If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Neatorama)   Potential employer goes all schoolteacher on applicant's cover letter   (neatorama.com) divider line 170
    More: Amusing, cover letters, NeatoShop, job searches, employees  
•       •       •

9467 clicks; posted to Business » on 27 Oct 2012 at 11:10 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



170 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2012-10-27 07:54:58 AM
The applicant should take that critique to heart and fix her cover letter.
 
she should also consider herself lucky she didn't land a job working with a pedantic prick.
 
2012-10-27 07:58:14 AM
That employer doesn't have a clam attitude.
 
433 [TotalFark]
2012-10-27 07:58:49 AM
It's a shame they don't teach "real world shiat" in grade school. Part of it would have been fixed just by paying attention in grammar/English class. The resume reeks of a resume fluffer that gave pointers but no specifics.
 
2012-10-27 08:25:31 AM

Mentat: That employer doesn't have a clam attitude.


clam?

*reads letter*

oh my. I was not prepaird for that.
 
2012-10-27 08:57:40 AM
I don't see why this guy should jump on someone applying for a bookkeeper position like that. That's one position where you don't want someone smart.
 
2012-10-27 08:58:19 AM
Give the poor girl a break. She was just trying to communicate how well she communicates with her excellent communication skills.

/communicate
 
2012-10-27 09:21:36 AM
At least she knows the potential employer read her application.
 
2012-10-27 09:22:29 AM
Must be nice to be an HR person in this job market and still have that much free time to mark up an application that you were just going to trash anyway.
 
2012-10-27 10:42:53 AM
that cover letter was so f*cked up I thought I was reading a Fark headline.
 
2012-10-27 11:17:15 AM

SmackLT: The applicant should take that critique to heart and fix her cover letter.
 
she should also consider herself lucky she didn't land a job working with a pedantic prick.


Dragging people kicking and screaming into the communication norms of civilized society is not the same as being pedantic.
 
2012-10-27 11:27:01 AM
What a dick.
 
2012-10-27 11:36:18 AM

SmackLT: The applicant should take that critique to heart and fix her cover letter.
 
she should also consider herself lucky she didn't land a job working with a pedantic prick.


Came to say this.
 
2012-10-27 11:38:10 AM

SmackLT: she should also consider herself lucky she didn't land a job working with a pedantic prick.


Marcus Aurelius: Must be nice to be an HR person in this job market and still have that much free time to mark up an application that you were just going to trash anyway.


Dear Job Seeker,

Thank you for taking a lot of time to write up a cover letter, resume, and reference sheet. I'm sure that you're really desperate for a stable job and currently are putting in a lot and effort into creating a lot of paperwork designed to give me an overview of your skills and personality without actually having to meet you. Thank you for allowing me this so I can throw your ego out the window.

You see, I can tell several things about you via your cover letter. First, it doesn't 'grab' me at all. Therefore, it goes in the trash. I'm sure you put a lot of hard work into it, which allows me the opportunity to gut your education. Since you don't speak proper English or have enough money to hire a proofreader, this automatically means you're a subpar piece of shiat I can take glee ripping on. And let's be honest, all of this is nonsense, isn't it? I'm just going to hire someone I know and skip the illusion that moving upward has anything to do with skill or talent. No, it is just a popularity contest that favors the lucky few that either learn quickly, happen to make me like them immediately, or follow an arbitrary set of rules designed to see just how desperate you are for a job.

It's pretty cruel, isn't it? I mean, you're just putting yourself out there for work so you can eat and have some sort of standard of living, and I'm using my power to rip you apart for no other reason than I can. Your cover letter may look like shiat, but that could be a variety of things like poor education (which our company should help pay for via taxes, since we have to hire from that population) to a few honest mistakes that any human being can make. But you know what? Too bad. You should be honored to work for our company and we only take the best...or those we know. That makes me job a lot easier, so I don't really have to work.

In short, thanks for applying. Take heart that you're one of the five people I decided to write a response letter to. I have about four hundred resumes on my desk that I'm just going to throw away without any sort of answer or response at all. Well, I might get around to bulk emailing a few months after the fact, but that's just business, isn't it? Anyway, good luck with your job search. I'm sure you'll recover slowly from my pointless and cruel critique during this difficult and scary time and go right back out to get kicked in the teeth again. See how a simple bit of encouragement just masks how malicious and vile I'm being? That's true professionalism.

If you have any questions, please contact me at this number nobody ever checks.

Sincerely,

Human Resources Manager

P.S. - I've already put your name out to our security team in case you want to put a bullet through my useless paper-shoving head.
 
2012-10-27 11:38:20 AM
i hate the your email service isn't the most impressive one at the moment so use a more popular one douchebags.
 
2012-10-27 11:45:35 AM
Call the employer a dick, sure, but that cover letter was completely atrocious. I hope he sent it with corrections back to her, because chances are good that she's using that cover letter as a template for all her applications.  Harsh, but I think it's kinder to give a lesson then trash the application and let the applicant carry on wondering why they're not getting any calls back whatsoever.
 
2012-10-27 11:56:43 AM
I missed out on a job because of a misspelling on my résumé. What sucks is I didn't apply for the job but they pulled my résumé from their résumé editor and attached it to the job without me ever submitting for it. The resume was only about 85% complete but i chose the save and edit later option and the first thing monday morning HR pulled the resume. They called me in for the interview and for ten minutes we talked about that misspelling and other résumé quirks and the importance of "attention to detail".
 
2012-10-27 12:00:34 PM

doyner: SmackLT: The applicant should take that critique to heart and fix her cover letter.
 
she should also consider herself lucky she didn't land a job working with a pedantic prick.

Dragging people kicking and screaming into the communication norms of civilized society is not the same as being pedantic.


telling someone that 110% isnt possible is being a pedantic prick. colloquialisms and common phrases are usually given free license to get their point across by resume reviewers who aren't pedantic pricks.

but at least much of the rest of it was useful for her to improve on the resume.
 
2012-10-27 12:01:18 PM

MaxSupernova: I missed out on a job because of a misspelling on my résumé. What sucks is I didn't apply for the job but they pulled my résumé from their résumé editor and attached it to the job without me ever submitting for it. The resume was only about 85% complete but i chose the save and edit later option and the first thing monday morning HR pulled the resume. They called me in for the interview and for ten minutes we talked about that misspelling and other résumé quirks and the importance of "attention to detail".


That's not the same as intentionally submitting that piece of garbage. Also, why would you keep a draft in an active file system?
 
2012-10-27 12:03:32 PM

error 303: What a dick.


Not disagreeing, but at the same time this person's corrections might help get that applicant a job faster.

Tough love is tough.
 
2012-10-27 12:04:09 PM

The Flexecutioner: doyner: SmackLT: The applicant should take that critique to heart and fix her cover letter.
 
she should also consider herself lucky she didn't land a job working with a pedantic prick.

Dragging people kicking and screaming into the communication norms of civilized society is not the same as being pedantic.

telling someone that 110% isnt possible is being a pedantic prick. colloquialisms and common phrases are usually given free license to get their point across by resume reviewers who aren't pedantic pricks.


Fine. In context, however, it doesn't help.
 
2012-10-27 12:06:24 PM

doyner: MaxSupernova: I missed out on a job because of a misspelling on my résumé. What sucks is I didn't apply for the job but they pulled my résumé from their résumé editor and attached it to the job without me ever submitting for it. The resume was only about 85% complete but i chose the save and edit later option and the first thing monday morning HR pulled the resume. They called me in for the interview and for ten minutes we talked about that misspelling and other résumé quirks and the importance of "attention to detail".

That's not the same as intentionally submitting that piece of garbage. Also, why would you keep a draft in an active file system?


You couldn't attach a word doc so it forced you to use their editor. I've never repeated that mistake again. That was my first time ever really looking for work so I was not overly savvy in the ways of hr.
 
2012-10-27 12:10:35 PM

LooseLips: Call the employer a dick, sure, but that cover letter was completely atrocious. I hope he sent it with corrections back to her, because chances are good that she's using that cover letter as a template for all her applications.  Harsh, but I think it's kinder to give a lesson then trash the application and let the applicant carry on wondering why they're not getting any calls back whatsoever.


True.

I would point out that diction and composition are really hard things to teach, IMHO.

/ still, a simple spell checking program would have partially cleaned up that cover letter...
 
2012-10-27 12:14:15 PM
KEEP CLAM

and

CARRY ON
 
2012-10-27 12:16:49 PM

starlost: i hate the your email service isn't the most impressive one at the moment so use a more popular one douchebags.


I think I might rip on the applicant's username no matter what domain is hiding under the ink, unless her last name actually is "Stylist" (and possibly even then).

That said, the blogger fails as a pedant as well. He has a number of valid points, to be sure, but look towards the end:

... in a successful organized and well-run company.

He corrects that to:

... in a successfully organized and well-run company.

I'm reasonably confident the applicant doesn't want to say (and he doesn't want to hear) that the company is successfully organized; the company is successful and it is organized. (Hopefully it is both of those, at least.) That is, the real correction should be to:

... in a successful, organized, and well-run company.
 
2012-10-27 12:23:06 PM

Araltaln: starlost: i hate the your email service isn't the most impressive one at the moment so use a more popular one douchebags.

I think I might rip on the applicant's username no matter what domain is hiding under the ink, unless her last name actually is "Stylist" (and possibly even then).

That said, the blogger fails as a pedant as well. He has a number of valid points, to be sure, but look towards the end:

... in a successful organized and well-run company.

He corrects that to:

... in a successfully organized and well-run company.

I'm reasonably confident the applicant doesn't want to say (and he doesn't want to hear) that the company is successfully organized; the company is successful and it is organized. (Hopefully it is both of those, at least.) That is, the real correction should be to:

... in a successful, organized, and well-run company.


Sure, if you're one of those Oxford comma heathens!
 
2012-10-27 12:42:39 PM
I don't get the 'clams have attitudes?' correction. Nowhere in the cover letter is "calm" misspelled.
 
2012-10-27 12:44:10 PM
Oh wait, I see it now. It looked like that criticism was connected to the "is" directly underneath the typo.

The "employer" really needs to be a little bit more thorough if he's going to bother being that pedantic in the first place.
 
2012-10-27 12:44:47 PM
That was a pretty bad cover letter, but the person who took the time to correct it and post it on a public forum of all places is a completely insecure prick.

Besides some of the edits aren't even necessarily warranted
- '110%' -- as much as I agree with the editor that this term irritates me and makes no sense, most of us understand it to be a common colloquial term
- 'Meeting deadlines takes care of this' -- actually no, I've worked with tons of people who meet deadlines but don't thoroughly complete tasks (as the applicant asserts)

As a whole the whole letter sounds pretty amateurish though -- no debate there.
 
2012-10-27 12:50:19 PM
At least he corrected it fairly decently. That is better than I seen from most departments. When correcting employee handbooks and sales team papers, I am often horrified at the basic grammar errors and spelling errors. I am not the best writer in the world, and my grammar is pretty atrocious so it pretty bad when I am cringing at stuff not making sense.
 
2012-10-27 12:51:50 PM
Sheesh, there's a lot of defensiveness in this thread I wasn't expecting. It's just somebody posting a terrible cover-letter. Why does this aggravate so many people while PeopleOfWalmart doesn't?
 
2012-10-27 01:18:40 PM

SmackLT: she should also consider herself lucky she didn't land a job working with a pedantic prick.


Picky employers = job security.
 
2012-10-27 01:21:02 PM

Mister Peejay: SmackLT: she should also consider herself lucky she didn't land a job working with a pedantic prick.

Picky employers = job security.


and hair trigger firings if you arent perfect enough.
 
2012-10-27 01:24:30 PM
So he wasted his company time doing something for no money or no profitable purpose?
 
2012-10-27 01:26:00 PM
Remember folks, people studying Liberal Arts are wasting their time.
 
2012-10-27 01:29:45 PM

Guntram Shatterhand: Dear Job Seeker,

Thank you for taking a lot of time to write up a cover letter, resume, and reference sheet. I'm sure that you're really desperate for a stable job and currently are putting in a lot and effort into creating a lot of paperwork designed to give me an overview of your skills and personality without actually having to meet you. Thank you for allowing me this so I can throw your ego out the window.

You see, I can tell several things about you via your cover letter. First, it doesn't 'grab' me at all. Therefore, it goes in the trash. I'm sure you put a lot of hard work into it, which allows me the opportunity to gut your education. Since you don't speak proper English or have enough money to hire a proofreader, this automatically means you're a subpar piece of shiat I can take glee ripping on. And let's be honest, all of this is nonsense, isn't it? I'm just going to hire someone I know and skip the illusion that moving upward has anything to do with skill or talent. No, it is just a popularity contest that favors the lucky few that either learn quickly, happen to make me like them immediately, or follow an arbitrary set of rules designed to see just how desperate you are for a job.

It's pretty cruel, isn't it? I mean, you're just putting yourself out there for work so you can eat and have some sort of standard of living, and I'm using my power to rip you apart for no other reason than I can. Your cover letter may look like shiat, but that could be a variety of things like poor education (which our company should help pay for via taxes, since we have to hire from that population) to a few honest mistakes that any human being can make. But you know what? Too bad. You should be honored to work for our company and we only take the best...or those we know. That makes me job a lot easier, so I don't really have to work.

