What is employers' problem

bod1467

Am I alone in thinking the OP exists somewhere on the autistic spectrum?

Xikams

swingaloo wrote: »

Four interviews in a week, really? If that is true then clearly someone helped to put your CV together to get to the interview stage.

I really wish they had, it took a long time to put together. A lot of the advice out there is really misleading - my best tip is to draft a copy which has just the bare bones of it, then do a second copy with a little more sales-speak in it. And making the CV relevant is also important - you need to have one for each field. I have 5 interviews this week (6 if you count the current one I am having on this forum).

swingaloo wrote: »

For someone who thinks he knows so much how is it that you are the only person on the thread who does not understand why you are not getting a job offer.

It's interesting how you say suggest that you can see what everyone else understands. Can you see everyone's thoughts? Is MSE some kind of Jung-style interconnected consciousness with a central brain?

bettyboo71 wrote: »

Entertaining though I have found this thread, I am wondering why so many people are continuing to attempt a discussion with someone who clearly is not interested in anyone else's opinion - in spite of having asked for it.

What we could also entertain is talking about jobs.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser wrote: »

Anyone capable of getting a job knows better about getting a job than you.

That statement doesn't make logical sense, as I consider myself capable of getting a job. If I didn't, I wouldn't bother talking about it.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser wrote: »

Seriously, what makes you think you know better than anyone about anything?

Again, that doesn't make sense, as if everyone knew equally, then we wouldn't share information. I think you have given up and are raving into a keyboard.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser wrote: »

I'll give you a hand there. Nothing. You've failed to succeed at everything and you blame everyone bar yourself.

Sadly, you're right. I never achieved my childhood dream of flying a space shuttle and saving the earth from an alien invasion while wearing a 100-foot tall robot suit. How will I ever live with myself.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser wrote: »

It's your fault. You're a fool. Recognise that and listen to people and you might get some joy out of life. Continue as you are and you will continue to fail, as you have.

I still can't see what this has to do with employers and how they advertise & fill their jobs.

bod1467 wrote: »

Am I alone in thinking the OP exists somewhere on the autistic spectrum?

This made me laugh.

Guest101

I think they're called appointments not interviews, speaking from a mental health point of view.


Don't you find it strange that, based upon your CV 5 people (let's presume at least 4 are reasonable and competent) are offering you an interview, but you fall down when they encounter your personality?


Let me put it this way, I wouldn't hire you. Even if you were the strongest candidate in terms of qualifications.


If someone does hire you, do you think you'll be there fore the 2 years required to get employment rights?


You need to either:
Change your attitude
Or go self employed

Malthusian

Am I alone in thinking the OP exists somewhere on the autistic spectrum?

Every time someone acts like a bit of an !!!! on the Internet someone says "maybe they're on the autistic spectrum". It's like seeing someone humming to themselves and saying "maybe they're on the schizophrenic spectrum". Not all human behaviour needs to be medicalised.

It's probably perfectly true - the thing about a spectrum is that literally every single human being can be said to be on it somewhere, in the same way that pitch black exists on the visible light spectrum. It just doesn't tell us anything useful.

undaunted

Xikams wrote: »

They are never clear about it. Things like "We found a more suitable candidate" or "We didn't feel you were right for the team". I hate it, because I give them specific answers, and they turn around and get vague or don't even reply.


Well then they're stupid, because they are missing out on someone who is going to be fully committed, flexible with hours, sponge for a brain, comfortable with targets, ideas man, self-motivated, able to turn up on time, grown-up and ready to work. If they're not taking me into their team then maybe it's them with the problem.

See I don't get this. When I was at school, that was when personality was the problem. At work, yes, personalities can clash but isn't it more important to believe in the company ethic, achieve your goal and put in the 110%?


:rotfl: I wish I WAS arrogant, it would get me places. You can get killer bonuses in sales these days. The more narcissistic the better. Come to think of it, sounds like right up your street mate!



I really appreciate that, choosing a candidate is a big decision in itself, and when I do these interviews, a lot of the time I think about how they are going to decide, what they are going to feel, and what their experience of hiring has been like. You can be swamped with candidates and be on a knife edge on it. So maybe that's something to learn ie. employers just want to get it over with.


Psh. Do you live in a world where employers come to your address, take your quizes, answer your questions for an hour and cross their fingers that they get chosen? Time and time again, it's all about them. I'm not getting out what I put in. So unless you want PMs of my callous-scarred feet and beaten shoes you can stop this bootstraps nonsense.


That's very interesting, do you think that you advertised the position fairly and accurately? I have no doubt that you didn't, but if people that had no name to the role were going for the job, what could be improved?

