Careerchat II

[Alarich II]

Quote

You guys appear to describe the existence of this fabled thing at the other end - highly skilled, highly experience employees who can command basic respect and oppeness and from an employer - but I honestly wonder sometimes whether that will exist for anyone at all the way things are going.

A problem I'm struggling with as well. At the moment the technological change puts into question our entire business model, And frankly, it feels like wandering through a fog, knowing that some time ahead, there will be a sheer cliff where you'll just have to jump and hope the parachute opens before you hit the ground.

Background: I have a tax law and accounting practice and I currently employ 13 paralegals and assistenants. We don't have many hierarchies around here: there's a boss (that's me) and there are people who work for me. There is no institutionalized hiring process, i.e. the only rules that apply is the law (obviously) and whatever my own self-respect dictates. For me, this means: I cannot hide behind corporate structures, higher-ups or anything. I make decisions and I bear ultimate responsibility, that's my job-description. So for my own mental well-being, I want to treat those who work for me in a fair and open manner. So far, this has worked out well. The turnover I have comes from natural causes: maternity leaves that turn into permanent SAHM-ness, retirement, or families who relocate because the partner found a better job in another city. I have not yet lost a single employee to a local competitor and had to fire only one because of irremediable ineptitude.

However, the ever faster growing automation of quantitative tasks will change our old ways completely and I don't know how our relatively small practice will hold up when the competition gets much fiercer than it already is. It is very likely that although we've grown in the past years, in the future we'll shrink with the whole industry. We'll probably have very little to no time for adjustment at all when the tipping point comes where suddenly, very many small pieces will fall into place and the investment into automated accounting tasks become cheaps enough to enter widespread into the market of small companies where most of our clients are at the moment. When it comes, it may mean that between 5 to 8 of my currently 13 employees will either not have the necessary skills or opportunities to create new income. I am dreading this day tbh. When I have to tell people who worked here for a long time, who are loyal, whose family and kids I know, that I can no longer employ them.

[baxus]

4 hours ago, Datepalm said:

You guys appear to describe the existence of this fabled thing at the other end - highly skilled, highly experience employees who can command basic respect and oppeness and from an employer - but I honestly wonder sometimes whether that will exist for anyone at all the way things are going.

If an employer doesn't treat you with the basic respect and openness, regardless of your level of expertise and skill, they are a bad employer. Period. It is absolutely irrelevant what position you're applying or being head-hunted for.

 

[Datepalm]

Yuh-huh. And nevertheless, welcome to, you know, the place we all live. If I passed up on employers based on sketchy contracts, openness and honesty about employment terms and basic human dignity, I'd have a much shorter CV.

aaaand just got a rejection from the South Sudan people ten minutes after setting up an interview for a different thing (in this country.) Annoying because international stuff feels like it doesn't come along that often and it seemed like basically a good fit (however short-term), but whatever. Felt like i'd had enough contact with them to ask about what the misfit was (particularly since I'd like to try again in the Autumn if nothing else interesting is happening at that point.) Curious if they answer, since I've never tried that before.

[Datepalm]

Quick rant...what is it with crotchety old econ professors who feel like they can be as patronizingly rude as they like because they think there's something subversive in adolescent psuedo-economistic reductionism like they're a sixteen year-old who's just read Freakonomics and thinks he's seen the matrix and has it all figured out? Do you not grow out of this at some goddamned point? I don't know how old this guy is, but he's been teaching intro to Economic Geography from a set of literally yellowed hand-written notes he claims date back to 1982. He brandished them proudly when I took his class seven years ago and according to contemporary accounts, still does.

I made the mistake of dropping in to ask if he needed a teaching assistant for said class, and was informed that he absolutely did and was actually scrambling to find anyone, because we all have, like, jobs and stuff and aren't available to be exploited as minimum wage labour for him, har har - but no, absolutely not he won't take me, because I'm planning on leaving in 18 months. Now, if I were to stay at the university for my PhD, maybe he'd consider it, because someone he can have for 7 years, now that's a worthwhile investment. (TA jobs usually being for a semester and basically paid in cafeteria coupons...but this one is special, apparently.)

I am, he explained, of low utility to him and therefore irrelevant. I pointed out that I have a good record of frontal teaching and a specialization in the course material not to mention actually being, you know, willing which is more than he had from anyone else, as he kept pointing out. He digressed into a whiny diatride about how hard it is to train TA's, even when they're very bright, and how they keep leaving. He was even down to a BA student, he explained, but then again her father is a professor at Princeton so it would probably be ok. I asked if he needed someone for the departmental seminar, which he is also running - 'sure, yes, but that would only be reading the student's bullshit'. (A seminar I took last semester.)  At this point I managed not to point out that he was a pompous ass and ask whether he actually listens to the words that come out of his mouth, and left.