In short, thanks for applying. Take heart that you're one of the five people I decided to write a response letter t ...



Please don't write as you'd speak. Writing a letter is a different skill than stringing together a bunch of sentences one after another.
 
2012-10-27 01:32:32 PM
He bashes the 110% remark and gives a pass to "I work great as a team and work very well independently as well." Ha-rumph.

Is it pedantic to critique a critique?
 
2012-10-27 01:33:51 PM
I work well as a team and work very well independently as well.

I work well in a team and work very well independently.

Missed that one, didn't you, Mister Language Person? Dock yourself ten Superiority points.
 
2012-10-27 01:40:05 PM
As an employer I see far too many resumes and applications with bad spelling and sub-par writing skills. My feeling is that the applicant will approach my business with the same lax attitude as their schooling and so I file them under "No."
 
2012-10-27 01:40:08 PM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Sheesh, there's a lot of defensiveness in this thread I wasn't expecting. It's just somebody posting a terrible cover-letter. Why does this aggravate so many people while PeopleOfWalmart doesn't?


I don't think it's defensiveness, it's people reacting to the public humiliation of another person and general assholeishness of the guy. Notice the "get a real email address" at the top? That's not useful criticism, that's being somebody who inflicts pain for sport.
 
2012-10-27 01:47:07 PM
 
2012-10-27 01:50:10 PM
I can sympathize with the recruiter/HR person here. I am on my company's recruiting team and have to deal with college kids graduating and looking for a position at our firm. Recently we had on-campus interviews and while fliipping through the resumes, one stood out because he had also penned a cover letter expressing his excitement for potentially coming to work for our company, and made several specific references that indicated he may have done some research about us.

During the interview I asked what should have been a softball obvious question. He had stated that (my company) had risen head and shoulders above the competition with respect to our capabilities in the industry. My question to him was "who was our competition?". I received a total deer-in-headlights response as he couldn't name one other company that he could've been considered competition.

Simple lesson....be prepared to back up your statements in an interview
 
2012-10-27 01:54:27 PM
Meanwhile, a good portion of resumes are processed by computer programs these days that do not give a crap about spelling or grammar, so long as a the proper keywords are present.

Job seekers need to be smart about their applications. Small business? Use a tailored resume. Recruiter or large company? Send a "kitchen" sink resumes with short sentences and the right keywords sprinkled throughout - forget the cover letter no one will read it.
 
2012-10-27 02:08:02 PM
"I am eager to be a potential employee [asasit] at your company."

Good thing this person is eager to be a "potential employee" cause with a crap cover letter like the one he sent for this job opening he certainly isn't going to be an "actual employee."
 
2012-10-27 02:55:25 PM
Dear Mr. Mynameisinthead

You are absolutely correct that my writing skills are, well, mediocre. So my texts need to be proofread, which is usually done by a friend of mine, who happens to work for your company. But this person told me that he/she is currently very busy, because his/her boss "doesn't get shiat done". This "insufferable pedantic douche" - his/her words - prefers to deal with insignificant trivia. So he/she suggested to send my unedited application to you and - tadaa - I now work for company XYZ, where I earn 20 percent more and experience a friendly and loyal atmosphere. Thanks for your proofreading efforts to get me this job.

PS. My friend in the company is the person who also spits in your lunchbag, although he/she thinks not to be the only one.

Sincerely...
 
2012-10-27 03:03:00 PM

The Flexecutioner: Mister Peejay: SmackLT: she should also consider herself lucky she didn't land a job working with a pedantic prick.

Picky employers = job security.

and hair trigger firings if you arent perfect enough.


Well, maybe. I've been with my company for close to eight years now. Before they hired me, there were something like 10 people in my position in the previous year.

I figure, they know how hard it is to find someone who meets their standards of anal-retentiveness. Which is fine by me, because I also can't stand working for companies who have low standards.
 
2012-10-27 03:05:15 PM

HempHead: Remember folks, people studying Liberal Arts are wasting their time.


Maybe not "Liberal Arts" in the 17th Century Prussian Hosiery Major kind of way, but DAMN, engineers have got nothing on actual artists for horrible grammar and spelling.
 
2012-10-27 03:37:29 PM
did he/she correct this and post it online to feel superior or was this done and handed back to the applicant as a way to help them.
 
2012-10-27 03:41:21 PM

Mentat: That employer doesn't have a clam attitude.


i18.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-27 03:53:27 PM
While I hate most HR people as a rule, I have to side with them as far as a zero tolerance policy on the paperwork. You as the applicant have all the time in the world to refine and perfect the resume, cover letter, and any other application-related forms. You have time to check and double-check everything, to give it your best shot. Just as you hopefully would execute your tasks, should I hire you.

To then submit some crap with bad spelling and grammar shows you are not qualified or didn't give a shiat. If I'm hiring, there are many applicants out there to choose from in a down economy: I can afford to be exacting and demanding. I will choose the person who made the extra effort.

What I find striking in all FARK threads on this topic is the number of respondents who are infuriated by this policy out of all normal proportion. I don't know why this seems so unfair and monstrous to them, but I have a theory. My theory is the whiners are younger and over-entitled, and were never held to high standards of personal performance in any tasks by their parents, (with consequences for failure) as they grew up.

Not every job requires hyper precision, all the time. However, a lot of them do. You become the company's public face to the world; your skills, or lack thereof, reflect on the company and can directly impact sales.

So "good enough" or "sort of done" or "but I tried", is NOT good enough in the real world. If your parents never made you do a task over to get it right, and just let you skate with half-assed efforts all thru your youth, well, they might have been trying to be nice to you, but they did you no favors.

I'm saying this as a flaming liberal: I don't know your back story. Your job as the applicant is to sell me on why you are the best fit for the opening and what your best qualities are. If you are in fact not well-educated in spelling and grammar, that's on you. That's something you should work on to improve, and don't tell me sad stories about privation and lack of opportunity. Go fix your farking problem. I meet people all the time that have worked their way up from circumstances I can't imagine myself overcoming. They don't make excuses, they make an effort. They work at their problem until they beat it, and they are not too proud to ask for help if they need it. There are free resources, there is the public library, there are reading and literacy programs you can sign up for in just about every town, there are free resources online... I mean, you can turn on a free farking spell-checker with one click. If you can't be bothered to make that little bit of effort, you're not going to work out on the job, anywhere.

It is not dickish HR people or employers that make it a problem: it is an applicant that gives less than their best and expects everyone to meet them half-way, that's that problem. If I want to go out on a first date, I bathe and shave and brush my teeth and put on the best clothes I own. If I go on a date unwashed, with bad breath, in shlumpy, dirty clothes, and the girl says we're done, I don't blame the girl for not lowering her standards, looking beyond the externals and automatically recognizing the supposed awesomeness that is the Inner Me. My presentation has shown her that I didn't think she was worth the effort of courting and thus learning more about me, and that my ego was unable to let me try harder.
 
2012-10-27 03:54:16 PM

The My Little Pony Killer: I don't get the 'clams have attitudes?' correction. Nowhere in the cover letter is "calm" misspelled.


Sure it is, which is why he made that comment. Take a look at the fifth bullet point, fourth word.
 
2012-10-27 03:55:44 PM

windowseat: As an employer I see far too many resumes and applications with bad spelling and sub-par writing skills. My feeling is that the applicant will approach my business with the same lax attitude as their schooling and so I file them under "No."


Pretty much this. If you can't even be bothered to proofread your own resume, you won't be bothered to do a thorough, detailed job at work. Spelling and grammar mistakes are the easiest way to filter resumes.
 
2012-10-27 03:57:53 PM

error 303: What a dick.


I agree -- submitting a cover letter riddled with so many pathetic errors shows a total lack of respect for the audience(s) she is writing to.
 
2012-10-27 04:03:14 PM

Mister Peejay: HempHead: Remember folks, people studying Liberal Arts are wasting their time.

Maybe not "Liberal Arts" in the 17th Century Prussian Hosiery Major kind of way, but DAMN, engineers have got nothing on actual artists for horrible grammar and spelling.


You don't get it. They're obviously subverting the comma-normative paradigm of the grammatical hegemony.
 
2012-10-27 04:15:16 PM

SCUBA_Archer: I can sympathize with the recruiter/HR person here. I am on my company's recruiting team and have to deal with college kids graduating and looking for a position at our firm. Recently we had on-campus interviews and while fliipping through the resumes, one stood out because he had also penned a cover letter expressing his excitement for potentially coming to work for our company, and made several specific references that indicated he may have done some research about us.

During the interview I asked what should have been a softball obvious question. He had stated that (my company) had risen head and shoulders above the competition with respect to our capabilities in the industry. My question to him was "who was our competition?". I received a total deer-in-headlights response as he couldn't name one other company that he could've been considered competition.

Simple lesson....be prepared to back up your statements in an interview


Oof, I've done that recently. I was averaging two interviews a day and got my research notes mixed up. There's an odd calculus to job hunting about how much effort a position or applicant is worth since so many of them don't pan out. It's like speed dating for money rather than sex. And while you, personally, might not see the equivalence on the hiring side because you're probably good about it, I've had more than one interview where the hiring manager asked some confusing questions about experience I never claimed I had only to have them go, "Oh God, I have the wrong resume here, that's our next interviewee." At which point I have to hand them my copy knowing full well who they're more interested in talking to.

Anyway, I made a remark about competition and couldn't remember if Competitor X was this company's competitor or the next interview's. So I decided to admit I put my foot in my mouth to the interviewer.

I consoled myself afterward by saying this position was not my number one pick and was a significant career change anyway so therefore was a longshot. Those are sour grapes anyway.

Oddly enough, my number one pick ended up having some major flaws that I found out about by offering a smoker my lighter after the interview (I don't smoke. Protip: always carry a lighter anyway and always collect references about your potential employer!). The company I flubbed with ended up allowing both of us to smooth things over with a second interview and extended a great offer, which I accepted. I start work with them on Monday.

/Job hunting often makes about as much sense as I Ching
//Don't be so hard on the young'uns.
 
2012-10-27 04:16:55 PM

The Flexecutioner: doyner: SmackLT: The applicant should take that critique to heart and fix her cover letter.
 
she should also consider herself lucky she didn't land a job working with a pedantic prick.

Dragging people kicking and screaming into the communication norms of civilized society is not the same as being pedantic.

telling someone that 110% isnt possible is being a pedantic prick. colloquialisms and common phrases are usually given free license to get their point across by resume reviewers who aren't pedantic pricks.

but at least much of the rest of it was useful for her to improve on the resume.


No. If you are applying to any job that requires a resume, your resume needs to look professional. If someone will be dealing with clients in any way, and they write that horribly, they could possibly stop clients from wanting to work with the company.
If I'm starting to do business with someone and their correspondence uses such terrible, repetitive, and vague language, or it's full of buzzwords that tell me absolutely nothing, I'm likely to look for another business partner. 

/double and triple checked this post
//pedantic
 
2012-10-27 04:20:13 PM

LooseLips: Call the employer a dick, sure, but that cover letter was completely atrocious. I hope he sent it with corrections back to her, because chances are good that she's using that cover letter as a template for all her applications.  Harsh, but I think it's kinder to give a lesson then trash the application and let the applicant carry on wondering why they're not getting any calls back whatsoever.


THIS.

Unless feedback was absorbed, she's sucking at the teat of the unemployment and/or welfare office on our dime.
 
2012-10-27 04:21:34 PM
Trussed knot yore spel chequer.
 
2012-10-27 04:31:05 PM
An applicant for a bookkeeper's position should submit a set of books that balance perfectly while leaving a few thousand dollars to split with the supervisor.
 
2012-10-27 04:43:53 PM
WTF is a bookkeeper anyways, like an accountant? Seems like a position where attention to detail might be important.
 
2012-10-27 04:51:05 PM

YouSirAreAMaroon: WTF is a bookkeeper anyways, like an accountant?


If only there were some online reposit-- oh farkkit just click this Link.
 
2012-10-27 04:51:45 PM

YouSirAreAMaroon: WTF is a bookkeeper anyways, like an accountant? Seems like a position where attention to detail might be important.


The bookkeeper is the one without a college degree who types all the numbers in. The accountant is the one that looks at it and says "This company's farked".
 
2012-10-27 04:58:31 PM
The first thing I noticed was that bit of arrant nonsense up with which Winston Churchill allegedly would not put. "Please consider me as an employee to fill the position you are currently hiring for." Yes, the preposition is necessary -- you're hiring people, not a position. ("As an employee" could go.)

/Winston Churchill didn't really say all the things he said.
//Yogi Berra did in fact say that.
 
2012-10-27 05:20:44 PM
A clam attitude means you can keep your mouth shut if you're told to keep it shut. That a good quality for a bookkeeper.
 
2012-10-27 05:22:10 PM
Is writing a cover letter even necessary? I know most on-line application forms have a spot for a cover letter but in my experience most companies use software to filter out 80% of the applications before they even get to an HR person. At that point the HR person is looking at work and education history and doesn't want to spend three minutes going through a cover letter that is likely a re-phrasing of the resume.