I'm asking this because again I am going to interviews and finding that interviewers are usually - if not always - pre-occupied in some kind of way, usually concentration on relationships rather than the role itself. It's concerning that so many people who are not applicable to the job are on the other side of your table.

You may or may not actually be arrogant - hard to tell from an online posting but you certainly come across as potentially so and / or abrasive.


To answer your question / comment above, IE " See I don't get this. When I was at school, that was when personality was the problem. At work, yes, personalities can clash but isn't it more important to believe in the company ethic, achieve your goal and put in the 110%? " I'd be interested to know in what way you are different now from school - perhaps you've over compensated for what you once perceived to be a failing? but would in the meantime suggest that no, for some employers a disruptive team member may be something they don't want or consider likely to benefit the overall cause, particularly if they have another good candidate who would be likely to work alongside that team far better.

undaunted

Xikams wrote: »

Would it kill you to think that I actually BELIEVE in these words?

I'm not lashing out honey, I'm disagreeing. We can still be friends. :x


Uh... hmmm.. ummm... (turns to psychiatist, talks, looks back) Yes. Yes, it does.


Hold on to your butts. There are employers out there, the same brand, the same location, the same job, and they are constantly advertising for the same job. People go in, people go out, and it's the same job, and there's no tolerance for people, and it's just plain nasty.

It's interesting that several posters have perceived you negatively - Eg as angry / lashing out, responding with sarcasm, sexist or patronising terms (how do you know that Cadon is / would appreciate being described as a "honey" ? for example)


Still, I expect you're right and they are all just idiots! ??


Your attitude to women seems contradictory - at points you first imply and then later outrightly spout sexism, at another suggest you actually mean quite the contrary. This may or may not come across at interview but if you even remotely come across as holding some of these views there's little wonder employers are running for the hills. Perhaps you'd be better to concentrate on their abilities rather than an employees sex? Incidentally, most scientific studies would consider your views on women and empathy to be total nonsense - they are in fact generally considered to be the more empathic and nurturing sex!

Though you profess to want to get along with others, state such things are obvious etc there's no evidence in this thread that you actually deliver on that I'm afraid - quite the opposite. If your interviewers are perceiving you similarly then perhaps there in lies the answer to your problem / question!

Sncjw

You just talk a load of waffle maybe that's what's putting people off along with your sexist views. Also combined with your sense of entitlement

undaunted

Xikams wrote: »

Women will be shallow, unprepared, cowardly, emotional, and unable, while the men are far more likely to be accurate, descriptive, stable, and directive in identifying and solving problems, of any kind, in any way. I have found a relivable success when I treat women like children.

During my interviews, they will read from a script, insert script words in conversation, and rely on constant scripting. They will often concentrate more on their relationship to emotions than the job itself. And the power I have over them as a man is obvious. They will walk and move in certain ways towards me because I am a man. They will repeat my words back to me; sometimes whole phrases. It's like I can almost see their father in front of their face, and I have to 'fit in' there. They are looking to be told what to do, by a man.

I suggest you wake up and smell the coffee! This is unlikely to be why they repeat your words back to you. Also, you have so much power over them and they are so incapable of making a decision without your approval that at the end of several interviews they've all decided not to give you the job!!!

TBagpuss wrote: »

Seriously? I've been trying, and I can't think of a single woman I know who fits into that pattern.

If as at least one poster has suggested the original poster is from a different culture could it perhaps be that there in lies a fundamental problem. IE They are used to relating to women in an entirely different manner than is considered normal or acceptable in modern Britain & this comes across through interview and / or references?

Guest101

undaunted wrote: »

I suggest you wake up and smell the coffee! This is unlikely to be why they repeat your words back to you. Also, you have so much power over them and they are so incapable of making a decision without your approval that at the end of several interviewers they've all decided not to give you the job!!!






If as at least one poster has suggested the original poster is from a different culture perhaps could it be that there in lies a fundamental problem. IE They are used to relating to women in an entirely different manner than is considered normal or acceptable in modern Britain & this comes across through interview and / or references?

I'm sure they do repeat whole phrases back to the OP, just to confirm they heard him right.....

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

Xikams wrote: »

I still can't see what this has to do with employers and how they advertise & fill their jobs.

It has everything to do with it. People don't want you working for them. Because you're not likeable, not qualified, not very bright, and have a massive and massively unjustified opinion of yourself. It's YOU they don't want.

They advertise their jobs to find reasonable people who will do a reasonable job, and fill them with just such people. You aren't one.

Try pretending to be someone else at interviews, maybe. Or better, stop having such ignorant opinions, open your eyes, and listen to other people. Once again, most people are more successful in life than you are. Listen to them. They know better.