Seriously, this is a guy who was MA advisor when I was thinking of doing that two years ago, and on leaving his office I nearly quit the university forever there and then. I said that I wanted a more quantitative orientation to my MA and whether I should maybe combine it with something else going forward or whatever it is that is available within the system on which he is tasked with advising me, and he leaned back, tsked at the cieling, and said that quantitative work is hard and you need to be quite intelligent to handle maths, you know? (I've taken most of this jerk's classes and aced all of them, btw.) He's the chair of the program and seems to have this totally contemptous attitude towards his own students as a bunch of underachieving idiots - unless he runs accross someone with an academic pedigree, ie - their parents. It's ridiculously transparent, and I guess some kind of pushback at being a self-important jackass who's research is primarily decades of tedious descriptive poring over municipal policy in a department of lefty geographers who are also, generally speaking, nice people? I dunno, but his policy as department head seems to be to dumb down the curriculum - particulalry in maths and programming - and then complain his students aren't technically inclined. IDEK. Grrr.

[Buckwheat]

Who is supposed to call in a skype interview - the candidate or the interviewer?

[HexMachina]

1 hour ago, Buckwheat said:

Who is supposed to call in a skype interview - the candidate or the interviewer?

In my experience of telephone interviews, it's the interviewer. They'll have set aside a time in their diary to interview you and will ring in that slot. Problem with you ringing them is they may not be free at the time (even if it's in the time slot - something may have cropped up they have to deal with). 

I actually had a telephone interview today. Got off to a bad start when the interviewer couldn't reach me (no idea why - phone was switched it, but it never rang and first I knew was when a voice message came through). Eventually we got in touch and it was going okay until my phone cut off again. He rang straight back, and was very understanding but it threw me and the interview kind of flopped at the end. 

[Xray the Enforcer]

Yep. In the times I've done video interviews, we've called the candidates.

[Buckwheat]

Thanks, I thought so too. I was just really nervous they did not call me. Turns there was a miscommunication issue. We are supposed to talk next week.

[Datepalm]

Always had a quick email or text exchange before a skype interview (initiated 50-50% by either side, i'd say), getting everyone coordinated, never a just sitting there and looking it and waiting for it go bloop bloop type thing at the appointed hour. 

[Joe Pesci]

Has anyone on here ever been injured at work? I was in a pretty bad work accident a few years back, and now that I'm able to work again, I'm starting to find that it's a huge red flag in the interview process, despite the accident not being my fault at all. Very frustrated with the job hunt atm...

[Datepalm]

I made it to a second stage of an interview process for a maternity cover to coordinate transport reform in the Palestinian sector here, which would have been a huge management project that I'm solidly underqualified for, so going to chalk that up to one of those failures that you need to get to know you're trying, or something.

That it would have been 8-10 months would have been ideal in terms of planning to go back to school in a year. That it would have meant starting in less than a week would have been an utter catastrophe in terms of finishing this degree, its associated thesis (due in December, largely unwritten and un-researched as yet) and subsequent round of applications and research projects. So probably for the best - I just can't help think that it would have been a good line for the CV for said applications. And then again - maybe not. I'm slightly relieved the decision is out of my hands, actually.

Slightly sneakily, I also learned during the first interview for this thing what firms were doing their actual planning work and one of them is hiring, so I already had an interview for that as well (and now they want me to write a mock-report test, which I find annoying and inappropriate, but whatever) but not sure if I should take that either - it would probably be less intense than the first thing, but - while more directly professionally relevant - less exciting. I'm wondering if it would be appropriate to like try and negotiate a slightly part-time position, in the 50-80% sort of range...?

[HexMachina]

I have a question, possibly a bit premature but i'd like an opinion before i go into this.

Anyway, i have two interviews coming up, one next week, one for the end of the month. Both are for jobs starting in August. I'm wondering two things: first, if asked is it appropriate to say i have another interview lined up? And second, what would be proper etiquette if i get an offer from the first interview? Would it be improper to go to the second interview (which is the job i would prefer if i'm honest) hoping I get that?

The big concern i have is that the second interview is only a week and a half before the other job would start, if I got that one. So it seems pretty shady on my part if i got that job and decided not to take the first job after all...

This is all premature of course, since right now i have 0 offers. But its something i've been wondering about

[Starkess]

I think in general it is fine to let them know you are pursuing multiple opportunities and to let them know your timeline. If job 1 isn't okay with your decision coming so late, then you'll have to decide whether to accept their hypothetical offer or put all your hopes on job 2.

I had a somewhat similar situation and I ended up backing out of the process after the second interview with job 1 because the timeline just didn't quite work out. But I don't think there is anything inappropriate about it, and it's best just to be relatively straightforward.

[baxus]

14 hours ago, HelenaExMachina said:

I have a question, possibly a bit premature but i'd like an opinion before i go into this.

Anyway, i have two interviews coming up, one next week, one for the end of the month. Both are for jobs starting in August. I'm wondering two things: first, if asked is it appropriate to say i have another interview lined up? And second, what would be proper etiquette if i get an offer from the first interview? Would it be improper to go to the second interview (which is the job i would prefer if i'm honest) hoping I get that?