/2cents
 
2012-10-27 05:22:29 PM

LooseLips: Call the employer a dick, sure, but that cover letter was completely atrocious. I hope he sent it with corrections back to her, because chances are good that she's using that cover letter as a template for all her applications.  Harsh, but I think it's kinder to give a lesson then trash the application and let the applicant carry on wondering why they're not getting any calls back whatsoever.


Oh, so much THIS.

And for all you idiots out there that see him/her as being a jerk for doing it, consider this:
What's worse: To have the applicant's mistakes pointed out with hope he/she will correct them OR to just ignore the letter and let the applicant keep failing in his/her pursuit of gainful employment?

Her letter reminds me of ads from people trying to sell their cars: It's 'TAURUS' no 'Torus' Terrus' or 'Tearus'.

It's 'CHEVY' not 'Shevy', 'Cheby' or 'Cheavy'. It's 'SUBURU' not 'Sueberu', 'Subarru' or 'Seubero'

I could go on.

When someone can't even spell the brand name of their car how can they be trusted to be honest about its condition?
 
2012-10-27 05:35:55 PM

douchebag/hater: LooseLips: Call the employer a dick, sure, but that cover letter was completely atrocious. I hope he sent it with corrections back to her, because chances are good that she's using that cover letter as a template for all her applications.  Harsh, but I think it's kinder to give a lesson then trash the application and let the applicant carry on wondering why they're not getting any calls back whatsoever.

Oh, so much THIS.

And for all you idiots out there that see him/her as being a jerk for doing it, consider this:
What's worse: To have the applicant's mistakes pointed out with hope he/she will correct them OR to just ignore the letter and let the applicant keep failing in his/her pursuit of gainful employment?

Her letter reminds me of ads from people trying to sell their cars: It's 'TAURUS' no 'Torus' Terrus' or 'Tearus'.

It's 'CHEVY' not 'Shevy', 'Cheby' or 'Cheavy'. It's 'SUBURU' not 'Sueberu', 'Subarru' or 'Seubero'

I could go on.

When someone can't even spell the brand name of their car how can they be trusted to be honest about its condition?


It's actually Chevrolet and I don't think any of the brand names mentioned belong in all-caps, they're not acronyms.
 
2012-10-27 05:37:44 PM

douchebag/hater: It's 'SUBURU' not 'Sueberu', 'Subarru' or 'Seubero'


It's Subaru, actually.
 
2012-10-27 05:51:24 PM

Any Pie Left: What I find striking in all FARK threads on this topic is the number of respondents who are infuriated by this policy out of all normal proportion. I don't know why this seems so unfair and monstrous to them, but I have a theory. My theory is the whiners are younger and over-entitled


Quick, everybody, get off of his lawn!!

Any Pie Left: So "good enough" or "sort of done" or "but I tried", is NOT good enough in the real world.


So everybody in the world in a position of power is qualified to be there. Tell me more of this work ethic you speak of, back in the days where people staying at a position for more than four years wasn't just a remarkable fluke.

I'm baffled why an HR person would bother doing this as any applicant is going to look at it, throw it away, and learn nothing from the experience. The way this is handled is obnoxious and condescending: if the cover letter is bad, throw a little hint in a rejection letter. But to talk down to an applicant is in incredibly poor taste, especially in such a sarcastic manner. Just because someone is looking for work doesn't mean they suddenly don't deserve to be treated like a subpar human being, and that sort of mentality reeks of the 'work or die' pioneer mentality that's often used by us Americans to blame any systemic flaws on the poor. It's not like we run a system where people don't have a choice of not working here, and it's rich that we're talking about 'teaching' somebody who needs a job. Apparently dignity is something you get when you have money.
 
2012-10-27 05:52:04 PM

stanhapsburg: Dear Mr. Mynameisinthead

You are absolutely correct that my writing skills are, well, mediocre. So my texts need to be proofread, which is usually done by a friend of mine, who happens to work for your company. But this person told me that he/she is currently very busy, because his/her boss "doesn't get shiat done". This "insufferable pedantic douche" - his/her words - prefers to deal with insignificant trivia. So he/she suggested to send my unedited application to you and - tadaa - I now work for company XYZ, where I earn 20 percent more and experience a friendly and loyal atmosphere. Thanks for your proofreading efforts to get me this job.

PS. My friend in the company is the person who also spits in your lunchbag, although he/she thinks not to be the only one.

Sincerely...


Dear IDidn'tEvenPretendToReadTheAccompanyingArticle,

The person doing the hiring is a blogger. He writes, for himself, for a living. Since he runs the company, he has access to these cover letters at home, when he is not technically on the clock. The idea that taking five minutes to edit/mark-up a cover letter causes a loss of productivity tells me that you have horrible time management skills and a complete lack of understanding of how most people work. It also tells me that you think it would take a lot more than five minutes to do this, which makes me feel you are probably quite slow.

The writing skills are not "mediocre". A few misspellings and an out-of-place comma or apostrophe is "mediocre". The writing displayed in the letter, meanwhile, read like the work of either a very recent immigrant with minimal English skills, or someone who is too thick to bag fries at McDonald's, let alone work in a detail-oriented and computationally-intensive role like bookkeeper.

This could be overlooked, potentially, if you had a long and extensive resume of bookkeeping positions with plenty of glowing references. I would completely understand. Some people are amazingly gifted in mathematically-oriented fields while being incapable of stringing together three words to form a sentence. I have my doubts that this is the case, however. First, your email address refers to either your current or ideal profession: stylist. Second, nowhere in the cover letter do you mention any skills directly related to the position (such as proficiency with various bookkeeping applications, knowledge of double-entry bookkeeping, etc.), nor do you mention any specifics about how or where you might have learned or performed bookkeeping duties, nor any other details that lead me to believe you have ever functioned in a bookkeeping profession. You do mention that you have precise record-keeping skills. This is good, but is also a bare-minimum for the job, and should not be a key point in differentiating yourself from the hundreds of other resumes I receive for the opening; it should be assumed that anyone applying for a bookkeeping position is at the very least an anal-retentive hoarder of information.

What makes your resume really stand out, though, is the level of unintentional irony displayed throughout. With as much focus as you place on your communication abilities, it's shocking that you display none of them in your cover letter. If you are going to (redundantly) point out how well you communicate no less than three times on less than a page of copy, you should do your utmost to make sure those skills are displayed in your first communication with me. Besides that little oopsie, you mention that you are "dynamically trained in multiple office programs". Now, I'm not sure what "dynamic training" is, exactly, and I can only assume that it is somehow better than "passive training". That said, it's shocking to me that your dynamic training in multiple office programs completely bypassed the "spellcheck" feature found in all common word processing software. I would strongly suggest that if you paid money for your "dynamic training", you ask for a full refund. Unintentional irony.

Ultimately, though, this cover letter tells me absolutely nothing positive about you. Even if you were to correct all of the atrocious spelling and grammar mistakes, this cover letter is a page of fluff without a single bit of substance. You speak of yourself in platitudes and cliches that at best paint you as a barely-competent employee who will come in, put in an unremarkable 8 hours, and leave. You will never make any meaningful contribution to my business. You will probably stick strictly to what you believe your job duties to be (whether those beliefs are actually valid or not), and get resentful if you are ever asked to do anything that falls outside of that definition. You will never push yourself to grow within the organization, and will remain in an entry level position while demanding annual raises that will (assuming you don't do anything to get yourself fired first, or quit with little notice) eventually price you out of your dead-end position. At that point, I will either have to eat the cost of paying an unmotivated bookkeeper significantly above industry-standard wages, or replace you. At worst, you come off as completely lacking in self-awareness and incapable of any original thought whatsoever.

In fact, I can sum up your resume in a one :

I have had jobs, and I know how to use a personal computer, and beyond that I have absolutely no marketable skills or personality whatsoever .

I get hundreds of resumes every time I post an opening. Unfortunately, I can usually only hire one person for a fair wage. This has nothing to do with me being a power-hungry asshole who enjoys inflicting pain on others. I am that at times, and am self-aware enough to know it, but this is not the case here. This is simply economics. There are a lot of you, but only one of me. When I make a hiring decision, I make it with the goal of hiring the best employee I can for a price that I can afford but is still fair to you. This is a huge decision for me. Keep in mind that while you may think I am wealthy beyond belief, my business is my sole source of income. If I make a bad hiring decision that ends up destroying my business (and bookkeeper is one of those positions where that is very possible. Especially in a very small company.), I am just as much out on my ass as you are. Except that you haven't poured years of blood, sweat, and tears (not to mention tens of thousands of dollars) into this job. I have. Practically everything I've done in the last several years has gone into making this company what it is. It is as much a part of me as anything else in my life, and if it fails because of a bad hiring decision, I lose all of that. You lose a just-barely-above-minimum-wage job. So if I seem exceptionally paranoid, anal, picky, cruel, pedantic, or whatever you want to call it, keep this in mind: I am looking through a pile of 100 candidates, from which I have to pull out the 10-15 that I can realistically interview. I will have to make a critical business decision based on your own description of yourself, maybe an hour of face-time, and possibly a couple of references. So sorry if I come off as an asshole, but I am making a big decision with very limited information, and I will be as careful as possible in assessing every single aspect of that resume, no matter how small. There are no "small mistakes".

Regards,

Lusiphur

P.S. The only acceptable email address to put on your resume/cover letter is some combination of firstname/lastname@your choice of email provider. This isn't about superiority. This is for your own benefit. First, you never know what someone might think of your hobby/career/inside joke. Something you think is awesome or hilarious might insult, offend, or plain turn off your potential employer. Like in this case: if your email address says that you are or were a stylist, it's a lot harder for me to take you seriously as a bookkeeper. Second, most employers are swamped with resumes these days. You need to take every opportunity to plant your name in your potential employers head. If he remembers your name, he's much more likely to call you back.
 
2012-10-27 05:57:06 PM

bigheadface: The Flexecutioner: doyner: SmackLT: The applicant should take that critique to heart and fix her cover letter.
 
she should also consider herself lucky she didn't land a job working with a pedantic prick.

Dragging people kicking and screaming into the communication norms of civilized society is not the same as being pedantic.

telling someone that 110% isnt possible is being a pedantic prick. colloquialisms and common phrases are usually given free license to get their point across by resume reviewers who aren't pedantic pricks.

but at least much of the rest of it was useful for her to improve on the resume.

No. If you are applying to any job that requires a resume, your resume needs to look professional. If someone will be dealing with clients in any way, and they write that horribly, they could possibly stop clients from wanting to work with the company.
If I'm starting to do business with someone and their correspondence uses such terrible, repetitive, and vague language, or it's full of buzzwords that tell me absolutely nothing, I'm likely to look for another business partner. 

/double and triple checked this post
//pedantic


colloquialisms and common phrases in and of themselves are not unprofessional. in context, maybe and maybe not, but it requires context. in this particular context it wasnt. her entire cover letter was unprofessional but if it had entirely been professional minus that one usage of '110%' it would not have been a deal breaker. she might have gotten an interview if everything else was good. so, yes, it was pedantic to highlight it among many other gaffs in that cover letter. he/she even missed this huge no-no: "I work well as a team and work very well independently as well." that's like the examples they give in resume-writing classes of how not to write a sentence and they missed it.

but honestly, in today's market they only have time for so many interviews and even really qualified people with mistake-free resumes wont get one. i have a friend in HR for a university and she tells me on average they received 1000+ applications per position (except faculty, which is in the 100-200 range) of which 50 or so are all qualified. But they only interview 10-20 of them (based on which department is hiring). Pragmatics like time can be such a biatch when it is an employer's market.
 
2012-10-27 06:05:34 PM

stiletto_the_wise: windowseat: As an employer I see far too many resumes and applications with bad spelling and sub-par writing skills. My feeling is that the applicant will approach my business with the same lax attitude as their schooling and so I file them under "No."

Pretty much this. If you can't even be bothered to proofread your own resume, you won't be bothered to do a thorough, detailed job at work. Spelling and grammar mistakes are the easiest way to filter resumes.


so how should one view a company that has job listings full of spelling and grammar mistakes?

/really really want to name names, but can't right now
 
2012-10-27 06:06:50 PM

Shafty: The My Little Pony Killer: I don't get the 'clams have attitudes?' correction. Nowhere in the cover letter is "calm" misspelled.

Sure it is, which is why he made that comment. Take a look at the fifth bullet point, fourth word.


Thank you. Now go back and re-read the second comment I left in this thread.
 
2012-10-27 06:09:52 PM

433: It's a shame they don't teach "real world shiat" in grade school. Part of it would have been fixed just by paying attention in grammar/English class. The resume reeks of a resume fluffer that gave pointers but no specifics.


Umm... I'm pretty sure English is taught in grade school.
 
2012-10-27 06:10:18 PM
"Just because someone is looking for work doesn't mean they suddenly don't deserve to be treated like a subpar human being,"

Guntram Shatterhand, I'm not saying you're not an example of the problem but you need to work on your double-negatives after you get off my lawn.

I will agree with you insomuch as this: the attitude of the person is that they are an applicant, not a supplicant. They are offering to trade their skills and hard work for a wage and agreed benefits, and this contract should be mutually beneficial to both worker and employer. But the employer has every right to hold a worker to a standard of performance. It has nothing to do with how the employer is or isn't fit to hold their job. It hasn't anything to do with being poor: grammar works the same way for everybody that can learn it. And if you want to learn it, you can, and if money's a problem, still, you won't let that stop you. You will find a way. That's what every generation of immigrant did and does today.

