Job Fairs.
I still get emails about job fairs. I attended my last one about seven or eight years ago. I vowed to never attend another. Here's a reply I wrote in a blog about them:
Job fairs ARE a waste of time, and a monumental waste of time, at that. Here are the reasons why:
1. Companies send reps to job fairs even when they are not hiring–even when they are laying off thousands of workers. Bank of America had reps at one job fair I attended, and the next day laid off 30,000 employees. Anyone here seriously think that BOA was REALLY into hiring new people?
2. Most companies participate in job fairs as a PR effort, not because they are really hiring.
3. Some companies participate in job fairs with no intention of hiring at all, but simply to get a feel for the job market, and how easy it would be to get new hires if they really did want to start hiring again.
4. Companies send low level reps to job fairs. They don’t send hiring managers. Forget getting an interview at a job fair unless it’s for a commission-only sales job. These jobs are always open because there is a 99.99% failure rate. And if you are hired, remember that the company has zero investment in you, and they expect you to fail.
5. If you do go to a job fair, and talk to company reps, they don’t even want a copy of your resume. They will tell you to go to their web site and apply online.
6. The vast majority of companies at job fairs are peddling commission-only sales jobs, or minimum-wage jobs like security guards or fast food restaurants. Then there are the franchise pushers masquerading as employers.
7. In addition to the faux-job outfits, there are also the schools hawking their courses at the job fairs. Are you really looking to take more courses? Hell, no. You are looking for a job–you probably don’t have surplus funds for more schooling, anyway.
8. Realize that the job market is crap right now. It has been crap since the 1990s. Companies are bringing people over from India on special visas to displace American and Canadian workers. They are outsourcing everything they can to India and Asia.
9. If you are over 50, you are killing yourself by going to job fairs and letting the employers know that you are old. HR people are schooled to screen out older applicants, no matter their credentials. Deny it if you want, but it’s true.
10. Forget all that crap about creating a “brand” for yourself. You are a human being, not a product or a brand. You must find people to work with who first respect you as a human being. Otherwise, while you may find a job, you will end up being just a cog in a machine, and you will work for people who have no idea of what a work-life balance is supposed to be, and they will burn you out and throw you on the scrap heap afterwards.
Well, that was my reply several years ago. It might sound a bit, well . . . "Trumpish." But I've seen the North American economy hurt by outsourcing and immigration policies.
Does anyone have any experience with job fairs that they could share? Did any of you ever get a job by going to a job fair? Or do you think of them the way I do, as a massive waste of time and energy?
If you are contemplating suicide, hurting yourself, or you are seriously depressed: please, seek professional help!
Call this hotline (1-800-273-8255) operated by our friends at the Suicide Prevention Lifeline, anytime, for free, professional, and confidential assistance. While other Helpers are likely to reply to your post, please make sure you understand that your use of Help-QA.com falls under or TOS.
Note: I'm a robot that the Help-QA creators programmed. If this response is in error, I apologize, please ignore it.
Haven't had the opportunity exactly; been to a couple of showcase / interview days prior to recruitment. They seemed to work much better since both you and the army have little choice in the matter of acceptance (ie by default you'll just fill some crack), and the second being academy oriented had decent matches.
But what you describe definitely corresponds to unemployment experience (as BA1 stated), except being haled to such interviews weekly in exchange for a dole.
Help me with: [quote]Test.
[/quote]
I don't need job fairs any more, but I still have memories of how disappointed I was in them. I brought a stack of resumes printed out on nice bond paper. Nobody wanted them. "Just apply online," they would say. The only hiring was done by insurance companies looking for sales people.
Anybody know how it works when you become a life insurance salesman? I saw my friends do it. Anyway, it goes like this: (1) first, you sell some policies to your family members, (2) then you sell some policies to your friends, and (3) then you hit the wall.
I talked to one life insurance company in Canada. It was Sun Life. Their "background questionnaire" was so intrusive that I said to myself, "No way I would ever work for this outfit." Again, I knew that 99.99% of life insurance sales people "hit the wall" after selling to the last friend who would buy a policy from them.
The view most hiring managers have of job fairs is that they are a "cattle call." You have one or two decent companies at one of those fairs, with people lined up to talk to some low-level non-decision-maker, and the rest are commission-only jobs, schools pushing courses and resume writing services.
