Job Applications: The Friendly Way to get Impersonal

[Rex Idiotarum]

If there is any implication of how a company will treat an employee, look no further than the Applications. Don't these people understand that until I'm hired, I'm still a customer, and like any other customer, I would not want to fill out twenty forms and a questioner just to talk to a manager.

Why do these companies think that they can treat potential customers and future employees like this? They run you through loops, lie to you, require all of your personal information, and never get back to you. It is ridiculous. I for one won't stand it. I'd rather, after an interview, have the person tell me what was wrong and that they won't hire me than just tell me they'll call and never do.

If there is one reason I'd support socialism, it's just to get rid of this crap that these cooperations have set up. And so, I'm going to start a blacklist and boycott of Companies that require online applications with tests that seed out applicants.

Walmart, Bestbuy, Office Depot, Border's, and the list goes on and on.

Because, the best way to see how a person interacts with another person, is to give him a set of questions via computer with limited answers.

[tannish2]

they treat us like this BECAUSE THEY CAN, no other reason, a human life has a set value(as does an hour), and quite frankly, you arent worth either in their opinion, noone is, people are stupid and can be duped, if you can pay someone less and treat them like crap thats a good employee. that and manners+political correctness are getting out of hand.

oh, and theres no form of government that would change this.

[RandomNPC]

a friend of mine went and took a series of management classes after high school. know what they are? the classes go on about how to get into peoples heads and make them do what you want, while still getting them really upset with you. no joke, management classes teach you to mess with people.

who makes job aplication forms? managers.

enjoy.

[Indon]

The majority of the labor market has little interest in the quality of the employee, sadly.

A few businesses are working on the (probably superior) paradigm that a reliable, competent, higher-morale worker is healthier and more productive, and that this pays off for the company... but they are, well, few and far between.

I guess it takes a healthy company to want to have a healthy workforce.

[Lilly]

Hear hear! The whole getting a job process sucks mightly. It's like a rainbow vacuum cleaner, it leaves nothing behind (like your soul). I guess it just prepares you to work in whatever job you actually get hired for. Also this is the same system that thinks paying a college graduate 6.35/hr to do mind numbing work that they really don't want to do a good idea.



BTW, those personality tests are really easy to beat. It's very easy to see that they have a right answer and a wrong answer to each question. You just have to answer the questions right.

[SDF]

A lot of it depends on what type of job you are going for, and how qualified you are. If I am applying for a lot of potential jobs and I have credentials out the wazoo, they have to sell me on their company.


BTW, those personality tests are really easy to beat. It's very easy to see that they have a right answer and a wrong answer to each question. You just have to answer the questions right.

It depends on the personality test. The MMPI-2 is comprehensive enough, and designed to pick up when someone is doing exactly that. Lots of government positions and many companies use it to figure out what kind of employee you will be. Other tests are often crap and answering truthfully on honesty questions will keep you from getting the job.

[Cruxador]

The original idea, I believe, was to make a process arduous enough that people wouldn't apply unless they actually wanted the job. otherwise, people would send in their applications to every company they even close to wanted, and then pick and choose from the best ones (kind of like how it works for colleges). The problems with that are that that generates a LOT of applications, and when people say "I'm sorry, I've found better employment somewhere else", or worse just never show up for work, then the company has to find someone else to replace them. Both of those things cost a considerable amount of manhours and money, things with which corporate entities are notoriously tight fisted. (Duh. :smalltongue: )

And Lilly, yeah, I cheat on personality tests too. it helps when you've taken a bunch of business classes and know exactly what they want. there are two general types, though. There are some that are actually tough to cheat on.

[DCrane1]

After reading this, it reminds me about the one thing good about working at Sullivan and Cromwell. They came to me right of law school. Sure the hours suck, the people are mean, the work long and boring and not what I dreamed my legal career to be, but hey, at least I didn't need to fill out one of those damned personality tests. Man those sound like they suck.

