn posted:Wow, I bolded, underlined and italicized the key word in that post and you both still missed it. Too bad, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 09:53
|
|
|
MickeyFinn posted:Wow, I bolded, underlined and italicized the key word in that post and you both still missed it. Too bad, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 10:20
|
|
|
Dik Hz posted:Nobody is arguing that it is acceptable to be late. If you can't understand why being really early to a job interview is annoying, just keep being you, I guess. And if you lack the social awareness to understand why someone would schedule an interview for 8:30 am Monday when the work day begins at 8:00 am, you should probably get out more. Now you are just crying for special snowflake status.  "Boo hoo, all strangers should know that 8:30 am on a Monday is when I'm done having a wank and need some attention from someone I don't know." Perhaps if your feelings are so easily hurt when some stranger doesn't know you well, you shouldn't be working with other people? I know plenty of people for whom an 8:30 am interview is (almost) mid-workday and some for whom an 8:30 am interview is still hours before they get up (especially on Monday) and they all work the same job at the same work place (and no they aren't on different shifts). Claiming some special status for any given time of day without telling someone who is prima facie unaware of either your work place schedule or your personal working schedule is stupid. Clearly, both the recruiter and the candidates she sends (and probably advises!) don't know that 8:30 am on Monday is a special time for you, because it gives you time "to respond to immediate needs before babysitting a candidate for 3 hours." Or you can continue complaining on the internet that they don't know your personal work schedule. I don't know, I'm clearly bad at people because I don't know what you do all day long.Because someone will read this post without reading my first post in response to Dik Hz, I will reiterate that failure to be on time for anything you agree to is at the very least rude and can have consequences because people don't like it, especially so for an interview.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
MickeyFinn posted:Now you are just crying for special snowflake status. Now, I'm honestly curious why your ranting so much now. What part of interview's at 8:30 am, work starts at 8:00 am, don't show up at 7:55 am is so hard to grasp?
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 21:34
|
|
|
Dik Hz posted:Calm down dude. Did I accidentally run over your cat or something? The candidates are made aware of the work schedule by the recruiter. If someone shows up early to the interview, they're usually trying to do you a favor. Maybe they want to have ample time to fill out paperwork in case you ask them to fill out an application or a reference sheet before the interview begins. Maybe you scheduled the 8:30 interview because even though work starts at 8:00, sometimes people show up a few minutes late. Maybe if those people are all there on time it might be better for everyone to get the interview out of the way first thing so other people can move on with their day. Maybe the 8:00 candidate cancelled, or is running late, and what would really be great for you is if you could get Mr. Early in and out and then there's actually room in your schedule when the 8:00 candidate walks in the door at 8:35. In short: try not to be such a colossal taint.
|
|
#
?
Apr 18, 2015 22:26
|
|
|
Dik Hz posted:Calm down dude. Did I accidentally run over your cat or something? The candidates are made aware of the work schedule by the recruiter. Edit: Since some people have missed this (including Zo, several times now), I should remind the reader that interviewees are expected to show up on time for their interviews. Now, with that in mind, read the following: I confess that I find your reaction to this problem (of people showing up early for interviews) fascinating. I don't feel like I am upset, nor do I think that my previous posts were rants, but I grant that it is hard to read tone in written text. At any rate, you still don't seem to understand my point, so let me start from the very beginning. There is incredible asymmetry in risk when showing up to an interview. Being late has far greater consequences than being early. You have admitted this yourself. Further, "late" is in the eye of the interviewer and there is a large variance in what late means for different interviewers. For example, I have known people for whom "15 minutes early is 5 minutes late." On top of that, even if the interviewee follows your advice and cases the joint the night before they still usually have no idea what awaits them when they walk through the front door. Maybe they have to fill out forms, maybe they have to wait for the front desk to painfully slowly take down their driver's license or maybe they can walk in the front door and walk straight in to your office without anyone stopping them. Further, they don't know if 8:30 is when they should check in or when they should be sitting in front of you and that difference can make or break an interviewee who shows up 2-5 minutes early as you want them to (same previous post). Given the asymmetry in risk and the uncertainty in information, interviewees have every incentive to show up early and significantly so. Now, you seem to be aware of the asymmetry in risk, but clearly don't understand it because you have bemoaned the consequences in this thread twice. Nonetheless, in dealing with interviewees showing up early (evidently this has been going on since before September of last year) you have a number of options that come immediately to my mind: (1) Do the work you claim you really have to do and see them at the appointed time of 8:30 am. People show up early to appointments of all kinds and patiently wait in doctor's offices, dentist's offices, restaurants, barber