Applying for jobs and scheduling interviews????

[LD1]

I get this scenerio quite a lot, and am never sure how to word, or handle it, so I thought I'd run it by the masses and see how you all handle these situations.

For starters, I have a job and I am happy. But could things be better???? I think so, but never know until you "shop around" so to speak.

So, I occasionally apply for jobs that I think "might" be better than where I am at. Now, some of the things look for as an improvement.....
1. Closer commute. I currently drive ~40-45 minutes
2. Pension. I currently have none. But the 401k match, quarterly profit sharing, etc are pretty good.
3. I work 12 hr shifts. I wouldnt have it any other way. Lots of days off, pay is better just based on hours worked, less miles on the car, less babysitter costs, etc. But I am currently on nights and no dayshift opportunity in the near future.
4. Better benefits. Medical etc. Though ours are not horrible by any means, I know alot that are worse, but some are better.
5. Pay. Pay isnt horrible, but there is better out there. For similar jobs in my skilled trade position, Its not uncommon to see anywhere from $16/hr up to $31/hr. I fall somewhere in the middle.

So, may of these jobs I apply for, have very limited descriptions. Just "competitive pay", "medical, vision, and dental", "401k" (but no mention of a match and how much, no indication of pay other than "based on experience", no mention of shift or schedule. (honestly I'd rather work 12hr nights than any 8hr schedule including m-f days)

No big deal. I know they can only put so much in the job description. So I apply, and figure if I get a call I can ask the questions then. And I usually get a call 75% of the time.

What gets me is.....why is the first thing they want to do is bring you in for an interview? Isnt that a big waste of time? of both theirs and mine?

I typically reply something to the effect of....."I am currently working full time, and I am not unhappy at my current position, but I am always looking for opportunities to improve. So before we waste each others time with an interview, I'd like to ask you a few questions to make sure the position you are hiring for truly is an opportunity for improvement, because I dont want to take a step backwards"

Most of the time, they are more than willing, and grateful that I dont want to waste their time interviewing for a job that pays $5/hr less than I am making now, or for a shift that wont work for me, etc. I typically ask about shift for starters. (I dont understand why its so hard to put that in the job description). 2nd or 3rd shift, 8hr days......but we have alot of OT available......that usually ends the conversation right there. But if 1st shift and/or 12hr shifts.....we continue. I inquire if a pension is offered. Not a dealbreaker if not, but if they offer one.....things are looking good. I ask about benefits 401k, etc. Last on my list....is Pay. And most times the answer is always "depends on your experience". So I always counter.....just give me a range. Or what does the top paid guy in this position make? and the lowest? (knowing I'll probably fall somewhere in the upper 25%)

Not many make the cut. Literally, I only interview in about 1 out of every 20 positions I get a call about. I am sorry, you want someone well versed in PLC's with RSlogix 500 and 5000, someone who can run a mill and lathe and whole host of other machine shop equipment, someone who can weld and fabricate, someone who is experienced with hydraulics, pneumatics, plumbing, servos, VFD's, equipment rebuilds, electrical schematics, etc etc etc......and you only want to pay $16-$18/hr. No thanks.....take me off your list and call the next guy please.

But today, I get a call form a company I applied to that had almost no information other than job description and requirements. Wanted to interview me either tomorrow or friday. Neither of which would work for me even if I wanted to. But I start in the same as always and wanted to ask some of these questions before I hire a babysitter, and waste half a day on an interview. The person that called kinda got an attitude as if "how dare I" She just kept saying that "I am just the person that schedules the interviews and I cannot answer any of these questions".....well.....can I please talk to someone that can answer them. Because I have no interest in scheduling an interview until I know basic things, like what shift, benefits, and pay range. She put me on hold and cam back after a few minutes and said.....everyone is out to lunch. I'll go ahead and schedule you for one of these days (tomorrow or friday) and if you dont show up thats okay. So I politely asked her not to schedule an interview yet, and when someone who can answer the questions I asked gets back from lunch have them call me if they are still interested.

So is it just me that does this? Or do people really expect me to go to every interview I get asked to schedule.....without any info about the position? I'd literally be going to 20-30 interviews a year.....for nothing, instead of only 1-2 promising leads. Is it so wrong to screen the prospective interviews like this? Just the same way companies pre-screen candidates. The better ones schedule phone interviews first. I have no issue with that at all. IT takes literally 3-4 minutes for me to find out if the schedule/benefits/pay are gonna be worth a trip in for a face-to-face interview. Why in the world would a company want to waste their time and mine if the job isnt gonna be an improvement over my current job?

 

[tcartwri]

I think you're very fortunate to be getting these opportunities. When I was "in between" I had two interviews in sixth months...