[Lilly]

It depends on the personality test. The MMPI-2 is comprehensive enough, and designed to pick up when someone is doing exactly that. Lots of government positions and many companies use it to figure out what kind of employee you will be. Other tests are often crap and answering truthfully on honesty questions will keep you from getting the job.

All the one's I've had to do for job applications are something a whole lot less reliable. You know all those internet Meyers-Brigs tests? They're worse than those. And then there was the PEP test which asked about 30 times "have you ever lied" and about 50 times "have you ever done drugs" and the company made important hiring decisions off of this test. There was also the one question that made my life miserable for the 6 months I was there "Do you plan on staying with the company for a long time?" I said No and was not allowed any real privileges because they didn't know when I'd leave. And now, even though I moved half way across the country so I wouldn't have to work retail anymore to support myself, I'm still having to apply for a lot of retail positions. Grumble.

[Rex Idiotarum]

I can't even get Retail. I'm trying to get away from food, but i can't even get companies to look at me.

[Midnight Son]

I can't even get Retail. I'm trying to get away from food, but i can't even get companies to look at me.It would probably help if you didn't pogo into the job interview wearing a blood covered straight jacket.:smallyuk:

[Rex Idiotarum]

You say that not knowing how true that statement is...

[tannish2]

The majority of the labor market has little interest in the quality of the employee, sadly.

A few businesses are working on the (probably superior) paradigm that a reliable, competent, higher-morale worker is healthier and more productive, and that this pays off for the company... but they are, well, few and far between.

I guess it takes a healthy company to want to have a healthy workforce.

but they like to get paid more. and according to many policies they HAVE to get paid more, ive read stories of people getting fired because they consistantly earned large bonuses.

[Brickwall]

I've been through the application process, my friend, and I know you're overreacting. If everyone who applied got hired, we wouldn't have so much trouble finding help when we're shopping, now would we? :smallamused:

Try finding work at a place where you can get a regular application. That slightly-less impersonal submission route may be what you need to get an interview. And the interview? Just try and act normal and confident. Avoid overdoing it on any jokes. Say maybe one, and laugh at all the interviewer's. Even if they're not funny, try and force out a giggle.

I hope this generic advice is helpful. Got me a job, and if I can do it, anyone with at least one arm and a voicebox can.

[Cyrano]

Of course, in your case, Rex, it's justified.
Jokes!
Anyway, your entire premise is flawed.
"If there is any implication of how a company will treat an employee, look no further than the Applications. Don't these people understand that until I'm hired, I'm still a customer, and like any other customer, I would not want to fill out twenty forms and a questioner just to talk to a manager."
Your assumption here is that "Walmart, Bestbuy, Office Depot, Border's" treat their customers DIFFERENTLY.

[Ikkitosen]

This is the sucky part about applying for a job that a lot of people could do (retail, food service, etc.) - they get a lot of applicants some of whom are, shall we say, not suitable. And so they're particularly draconian when it comes to the treatment of applicants. Don't worry, when you've got some experience, or an education (to some extent) then it'll improve. A bit.

That said, there are some companies where HR run the recruitment for roles they don't really understand. They can be inefficient and annoying, and not know what they're doing. They won't get back to you for months either, but that's for entirely different reasons.

Either way, you're screwed. Which when I started typing wasn't the moral of the story I was going for, but it seemed inevitable! :smallamused:

[Rex Idiotarum]

Is it possible to change my status to illegal alien?

Yo, 'omes, chance you get me a yob?

[Nightgaunt]

Why do these companies think that they can treat potential customers and future employees like this? They run you through loops, lie to you, require all of your personal information, and never get back to you. It is ridiculous. I for one won't stand it. I'd rather, after an interview, have the person tell me what was wrong and that they won't hire me than just tell me they'll call and never do.


1) As others have said, because they can. When the number of applicants far exceeds the number of employees the company requires the treatment of the employees decreases. This is the other side of "the invisible hand of the market". They rely on their silly tests because it takes too long to interview everyone, and it costs too much. As others have said, some of the tests are useless, some of them are actually based on personality traits. Unless you happen to know what traits they are hiring for, you won't be able to fool the test.

