How to get a job (or not)

[downtown]

I've been on both sides of this decision, and I think a lot of it depends on the industry, and seniority level of the job you're applying for, as well as your industry.

If this is for some hourly, relatively junior gig, I think it's totally okay to quit as soon as you find a better job. As an employee, your ability to project leverage is far diminished compared to your employer in these scenarios, so I don't see anything unethical about utilizing it in this case, so long as you are honest and forthright in your communication with both parties.

I think the higher up you go, the harder this decision becomes. Think very carefully if your industry is insular, or your move could ever come back to haunt you, even in several years...since people remember this sort of thing.

 

[ywhtptgtfo]

Agreed. One week, you are told you are doing great. Next week, you are fired. The days of working 40 years at the same company are in the past.

Agreed.

Especially in IT, everyone's a mercenary. Loyalty is a good buzz word to throw around but in the end, it's be one's detriment to read too much into it.

 

[Hygro]

Agreed.

Especially in IT, everyone's a mercenary. Loyalty is a good buzz word to throw around but in the end, it's be one's detriment to read too much into it.

Perhaps related then: so many startups around here are started by friend groups, fraternity brothers, housemates, etc.

 

[ywhtptgtfo]

Perhaps related then: so many startups around here are started by friend groups, fraternity brothers, housemates, etc.

I am mostly referring to bigger companies. For very small companies like start-ups, the power dynamics are different, since each person takes up a bigger portion of the manpower. However, this doesn't mean the CEO can't be a total cxxt face.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Relevant background to my question:
I do not have any current offers, but Company 1 is overdo to tell me I got the job or not (they said I would hear back either way by last Friday).
A contact I have at Company 2 reached out to me to tell me he was working on getting a requisition for an intern so he could hire me. He didn't sound confident, but he's trying.

I am looking for internships or co-ops (3 months vs 6 months) currently, not full-time work. The field is aerospace engineering.

Company 1 offers co-ops only (which pushes back my graduation) and doesn't pay great. It's not too aligned with my long-term goals, but it pays OK and it's close to home and experience is experience.

Company 2 offers internships (doesn't push back graduation), pays good and is very much in line with my long term interests. It is very far from home though.

So basically, should I tell Company 1 yes because chances are Company 2 won't come through and then IF Company 2 comes through, I should tell Company 1 sorry, but my plans have changed? I don't want to turn down Company 1 and pin all my hopes on Company 2, I've been burned before. And Company 1 has NOT been prompt in dealing with me, they don't even answer emails when I try and get a hold of people there.

 

[ywhtptgtfo]

Relevant background to my question:
I do not have any current offers, but Company 1 is overdo to tell me I got the job or not (they said I would hear back either way by last Friday).
A contact I have at Company 2 reached out to me to tell me he was working on getting a requisition for an intern so he could hire me. He didn't sound confident, but he's trying.

I am looking for internships or co-ops (3 months vs 6 months) currently, not full-time work. The field is aerospace engineering.

Company 1 offers co-ops only (which pushes back my graduation) and doesn't pay great. It's not too aligned with my long-term goals, but it pays OK and it's close to home and experience is experience.

Company 2 offers internships (doesn't push back graduation), pays good and is very much in line with my long term interests. It is very far from home though.

So basically, should I tell Company 1 yes because chances are Company 2 won't come through and then IF Company 2 comes through, I should tell Company 1 sorry, but my plans have changed? I don't want to turn down Company 1 and pin all my hopes on Company 2, I've been burned before. And Company 1 has NOT been prompt in dealing with me, they don't even answer emails when I try and get a hold of people there.

Tell them you are sorry if Company 2 comes through.

 

[Mise]

This was interesting: http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2014/05/kill-the-cover-letter-and-rsum.html

[R]esearchers have finally built up enough solid science about human decision-making to confirm a belief held by many on both sides of the hiring equation: It’s time for the résumé and the cover letter to die.

The problem is that the résumé-and-cover-letter bundle — call it “the packet” from here on — is an inefficient, time-wasting way for employers to sort through a first wave of applicants. It doesn’t provide nearly as much useful information about potential employees as we’ve been led to believe, meaning that firms that overly rely on it are likely missing out on talented applicants whose materials get overlooked. What’s worse is that it’s discriminatory — it exacerbates many of the biases that fuel a winner-take-all job market at the expense of minorities and people without fancy connections.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

Shorts, open sandals and a sleeveless shirt to a job interview - yes, no or maybe? (it's pretty hot here now)

 

[illram]

Do some scouting. Wear whatever is appropriate for that specific employer. Maybe one notch above. If it's an office setting I doubt that would be appropriate.