I would think if you're generating this much interest, then they see something they want. I would be telling them what wage and conditions I was comfortable with.

 

[wjmst]

I always put the salary range I am looking for on my application or resume and I rarely get called for an interview! But like you said, it save me time and them time as well.

 

[LD1]

I have been in between jobs a couple of times.

Hands down, the application to call ratio is alot better when employed. Easily 65-75% of the jobs I apply for I get a call. Most arent what I am looking for, but never know til they call comes in.

When I was in between, I'd get a call for maybe 1 in 5 if I was lucky.

But even being laid off or un employees.....I have certain standards and criteria. Certain things are a big time deal breaker right off the bat. These hiring managers must think that everyone has endless time and money to do nothing but go to interviews. when unemployeed, you have the time, but not money to waste on gas. When employed, you got the money but lack the time.

I get calls from recruiters or temp services like addecco, acloche, etc etc. Sometimes because they "found" my resume online, other times because I have applied for jobs they are hiring for. They always want me to "come in and fill out an application". Thats even worse than wasting my time for an interview. If its a job that I applied to online and they are calling me wanting me to come in and fill out an application. (What the h3ll did I just fill out online). But on a serious note, e-mail me whatever you need filled out, because I aint coming in.

 

[Industrial Toys]

There are certainly niche type jobs out there and very well paying. I knew a guy in his 70s that was asked to come back to Boeing under contract. Very lucrative and rewarding work.

But basically, (I think) most companies just want a reasonably intelligent body to fill a position as cheaply as possible. Long term employees can cost a fortune in severance, and really mess up the department pay scale with all those annual raises. So, a revolving door is best for the bottom line.

I think most companies would also prefer a much dumber team player over a smarter lone wolf.

So really HR doesn't care to meet you. It's not personal. Everything they pretty much want to know is on the application.

Actually, nothing is as it used to be. In Ontario, if a company hires you away from a long time job, and things don't work out. They are liable for the severance for the former job, not just the one with them.

 

[roadhunter]

The joys of working for someone else. So frustrating.

 

[mapper]

Perhaps you should request a telephone interview to start with when you are unable to match your schedule with theirs. Tell the person who is setting up the interview that the times do not work for you but you are interested in a telephone interview and if things look promising that you would then be interested in a more formal face to face meeting. As you stated, you can usually tell in the first few minutes if the position will be a good fit.

 

[CanDo]

I think that most competent, skilled men and women with an excellent work history have on occasion seen what is being discussed here. Being in a bit of a philosophical mood at the moment, I can't resist putting in my two cents worth.

... basically, (I think) most companies just want a reasonably intelligent body to fill a position as cheaply as possible. Long term employees can cost a fortune in severance, and really mess up the department pay scale with all those annual raises. So, a revolving door is best for the bottom line.

I thing there may be some truth in this statement. I know that at the management level there are scads of examples where companies have gotten rid of longer term employees (likely also older) in order to replace them with newer (likely younger) employees because of the salary savings. When sued for age discrimination, the long term "older" employee often loses because it is not illegal to discriminate based on salary. Remember, it is the plaintiff's (the fired employee's) burden to prove that it was age discrimination rather than mere money.​

I think most companies would also prefer a much dumber team player over a smarter lone wolf.

Where does the "smarter team player" fit in this equation?​

So really HR doesn't care to meet you. It's not personal. Everything they pretty much want to know is on the application.

Interesting isn't it that HR, who often knows little or nothing about the actual expertise that the position requires, is the gate keeper and sometimes the final arbiter on who is hired and who is not? I know that this often frustrates managers in the area that is hiring because they may see a "fit" that would be much better than who they ultimately end up with.​

Actually, nothing is as it used to be. In Ontario, if a company hires you away from a long time job, and things don't work out. They are liable for the severance for the former job, not just the one with them.

Well, in the good ol' USA it seems that for better or worse, employers currently hold the upper hand. Certainly there are many who are excellent employers and they often have outstanding and generally content employees and thus profit for it, but there are also many employers who are making decisions purely for the short term benefit of saving a penny.​

So, what to do? Any way to affect those companies that are screwing up and thus screwing with employees or potential employees? I know that long term the pure competition model will weed out some bad practices, but the reality is that many others will survive through various other means. Does a company have any responsibility to their employees other than demanding the most and giving up the least that they can get away with? Does a company that benefits from society's infrastructure owe any responsibility to society as a whole?

Hmmm....

 

[LD1]

The joys of working for someone else. So frustrating.