For example Wal-Mart (I was a manager there about 8-10 years ago) wants you to go as Local and Happy as possible (for example when they ask what part of the newspaper you read, you read the Local section first). Say Yes when they ask if you've ever stolen anything, then give a low amount. Wal-Mart knows everyone steals, but they want you to be honest about it.

Anyway...
2) Do what I used to do, lie to them. Give fake references, don't disclose your SSN (if in the US) or any real personal information. Like so many places, the companies that do background checks use an outsourced company to the check. For example, you could use one SSN for your resume/application and then give another to HR after you are hired. The two systems are almost always completely separate.

3) No one ever tells you what was wrong, because they don't want to waste their time telling you. This is true on almost all levels of the ladder. Even at higher levels or when you are a highly-trained consultant doing RFP (request for proposal) they still won't give you the actual reason you were not chosen. I can't blame them for it, it's just the way it goes.

--
Have heart, if you ply your trade with effort long enough maybe you can get in to a field or become skilled enough where it doesn't happen anymore. I'm an Independent Contractor (I prefer Mercenary) who does a very specific kind of job. It is rare that I have hunt anymore, like another poster said I can now screen out the potential employers. :) Good luck!

[Totally Guy]

Wal-Mart knows everyone steals, but they want you to be honest about it.

What? Normal people don't steal things, it's not a normal thing to do.

[Pwenet]

BTW, those personality tests are really easy to beat. It's very easy to see that they have a right answer and a wrong answer to each question. You just have to answer the questions right.

Strange.

I once tossed in an application to CompUSA. Within a few days I was called in for an interview. We sat down, had a good one, the managed admitted up front I was already better than almost everyone else they brought in to interview. He then brought me to a computer with a personality quiz.

I like to consider myself a decent honest person, who stays within the laws. Somehow on that test, I got red-flagged, and the interview, which was going really well, stopped like you woulden't believe. The interviewer couldn't even tell me what was wrong that turned me, a person whom he was having a nice conversation with, into someone with the black plague.

Going back to the original post, yes the job applications suck (I filled out many, layoffs do that to you). But at least you have not had the experience of walking into a interview with someone leaving, be treated like a slab of meat and then leave to see another victim right behind you.

[Xuincherguixe]

I think you've summed up why self employment is so popular.

Personally, I want to get into the stock market. I'm actually pretty good with the whole educated guess thing.

Might be an idea to take some of those manager courses to get an idea about how people are trying to control you. Of course, not being controllable seems to be unattractive to employers too. Really it's one giant no win situation.

Hence once again, self employment :P

[Supagoof]

See, most interview questions are behavior based now a days. They are meant to have you give examples to exhibit what kind of behavior you would take as situations arise.

So, knowing that, you'll have to answer in a "paladin lawful good" way rather then your normal way.

having been part of the interviewer process, my favorite question to ask was "Tell me about a time where you did something that was against company policy and why."

It's amazing the kind of stories you hear when you ask this question. I call it a hit or miss. A hit - you have someone answer that they ignored the company policy in order to help retain a long time customer. A miss - you have someone admit that they stole from the company because they didn't agree with their benifits. So - which would you hire?

A lot of the questionaires are actually to filter out a lot of applicants. Sure, the companies may miss a few good candidates, but if you consider the cost of having to interview a lot of the bad candidates, you can see why a lot of them use a questionaire as part of the process.

One thing I suggest - take your time! Think your answer through before you commit to it. As a person who did interviews, it was never ever a big deal to have someone sit back and think about the question before they answer. This would tell me that the person thinks, actually thinks about an answer before giving one. If I'm hiring for anything, I'd certainly want someone who shown he/she thinks about what's going on rather then shooting off the first thing that comes to their head.

Remember, you want the job, so you are trying to sell yourself to the company to hire you for the job. if you were the company, who would you want - the best. So sell yourself as the best person for the job. The company wants the best person. They don't want to waste time hiring someone who is not right for the job, as it costs money to train a person, and if they don't work out, that's money lost. Buisinesses are not in the market to lost money.