Oh--and here's the worst thing you will find at a job fair: an outfit promising to "sell" you to potential employers, and asking only $5,000 UP FRONT. You can well imagine that legitimate companies will have nothing to do with these outfits--they know them for what they are. The great thing about the Internet is that you can go online and find out which outfits are running a scam.
And speaking of the Internet, how do most job applicants find their jobs today? Well, it's not through the Internet--80% get their jobs through "networking."
Lastly, you want to bypass the human resources departments whenever possible. They are staffed by the laziest and most ignorant people on the face of the earth. It's a fact that HR departments are taking longer and longer to fill positions--and it's just because they are lazy. You need to get your resume in front of a hiring manager--because it will just languish in HR.
I completely agree. Everything now is just 'apply online'. There was a day where you dress nicely, have you CV ready, go to the place you want to work and hand your cv to the boss. Not anymore.
But I disagree with the brand part. This is the social media time, you most definitely are a brand
Nix wrote:
I completely agree. Everything now is just 'apply online'. There was a day where you dress nicely, have you CV ready, go to the place you want to work and hand your cv to the boss. Not anymore.But I disagree with the brand part. This is the social media time, you most definitely are a brand
Interesting. So how would you describe yourself as a "brand"?
The term just seems so "tool-ish" to me. I do not want to try to be someone's box of Rice Krispies!
Well I'm the best dog trainer on the planet!
I know what you mean, but its a competitive world out there. Social media is now a job. Getting people to look at you is a job. Both tools can make business opportunities beyond my tiny city. Instead of reaching the 2 million who live in my county, I can reach countless millions on line just by promoting my brand on youtube and facebook
Nix wrote:
Well I'm the best dog trainer on the planet!I know what you mean, but its a competitive world out there. Social media is now a job. Getting people to look at you is a job. Both tools can make business opportunities beyond my tiny city. Instead of reaching the 2 million who live in my county, I can reach countless millions on line just by promoting my brand on youtube and facebook
If you can pioneer an online dog obedience school, the world will be your oyster! ;-)
Sherlock wrote:
Nix wrote:
Well I'm the best dog trainer on the planet!I know what you mean, but its a competitive world out there. Social media is now a job. Getting people to look at you is a job. Both tools can make business opportunities beyond my tiny city. Instead of reaching the 2 million who live in my county, I can reach countless millions on line just by promoting my brand on youtube and facebook
If you can pioneer an online dog obedience school, the world will be your oyster! ;-)
Thats the plan :D
Yes, you both are right. Sherlock your point started 10 years old.
Nix's idea is current.
Some of the issues of concern are; Government subsidized recruiting and training programs (job fairs make them money), training wages for new immigrants (not protected under law because of not being landed citizens), monopoly of the industry with the ability to black mail with closure and increase unemployment and manipulation of the media to distract and slant information to cause fear.
Solution, circle the wagons. Opps! No disrespect to wagon owners or anything implied. It will get worst before it gets better my friend. The good news is when you're at the bottom up is the only direction you can go:)
Sherlock wrote:
Do you think, Max, that networking has decreased in importance as a job finding tool?
Good point! Networking is the only real way of connecting, but the networks are becoming more selective and even demanding up front..umm..commitments before a conversation can take place. Examples; church groups, french groups or ethnic groups, political groups and now the Six Sigma certified groups.
I met a guy that repeated an old statement from years ago in broken English; "that company speaks through both sides of their face"!
True.
It still seems that you need to "know someone" to get a job--even in the 21st century, even with the Internet.
You still have to get your resume out of HR and in front of a hiring manager. HR people are so lazy that they all have cats to do their breathing for them.
I was in a church once and some people there were in a position to help me get a job with their firms. Did they? No. One of them later regretted taking no action--and was very apologetic.
My daughter recently applied for an "intern position" with a police department. Guess what? The internships all went to minority candidates--who had less experience and education and fewer accomplishments than she had. Affirmative action programs further complicate the job hunting situation for non-minority applicants. You can be the best candidate out there--but you're not going to get hired because you got the wrong genes and the wrong chromosome. (PS - I hate discrimination in all forms, including reverse discrimination.)
It's really tough on young people these days. They get a university degree, and end up waiting tables or working some dead-end retail job. When I was young, anyone who wanted a decent job could get one.
Not any more.