shops, mechanics and all sorts of other places. If you really do have work to do before conducting an interview, do it! This method has the added benefit of being really easy. (2) Reduce the asymmetry in the risk to interviewees by spending an hour throwing together an introduction sheet telling them where they can park, what the interview schedule will be like: when you check in at 8:30 am, you'll have to fill out this thing and do that and then we'll sit down 15 minutes later. This option may not work because the asymmetry in risk is REALLY high, but it might save your Monday morning every once and a while. (3) Assume that everyone should know what your schedule is like, what the process at your company is like and how they can be accommodate those. When they fail to do so, complain about it on the internet. (4) Stop scheduling interviews at 8:30 am. This one is also really simple. You have clearly chosen option 3. Finally, my point is that this is the worst possible way to address the problem of interviewees showing up too early, not only is it clearly not effective at getting the outcome you want, it is also the stupidest because it assumes that the interviewee has knowledge that they extremely unlikely to have and that even if they do, they'll act on it contra to a very large asymmetry in risk coupled with uncertainty in information. Does that clear things up? MickeyFinn fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Apr 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 00:07
|
|
|
Wtf is this poo poo. For an interview: 1.Show up on at appointment time or a few minutes early. 2. Call and say if you'll be late as soon as possible. That's it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
MickeyFinn posted:I confess that I find your reaction to this problem (of people showing up early for interviews) fascinating. I don't feel like I am upset, nor do I think that my previous posts were rants, but I grant that it is hard to read tone in written text. At any rate, you still don't seem to understand my point, so let me start from the very beginning. Ooor the interviewee could just show up on time. Are you really so slow that you couldn't conjure up that scenario? N.N. Ashe posted:Wtf is this poo poo. nah that's not gonna work, I must show up an hour early and expect to be babysat - a particularly dumb goon
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 02:16
|
|
|
MickeyFinn posted:I confess that I find your reaction to this problem (of people showing up early for interviews) fascinating. I don't feel like I am upset, nor do I think that my previous posts were rants, but I grant that it is hard to read tone in written text. At any rate, you still don't seem to understand my point, so let me start from the very beginning.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
Vulture Culture posted:I don't want to dogpile, but honestly, you come across like a pretty miserable person to work with. You clearly do not handle interpersonal situations well. You become personally offended at deviations from the script you have written. You are incapable of getting the candidate a cup of coffee and letting them sit in a waiting room for 30 minutes because you are incapable of telling a person "no" and instead you passive-aggressively accommodate them and hope they've learned the error of their ways. You have communicated that the only thing that makes you more uncomfortable than "babysitting" a candidate for thirty minutes is not babysitting a candidate for thirty minutes. They aren't going to rifle through your belongings and make off with your Important Company Secrets when you get up to take your 8:15 dump. Also, don't overthink it. If I schedule an interview at 8:30, it's because I want the person there at 8:30. I'm not playing elaborate mindgames and discounting interviewees that show up on time. I work in a stand alone R&D building. Guests must be escorted at all times.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 14:26
|
|
|
MickeyFinn posted:I confess that I find your reaction to this problem (of people showing up early for interviews) fascinating. I don't feel like I am upset, nor do I think that my previous posts were rants, but I grant that it is hard to read tone in written text. At any rate, you still don't seem to understand my point, so let me start from the very beginning. As for your other options: 1. As I said above, guests have to be escorted (which the recruiter knows) in our facility. 2. I already give them all this information when scheduling the interview. It would look sloppy and unprofessional to hand them a make-work worksheet the first thing in through the door. I'm interviewing PhD's, not fry cooks. 4. Monday morning is a very convenient time for the interviewees, who are usually flying in from other parts of the country. By having the interview on a Monday morning, they only have to miss one day of work at their current jobs. As for 3., the reason I'm posting on the internet about is because this is an advice subforum. There's a pretty large percentage of hiring managers that are annoyed by candidates that show up really early for interviews. You go on-and-on about game theory and asymmetry, but you'll never get penalized for showing up at the scheduled time. Honestly, I'm a little weirded out that you went through my post history and are making citations and poo poo. Do you really not understand why showing up really early is a bad thing? It's basic social etiquette. Also, why is waiting in the nearest coffee shop until 5-10 minutes before the interview not your best possible solution? Finally, why are you so mad? MickeyFinn posted:Now you are just crying for special snowflake status. "Boo hoo, all strangers should know that 8:30 am on a Monday is when I'm done having a wank and need some attention from someone I don't know." Perhaps if your feelings are so easily hurt when some stranger doesn't know you well, you shouldn't be working with other people?