So while I don't agree with the questionaire before the interview as it's impersonal, I do realize in this world of monsterjobs.com that companies receive tons of applicants for most positions, and the questionaire does act as a filter to get qualified people through and non-qualified people out. It's a very cost effecient method. You can host questionaire's online for fractions of a penny, and if someone gets past the questionaire, they have shown that can pass the test. Remember, nothing stops you from taking the test over and over and over again. Sometimes persistence pays off.

Also, if anyone you know can help you get a job, use them! About 80% of people who are hired are hired because a friend recommended them or they have a relative or something.

My two cents. Hopefully you'll find it helps Rex.

Know that you may hear many no's to applying for jobs, but it just takes one yes.:smallsmile:

[crimson77]

Why do these companies think that they can treat potential customers and future employees like this? They run you through loops, lie to you, require all of your personal information, and never get back to you. It is ridiculous. I for one won't stand it. I'd rather, after an interview, have the person tell me what was wrong and that they won't hire me than just tell me they'll call and never do.

I understand your frustration with the job process, it does suck to wait and wonder and have them never call you back. However, there is another side.

Think what it must be like to be on the other side of the desk, having 50 to 100 applications to weed through and interview the best 10 and make a decision. Often employers do not have the time and energy to inform those 100 or even those 10 that they did not get the job.

Additionally, it is not the managers place to tell you why you did not get the job. Many people do not handle constructive criticism well. What would they tell you even if you did not get the job? My guess is that they would say "We took the applicant with the most experience."

[tannish2]

some people dont steal.
cost effective isnt an issue when your making 500000% profits. i may be insane, but i think people actually matter. wait... im pretty sure i am insane, nevermind.

[Tobaselly]

There are actually lots of reasons why businesses and companies have extensive application processes. One of the biggest is because after a certain size businesses are required to keep track of all applications that meet the qualifications for a position. So what they do is they build into the application process a series of flag that if you trigger one allows them to no longer have to track your application. Successfully meeting all of the qualifications for the position means that they HAVE to(as in by law) consider your application.

For whoever mentioned giving incorrect SSNs and false info on applications. I wouldn't do that. Now adays the application (especially online applications) is fed into various HR applications and if your position requires a background check and if you signed an FCRA form (either by hand or electronically) during that application process (both of these are very likely) that false information is what they are going to use to perform the background check on you. And failing a background check is one of those things that will kick you out of the application process. Also if you are applying for a position that is regulated (say a CDL Driver), they have to keep that application on file and show it to auditors on request.

[Reinboom]

This is why I find it best to find businesses that are owned on a personal scale or I already know someone personally in who 'sneak' me into an interview.
Of course, I can't forever rely on this—fortunately, my planned target of work relies on a portfolio more than anything anymore.

I can't stand the little machines of test... to know I should lie to them. I.. can't stand that... :smallfrown:

[cucchulainnn]

it sucks but when interviewing you need a way to weed people out. imagine you have to fill maybe 10 positions and have 4,000 people applying. after weeding out unqualified people you may have a few hundred left. what then? in my last job i had to hire the interns. we had a total of 7 positions and would get 500-700 applicants each term. after a wile i set up test, to see if you follow directions, do you need to have your hand held, are you reliable. even then how do you decide between a few people who have similar or the same qualifications and remain fair. unfortunately that means missing some good people but you still need some way to reduce the numbers.

[Tarnag40k]

If there is any implication of how a company will treat an employee, look no further than the Applications. Don't these people understand that until I'm hired, I'm still a customer, and like any other customer, I would not want to fill out twenty forms and a questioner just to talk to a manager.

Why do these companies think that they can treat potential customers and future employees like this? They run you through loops, lie to you, require all of your personal information, and never get back to you. It is ridiculous. I for one won't stand it. I'd rather, after an interview, have the person tell me what was wrong and that they won't hire me than just tell me they'll call and never do.