Sherlock wrote:
It still seems that you need to "know someone" to get a job--even in the 21st century, even with the Internet.You still have to get your resume out of HR and in front of a hiring manager. HR people are so lazy that they all have cats to do their breathing for them.
I was in a church once and some people there were in a position to help me get a job with their firms. Did they? No. One of them later regretted taking no action--and was very apologetic.
My daughter recently applied for an "intern position" with a police department. Guess what? The internships all went to minority candidates--who had less experience and education and fewer accomplishments than she had. Affirmative action programs further complicate the job hunting situation for non-minority applicants. You can be the best candidate out there--but you're not going to get hired because you got the wrong genes and the wrong chromosome. (PS - I hate discrimination in all forms, including reverse discrimination.)
It's really tough on young people these days. They get a university degree, and end up waiting tables or working some dead-end retail job. When I was young, anyone who wanted a decent job could get one.
Not any more.
🙋♂️ Question!
How do we fix this?
(The “market” - discrimination is easy to fix but people are too afraid of being seen as racist so they reverse discriminate.)
Rockster160 wrote:
🙋♂️ Question!How do we fix this?
(The “market” - discrimination is easy to fix but people are too afraid of being seen as racist so they reverse discriminate.)
We are going to have to risk the wrath of minorities and their sycophantic allies in order to "right" the ship. We are not getting the best and brightest right now because of "affirmative action," the liberal phrase for "quotas." It's not that there are not qualified minorities--it's that agencies feel they must hire the first minority candidate who walks in the door. What if they had to hire the first white male whose last name ended in the letter "d"? They'd probably get more than their share of doofuses in that way. So, in other words, we need to ensure that we have true meritocracies--and IF an organization is seen--statistically--to be discriminating against ANY group, then lawsuits and firings of executives need to happen.
The other thing that has to happen is to bring jobs back. For decades we have been hemorrhaging jobs. Jobs have been our chief export. We not only have to stem the tide, but reverse the tide. We need to punish--through taxation--companies that go offshore and then want to import their goods and services back into the country. Let's say Comcast wants to outsource their customer service to India--we slap a tax penalty, a big one, on Comcast for every outsourced job. We make it unprofitable for them to outsource overseas. It can all be done with a few strokes of a pen at the end of some legislation.
And we need to hammer government agencies and businesses that discriminate on the basis of age. It's not hard to do--you can conduct sting operations, and you can gather data from individuals who have reported discrimination. You hit them in their pocketbooks hard--and you also prosecute everyone involved in it, from the highest executive to the lowest, laziest HR drone carrying out those executives' policies.
It will take several high-profile lawsuits and prosecutions to fix the problem of discrimination, and it will take legislation to bring back our jobs. But this is not only do-able, but it's a must if we are to have a future for our countries.
HR departments were designed to throw bones to little violations and secretly derail any large law suit while diminishing employer costs with a false sense of ethics.
The only thing that'll fix this is stronger families, communities and friendships.
Take greed and need out and they're screwed. Example; don't pay me or hire me and I'll stay home.
Their plan, screw up the "home" and family. Example; high taxes, churches are full of perverts, grandparents are better off dead or working in MacDonalds, I'll pay you more if you're unattached and uninfluenced by social events, career oriented regardless of the lifestyle and you'll do as they say or dictate.
Call in Brave heart!
You know, Max, I can still remember reading the Augusta (GA) Chronicle and seeing employment ads that read like this:
MANAGER WANTED. MUST BE MARRIED AND BETWEEN THE AGES OF 25 AND 35.
I kid you not. Before anti-discrimination laws were passed, employers could openly discriminate on the basis of age and marital status.
Today, age discrimination is aided and abetted by the drones in HR departments. When a candidate is being interviewed for a job--particularly if the candidate is a woman--an HR twit will check out her car to see if it has a child seat in it!
I absolutely loathe people who work in HR. If they had lived in 1930s Germany, they would have joined the Waffen SS or the Gestapo; they would have excelled in running the concentration camps.
Exactly. I remember when they (employer groups) developed the first HR departments. Secret meeting, limiting personal contracts with loop holes and false offers.
Nix at one time being married meant you had a contract with responsibilities to a family and would work responsibly to supply the income needed for both employer and children. Today all of that is concerned a negative. Employers want FREE skills, FREE labour and lots of money. HR departments spread false ideas of caring and support while sucking the human factor out of society for the machine.
