Annoyances on the Job Hunt

-

Job hunting is no fun, and this is especially true in the current job market. Endless applications with little or no response is draining on the soul. Here are some specific annoyances in the job hunt that I feel like listing out. 

One of the most common issues is ghosting. This happens when I'm talking to a recruiter or even a hiring manager and they just stop communicating with me. It's a little embarrassing to follow up to try to get a response out of them, so generally I just let it go. Recruiters in particular should be keeping up with their potential candidates, especially after submitting them for a role. But it's about equally bad when I've been through a round or two of interviews and then hear crickets. 

Another issue, and probably the most prevalent, is spam. I don't know how many emails, calls, and text messages I receive per week from "recruiters" excitedly telling me about roles that would "be a perfect fit." And then it turns out that the position is located several hours away or even on the other side of the country from me. I also get emails for completely incorrect roles, like the time someone reached out to me about a Senior Java Developer role. 

How about multi-level marketing schemes (MLM)? Sometimes someone on LinkedIn or elsewhere learns that I'm out of work, and contacts me about their exciting opportunity. If you try to say it's an MLM, they'll deny it and point to the product or service they provide. My friends, it doesn't matter if a service or product is actually provided. A pyramid is a pyramid. 

In the present job market I've had to contend with over-specific job descriptions. The list of "must haves" looks like a deluded wish list for a superhuman being capable of being a business analyst, project manager, and engineer. What really gets me is when they list unique and someone uncommon systems that the candidate must be proficient in using. It's an employer's market right now, in which if they wait long enough the companies will probably find their unicorn (and then underpay them). Too bad for the rest of us. 

A recent development has been the rise of the "virtual recruiter." This is an AI-powered tool that calls the candidate to ask preliminary questions about their fit for the role. I suppose it's supposed to save the real recruiters time by allowing them to listen to recorded responses. It's terribly impersonal and I've never completed answering one's questions. Too frustrating. 

Here's one that's less common now that it was several years ago: application forms that require a resume but still make you to fill in all your work and education experience. What's the point of providing the resume if you have to retype all the details again? Nowadays we have systems that are able, to a limited extent, to parse resumes and pre-fill information, but they aren't perfect. There's usually a little fussing over the form that's still required, putting in correct dates or other info.

LinkedIn is a great tool for job hunting. Although I've heard people say it's terrible, and I'll admit that I've sent hundreds of applications with no response, I have gotten some responses that led to interviews. However, LinkedIn has flaws. One of which is that it keeps showing me jobs that I've already applied for. My job feed is currently junked up with them, and there seems to be no way to sort out the ones where I applied. 

Finally, one of the banes of my job search are perpetually reposted jobs. I've been looking for work since a few months before my Meta contract ended, and it's been nearly five months since I left Meta, yet I'm still seeing some of the same jobs reposted. These companies aren't serious about hiring. They're just collecting resumes to see what's out there and perhaps give the impression that they're doing well (since their hiring).  

So there you have it, my laundry list of bad vibes from the job hunt. Despite it all, I keep getting out there and trying every day. It's the only thing I can do.

Popular posts from this blog

The Dual Faces of Technology: Enhancing and Replacing Jobs

-
Image
Automation has been on my mind a lot lately, more immediately due to a book I read , but also because of the looming reality of artificial intelligence. To understand what's involved, making the distinction between replacing technologies and enabling technologies is crucial. As we traverse the timeline of the 20th century, we observe how each type of technology has distinctly influenced employment. Automated technologies have transformed industries by replacing manual labor with machines. Consider the automated switchboards introduced in the early 20th century. Previously, telephone operators manually connected calls using physical connectors on a switchboard. With the advent of automated switchboards in the 1920s and 1930s, many of these jobs were eliminated as calls were routed through electromechanical systems. Similarly, in agriculture, the introduction of mechanical harvesters like the combine harvester in the 1930s drastically reduced the need for manual labor. These machine...
Read more

The Technology Trap: Capital, Labor and Power in the Age of Automation (Book Review)

-
Image
In his compelling book, " The Technology Trap: Capital, Labor, and Power in the Age of Automation ," Carl Benedikt Frey offers a sweeping examination of the historical and ongoing impact of mechanization and automation on society. Starting with the onset of the first Industrial Revolution, Frey deftly navigates through the evolution of technology up to the modern age of artificial intelligence, presenting a nuanced view of how technological innovations have reshaped labor markets and power dynamics. Frey categorizes technological innovations into two types: enabling technologies, like the typewriter, which enhance worker productivity without displacing the labor force, and replacing technologies, such as robotic machinery in factories, which eliminate certain job roles altogether. This distinction forms the backbone of Frey’s analysis, as he explores the varying implications of each type of technology on different segments of the workforce. The book traces a historical patter...
Read more

Deputy Product Owners

-
Image
"The Product Owner is one person, not a committee. The Product Owner may represent the desires of a committee in the Product Backlog, but those wanting to change a Product Backlog item’s priority must address the Product Owner." - The Scrum Guide There are a lot of ways in which my approach to Scrum differs from what's in the official guide, and since that document refers to Scrum as 'immutable,' let's just call what I do 'Notscrum™.' In Scrum, there is only one product owner per team. That person is the sole person responsible for the product backlog, and the person who advocates for the work to be done. In Notscrum there is one product owner, but there can be multiple deputy product owners. Here's how it works. When my program at Viacom was first forming I met with the then-director of the Library & Archive group and learned that while he set the priorities on work done, the archivists were organized in three distinct areas with a team lead ...
Read more