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 14:46
|
|
|
This is ridiculous. If I schedule an interview at 8:30 I expect to get a call from the receptionist at 8:25 or so saying that the candidate is in the lobby. I expect the candidate to have enough of a sense of decorum not to show up too early and if they do, to sit and wait patiently in their car. This isn't a difficult concept.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 15:20
|
|
|
I thought this might happen because I did not reiterate in that particular post that interview candidates should be on time to an interview. On the other hand, you should not be shocked or put out when they show up early for the aforementioned reasons. I see the problem here, you lot are approaching this discussion as if it is about the candidates whereas I am approaching it as if it is about the interviewer (or specifically Dik Hz). Anyway, it is clear you aren't interested in discussing it anymore, so I'll leave this with one more comment:Dik Hz posted:Honestly, I'm a little weirded out that you went through my post history and are making citations and poo poo. Do you really not understand why showing up really early is a bad thing? It's basic social etiquette. Also, why is waiting in the nearest coffee shop until 5-10 minutes before the interview not your best possible solution? I recognize your avatar and remembered that you had complained about this before when you brought it up again.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 16:07
|
|
|
In the corporate thread we've been talking a bit about entry-level vs. upper-level positions, and I was wondering how much work experience/credibility do you need to no longer be confined to entry-level stuff? I've been at my entry-level job (laboratory-based) for a year and a half now, with three years of grad school before that. I'm interviewing next week for a promotion at work where, if I get it, my title will be something along the lines of "Department Lead". While it's not a supervisor role I feel like that title, along with how much I accomplished here in 18 months, would be enough where I could be considered for an associate- or mid-level role elsewhere. I ask because my fiancee and I are moving next month and I'll have to re-apply for work in our new city, and I would like to not have to start at the very bottom again and I'm hyping myself up that getting promoted here will give me a leg up when applying for new jobs. Do you think having a promotion on my resume, especially after a relatively short time in the workforce, will give me a shot at those non-entry jobs, or does only having 1.5 years working experience mean I'm stuck there until I get a few more years under my belt? C-Euro fucked around with this message at 21:27 on Apr 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
It's hard not to remember someone being so arbitrarily angry about interviewees not being able to mind read. I'm just glad it's you posting bad opinions again and again rather than that being an actual prevalent mindset in the world.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
I was 10 minutes late for an interview and didn't acknowledge it at all. Was super bummed afterwards about the tardiness, however they gave me an offer the next week. What mattered was I was exactly what they wanted in a candidate and could talk about myself and accomplishments in detail while keeping them engaged.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
C-Euro posted:In the corporate thread we've been talking a bit about entry-level vs. upper-level positions, and I was wondering how much work experience/credibility do you need to no longer be confined to entry-level stuff? Anecdotally, I have less than a year in my entry-level analyst role in a tangential field of study (market research) and am currently in the last stages of the hiring process for a Senior Analyst role at one company and an Associate (consultant) role at another company, both in my actual field of study (I/O Psychology). Though I did applied work in my field during grad school, so that may be playing a part in this.
|
|
#
?
Apr 19, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
Anachronist posted:It's hard not to remember someone being so arbitrarily angry about interviewees not being able to mind read. I'm just glad it's you posting bad opinions again and again rather than that being an actual prevalent mindset in the world.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 12:29
|
|
|
So I have a job interview tomorrow in a field I don't really have any experience in. It's relatively entry level and they have to know from my resume and cover letter that I don't have any specialized experience in the field they're in. I should be upfront about that, yeah? Like, I don't have specific experience in this field, but here's the awesome experience I do have and this is why it'd be applicable, and this is why I'm interested in working here. I really just need to find a way to ask what about my resume stood out to them (without implying I'm totally under-qualified) and then emphasize that. Xandu fucked around with this message at 00:08 on Apr 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2015 00:03
|
|
|
Xandu posted:
I don't think you should put a bad foot forward if you do have to. Be prepared if they bring it up, but don't if you can just avoid it. I mean you already stood out enough to get in the door, it's probably not an issue. If you're still hesitant, just ask try to ask the day to day ops & what are you looking for in the ideal candidate early.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2015 02:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 22:42 |
|
|
Xandu posted:So I have a job interview tomorrow in a field I don't really have any experience in. It's relatively entry level and they have to know from my resume and cover letter that I don't have any specialized experience in the field they're in. I was part of the hiring process for a lot of people in this scenario (engineers applying for patent positions) and you're right, they already know exactly how unexperienced you are in that field. It really doesn't matter, and you don't have to bring it up explicitly. Just come across as a flexible, fast learner who has interest in the new field. Compared to an experienced hire, there's a lot more human interaction (training) involved so our biggest goal was to avoid hiring shitlords basically.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2015 02:55
|
|