The big concern i have is that the second interview is only a week and a half before the other job would start, if I got that one. So it seems pretty shady on my part if i got that job and decided not to take the first job after all...

This is all premature of course, since right now i have 0 offers. But its something i've been wondering about

I never saw a problem with telling potential new employer that I'm interviewing for other positions. After all, it's not as if they're not interviewing other candidates for the position they're interviewing me for. Maybe I just haven't come across the company that I'd love working for so much that I'd leave everything else aside.

As far getting an offer from both interviews is concerned, my personal rule is that once I've accepted an offer I don't consider other offers. It has backfired on me in the past, but I find it extremely unprofessional to accept an offer and then back out on it. It's one of those things I've told myself I would never do, along with taking a counter-offer after I resign.

[Inigima]

Ix and others have said that they don't have a problem with that question; I personally am uncomfortable answering it because I worry that it gives employers undue power. If I tell them I'm not interviewing for other positions, then they a. can take their sweet time with the decision, and b. might make me a lower offer because they know there's no competition. I guess there is hypothetically no downside to telling them you are interviewing for other positions?

EDIT: I just went back and re-read our previous discussion. For both Xray and Ix the thinking is, we're both experienced professionals, you're probably already in a job you could just stay in so there's not much leverage there, etc. I think I am at that point in my career now -- knock on wood -- but I think that line of thinking doesn't apply nearly as strongly to people who are earlier in their careers, when they are maybe in a job they hate and don't want to stay in, or don't have a job, or don't have enough experience to make them the always-in-demand candidate they're picturing.

[HexMachina]

Thanks for the feedback. I think if they ask I will tell them I have another interview lined up but otherwise not mention it. I'll wait and see if I get an offer before making the decision whether to accept that offer and decline the second interview, or take a risk and reject the offer. 

[Iskaral Pust]

Helena - my approach on this is similar to Baxus.  Also, DatePalm asked basically the same question on the previous one of this thread and got several responses. 

[Datepalm]

On that note, I have learned my lesson and will turn down job num 2 interviewed for first thing Monday. I don't have time to write their test-report, and they're a big name in the very small local pond, so I really don't want to burn a bridge there by starting and then quitting after three months. I also got a tentative offer to be a research assistant on a project in Uganda and Tanzania in the autumn and winter, so I think i'm going to b e continuing to juggle a number of academic-related part time things at least until my thesis is done (optimistically, October-Novemberish) focusing on that and keeping options open, rather than following a certain nervous inclinations and shutting all that down and getting A Real Job with a planning firm and muddling through the thesis in the background.

The reaserch assistant thing will be partial and probably short term (through hopefully with some travel) and I'm still not 100% sure its really happening (an acquaintance who knows my work and interests is running it, and she's great and I trust her, but there's that nervousness about it all being a chat over a beer and not any kind of formal hiring process for a while yet and then god knows what weird limitation the whole bunch of institutions involved will dump on who can be hired and for what.) But its in labour and microfinance economics and probably going to be some kind of natural random-control trial, much more quantitatively focused than most of what I've done and exactly the kind of research experience I need, so that feels like a risk worth taking. If it doesn't play out, I can go back to the mill of applying to transport planning consultancies in October or something without having lost very much. At least thats the rational side of it, but I'm still strangely nervous about walking away from any kind of job, even partially offered, even if I never entirely wanted it.

[Iskaral Pust]

@Datepalm the career path in academia and NGO/public service sounds Byzantine to me.  Perhaps we would all say that about any unfamiliar pursuit.  Best of luck.  Hopefully you're getting closer to your target destination.

[Datepalm]

5 hours ago, Iskaral Pust said:

@Datepalm the career path in academia and NGO/public service sounds Byzantine to me.  Perhaps we would all say that about any unfamiliar pursuit.  Best of luck.  Hopefully you're getting closer to your target destination.

Thanks, :-), I hope so...it does all feel a little byzantine and frustrating at the moment. Though, my issue is partially that I'm based in one country (with its academic culture and norms,) looking for opportunities in another (with distinctly different ones) and aiming to work in yet a third region, and urban planning is a bit of an odd duck, I think, since its a practical field and things like interesting professional experience, volunteer work, etc, are valued. So, I think, if I were trying to do a, say, economics PhD things might be more straightforward - it would all be about grades and scores and relevant research experience and outputs and recommendation letters (which would be achieved by grades and scores and research outputs) and this decision would be a complete non-event.

In my case, I have a sense that another year of work as a planner is a good thing too (for academia!), so there's the dillemma. But research fieldwork in Africa beats planning fieldwork in Israel...although that might also depends on my research directions...my PhD applications have a major labour economics component which I can't really show strong experience in, so this particular project is potentially a really good round-out opportunity. If I wanted to research something to do with, say, modelling or such, the planning firm job and doing real modelling in real towns might be a better line for the damn CV. Anyway, these are all considerations, and it beats me - and, almost as much, my various sources of academic advice - what precise constellation of them is objectively best for what I want to be doing.