Amen

Perhaps you should request a telephone interview to start with when you are unable to match your schedule with theirs. Tell the person who is setting up the interview that the times do not work for you but you are interested in a telephone interview and if things look promising that you would then be interested in a more formal face to face meeting. As you stated, you can usually tell in the first few minutes if the position will be a good fit.

Thats a good idea. I'll have to try that. Which is basically what I attempt to do with the person setting up the interview on the first phone call

 

[Sigarms]

Looking for a job is a lot like looking for a woman.

When you have one, they seem to be falling all over you and you can't keep track of the time because it goes so quick. When you don't have one, they can't be found and time sure can drag, particularly if they say they're going to call you.

 

[LD1]

Looking for a job is a lot like looking for a woman.

When you have one, they seem to be falling all over you and you can't keep track of the time because it goes so quick. When you don't have one, they can't be found and time sure can drag, particularly if they say they're going to call you.

Wow, aint that the truth

 

[Travelover]

Interesting isn't it that HR, who often knows little or nothing about the actual expertise that the position requires, is the gate keeper and sometimes the final arbiter on who is hired and who is not? I know that this often frustrates managers in the area that is hiring because they may see a "fit" that would be much better than who they ultimately end up with.​

When I worked for MegaCorp and was hiring, I did everything I could to leave HR out of it until the very end. Ditto for the guy looking for a job. You need to network with people that work there now, get the names of the guys with the authority to hire and deal directly with them. Then they add you to the list of prospective hirees and choose you, but it looks like all candidates were considered equally. People that work in HR (in general) are people that can't do anything useful, that is why they work there.

 

[DuckSlayer1017]

At my company we always start with a phone interview conducted by the hiring specialist in HR. If the candidate appears to be a good fit then we schedule a onsite interview. We don't want to waste our time or yours. The phone interview is the perfect time to ask all the questions you mentioned earlier. The HR rep has a decent idea of what type of candidate we want and can answer all the salary and benefit questions that the engineering managers and supervisors that do the face to face interview can't always do.

I say keep doing what you are doing and push for the phone interview to start. It takes a lot less time and can get about the same result as a face to face. As far as recruiters I just tell them what I'm looking for and send them copy of my resume. I tell them that when they find me something better than I have give me a call.

 

[jack707]

Looking for a job is a lot like looking for a woman.

When you have one, they seem to be falling all over you and you can't keep track of the time because it goes so quick. When you don't have one, they can't be found and time sure can drag, particularly if they say they're going to call you.

Woman are easy to get - to get a good woman is hard to find today.

 

[MossRoad]

....

I typically reply something to the effect of....."I am currently working full time, and I am not unhappy at my current position, but I am always looking for opportunities to improve. So before we waste each others time with an interview....

Not to be rude or anything, so don't take this the wrong way. This is a discussion and I'm not trying to pick an argument or make you ticked off, so take it for what its worth... coming from the other side of the fence, and the advice from someone that has interviewed hundreds of people over the past 30 years for I.T. related jobs....

First, our on-line application process sucks. It has to go through corporate first, they select the people they want us to interview. And they have to approve the job postings. We don't get to put a lot of the information in the employment ad that we'd like to, which would weed out a lot of people and save your time and our time.

Second, if we weren't interested in you, we wouldn't have called you. That's a plus for you. You beat out a couple hundred other folks before we decided to call you.

Third, as soon as we read your reply and got to that second sentence, right there, we'd put you on the 'no thanks' list. Why? Because you're telling us we may be wasting your time. That indicates disdain for an employer. From that sentence, we know, as soon as we hire you, you'll be looking for a better job. And that wastes our time and money. Also, that indicates you are too busy to make the necessary adjustments to your schedule to come in to talk to us, therefore, you'd probably be inflexible in your work schedule, and probably inflexible in your job duties as well. It comes across as "stuck in your ways" and we want flexible.

Again, that's not meant as criticism. Just a view from this side of the application process. You're in the fortunate position to have skills that command good pay and benefits. By the number of interview offers you get, that's obvious. Good luck to you. :thumbsup:

 

[BigCountry1689]

I am an administrator and recently have conducted many (+175) interviews due to attrition. I have found during the interview process that I am being asked more questions then I am asking. Often I ask the potential if they had these questions and felt that they could be disqualifiers for them then why not call and ask for the job summary before wasting your time applying. It makes more sense to call up a say " I am a potential applicant and I would like to ask some questions about the vacancy you have." Often times you can avoid giving your name hence avoid any perception of arrogance on the potential employers part and get all your questions answered. I know I get called frequently and asked job specific questions that would help a person decide if the position is the right fit. I mean no offense at all but if I called to schedule an interview with you and your response was "Well before we waste each others time I have some questions." My response would be " Well you've already wasted each of our time by not doing your due diligence to query the position, sorry but the position has been filled." But if your interviewing for 1 out of 20 calls by your choice I would say your wasting the time of both parties. I'm sure your skill set allows for a more selective process on your part but to avoid negative perception on the part of the potential employer I would say try to acquire all information before applying, and it will save you the time of filling out tedious applications. Good luck on your job hunt and hopefully you can settle on the right fit for you.