It is not about them, but about you. And I would can your application in favor of someone with better grammar, if you put several double-negatives in your correspondence. Here, on Fark's comments page, meh, typos and misspellings happen in the flurry of emotional an rapid-fire typing. I mistype things too. But OTOH, I'm not applying for a job here. My resume and cover letter would be flawless, I assure you. I would work for days to make it perfect, if I needed to. In the real world, you have to step up your game, man.
 
2012-10-27 06:10:28 PM

maxx2112: Pic of applicant delivering her letter.

[images.popmatters.com image 500x250]


Awesome! Maybe even obscure.

/at least one person here will understand what proofreading the ex's papers with a red marker resulted in.
 
2012-10-27 06:15:42 PM

Guntram Shatterhand: Just because someone is looking for work doesn't mean they suddenly don't deserve to be treated like a subpar human being


First of all, get your double negatives straight. Then realize that no one is being condescending to the applicant because they are down on their luck and looking for work. They're being condescending because the applicant writes like a retarded child having a seizure in front of a computer and can't be bothered to use the spell-check feature or ask someone to look over the resume/cover letter. And, from my experience, is probably proud of being ignorant and responds to attempts to help with some variation of "you think you're better than me?!?!"
 
2012-10-27 06:21:47 PM

dumbobruni: so how should one view a company that has job listings full of spelling and grammar mistakes?


As complete buffoons unworthy of decent employees. Or, if you play it well, as marks.
 
2012-10-27 06:26:40 PM
This is why the economy is pooping out its own guts.
1) Idiots who are too stupid to do jobs,
2) Passive-aggressive HR morons who impose a zero-defect mentality on the hiring process.
 
2012-10-27 06:30:00 PM
Lusiphur, you put it pretty well in that last sentence, and I have to say we do have a problem in America of putting so much weight on being employed and establishing our self-worth and relative status via what we do, versus who we are.

What you do is not who you are. But for most of us, our identity is deeply wrapped up in our employment. When we lose a job, we lose a huge chunk of who we thought we were, and our ego takes a wicked amount of damage. People on the hunt for jobs feel very stressed and put-upon and often can feel that the world is being unfair to them. That individuals are unfair to them, just because of their employment status.

Still doesn't fix the fact that a mangled cover letter or resume makes a person look like a 'tard.
When that piece of paper is all you know about a person, it counts for much more.
 
2012-10-27 06:31:25 PM

Guntram Shatterhand: Just because someone is looking for work doesn't mean they suddenly don't deserve to be treated like a subpar human being, and that sort of mentality reeks of the 'work or die' pioneer mentality that's often used by us Americans to blame any systemic flaws on the poor.


Heh-heh.
Choosing to stay home and be a full-time parent for a few years is the rough equivalent of being convicted of a felony for hiring purposes.
 
2012-10-27 06:41:39 PM
cover letter? what's that
 
2012-10-27 06:59:34 PM

Any Pie Left: Lusiphur, you put it pretty well in that last sentence, and I have to say we do have a problem in America of putting so much weight on being employed and establishing our self-worth and relative status via what we do, versus who we are.

What you do is not who you are. But for most of us, our identity is deeply wrapped up in our employment. When we lose a job, we lose a huge chunk of who we thought we were, and our ego takes a wicked amount of damage. People on the hunt for jobs feel very stressed and put-upon and often can feel that the world is being unfair to them. That individuals are unfair to them, just because of their employment status.

Still doesn't fix the fact that a mangled cover letter or resume makes a person look like a 'tard.
When that piece of paper is all you know about a person, it counts for much more.


This is what I was trying to get to, right before some people steamrolled over me for using a double negative. Which, in a way, really proves my point: the purpose of grammar is for better understanding. But it's also a very easy way to negate someone's valid point. Okay, I used a double negative. I'm a human being. But to use that to counter my points really puts all this sad grammar correction in focus. Are we really trying to help someone find a job or even correct behavior that could leave a bad impression, or are we engaging in superiority tactics for the sheer hell of it?

The latter view will not help someone find a job, and the HR person mentioned isn't trying to help someone. It's an humiliation tactic that adds more stress to the job seeker and robs them of dignity. Simply put, it isn't right. We can talk all day about other thought-terminating cliches like 'that's the way life is,' but it only serves to boost someone's ego at the expense of someone in a really bad spot. And, if we really want to get into it, it does come off as an elitist viewpoint from someone employed against someone who is not.

At its heart, we should really consider why our employment is such a big part of our identity. But I'll wait until someone decides to dig into my grammar to see if everything's correct before ignoring the point I'm trying to make.
 
2012-10-27 07:04:12 PM
Spellcheck probably wouldn't have flagged any of those misuses anyway.

HR douchebag is a douchebag.
Think of working only with people selected by this douchebag.
The HR culture is why we suck.
 
2012-10-27 07:28:34 PM

Araltaln: starlost: i hate the your email service isn't the most impressive one at the moment so use a more popular one douchebags.

I think I might rip on the applicant's username no matter what domain is hiding under the ink, unless her last name actually is "Stylist" (and possibly even then).



I thought it was idiotic hate on the email service as well. If it was a dig at the username, well, that's still pretty dumb, unless the username is something blatantly inappropriate for work.
 
2012-10-27 07:36:34 PM
Are bookkeeper and bookkeeping really the only English language words with three pairs of double-letters in consecutive order?
 
2012-10-27 07:41:22 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: Spellcheck probably wouldn't have flagged any of those misuses anyway.

HR douchebag is a douchebag.
Think of working only with people selected by this douchebag.
The HR culture is why we suck.


Imagine an office full of stephstylist1's...

HR guy is being a dick but he's not wrong, if you actually want the job, make some effort to seem interested. Cover letters should never be to whom, make a call, get the name of the person... Even if you can't get a name, proof read (and have someone else proof read), the word and formatting salad after the "Dear HR Ass Captain:"
 
2012-10-27 07:42:33 PM

dryknife: Are bookkeeper and bookkeeping really the only English language words with three pairs of double-letters in consecutive order?


No. The facial recipient of a phantasm's biological manifestation of excitement is a bukkaakkee.
 
2012-10-27 07:46:34 PM

Krieghund: Araltaln: starlost: i hate the your email service isn't the most impressive one at the moment so use a more popular one douchebags.

I think I might rip on the applicant's username no matter what domain is hiding under the ink, unless her last name actually is "Stylist" (and possibly even then).


I thought it was idiotic hate on the email service as well. If it was a dig at the username, well, that's still pretty dumb, unless the username is something blatantly inappropriate for work.


I think it's the username: stephsylist1@ v. steph.lastnamehere@ the service is scratched out to keep her from getting e-mail abuse.
 
2012-10-27 08:03:54 PM

SCUBA_Archer: I can sympathize with the recruiter/HR person here. I am on my company's recruiting team and have to deal with college kids graduating and looking for a position at our firm. Recently we had on-campus interviews and while fliipping through the resumes, one stood out because he had also penned a cover letter expressing his excitement for potentially coming to work for our company, and made several specific references that indicated he may have done some research about us.

During the interview I asked what should have been a softball obvious question. He had stated that (my company) had risen head and shoulders above the competition with respect to our capabilities in the industry. My question to him was "who was our competition?". I received a total deer-in-headlights response as he couldn't name one other company that he could've been considered competition.

Simple lesson....be prepared to back up your statements in an interview


Easy answer: "Oracle."
 
2012-10-27 08:07:22 PM
I once got a resume from an applicant who had misspelled "resume", "references", and "editorial."

It was for a proofreading position.
 
2012-10-27 08:08:52 PM

Lee Jackson Beauregard: The first thing I noticed was that bit of arrant nonsense up with which Winston Churchill allegedly would not put. "Please consider me as an employee to fill the position you are currently hiring for." Yes, the preposition is necessary -- you're hiring people, not a position. ("As an employee" could go.)

/Winston Churchill didn't really say all the things he said.
//Yogi Berra did in fact say that.


This is what confused me because I felt the preposition was necessary, too. English isn't my first language, so I wasn't sure about this, though.
 
2012-10-27 08:19:32 PM

HotIgneous Intruder: 2) Passive-aggressive HR morons who impose a zero-defect mentality on the hiring process.


I'm not an HR guy (I'm on a committee at work that assists with college recruiting) but I do take offense at your comment. The sad truth is, when you are faced with 10 or 20 (or more) potential recruits for one position, EVERYTHING is important. You are being compared to all the others and short of getting to know everyone personally, you need to set arbitrary evaluation standards. Everyone that I interview gets 30 minutes to sell me on themselves. The floor is yours, why should I hire you. And after a bunch of interviews, you get real cynical about who you might want to hire. I'm sorry that I can't hire everyone and there's no ranking system that automatically grants you a job at my firm, but that's life.

On the other hand, one of the best interviews I had was with an upcoming graduate, he showed up in jeans and t-shirt and had several earrings in (most interviewees take them out or cover them up). He then proceeded to wow me with articulate and intelligent banter about his experiences and his desires for his future. He rose to the top of the pack in spite of several "sins" that may have automatically excluded him in other scenarios.
 
2012-10-27 08:54:05 PM
farm1.staticflickr.com
 
2012-10-27 09:55:36 PM
Most HR employees are failed writers and teachers.
 
2012-10-27 10:16:22 PM
Dear employer/editor:

1) Yes, that preposition was necessary. Otherwise the sentence would read "Please consider me as an employee to fill the bookkeeping position you are currently hiring." Now, we could argue whether it's appropriate to end a sentence with a preposition but, as William Zinsser once wrote, "I think a sentence is a fine thing to put a preposition at the end of." Either way, that sentence did still need a preposition.

2) "Organization" is perfectly acceptable as an adjective, see: Collins English Dictionary, 2009.

3) "Recordkeeping" is not a word, as you suggest. Rather, it should be "record-keeping".

4) "Except for the task of spelling prepared" should be "Except for the task of spelling 'prepared.'"

Yours, rugman11

/Yes, I probably made some misteaks, two.
 
2012-10-27 10:32:14 PM

MaxSupernova: I missed out on a job because of a misspelling on my résumé. What sucks is I didn't apply for the job but they pulled my résumé from their résumé editor and attached it to the job without me ever submitting for it. The resume was only about 85% complete but i chose the save and edit later option and the first thing monday morning HR pulled the resume. They called me in for the interview and for ten minutes we talked about that misspelling and other résumé quirks and the importance of "attention to detail".


That's totally insane. You inputted a resume on one of those online corporate recruiting repositories, and someone actually contacted you for an interview after actually looking at it? I didn't think that sort of thing really happened. They must have been desperate to hire more people.
 
2012-10-27 10:32:29 PM

Guntram Shatterhand: Any Pie Left: Lusiphur, you put it pretty well in that last sentence, and I have to say we do have a problem in America of putting so much weight on being employed and establishing our self-worth and relative status via what we do, versus who we are.

What you do is not who you are. But for most of us, our identity is deeply wrapped up in our employment. When we lose a job, we lose a huge chunk of who we thought we were, and our ego takes a wicked amount of damage. People on the hunt for jobs feel very stressed and put-upon and often can feel that the world is being unfair to them. That individuals are unfair to them, just because of their employment status.

Still doesn't fix the fact that a mangled cover letter or resume makes a person look like a 'tard.
When that piece of paper is all you know about a person, it counts for much more.

This is what I was trying to get to, right before some people steamrolled over me for using a double negative. Which, in a way, really proves my point: the purpose of grammar is for better understanding. But it's also a very easy way to negate someone's valid point. Okay, I used a double negative. I'm a human being. But to use that to counter my points really puts all this sad grammar correction in focus. Are we really trying to help someone find a job or even correct behavior that could leave a bad impression, or are we engaging in superiority tactics for the sheer hell of it?

The latter view will not help someone find a job, and the HR person mentioned isn't trying to help someone. It's an humiliation tactic that adds more stress to the job seeker and robs them of dignity. Simply put, it isn't right. We can talk all day about other thought-terminating cliches like 'that's the way life is,' but it only serves to boost someone's ego at the expense of someone in a really bad spot. And, if we really want to get into it, it does come off as an elitist viewpoint from someone employed against someone who is not.

At its heart, we should really consider why our employment is such a big part of our identity. But I'll wait until someone decides to dig into my grammar to see if everything's correct before ignoring the point I'm trying to make.


I stopped reading at "an humiliation tactic" and if this had been a cover letter instead of a fark post that's the moment it would go on the trash.
 
2012-10-27 10:47:54 PM
telling someone that 110% isnt possible is being a pedantic prick. colloquialisms and common phrases are usually given free license to get their point across by resume reviewers who aren't pedantic pricks.

It might be forgivable as a colloquialism, but in this case it is also a blatant lie as it was obvious that she didn't put much effort at all into the cover letter.
 
2012-10-27 10:49:52 PM
/csb warning

Back in my younger days, daytime was spent in college, aiming for a diploma in Radio Broadcasting, and nighttime was spent playing in a bar band. Knowing that an important (and well paying) gig was to coincide with a report to be handed in, I pulled an "all-nighter" that effectively lasted 3 days.

The next week was quiet, with paper handed in to professor to be graded, and gig completed with money in hand and an offer to come back, i was feeling great.