If there is one reason I'd support socialism, it's just to get rid of this crap that these cooperations have set up. And so, I'm going to start a blacklist and boycott of Companies that require online applications with tests that seed out applicants.

Walmart, Bestbuy, Office Depot, Border's, and the list goes on and on.

Because, the best way to see how a person interacts with another person, is to give him a set of questions via computer with limited answers.


my job never did that to me, but then again they are a single dealershp, that gives their workers free corn (was a thankyou from some farmers that they donated a couple of trucks to) and free ham, at the owners wallet, not the dealership's, and donate's several engines to the local less then a block away Vocational school each year for the engine theory part of the auto tech classes.

Then again it also counts on who's in management, who owns the place and how big the corperation is. I've dealt with a radioshack that had an manager that was an *******, and was not able to put in a complaint with the company, but whent to another and got exactly the help I wanted.

Also it took me 23 job interviews, and 8 months to finally get a job. And have a clean record and had several good references. Unfortunately my boss hasn't had the best luck in hiring and is typically busy dealing with customers calling about returns, or damage (we deal with delievering GM parts all over New England) and well as such has a hard time realizing the lazyness of some of the co-workers

[Nightgaunt]

What? Normal people don't steal things, it's not a normal thing to do.

That is not the question. The question is posed as "have you ever stolen anything". It is very difficult to find people who have never, once, stolen something. Even if it is a piece of bubblegum from a friend, a nickle from your mothers purse, a siblings toy. Chalk from your school. etc. al. Or perhaps say, a copywritten piece of information from the internet? Add: Office Supplies?

[Damage Control]

"Have you ever stolen anything?"
"Stuff from my friends, but don't worry, I hate you!"
"You're hired."

[Ranis]

I worked in a produce department for a grocery chain in the upper-midwest called Meijer that is famous for it's produce, on a total whim shot because I needed a good job before college started up.

They taught me a LOT while I worked there, for a year and three days to the letter. I started getting some elbow room with some of the management there, and I liked *most* of the people I had to work with. It was a good job. Then, they started screwing with me. I'd get all of my work done on time, early even, and they would expect more out of me than they were expecting out of some of the people that had been there five years. Granted I had been there for a long time, but that produce department was literally a fourth of the entire store, and there was only so much I could do.

The final straw at this Meijer was when the other guy on second shift called in because his wife was in the hospital-PERFECTLY understandable. No hard feelings to him there, whatsoever. The problem was that apparently seven old women on first shift can't do half of what they are actually supposed to do, leaving my co-worker and I enough work for four people in the back. Oh yeah, he called off! I'm by myself now. So I went to my superior, who was running the store last night, and told him that if I didn't get any help that night, the job wasn't going to get done, because there was simply too much for me to do by myself, and I wanted to make sure it got done, so I asked if he could call someone in for a couple of hours to help me out.

He told me something very rude which I cannot repeat here, but it was to the effect of "I don't have time to listen to you complain. Do your best. *click*"

Final. Straw.

I got all of my work done out of being in a sheer rage giving me the adrenaline I needed to drive me over the edge to organize and sort everything to count it that night.

When I got done, I left and went to the nearby Wal-Mart and put in an application in their computer-thingy. The next day I was called down for an interview, and I told the lady interviewing me everything I would tell anyone else, hands-down, no fluff, honestly. I told her how I didn't like the way things were going, and I couldn't work for a company where my superiors didn't care if the work got done. "When you're paying me for my time, I want to make sure that I'm earning what you're giving me," I told her. She hired me on the spot making over $1.50 more than anyone else in the department. Oh, she also hired me in the Deli with no experience. At all.

The point I'm trying to make here is when you do go in for an interview, act like a person and not like a machine. They already know the machine part of you, the raw facts about who you are, and they have that on a nice stack of papers for you. What you need to do is fill in and be a person-be confident when you talk, when they ask you a question, think about it first, then answer it fully, so that there is no doubt upon your stance on the situation. "I went out of my way for a lady who couldn't eat potassium to find her a fruit she could eat." is a much better answer than "Yeah."