If you were married Nix your wife would tell you what the benefits are...lol.
That's going to open a box.
I think there is a game where you develop new cities and communities. Well that describes how it's suppose to work. If you don't follow the game you'll not be successful completing it and just get bored and not play at all.
Nix wrote:
Why on earth would being married be a benefit?
Perhaps they would be less likely to transfer on account of a competitor's proposal or quit unexpectedly due to the logistics involved? Or perceived as more reliable in general?
Help me with: [quote]Test.
[/quote]
Yͤͭͥ̇eti. wrote:
Nix wrote:
Why on earth would being married be a benefit?Perhaps they would be less likely to transfer on account of a competitor's proposal or quit unexpectedly due to the logistics involved? Or perceived as more reliable in general?
Yes.
So why is single, no family and alone better?
Max wrote:
Yes.
So why is single, no family and alone better?
It's just a (an?) hypothesis of managing resources, not that I've much experience in such matters. I prefer not to think of people in terms of superiority.
Help me with: [quote]Test.
[/quote]
Back in the old days, HR departments would post ads requiring the candidates to be male, between 25 and 35, and be married.
Why?
Because they knew that a married man would put up with more s**t from the employer because he had a family to support, whereas a single male or female would tell them to go eff themselves and walk out the door.
Sherlock wrote:
Back in the old days, HR departments would post ads requiring the candidates to be male, between 25 and 35, and be married.Why?
Because they knew that a married man would put up with more s**t from the employer because he had a family to support, whereas a single male or female would tell them to go eff themselves and walk out the door.
Ya there is some truth to that, but superior is not the issue because this requires more money,it's stability, reliability and responsibility.
I've employed hundreds and somebody has to turn the lights on and only call in sick when it's true. If everybody was single with no children we would be having this chat:)
Nix wrote:
Max wrote:
If you were married Nix your wife would tell you what the benefits are...lol.
Husband :P (I'm female btw, but not likely to marry at all)
When your husband was bitching with a hang over and wanted to call in sick you'd kick his asss or he'd be labeled as a dead beat. Dead beats today enjoy a life today at someone else expense. I'm pro female but believe the family unit has been moved to the bottom of the list and it's all "me" and greed. Rich kids and poor kids...no middle.
Max wrote:
Nix wrote:
Max wrote:
If you were married Nix your wife would tell you what the benefits are...lol.
Husband :P (I'm female btw, but not likely to marry at all)
When your husband was bitching with a hang over and wanted to call in sick you'd kick his asss or he'd be labeled as a dead beat. Dead beats today enjoy a life today at someone else expense. I'm pro female but believe the family unit has been moved to the bottom of the list and it's all "me" and greed. Rich kids and poor kids...no middle.
I think thats quite unfair. Especially in the UK, cost of living is so expensive, if you dont have an excellent job then its doubtful that you would be able to afford a mortgage and living costs with only one income. Especially in London. And why shouldnt woman have a career? We can contribute just as much as men. If I was to get married and have kids there is absolutely no way I would spend my day babbling to a child, it would drive me crazy.
lol..my children didn't babble, but due my career I didn't see them much when they were small and grand dad was chasing that ring too. Trust me..babbling is life and career is money and power.
I understand I felt the same way years ago but now it's just stupid because they'll take your money anyway. Woman should have anything they want, but death and the end of time comes to us all and women contribute more then men. Woman are having heart attacks at 50 now more then men.
I think it's respect and truth we're missing.
Max wrote:
My government has granted daycare so you can have a career and I'll pay the child care. Unfortunately there is no money left for health care, seniors and families to enjoy themselves. It's a big issue and something I'd wouldn't think too much about.
But you could say that about everything.... I dont want kids but I still have to contribute to peoples education, Ive never been to uni but I still have to contribute to that, Ive never needed the fire services, military, pensions, job seekers allowance, disability benefits, transport (i have a car which is taxed separately), I dont use libraries or museums. but still have to pay for it all.....
Yes. I had to bring my children to work sometimes. Not the best, but they developed a good work ethic.
My brother loses half of his employees when there is a storm over no baby sitter.
Shuts him down.
Most HR departments are a step backwards.
If they want your info they should put their cards on the table.
Help-QA supports basic Markdown, emoji 😁, and tagging friends with @username!
To use this site you must be 13 years or older and occasionally submit your email address. Your email address is only shared with your explicit permission.