Until I was summoned to professor's office.

He held my paper in his hand, and asked "Did you write this?"

I was still mildly hung over, and combined with the self inflicted sleep deprivation, it took me an uncomfortable number of missed heart beats before I could assert that it was not plagiarism, and I had written it.

he had called me into his office to inform me that my paper had surprised him with it's stream of consciousness style, while maintaining a coherent narrative and surprising descriptive qualities ... but I had misspelled "media" .... several times ... and as such, he could not give me the only perfect score out of the entire class

Moral of the story: red lines under text are your friends

/end csb
 
2012-10-27 11:33:16 PM

NotARocketScientist: telling someone that 110% isnt possible is being a pedantic prick. colloquialisms and common phrases are usually given free license to get their point across by resume reviewers who aren't pedantic pricks.

It might be forgivable as a colloquialism, but in this case it is also a blatant lie as it was obvious that she didn't put much effort at all into the cover letter.


haha, fair point i guess. i think she was referring to her bookkeeping skills though. i mean, 110% in those skills evidently means she only has -10% for cover letter writing.

/well played
 
2012-10-27 11:33:46 PM
ALLRITE GUYZ, WHICH ONE OF YOU FARKERS DID THIS LOL
 
2012-10-28 12:01:33 AM

Fish in a Barrel: Sure, if you're one of those Oxford comma heathens!


25.media.tumblr.com
 
2012-10-28 12:09:30 AM
Colloquialisms and similar phrases can be accepted, as long as the writer is confident the reader will understand. And that makes me happier than a possum in nickel factory.
 
2012-10-28 12:23:25 AM
I don't bother with resume's these days. If you want me, you can contact me. And make the gig interesting, I'm bored.
 
2012-10-28 12:39:04 AM
I don't want to think about how many interviews I missed out on because the last line of my cover letter said "I can be reached be email at..."

Took me all of farking undergrad to catch that error.
 
2012-10-28 12:55:49 AM

Fish in a Barrel: Araltaln: starlost: i hate the your email service isn't the most impressive one at the moment so use a more popular one douchebags.

I think I might rip on the applicant's username no matter what domain is hiding under the ink, unless her last name actually is "Stylist" (and possibly even then).

That said, the blogger fails as a pedant as well. He has a number of valid points, to be sure, but look towards the end:
RRr
... in a successful organized and well-run company.

He corrects that to:

... in a successfully organized and well-run company.

I'm reasonably confident the applicant doesn't want to say (and he doesn't want to hear) that the company is successfully organized; the company is successful and it is organized. (Hopefully it is both of those, at least.) That is, the real correction should be to:

... in a successful, organized, and well-run company.

Sure, if you're one of those Oxford comma heathens!


Who gives a fark about an Oxford comma?
 
2012-10-28 01:17:21 AM

Blue_Blazer: Who gives a fark about an Oxford comma?


Yale?
 
2012-10-28 01:27:02 AM

lohphat: Blue_Blazer: Who gives a fark about an Oxford comma?

Yale?


sorry, the correct answer was

I've seen those English dramas too, they're cruel

would also have accepted

I climbed to Dharamshala too, I did

/Vampire Weekend
//Philosophy and humanities BA
///love me some Oxford comma for serious
 
2012-10-28 02:50:14 AM

SCUBA_Archer: I can sympathize with the recruiter/HR person here. I am on my company's recruiting team and have to deal with college kids graduating and looking for a position at our firm. Recently we had on-campus interviews and while fliipping through the resumes, one stood out because he had also penned a cover letter expressing his excitement for potentially coming to work for our company, and made several specific references that indicated he may have done some research about us.

During the interview I asked what should have been a softball obvious question. He had stated that (my company) had risen head and shoulders above the competition with respect to our capabilities in the industry. My question to him was "who was our competition?". I received a total deer-in-headlights response as he couldn't name one other company that he could've been considered competition.

Simple lesson....be prepared to back up your statements in an interview


can you provide the correct answer to you question "who was our competition?" that the other candidates provided or at least how many provided the correct answer to that question?
 
2012-10-28 02:57:41 AM
WTF is wrong wiht ypu purple? Purple beg me job, and I say Yars or Nor. Need not resume be good, cause I smart, bwhahah, potateo.
 
2012-10-28 02:58:51 AM
FYI, guys is a douche, but gave some reasonable advice. Grain of salt, etc...Don't work in a salt factory....
 
2012-10-28 03:04:57 AM
Lots of rotsky 'round these parts....
 
2012-10-28 03:50:42 AM
Yes, below mediocrity is a good state to be in ... keep defending the applicant.
 
2012-10-28 03:56:26 AM

erik-k: Fish in a Barrel: Sure, if you're one of those Oxford comma heathens!

[25.media.tumblr.com image 500x654]


4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2012-10-28 05:38:42 AM

Dr.Fey: 4.bp.blogspot.com


In the top right, "JFK" is a restrictive appositive and should not be set off using commas. Joe Kessler is mistaken.
 
2012-10-28 06:13:05 AM

Any Pie Left: While I hate most HR people as a rule, I have to side with them as far as a zero tolerance policy on the paperwork. You as the applicant have all the time in the world to refine and perfect the resume, cover letter, and any other application-related forms. You have time to check and double-check everything, to give it your best shot. Just as you hopefully would execute your tasks, should I hire you.

To then submit some crap with bad spelling and grammar shows you are not qualified or didn't give a shiat. If I'm hiring, there are many applicants out there to choose from in a down economy ****:**** I can afford to be exacting and demanding. I will choose the person who made the extra effort.

What I find striking in all FARK threads on this topic is the number of respondents who are infuriated by this policy out of all normal proportion. I don't know why this seems so unfair and monstrous to them, but I have a theory. My theory is the whiners are younger and over-entitled, and were never held to high standards of personal performance in any tasks by their parents, (with consequences for failure) as they grew up.

Not every job requires hyper precision, all the time. However, a lot of them do. You become the company's public face to the world; your skills, or lack thereof, reflect on the company and can directly impact sales.

So "good enough" or "sort of done" or "but I tried", is NOT good enough in the real world. If your parents never made you do a task over to get it right, and just let you skate with half-assed efforts all thru your youth, well, they might have been trying to be nice to you, but they did you no favors.

I'm saying this as a flaming liberal: I don't know your back story. Your job as the applicant is to sell me on why you are the best fit for the opening and what your best qualities are. If you are in fact not well-educated in spelling and grammar, that's on you. That's something you should work on to improve, and don't tell me sad stories about privati ...


Ha, ha! That colon should have been a semicolon. YOU'RE FIRED!
 
2012-10-28 06:58:28 AM

Klopfer: Lee Jackson Beauregard: The first thing I noticed was that bit of arrant nonsense up with which Winston Churchill allegedly would not put. "Please consider me as an employee to fill the position you are currently hiring for." Yes, the preposition is necessary -- you're hiring people, not a position. ("As an employee" could go.)

/Winston Churchill didn't really say all the things he said.
//Yogi Berra did in fact say that.

This is what confused me because I felt the preposition was necessary, too. English isn't my first language, so I wasn't sure about this, though.


You do need the preposition if you keep the sentence structured like that, but it reads incredibly awkwardly. If you've written yourself into a corner where you have to end with a preposition, you're better off scrapping the whole thing and starting again.

I'd have gone with: "Thank you for considering my application for the bookkeeping position (advertised blah blah date/location)".

"Thank you for considering" works better than "please consider" - if you didn't want them to consider you, you wouldn't be applying in the first place.
 
2012-10-28 07:17:03 AM

Lusiphur: You will probably stick strictly to what you believe your job duties to be (whether those beliefs are actually valid or not), and get resentful if you are ever asked to do anything that falls outside of that definition.


Gosh, people are resentful if they're saddled with work above their pay grade? Hold on, I think I've got the world's smallest violin here, somewhere -- I'll play it for you.

Man, I feel sorry for whoever you hire.

Asshole.
 
2012-10-28 07:42:22 AM

MaxSupernova: I missed out on a job because of a misspelling on my résumé. What sucks is I didn't apply for the job but they pulled my résumé from their résumé editor and attached it to the job without me ever submitting for it. The resume was only about 85% complete but i chose the save and edit later option and the first thing monday morning HR pulled the resume. They called me in for the interview and for ten minutes we talked about that misspelling and other résumé quirks and the importance of "attention to detail".


Happened to me during school co-op postings. I had one spelling error on my resume albeit a big, obvious one. The first thing the recruiter does it point it out. Interview over, I rush back to my room, fix my resume, print it off. The next day before I sent it out I look it over again, and sonofabiatch, same word misspelled.

To end my csb, no one got the position I got screened out because of my resume error. I had to go back with fixed resume, got the placement.
 
2012-10-28 09:49:01 AM
I'm sure this is just a troll to generate traffic....

Still - a lot of the corrections are stupid. I'd be happy *not* to get that job.
 
2012-10-28 10:06:40 AM
I'm a graduate student, and about 75% of our research group (including the professor) is Chinese. As a native English speaker, I am sometimes tasked with proofreading manuscripts before submission.
There have been times when I wanted to scream, biatch, and moan about their writing, but then I remember that the authors are not native speakers so I bite my tongue; besides, I know all of two words of Chinese. So I would never post my ridicule of a manuscript to a public forum.
If I come across a horrible manuscript written by a native English speaker, on the other hand, all bets are off.

/Sorry, needed to rant
//The employer is a bit of a dick
 
2012-10-28 10:22:30 AM
A simple "This cover letter is highly repetitive with multiple spelling and grammar errors. Have someone proofread your cover letters before sending them out, it will definitely help." would have sufficed. Way over the top.
 
2012-10-28 10:24:31 AM
I recently saw an employer's post on LinkedIn excusing misspelled words for the employer on a 'no-one's perfect' basis. The poster did not say that he excused mistakes by applicants.

It's my observation that the corporate power elite are tall former jocks (males) or nice pieces of tail (females). Although I think of myself as a grammar Nazi, I really don't think that US employers value knowledge or the aptitude for it: that and scabbing are why we hire brown and yellow people for the brainy grind back-office work. Look around corporate America, and you'll see that looking like a Ken or Barbie doll counts for more than being intelligent, educated and conscientious.

This helps to explain the lack of business ethics in the US, and the decline of the US as an economic power generally.
 
2012-10-28 10:55:04 AM
I once worked at a restaurant owned by a man who, despite owning five such restaurants and the words being printed on every employee's shirt, every piece of letterhead, and the wall, could not spell "bergers" or "fry's".
However bad the applicant's grammar might be, this proofreading wasn't done with compassion in mind. The employer just wanted to insult the applicant.
 
2012-10-28 11:06:30 AM

YouSirAreAMaroon: I stopped reading at "an humiliation tactic" and if this had been a cover letter instead of a fark post that's the moment it would go on the trash.


*sigh* Even though using "an" and "humiliation" together is perfectly acceptable. Yes. you might argue that it required an "a" only because the start of humiliation is a consonant, but depending on the English variant, "h" can take the soft form and give emphasis to the vowel, necessitating an "an".
Try it with me. Say "an umiliation".
This combination of "an" with "h" can persist even though the soft "h" isn't utilized, as is often the case in American English.
In simpler terms, you just busted his chops for saying "colour" instead of "color".
 
2012-10-28 12:06:16 PM

James F. Campbell: Dr.Fey: 4.bp.blogspot.com

In the top right, "JFK" is a restrictive appositive and should not be set off using commas. Joe Kessler is mistaken.


Only if you think "JFK" is essential to the sentence, which I don't think it is. If you drop it, then you still have a stipper, you just don't know that (s)he's named JFK.
 
2012-10-28 12:43:49 PM

James F. Campbell: Gosh, people are resentful if they're saddled with work above their pay grade? Hold on, I think I've got the world's smallest violin here, somewhere -- I'll play it for you.

Man, I feel sorry for whoever you hire.

Asshole.


If I hire a bookkeeper, it is not "above their pay-grade" if I ask them to print out some automatic reports and drop them off for certified mail at the post office. Likewise, it is not "above their pay-grade" if I ask them to hand deliver some paperwork to my lawyer (a short subway ride away) while they are on the clock and if I pay for their transportation. It is also not "above their pay-grade" if I ask them to come in an hour early or stay an hour late around tax time to go over the books with me.

Look, I have worked for small businesses for the last several years, and I can't stand the way most of them treat their employees. I had a boss who asked me to pick up his dry cleaning, and I flat out told him to go fark himself because I had real work to do and wasn't a secretary. I swore when I started my company I would treat every employee like a person, be fair, be reasonable, and not sweat the little stuff. I think I've stuck to that, and my employees actually love me. I leave them alone to do their work as they want, I give them work that I know they can do and like doing, and occasionally I'll challenge them, with the full expectation that they might fail and that's not a bad thing.

I have 2 full-time employees now and 2 part-timers. The full-timers have been with me for almost two years, and have grown with the company (they started as freelancers). That's what I mean when I say that I don't need employees who will stand still and stagnate. In a six-person organization (I have a partner, too, before you say my math is off), I cannot afford to hire someone who does one thing and refuses to budge on anything else. I let all of my employees know this before they're hired, and I keep track of what they do and provide bonuses and raises based on them growing into new roles and taking on work that is not strictly in their job description. One of my full-timers started off as a freelance writer right out of college while making most of her money babysitting. She's now my chief editor and manages the day-to-day of the other writers. She didn't start of capable of it, and I didn't throw her in. What she had was the desire to learn, and the ability to expand what she was capable of and comfortable with.

