Recently
Defending Oneself Is Always Worth the Effort
Q: A former supervisor falsely accused me of things in order to fire me, so I resigned before she had the chance. She had no proof of any of the accusations, and she did not report anything to the authorities. That was five years ago, and I have had …Read more.
Dressing Appropriately Shows More Than Style
Q: I started a new job after being unemployed for some time. While I was unemployed, I gained weight and can no longer fit in my work clothes. I can't afford to buy new things right now. I need to catch up on my bills. I did buy new jeans and a pair …Read more.
Partner Moves Funds Into Own Account, Leaving Other Partner With Bills
Q: I am going through the biggest fight in my life right now. My husband moved our personal and business money into offshore accounts in his own name before I realized he was having an affair and I filed for divorce. He is colluding with a banker …Read more.
Mortgage Industry Downfall Affects All Workplaces
Q: I have been a successful, full-time real estate agent in Chicago for 20 years with a prestigious, nationally known company. Our residential market held on longer than other areas in the country, but what I see happening now to homeowners who are …Read more.
more articles
|
Lost Job by Using Recruiter in a Tight EconomyQ: I am employed and happy in my job. I was contacted, however, by a recruiter for a job that was closer to my academic background, a more senior position than I am currently in, and located in another part of the country. The job interested me, but the recruiter warned me that the hiring manager has a "bland" personality. I decided to interview anyway. After the phone interview with the hiring manager, I knew the recruiter was right about the manager. The manager seemed uninterested and questioned bringing me into such a position. I reassured him about my abilities and all that I had done, so the company brought me in for an interview. At the company, everyone seemed frantic, harried, cold and disorganized. I brought in a presentation as required, and this manager complained about others in the groups — women on maternity leave, the lack of money the company has (despite the fact that the company bragged about growing its many projects). A week later, I learned that the company had passed on me, and the recruiter said they were considering candidates who had applied directly to the company. I am not upset over the rejection, especially because of how poorly the company represented itself. I am wondering how I can obtain more information on such a company, or should I just consider this a learning experience? I never would recommend this company to anyone; it doesn't matter how impressive its size and Web site articles are. A: Every bit of research you glean on a company is part of the learning experience to help you make a good decision on whether to join if offered a job. Of course companies are going to present the most impressive information on their Web sites and in news releases, news features, annual reports and any other method of distributing information to the public. Potential employees must then add that formal information to what they observe of all the inner workings of a company when at the interviews. Always consider the employees' manners, moods, personalities and attitudes, as all of those are part of the learning experience. Joni Lampi, founder and president of Management Recruiters of Pittsburgh-North, says it is common for companies to continue their own job searches while retaining recruiting firms to help.
Your description of the hiring manager was far more accurate than your recruiter's opinion. The manager was not "bland." He was uninterested, rude and unprofessional. You picked up critical information through your phone and in-person interviews by seeing that no one at the company was relaxed, warm, friendly or happy. In short, you would have been nuts to accept the job had it been offered, and that is all the information you need to know about a company. New Sign-in Phone System Is Unfair Q: My employer — a service company of janitors, rest-stop workers and bridge tenders — now has a toll-free phone number for employees to use to sign in and out each day. The sign-in time window is one minute before start time and one minute after. We were told the company needed to initiate the system because employees were leaving early and not working their full shifts. The problem is that if you miss that two-minute window, you get docked for 15 minutes, which is wrong. A: A two-minute sign-in window on a phone line is absurd, and docking an employee 15 minutes' pay for being two minutes late is wrong. Let's hope that because this is a new system for your company, its human resources department will start seeing the problems and correcting the time window to allow at least five minutes. If you hear similar complaints from all your co-workers about not getting through in that two-minute period, everyone should register a written complaint to his boss about the system. If the company continues to dock 15 minutes for calling in two minutes late, file a complaint to your state's labor department. Requiring the company to correct its new phone sign-in system should be in order so as not to break any fair labor standards. Please send your questions to: Lindsey Novak, c/o Creators Syndicate, 5777 W. Century Blvd., Suite 700, Los Angeles, CA 90045. E-mail her at LindseyNovak@yahoo.com, or visit her Web site at www.LindseyNovak.com. She answers all e-mails. To find out more about Lindsey Novak and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com. COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS.COM
|
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
