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  
•       •       •

9470 clicks; posted to Business » on 27 Oct 2012 at 11:10 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
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.
 
Displayed 50 of 170 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report