If she had refused to take on that role, I would have been fine with it because she was a damn good writer. I would have kept her on, and kept paying her for excellent work, but she would have topped out, and I would have either had to let her go if she demanded more money, or she would have sat at her level and plateaued and stewed. I don't want to be responsible for that, and I can't afford to keep giving people raises well past the point where the money is justifiable.

I've worked with way too many people who refuse to ever do anything except what they think they should be doing, refuse to adapt, refuse to grow, and then do nothing but bad-mouth their boss because they haven't gotten a sizable raise in years. This isn't oppression or a dick boss. It's basic economics. I'm sorry that you've had shiatty work experiences that caused you to grow resentful. I'm sorry that you seem to have gotten stuck in the rat race and now see all business-owners as callous dicks. Some of them are, and working for a large faceless company can often seem like a pointless grind where merit and ability are overlooked because of petty politics and cronyism and nepotism. I'm sorry if you've had small business bosses that treated their employees like expandable shiat, that overloaded you with crap work and tasks way below or above your pay grade. I'm sorry your career isn't making you happy. I'm NOT sorry for expecting more out of my employees. I'm NOT sorry for hiring people that I feel are the best, and passing over anyone that I don't think will grow as we grow. I'm NOT sorry for holding my employees to an impossibly high standard, because I know they will not be able to rise to it every single time, but so long as they try in everything they do, I am ok with them failing sometimes.

Mostly, though, I am NOT sorry for demanding flawless spelling, grammar, and thinking in my potential employees' resumes and cover letters.
 
2012-10-28 12:49:16 PM

Fish in a Barrel: Only if you think "JFK" is essential to the sentence, which I don't think it is. If you drop it, then you still have a stipper, you just don't know that (s)he's named JFK.


Also, this. Usage of commas is not a hard and fast science, and anyone who says it is absolutely sucks at writing. Setting JFK off in commas makes the sentence easier to read and conveys meaning better.

As to the oxford comma situation, use it if it will clarify things. Don't use it if it won't. If your sentence is such that you can't figure out the meaning from context, you have written a bad sentence and you should feel bad.
 
2012-10-28 12:54:28 PM

Lusiphur: As to the oxford comma situation, use it if it will clarify things. Don't use it if it won't. If your sentence is such that you can't figure out the meaning from context, you have written a bad sentence and you should feel bad.


I really have no feelings on the matter; I was just stirring shiat up. :D
 
2012-10-28 12:59:10 PM

Fish in a Barrel: I really have no feelings on the matter; I was just stirring shiat up. :D


Whatever, man, you're one of those semi-colon using fops so it's not like your opinion matters anyway! The only colon god intended was the full colon.
 
2012-10-28 01:20:13 PM

Hyjamon: can you provide the correct answer to you question "who was our competition?" that the other candidates provided or at least how many provided the correct answer to that question?


I didn't pose that question to any other candidates, because none of the other candidates offered up a cover letter with their resume that explained they had "researched several other companies and (my) company rose to the top of the list". But really, I wasn't looking for a specific answer, any other company he had named in our field would have satisfied my request.

Like I said, it was an easy throwaway question if he had been honest in writing the cover letter he chose to include with his resume (none of the other candidates offered a cover letter). By not giving me anything there, that made me question his entire letter and resume credentials.
 
2012-10-28 01:33:26 PM

Fish in a Barrel: Only if you think "JFK" is essential to the sentence,


It is essential because it restricts the meaning or scope of "the stripper." It isn't just any stripper we're talking about: it's JFK.
 
2012-10-28 01:40:01 PM

Lusiphur: Words, words, words.


I can distill your logorrhea into once sentence: "I want to hire talented but submissive people who won't fight for themselves so that I can keep them loyal to me while giving them as much work and as little pay as possible."

Sure. As a scumbag and an employer, it's your right to do that. You're still an asshole, asshole.
 
2012-10-28 01:42:37 PM

James F. Campbell: one sentence

 
2012-10-28 01:53:24 PM

Lusiphur: I've worked with way too many people who refuse to ever do anything except what they think they should be doing, refuse to adapt, refuse to grow, and then do nothing but bad-mouth their boss because they haven't gotten a sizable raise in years.


I know you won't think so, but this right her is the basis of your scumbag employer status.
You put the compensation part after the going above and beyond part. As much as you pontificate about basic economics, you must understand that it makes zero economic sense to adapt, learn, and grow on the mere faith that your employer will compensate you should you succeed. I wouldn't be surprised if 100% of working Americans would tell you that faith is misplaced.
If you hire someone for a certain job at a certain pay rate, they have every right to expect that job nets that pay, no more, no less, and you, as an employer, should expect the exact same thing. More work requires more compensation, and it's no surprise people start getting resentful when their employer starts asking for more work minus more compensation.
It's just as much the onus of the employer to create an environment that fosters growth as it is an employee to seek it. Could be something as simple as extra pay for an extra certification, but whatever the method, you, even as an employer, have no right to demand extra work without such incentives.
 
2012-10-28 01:54:45 PM
telling someone that 110% isnt possible is being a pedantic prick. colloquialisms and common phrases are usually given free license to get their point across by resume reviewers who aren't pedantic pricks.

It might be forgivable as a colloquialism, but in this case it is also a blatant lie as it was obvious that she didn't put much effort at all into the cover letter.

haha, fair point i guess. i think she was referring to her bookkeeping skills though. i mean, 110% in those skills evidently means she only has -10% for cover letter writing.


Except she says she puts "110% into all I do", not just bookkeeping.
 
2012-10-28 02:03:17 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: As much as you pontificate about basic economics, you must understand that it makes zero economic sense to adapt, learn, and grow on the mere faith that your employer will compensate you should you succeed. I wouldn't be surprised if 100% of working Americans would tell you that faith is misplaced.


It sounds like you've worked for some shiatty employers. In my experience, putting in extra effort and improving myself directly resulted in significantly higher pay than coworkers who just did what they were asked to do. In the one job I had where it didn't, I just coasted until I could get out of there. So no, I don't think you'll get to 100% on that question.
 
2012-10-28 02:04:50 PM

The Flexecutioner: haha, fair point i guess. i think she was referring to her bookkeeping skills though. i mean, 110% in those skills evidently means she only has -10% for cover letter writing.


LOL, I missed this comment. THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU MIN/MAX YOUR CHARACTERS! :P
 
2012-10-28 02:15:39 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: I know you won't think so, but this right her is the basis of your scumbag employer status.
You put the compensation part after the going above and beyond part. As much as you pontificate about basic economics, you must understand that it makes zero economic sense to adapt, learn, and grow on the mere faith that your employer will compensate you should you succeed. I wouldn't be surprised if 100% of working Americans would tell you that faith is misplaced.
If you hire someone for a certain job at a certain pay rate, they have every right to expect that job nets that pay, no more, no less, and you, as an employer, should expect the exact same thing. More work requires more compensation, and it's no surprise people start getting resentful when their employer starts asking for more work minus more compensation.
It's just as much the onus of the employer to create an environment that fosters growth as it is an employee to seek it. Could be something as simple as extra pay for an extra certification, but whatever the method, you, even as an employer, have no right to demand extra work without such incentives.


Everything you've said is exactly right.

Given everything I've seen over the years, it's stupid to be loyal to an employer. Promised raises never materialize despite doing more work. I can't tell you how many friends of mine did tasks that managers ought to be doing -- while getting paid squat. Oh, and $deity help you if you get sick or if you actually manage to hang in there long enough to retire: they'll find some way to fire you. I've personally seen it happen time and time again, not to mention all the stories I've read online, even here on Fark. Long gone are the days where loyalty matters. Don't trust your employers.
 
2012-10-28 02:23:26 PM

Fish in a Barrel: It sounds like you've worked for some shiatty employers. In my experience, putting in extra effort and improving myself directly resulted in significantly higher pay than coworkers who just did what they were asked to do. In the one job I had where it didn't, I just coasted until I could get out of there. So no, I don't think you'll get to 100% on that question.


On what basis did your higher pay come? Bonuses? Your boss taking notice and offering a raise?
If there's systemic methods of advancement, like I mentioned certifications, then that is entirely different from impressing your boss into higher pay.
At my last job (which was outsourced... blargh) they at least had a very defined method of advancement. Getting new certifications or additional education was a huge deal, and they pushed it hard, but even if you didn't you could expect a COLA raise and performance bonus.
At my current job... not so much. My job ends up spanning three different departments and I could be the IT guy if they'd just give me the passwords. I have no direction to go for advancement because working as a go-between, I'd be leaving other departments in the lurch if I dedicated myself to one, and doing that wouldn't necessarily net me more money. So I have the dubious distinction of always needing to be on top of what the departments are doing, but no clear metric by which to judge my ability to do so.
 
2012-10-28 02:37:31 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: Your boss taking notice and offering a raise?


Basically. At annual raise time the bosses would note the extra effort. My raises were always very generous, while the slackers would be complaining about their small or non-existent raises.

That's just my experience, but so far it's taught me that putting in the work gets noticed and rewarded.
 
2012-10-28 02:42:04 PM

James F. Campbell: Lusiphur: Words, words, words.

I can distill your logorrhea into once sentence: "I want to hire talented but submissive people who won't fight for themselves so that I can keep them loyal to me while giving them as much work and as little pay as possible."

Sure. As a scumbag and an employer, it's your right to do that. You're still an asshole, asshole.


Wow, normally I would assume you're trolling, but this thread being what it is, instead I'm going to assume you've been at an entry level job for the last two decades and are frustrated because you can't get ahead. I'll help you out: it's not because your boss sucks. It's because you're mildly retarded.

As a side note, of course I wanto to hire the most talented employees for the lowest compensation they'll take (that is reasonable for the industry, I recently paid a freelance graphics designer twice what she asked because she way under-priced herself and I didn't want to take advantage). That's how business works. And you, as the employee, want to work for the best employer possible for the highest amount of money you can get. Employees and employers then sit down and negotiate something that lands pretty close to the middle, and everyone wins a little.

Or you have no marketable skills and can be replaced by a retarded chimp, in which case you have no position to bargain from. If you aren't a complete cretin, then, you will band together with others and bargain collectively. Or you'll shut up and take it, in which case you thoroughly deserve it. If you're not willing to stand up for yourself and your rights, it's no one elses responsibility to provide them for you. Also, I wouldn't want you for an employee. So basically, I hire kind of the opposite of who you think I do. Thanks for playing.

Sergeant Grumbles: It's just as much the onus of the employer to create an environment that fosters growth as it is an employee to seek it. Could be something as simple as extra pay for an extra certification, but whatever the method, you, even as an employer, have no right to demand extra work without such incentives


Ummm...I have just pointed out that I absolutely compensate employees extra for extra work, and promote and dole out raises liberally. There's like a whole four sentences that explicitly mention that in my last post. So why am I a scumbag? Because I clearly mentioned that if someone doesn't want to grow, I don't fire them but keep them where they are and give them reasonable raises based on performance, but am more than keen on raises and bonuses if they do decide to rise up?

I don't see where you drew the "scumbag" part from. You seem to assume that I work people to death and never reward them. I'm not sure how you got to that point, unless you skimmed and basically ignored the majority of my post. If that's it, cool. Just say it: I have difficulty reading, and it makes me embarrassed to admit it." Otherwise, you're just being lazy and intellectually dishonest. Your call.
 
2012-10-28 02:44:34 PM
Oh, and the one job where it didn't matter how hard I worked: low-level IT flunky. That just seems like a field with a shiatty culture.
 
2012-10-28 02:56:01 PM

Lusiphur: I recently paid a freelance graphics designer twice what she asked because she way under-priced herself and I didn't want to take advantage


Oh, what a good boy are you. Yet little do you realize that this little anecdote of yours, designed to make you look benevolent, supports my diagnosis: as I said, you purposefully choose talented but submissive workers (she undercharged herself) so that they will be utterly loyal to you (you paid her more than she asked for, though obviously still less than the work was worth).

Lusiphur: Or you have no marketable skills and can be replaced by a retarded chimp, in which case you have no position to bargain from. If you aren't a complete cretin, then, you will band together with others and bargain collectively. Or you'll shut up and take it, in which case you thoroughly deserve it.


Translation: only people with "no marketable skills" band together and bargain collectively. And if you shut up and take it, you deserve to be abused and under-compensated. See folks? This is how employers really think. You are witnessing it right here in this thread. Don't forget that.

Lusiphur: Also, I wouldn't want you for an employee.


If I were a full-of-shiat scumbag, I wouldn't want someone who sees through that working for me, either.
 
2012-10-28 03:09:47 PM

Lusiphur: Ummm...I have just pointed out that I absolutely compensate employees extra for extra work, and promote and dole out raises liberally.


No, you didn't. You definitely didn't say anything about giving reasonable raises based on performance. Your exact words were

Lusiphur: I cannot afford to hire someone who does one thing and refuses to budge on anything else.