 

[Harv]

Shorts, open sandals and a sleeveless shirt to a job interview - yes, no or maybe? (it's pretty hot here now)

Um, could you give a region or a country so that we have a better idea of the culture? The company's culture is also relevant.

I went to a job interview where it was 98°F and 98% humidity (you get the point) in a full suit. The only time I did not go to an interview wearing a suit was when I was specifically instructed not to wear a suit.

Especially if you are young, you get to show off how good-looking you are! Assuming that the job you are applying for is not the kind where your wage is already fixed, looking good may affect the number that goes along with the offer.

Once again, I am assuming that you are applying for a professional position. Good luck!

 

[illram]

This was interesting: http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2014/05/kill-the-cover-letter-and-rsum.html

Awesome. I sent that to my boss. I like the idea of anonymous tests or work samples before getting the applicant's info.

The cynic in me thinks "well instead of needing anonymous applications how about we all stop being secretly racist lazy twits?"

 

[Loppan Torkel]

Thanks for your input. Sweden's the country. I've got a similar job to that I'm being interviewed for. Just looking around a bit. Suiting up is out of the question and would probably not benefit me anyway. ..however good-looking it would make me

It was 'the notch above' I was considering. I don't want to come across as unprofessional, but in the end I think this outfit will suit the occasion.

 

[Commodore]

Awesome. I sent that to my boss. I like the idea of anonymous tests or work samples before getting the applicant's info.

The cynic in me thinks "well instead of needing anonymous applications how about we all stop being secretly racist lazy twits?"

Why should I have to provide my work samples for free though?

Also, testing is so fraught with error bias itself, I don't believe it is the answer to the problem. For example: a competent, even exceptional, independent worker could be labeled as not being a team player. I tend to think that testing would also disadvantage applicants that are immigrants or with certain social/cultural backgrounds.

 

[illram]

Why should I have to provide my work samples for free though?

Also, testing is so fraught with error bias itself, I don't believe it is the answer to the problem. For example: a competent, even exceptional, independent worker could be labeled as not being a team player. I tend to think that testing would also disadvantage applicants that are immigrants or with certain social/cultural backgrounds.

Well if you want to get paid for doing the work, I think it is fair to demonstrate your ability to do it first.

For my field, it is standard to ask for a writing sample, (which is typically some type of document drafted for court proceedings, or clients) so I am thinking if I tried this, it would basically just be an anonymous writing sample. Then if I like it I follow up.

But it's true, interviews where the employer just pumps candidates for free information are annoying.

 

[downtown]

I ask for a work sample for every writer or graphic designer that I interview, but I also have them sign a document that states that they retain all rights to the work product in the event that we don't hire them, but that we own it if they do. If it's great, and I hire them, I"ll just publish their work, and save them some time. If I don't, hey, they should be free to sell it elsewhere.

Resumes are important, but seeing how somebody works through the editing process, for my industry, better. Lots of writers just use interviews for #free #content though, I which I think is skeezy

 

[Mise]

Vaguely relevant article/essay with implications for the hiring process: http://aeon.co/magazine/world-views/is-the-most-rational-choice-the-random-one/

Basic thesis: Randomness eliminates good reasoning and bad reasoning, so is appropriate in situations where the risk of bad reasoning outweighs the reward of good reasoning. E.g. picking job or university applicants, where candidates are often subconsciously discriminated against based on non-relevant factors such as race, gender, class, etc, or on statistically insignificant factors such as a difference of 4 points on a test or 12 months vs 10 months work experience. In such a case, there is no good reason to choose one candidate over another; all that's left are bad reasons. Thus, choosing between them by flipping a coin actually yields better outcomes on the whole than choosing based on bad reasoning.

Anyway, that's my really bad summary; the article lays the case out brilliantly IMO.

 

[brennan]

HR (in the UK - I hear it's a lot better in the US) is absolutely riddled with 'risk avoidance' strategies. It's notable that as HR has become more professional and exerted its efforts allegedly increasingly towards choosing and keeping the 'best people for the job' the result has been a marked decrease in the average duration of employment.

Have you seen the rigamarole kids go through just to serve coffee in Starbucks? A ludicrous time-wasting pantomine just to find someone who can make coffee and smile. Extra-ordinarily wasteful and in place essentially so that HR can claim to have done their best.

 

[Hygro]

When you get an interview: do you ball it up and treat them like you're the interviewer, once you've demonstrated worth and respect for their organization? Or stay deferential the entire time? I've opted toward the latter mostly.

 

[brennan]

It depends.

If it's a job any idiot can do they're probably going to be put off if you start interrogating them. On the other hand, for a professional role the more your input drives the interview the better. If you appear 'deferential' or 'arrogant' you're doing it wrong, it should be a conversation between equals.

 

[Hygro]

The position level probably matters, too, unless you think it should be a conversation between equals at all points?