Nice people thread part 8 - worth the wait

PasturesNew

chewmylegoff wrote: »

An analyst/investigative type role paying up to £lots.

My skillz would perfectly align to that .... although, obviously, you'd want bits of paper I don't have... but if I did have the bits of paper that's what I'd excel at..... but I'd not get picked because I don't know the answer to irrelevant questions

PasturesNew

By the way ... analysis: Bad time to have picked a question when you're outnumbered 3:1 by girls..... and you can't even manage the 1:1 in your own home as she always wins.

Poor timing ...... no NP boys to help you out.

lostinrates

I agree with chewy actually.

lostinrates

PasturesNew wrote: »

My skillz would perfectly align to that .... although, obviously, you'd want bits of paper I don't have... but if I did have the bits of paper that's what I'd excel at..... but I'd not get picked because I don't know the answer to irrelevant questions

Mine wouldn't. But I could probably sniff out whether I thought ' the client' in question was a good egg or a bad egg. They should intro Duce the lie egg test as a reliable indicator.

PasturesNew

I'm the person that went into a new contract role as a gofor/minute taker, and realised after 3 hours that the maths didn't add up .... and even though it was a multi-million pound project, with a full specialist team whose job it was to do the maths .... none of them had actually done it. And on the back of my fag packet, I showed them...... " ... now let's rethink...."

And then they gave me the PM role and I was extended on contract to double my contact time to the end of it, covering implementation, not just planning. £50k/year in 1999.

lostinrates

Friend of mine is visiting from Korea next week. I'm really excited, I haven't seen her for years and years and years. She has a super great career now. She hasn't met DH but is going to meet him in London for a coffee then get the train here just for the afternoon,

PasturesNew

lostinrates wrote: »

Mine wouldn't. But I could probably sniff out whether I thought ' the client' in question was a good egg or a bad egg. They should intro Duce the lie egg test as a reliable indicator.

I'd produce a chart with fat red pen everywhere they slipped up!

PasturesNew

lostinrates wrote: »

I agree with chewy actually.

pfft.
I guess, the law of averages said somebody had to one day.

lostinrates

PasturesNew wrote: »

pfft.
I guess, the law of averages said somebody had to one day.

I often do, he's just too funny to not engage with, but I am fairly certain he knows that.

neverdespairgirl

chewmylegoff wrote: »

An analyst/investigative type role paying up to £lots.

Then yes, it's a reasonable question. We ask our prospective pupils / tenants something similar - "why do you want to come to this Chambers?"

If they then say, "I want to do insolvency / employment / personal injury law" we can have a good guess they've not even looked at our website (-:

If they talk about wanting to do extradition, immigration, public law or crime, and then give some examples of cases, at least they know what we do.

PasturesNew wrote: »

It's all fluff and b0ll0x though isn't it. You're really asking people to exhibit skills (bullsh1t and fluff) that they might not possess, yet they'd be fab at doing the actual job.

I can't do fluff and nonsense, I just do a d4mned good, methodical, perfect job to a high standard while thinking outside the box and streamlining the processes over time to ensure the work's completed faster/better .... before I move onto pre-empting what you need and delivering it ahead of and above your expectations.

Saying exactly that would almost certainly get you the job, though!