You denigrated anyone who stagnates and said that if your own employees did so, it was to the detriment their advancement within your company.
Like I said, you won't think so, but the sentence I quoted before is exactly why you're a scumbag boss.
It's a simple thing. You are under the impression that as an employer, your employees owe you the desire to learn, adapt, and expand their skills and knowledge. I'm telling you the reality is that you've no more right to demand they expand their repertoire than they have to demand you increase their pay. Taking it on faith that additional work equals additional pay has no basis in today's employment environment. You may indeed be an exception, but without a clear cut example of "if you do X, you get a $Y amount raise" then there is little incentive for the employee and no cost/benefit analysis at all.
Your operation doesn't sound bad to work for, but there's that little seed of doubt your statements give me, that your employees owe you something beyond their job description if they want to advance. The scumbag part comes from you wanting more from your employees than you expect to give them back.
Your stock diatribe about my reading ability also tells me you can't handle criticism well, which further dampens my outlook of your employees' futures.
 
2012-10-28 03:14:44 PM

James F. Campbell: Translation: only people with "no marketable skills" band together and bargain collectively. And if you shut up and take it, you deserve to be abused and under-compensated. See folks? This is how employers really think. You are witnessing it right here in this thread. Don't forget that.


It really is sickening how entitled some people feel to others' labor. I wonder if Lusiphur is a fan of the minimum wage...
 
2012-10-28 03:22:40 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: It really is sickening how entitled some people feel to others' labor.


I agree. This conversation reminds me of a nice graphic I recently saw. A lot of people should probably consult this, especially with the rise of internships as a way for scumbag companies to obtain free labor: "Should I work for free?"
 
2012-10-28 04:05:22 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: Lusiphur: Ummm...I have just pointed out that I absolutely compensate employees extra for extra work, and promote and dole out raises liberally.

No, you didn't. You definitely didn't say anything about giving reasonable raises based on performance. Your exact words were
Lusiphur: I cannot afford to hire someone who does one thing and refuses to budge on anything else.
You denigrated anyone who stagnates and said that if your own employees did so, it was to the detriment their advancement within your company.
Like I said, you won't think so, but the sentence I quoted before is exactly why you're a scumbag boss.
It's a simple thing. You are under the impression that as an employer, your employees owe you the desire to learn, adapt, and expand their skills and knowledge. I'm telling you the reality is that you've no more right to demand they expand their repertoire than they have to demand you increase their pay. Taking it on faith that additional work equals additional pay has no basis in today's employment environment. You may indeed be an exception, but without a clear cut example of "if you do X, you get a $Y amount raise" then there is little incentive for the employee and no cost/benefit analysis at all.
Your operation doesn't sound bad to work for, but there's that little seed of doubt your statements give me, that your employees owe you something beyond their job description if they want to advance. The scumbag part comes from you wanting more from your employees than you expect to give them back.
Your stock diatribe about my reading ability also tells me you can't handle criticism well, which further dampens my outlook of your employees' futures.


You sound like someone who doesn't get raises very often
 
2012-10-28 04:19:16 PM
I think that was very nice of the employer... not so much the posting it publicly, but taking the time to help the applicant understand why that generic cover letter was such a bad thing. The other thing that some of the farkers fail to appreciate is just how detail-oriented bookkeepers need to be. When you're trusting someone to keep track of your money, this kind of sloppiness and lack of attention to the task at hand can cost you your business, your livelihood, and your home. Could you imagine if this applicant worked at a doctors office and did her medical transcriptions with this level of inaccuracy? Aside from the potential lawsuit, the records would be virtually useless if someone else was trying to do a differential with them. I only proofread formulas and math, but if I did as bad of a job with them as this lady did with her own resume, I certainly wouldn't be expecting any work.
 
2012-10-28 04:23:35 PM

bigheadface: You sound like someone who doesn't get raises very often


Nope, just a product of the times. You're dating yourself if you put faith in an employer.
 
2012-10-28 04:59:33 PM

James F. Campbell: though obviously still less than the work was worth).


How, would you say, is that obvious? She charged me what a freelance artist still in college would charge. If it was a less talented designer, I would have been ok with it. I paid her what I would pay someone with several years of experience.

James F. Campbell: Translation: only people with "no marketable skills" band together and bargain collectively. And if you shut up and take it, you deserve to be abused and under-compensated. See folks? This is how employers really think. You are witnessing it right here in this thread. Don't forget that.


And...reading comprehension fail. People with no bargaining chips should band together to increase their bargaining power. Nowhere there does it exclude anyone. BTW, I've worked as a union organizer. What have you done to better the working conditions around you?

But yes, if you don't have the confidence in yourself to be assertive about how much you're worth, it's no one else's job to be assertive for you. If you are ok with making minimum wage (which is too low, in this country, but that's a different argument), then that is your choice.

James F. Campbell: If I were a full-of-shiat scumbag, I wouldn't want someone who sees through that working for me, either.


Glad we're in agreement!

Sergeant Grumbles: Your operation doesn't sound bad to work for, but there's that little seed of doubt your statements give me, that your employees owe you something beyond their job description if they want to advance. The scumbag part comes from you wanting more from your employees than you expect to give them back.


My "stock diatribe" was in response to you ignoring large swaths of my comments. Of course I require my employes to grow in order to advance. Otherwise, why would they advance? Here, let me throw out some quotes that might bridge the apparent understanding gap we've come to:

Lusiphur: I have 2 full-time employees now and 2 part-timers. The full-timers have been with me for almost two years, and have grown with the company (they started as freelancers). That's what I mean when I say that I don't need employees who will stand still and stagnate. In a six-person organization (I have a partner, too, before you say my math is off), I cannot afford to hire someone who does one thing and refuses to budge on anything else. I let all of my employees know this before they're hired, and I keep track of what they do and provide bonuses and raises based on them growing into new roles and taking on work that is not strictly in their job description. One of my full-timers started off as a freelance writer right out of college while making most of her money babysitting. She's now my chief editor and manages the day-to-day of the other writers. She didn't start of capable of it, and I didn't throw her in. What she had was the desire to learn, and the ability to expand what she was capable of and comfortable with.

If she had refused to take on that role, I would have been fine with it because she was a damn good writer. I would have kept her on, and kept paying her for excellent work, but she would have topped out, and I would have either had to let her go if she demanded more money, or she would have sat at her level and plateaued and stewed. I don't want to be responsible for that, and I can't afford to keep giving people raises well past the point where the money is justifiable.


Sections bolded for emphasis. Or to paraphrase: if you are excellent in the role you were hired for and nothing else, I will hire you, and I will pay you a fair market wage, and I will continue to reward you for great performance in your role with regular raises. BUT eventually, you WILL top out on "fair market wage", even adjusted for individual talent and performance. If you do not grow into a bigger role, you will NOT be paid more. Eventually, I will have to either stop with the raises, or let you go. Because if I need your job done, AND I need a more advanced version of your job done, it does NOT make sense for me to pay two people the same wages for both positions.

If you're ok with topping out your salary, great. No problem. You don't want any extra responsibility, and you aren't expecting more money? Fine, I'm ok with that. If you want more money past a certain point, and you are still doing the job that you started of doing five years ago with no additional duties and responsibilities? Sorry. Try somewhere else.

This isn't greed. This is pretty farking simple: if I'm overpaying everyone, eventually, I will not be able to grow my business, and we will all stop growing at best, or die as a company at worst. And then NO ONE will have a job. My margins are not huge, and most of the margins right now go into expansion. If I have to cut margins too much, the company dies. Either way, you are out of a job.

Sergeant Grumbles: It really is sickening how entitled some people feel to others' labor. I wonder if Lusiphur is a fan of the minimum wage...


As I mentioned earlier, no, but not for the reasons you think. It needs to be at least $10-12 an hour these days. Also a former union organizer, a hard-left anarcho-syndicalist, and general rabble-rouser. I'm not entitled to anything of yours. I AM entitled to set the conditions for working for me. Don't like it? Great, go work for someone else or start your own company. More power to you, and I wish you all the best. But don't think that you're entitled to getting paid $X for Y work where you are the sole arbiter of both $X and Y.

James F. Campbell: I agree. This conversation reminds me of a nice graphic I recently saw. A lot of people should probably consult this, especially with the rise of internships as a way for scumbag companies to obtain free labor: "Should I work for free?"


Translation: "I don't really have a coherent argument, other than ad-hominem and supposition, so I will shift the topic towards something that IS a valid problem and try to conflate the two arguments. That way, people might confuse the point I'm arguing with an actual, legitimate point."
 
2012-10-28 05:12:33 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: Nope, just a product of the times. You're dating yourself if you put faith in an employer.


Really? I'm a product of the times. On the cusp of Gen X and Y. Never had a single problem with an employer that wasn't quickly and easily resolved, either through negotiation or leaving that job for a better one. Never been fired either. Not super wealthy, by any means. Still have months where I barely make rent. Could be doing much better at an existing company.

So what is it that crawled up your ass and made you hate employers so much? Honestly, and I hate this cliche, but you sound like you are in your early 20's, have been fired from the job your family hooked you up with because you didn't want to play the game, and are now cycling through a series of dead-end jobs because your dad won't float you rent money anymore. Am I close?

Business owners and companies can be dicks. So can employees. It's far from one-sided, as you seem to assume. You make it sound like businesses owe it to people to hire them for their dream jobs and pay them exorbitantly for the privilege of having them as employees. They aren't. If you want to be happy and well-compensated at work, that's on you. You have to bust your ass, and you have to sacrifice, and you have to do shiat you don't want to. My car got repoed early last year, because I was spending that money on making payroll and covering business expenses. We were three months behind on rent at one point. We pushed through, and we're doing ok now. That's life. It's hard, it can suck, and it's up to you to make it worthwhile.

So if you want an honest discussion about workers rights and where the balance between employee/employer responsibility lies, I'm all ears. If you want to spout generic invective and ad hominem, with little substance to back up your points, we can't have a real conversation.
 
2012-10-28 05:22:03 PM

Lusiphur: Sections bolded for emphasis.


Again. No. You make no mention of paying extra for performance and make every indication that the only way to advance is to branch out from their current job. If your first statement was in error, say so. Do not try to devalue my opinion and insult my reading comprehension for something you failed to include in the original statement.
Your comments make it clear you expect this branching out regardless, that you expect the worker to go beyond their job description as a matter of course. I said you may be one of the few who legitimately makes this worth the while, but the vast majority of workers can't take such things on faith.

Lusiphur: Don't like it? Great, go work for someone else or start your own company.


If all your union rabble-rousing wasn't in jest, you know it's not that simple.
 
2012-10-28 05:24:55 PM

Lusiphur: So what is it that crawled up your ass and made you hate employers so much? Honestly, and I hate this cliche, but you sound like you are in your early 20's, have been fired from the job your family hooked you up with because you didn't want to play the game, and are now cycling through a series of dead-end jobs because your dad won't float you rent money anymore. Am I close?


You're very close to the reason I hate employers, yes. As for my situation, no, you've missed the mark by miles.
 
2012-10-28 05:28:43 PM

Lusiphur: other than ad-hominem


Really? You're going to play this card, despite the fact that you've been insulting everyone who isn't you for the past... ever? Get lost, scumbag.

Again: I feel sorry for anyone who has the misfortune of working for you.
 
2012-10-28 07:42:03 PM

James F. Campbell: Really? You're going to play this card, despite the fact that you've been insulting everyone who isn't you for the past... ever? Get lost, scumbag.


You came out swinging with "scumbag" this and "scumbag" that, and in a moment of weakness I stooped to that level. But really, it was the kindest assumption I could make given that you blatantly disregarded most of what I wrote and attacked me solely for being an employer.

Sergeant Grumbles: If all your union rabble-rousing wasn't in jest, you know it's not that simple.


No. It's not. Nothing is. It's hard as shiat. Doesn't mean it isn't doable and that it is a good reason to despise employers. I happened to come from a reasonably privileged background: upper middle class family, great schools, lots of opportunities. My former in-laws, on the other hand, started a very successful trucking company from nothing. Both came from essentially the trashiest of white trash, by their own admission, neither have a full high-school education. Still managed to do it. Not everyone can do it. That's ok. Some people are ok with finding a rut and sticking in it. Those people should also not expect to move ahead or get promoted past a certain point. If they're ok with that, I'm ok with that.

Sergeant Grumbles: Again. No. You make no mention of paying extra for performance and make every indication that the only way to advance is to branch out from their current job.


Ummm...yes. That's what "advancement" means. What do you assume advancement meant? Do you think people get promoted to do the same exact work they were doing before the promotion, just for significantly more money? I don't understand your point. Of course I expect employees to branch out in order to advance. For instance, my current managing editor started as a freelance writer, doing occasional assignments when I had them. Then, she advanced to a part-time copywriter, taking on more steady projects, and becoming responsible for regular assignments and clients. She "branched out from her current job, and as a result got more money. Then she became a full-time copywriter. She again, increased her responsibilities, increased her commitment, and got a promotion and a raise. Then, she moved into managing the whole writing team. Again, she branched out from her last job description, by taking over the management of the other writers and freelancers, as well as interfacing directly with clients when needing to, and took over proofreading and associated duties. So she got a promotion, and a raise.

That's how a "career" works. Actually, that's how most jobs work: you don't advance by doing the same thing over and over again. That's the whole point of a meritocracy. You seem to be implying that I should hire all employees at their maximum possible salary, and then let them keep doing the same thing for decades. How would that work? What kind of advancement is possible if you don't expand and branch out from your initial responsibilities and duties? Hell, even in labor jobs you start of as a cog in the machinery, then advance by becoming a supervisor, then a shift manager, then a production manager, etc.

I really just cannot even conceive of the kind of structure you are envisioning. I can't tell if you think the entire company structure should be perfectly flat with no advancement whatsoever, or if you're advocating that I should promote and reward people BEFORE they earn it in the hopes that they then live up to the new pay grade. In the former case, that doesn't make any sense: why should people who have more duties and responsibilities be paid the same as people who have less? In the second, you seem to be saying that my employees should be doing the same thing you criticize me of doing: demanding proof of reward before they put in the extra effort. In that case, my question would be: why is this ok for employees to do but not for employees? "Good for me, but not for thee" is hardly a valid argument.

Sergeant Grumbles: You're very close to the reason I hate employers, yes. As for my situation, no, you've missed the mark by miles.


Am I? I hardly see why, and my employees are incredibly happy. Happy enough to willingly turn down more financially lucrative offers because they like the work I have them do and they like working for and with me. My second guess for you would be that you bust your ass for some large, faceless company; survived multiple layoffs, only to have your workload increase without any related increase in compensation; and were finally let go and replaced by a cheaper, younger worker. If that's the case, my apologies. Some employers are absolutely horrible. I will never deny that. YOU, however, seem to be refusing to admit that some employees are absolutely worthless. That's not a rational or reasonable position to have a discussion from.

Sergeant Grumbles: I said you may be one of the few who legitimately makes this worth the while, but the vast majority of workers can't take such things on faith.


So get it in writing. Done. Closed. Nothing left to say. Get your performance review in writing, and discuss goals and requirements for advancement. Make a deal, in writing, with whoever is authorized to give out raises that says "My goals for the next quarter/6-months/year are X, if I meet them, I get a raise in pay of Y. If I exceed them by Z, I get my raise and a bonus." Period. Monitor your goals, and when it's time for your next review, get the final numbers in writing. If your company renegs, take your performance revies and go to your competitor and say "This is what I did, these were my goals, this is what I exceeded them by, this is what I want."

I never said anything about taking anything on faith. I don't, and you shouldn't either. If you do, that's on you. Take some responsibility for your career and you'll be fine. But don't expect employers to treat you like Big King shiat just because you feel you deserve it. If you deserve it, prove it. If you don't want to, fine. That's your call. You don't have to work for me, and I don't have to hire you.
 
2012-10-28 08:44:33 PM
Lusiphur
If your company renegs, take your performance revies and go to your competitor and say "This is what I did, these were my goals, this is what I exceeded them by, this is what I want."

Well, showing internal documentation to a competitor is a great way to get sued, so don't do that. Losing an employee that way is pretty embarrassing, there's no company that wouldn't leap at suppressing that sort of thing getting out.

But otherwise, yeah, I left my last job because they reneged on a deal we made when I was hired. It wasn't a contract and legally worth a used napkin, so getting it in writing was little more than a sanity-saver. I did a lot of uncompensated work for them that went far above and beyond my job title.

Using that to my advantage was even easier than what you suggest, I just put the experience in the resume and talked about what I learned with my 'above and beyond' projects. The new company was pleased that I made the small mistakes on someone else's dime and seemed extremely glad to have me land in their lap (figuratively).

I get what James F. Campbell is saying, but I'm so sick of Battered Wife Syndrome coworkers - stop being "victims" and treat this like the business that it is. In theory it's a reciprocal relationship. They have contingency plans, do you? They'd lay you off in a heartbeat, are you willing to fire your employer with or without notice?

/scumbag managers and scumbag employees, I guess
//it really does make you appreciate the good managers when you find them
 
2012-10-28 11:59:28 PM

Lusiphur: Ummm...yes.


*sighs*
You really should stop putting words in my mouth. In the future, it'll save you the effort of constructing walls of text to refute things I've never said.

My original assertion, based on this quote

Lusiphur: I've worked with way too many people who refuse to ever do anything except what they think they should be doing, refuse to adapt, refuse to grow, and then do nothing but bad-mouth their boss because they haven't gotten a sizable raise in years. This isn't oppression or a dick boss. It's basic economics.

was that you were being a dick boss because while you were bemoaning the economics of your own situation, you failed to take into consideration that of your employees. It sounded like, from the original post, that "just doing the job" wasn't good enough, that from the get-go you expected your employees to constantly strive to make themselves better not just at their job, but beyond their job description. It just sounded very one-sided, and as much as you boasted how well your bonuses and compensations were, there was that tainted edge to the statement where you could easily accuse anyone of stagnation.
Before you launch into a five paragraph essay about why I'm wrong, I have said multiple times that you may truly be an employer who does not take advantage like that, but I have been burned too many times to leave it to trust.
 
2012-10-29 12:17:42 AM

LouDobbsAwaaaay: Sheesh, there's a lot of defensiveness in this thread I wasn't expecting. It's just somebody posting a terrible cover-letter. Why does this aggravate so many people while PeopleOfWalmart doesn't?


Because too many people don't believe English class is important? Using those skills will prove you've actually got an education when you're drafting up your "pick me cuz I'm so smrt" cover letter. When you approach a potential employer using the printed word, you damn sure better show some excellent writing skill, especially if you claim you're "a rilly gud communicator."
 
2012-10-29 02:46:37 AM

lohphat: LooseLips: Call the employer a dick, sure, but that cover letter was completely atrocious. I hope he sent it with corrections back to her, because chances are good that she's using that cover letter as a template for all her applications.  Harsh, but I think it's kinder to give a lesson then trash the application and let the applicant carry on wondering why they're not getting any calls back whatsoever.

THIS.

Unless feedback was absorbed, she's sucking at the teat of the unemployment and/or welfare office on our dime.


Funny, isn't it?

"The unemployment rate is too high" and "there aren't enough qualified applicants" may be true, but it is damn near doublethink.

The only way to solve both is to increase the number of unskilled job openings, and most of those went overseas. Or, some BS about education. Yeah, that might work... For the next generation. Until we have too many "educated" workers.

Eh.
 
2012-10-29 11:17:41 AM
I'm surprised they found a candidate with that much literacy. For a bookkeeping position, even. I support accounting software and most of the women that call me for help had awesome qualifications for bookkeeper back in 1949, when they got hired. They had "great gams" but now, and I can tell the nation had its ration of stupidity pills over the weekend, and it's only 11"15, Now, we use accounting software. And most bookkeepers have no idea WTF the definition of "accounting" really is.
Here is a glossary of modern bookkeeping terms I have heard:
Make it go away.
Took it back out again.
Canceled it.
Fix the ledger.
Hide this.
Can we undo the batch? (closed deposit)

And don't tell Me the economy sucks because they are hiring just anyfarkingbody out there.
Do keep it up. It's excellent job security.
 
2012-10-29 11:47:08 AM
She's probably on unemployment and didn't want he job anyway.
 
2012-10-29 01:13:56 PM

Sergeant Grumbles: Before you launch into a five paragraph essay about why I'm wrong, I have said multiple times that you may truly be an employer who does not take advantage like that, but I have been burned too many times to leave it to trust.


Sorry, I'm a long-form writer and have difficulty keeping things under 1000 words, but I'll try:

Apologies. I misunderstood the particular sentence you were referring to. You're somewhat right: it was very one-sided. That's because I am my own first priority. Maybe there are more altruistic people out there that place others first, but they are very few and far between. If you don't want to advance, I can not afford to keep giving raises past a certain point. Moreover, my company is VERY small and growing VERY fast. I can't afford to hire managers, because I don't know when I'll need them or if I'll need them, so I need all of my employees to be ready to step up if the opening becomes available. That's just the nature of my company right now. It's not a hard and fast rule for all companies, or how I would run things once I'm at a comfortable size and things slow down.

I feel for you, I really do. I know of too many people who got burned. But as someone just above you said, YOU are the first person that needs to be worried about YOUR situation, just as I worry about mine. I have plans and fall-backs in case you don't work out and I need to fire you. Can you say the same about yourself?
 
2012-10-29 02:29:36 PM

Lusiphur: Sorry, I'm a long-form writer and have difficulty keeping things under 1000 words


You use a lot of words because you are a self-important cockface with little of actual value to say. People like you are a greater offense to words than the idiot in the article. At least their ignorance can be remedied; you're selfish and evil, and there's no cure for that.
 
2012-10-29 03:02:53 PM

Lusiphur: YOU are the first person that needs to be worried about YOUR situation, just as I worry about mine.


I agree with this.
It's just a nasty tendency for employers to expect their employees to care about the business more than themselves, and because they're employers, they can get away with it. When you say "working outside your job description" I take it to mean mission creep, doing things unrelated to your job that still need doing but the employer won't hire for. From my point of view, this is an entirely different thing than advancement and additional job responsibilities. It's one thing to ask a part time copywriter to take on more full time projects and another thing entirely to have them manage your company IT.

CSB time:
My father-in-law worked in an architecture firm that was advertising for a graphic design position. Duties included developing high quality renders of projects, dealing with things like company circulars, and putting together professional presentations for their sales pitches.
I had just graduated with degrees in graphic design and 3D design, figuring I might as well benefit from the nepotism. I was more than qualified for the position and I'd even worked with their architecture software, as the 3D Design program I attended was part of the architecture college.
So of course, I inquire.
Turns out they didn't want a graphic designer. The back and forth went something like:
"We are looking for a graphic designer."
"Yo."
"But they must have an architecture degree (and experience), so they can help with our workload."
"So you're looking for an architect, not a graphic designer."
"No, we need a graphic designer. With a degree (and experience) in architecture."

They had that position open for more than a year, finally filling it with an architect who specialized in interior design, who now does their graphic design as well.

And sorry to say that many other interviews and research turned up the same thing elsewhere, along with what might laughably be considered compensation for multiple degrees in unrelated fields and years of experience.
I was lucky enough to land an internship with a great tech-company that had been honored by the President for creating good, high paying American jobs. I'd been applying to them for three straight years, since before I even graduated college. Worked my ass off and was promoted to full time.... and one month later the entire company is shut down and outsourced, to the complete surprise of everyone in our department. Our parent company had gotten some new VP...

There's more, but I have to go... and this cool story has gone on too long, bro.
It's sufficient to say I'm bitter.
 
2012-10-29 11:08:17 PM

SmackLT: The applicant should take that critique to heart and fix her cover letter.
 
she should also consider herself lucky she didn't land a job working with a pedantic prick.


I don't know. Chock full of ridiculous errors, I would consider the penisy route, most likely.
 
2012-10-30 12:08:56 PM
The small business I work for has been rolling out a new product aimed at resume parsing and automated review methods, been deployed to some career services offices at a big state university for a pilot.

As part of this I've had the chance to meet with undergrads during free resume review sessions at the career offices to help offer advice and improvements to young (mostly engineering) students who are at a place where I was a few years ago (I'm 24).

Even the brightest kids I've seen have some awful resumes. Listing their McDonalds highschool job with 4 bullets about tasks followed by 1 bullet covering their college internship with Caterpillar. Why would you do this? It's like they don't think about what they're trying to get across with a resume and offering a very rote listing of Stuff I've Done. It needs to be written to inform and (ideally) impress, not like a sheet that a private investigator would write about you if they observed you for a week.

Been interesting to see a wide variety of resumes from young and grad students, domestic and international. Runs the gamut from excellent to word vomit. Sometimes it's grammatical, but sometimes its fundamentally useless or poorly conceived information and asides. Also kids trying to be "cute" a bit more than they probably should, or undervaluing certain things they don't perceive as interesting.
 
2012-10-30 03:25:25 PM

jjorsett: LouDobbsAwaaaay: Sheesh, there's a lot of defensiveness in this thread I wasn't expecting. It's just somebody posting a terrible cover-letter. Why does this aggravate so many people while PeopleOfWalmart doesn't?

I don't think it's defensiveness, it's people reacting to the public humiliation of another person and general assholeishness of the guy. Notice the "get a real email address" at the top? That's not useful criticism, that's being somebody who inflicts pain for sport.


When I went job hunting again earlier this year, the first thing i did was create a new Gmail account with my full name. I know that it's far more impressive to have a decent email address than it is to put some nickname/internet nickname address like FunkyBlue298423. Plus, I wanted to make it so that when you saw the address, you instantly knew who it was from just by looking at it. you don't want an employer trying to pick your name out of a folder of emails because your address makes no sense to anyone but yourself.
 
2012-10-30 04:14:25 PM

doyner: SmackLT: The applicant should take that critique to heart and fix her cover letter.
 
she should also consider herself lucky she didn't land a job working with a pedantic prick.

Dragging people kicking and screaming into the communication norms of civilized society is not the same as being pedantic.


This guy took a bit of time and taught her more than any other person (apparently) in her job search.
 
2012-10-30 05:29:12 PM
I love threads like this. The outrage of the majority over somebody being called on their idiocy makes me feel pretty good about my job security. I'm no grammar/spelling Nazi, but I'm also not a drooling idiot like most of you are apparently.
 
Displayed 170 of 170 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report