 

[joefromga]

You should start your own business then you can hire people in the way you'd want to be hired.

 

[drssg]

Have you tried working with a recruiter? My background is in computers, and I don't know how common it is in other areas. They can help avoid wasting each other's time without offending the employer. A good one should only call you with a pretty good fit.

 

[oosik]

This is just my experience from working for the government for around 20 years. In all those years I NEVER had an applicant that was currently working in a similar position elsewhere that applied for a position in our department. I think an unemployed applicant is a lot less concerned regarding hours, salary & benefits. They are just a lot more concerned about a job and meeting their on-going financial obligations. You may have to accept the fact that a "better" job in your area of expertise simply does not exist in your immediate area. Likewise - the conditions you are looking for may only become a reality after you have obtained seniority in any new job.

A person could look a lifetime and never find the "perfect" job. I feel you must tread lightly in your questioning - otherwise you will come off appearing as not really committed to any company, job or position. You do not want to appear as an individual who will be continually applying for or looking for the "better" position. At least in the area of government I was in - we were looking for a qualified person who would fit in with the team, learn the specifics of the position & become a long term employee. Fortunately, in the department where I worked there was the opportunity for a new employee to advance in both salary & position.

 

[LD1]

Third, as soon as we read your reply and got to that second sentence, right there, we'd put you on the 'no thanks' list. Why? Because you're telling us we may be wasting your time. That indicates disdain for an employer. From that sentence, we know, as soon as we hire you, you'll be looking for a better job. And that wastes our time and money. Also, that indicates you are too busy to make the necessary adjustments to your schedule to come in to talk to us, therefore, you'd probably be inflexible in your work schedule, and probably inflexible in your job duties as well. It comes across as "stuck in your ways" and we want flexible.

Again, that's not meant as criticism. Just a view from this side of the application process. You're in the fortunate position to have skills that command good pay and benefits. By the number of interview offers you get, that's obvious. Good luck to you. :thumbsup:

Thanks for the insightful reply. I am anything but "stuck in my ways" when it comes to my job. I actually like the job I do and the jobs I am apply for just because I like the variety of tasks in which I get to do. But when it comes to schedule....I am absolutely NOT flexible. You tell me the shift/schedule I am to work....and I'll be there on time, every day. Beyond that, dont be changing my schedule up at the drop of a hat. I have a family, two kids, one in school, and a life outside of work. I am not one to work a ton of OT (I actually dont work any). My life doesnt revolve around work, my family is 1st and foremost the most important thing in my life. Dad just retired from his job of 35 years, and the same company I spent 3-4 years with when they were a 24/7 12-hour shift operation. When the company was sold, they re-structured to M-F 8-hour shifts. Which evolved into lots of forced saturday OT, and lots of sunday night startups for the night shift crew. So one in his position, on his schedule, was literally in there 7 days a week. And being able to force you to work over 4 hours if the next guy failed to show up. Same reasons another location near me for this same company was on strike for the last several months. So, give me a schedule, and I'll work it, but dont change it up and force me to work different days and hours as that effects my family, which is more important than any job.

The shift/schedule/hours are the single most important thing for me. Even above pay and benefits. As 2nd shift just dont work with two young kids, after school activities, sports, etc. I dont care if its a $40/hr job....2nd shift aint for me. And if that aint in the job description I apply for, I feel I need to get some clarification on that prior to scheduling an interview. And if asking such simple.....yet important questions rules me out of being a candidate.....then its probably not a company I would have wanted to work for anyway.

I am an administrator and recently have conducted many (+175) interviews due to attrition. I have found during the interview process that I am being asked more questions then I am asking. Often I ask the potential if they had these questions and felt that they could be disqualifiers for them then why not call and ask for the job summary before wasting your time applying. It makes more sense to call up a say " I am a potential applicant and I would like to ask some questions about the vacancy you have." Often times you can avoid giving your name hence avoid any perception of arrogance on the potential employers part and get all your questions answered. I know I get called frequently and asked job specific questions that would help a person decide if the position is the right fit. I mean no offense at all but if I called to schedule an interview with you and your response was "Well before we waste each others time I have some questions." My response would be " Well you've already wasted each of our time by not doing your due diligence to query the position, sorry but the position has been filled." But if your interviewing for 1 out of 20 calls by your choice I would say your wasting the time of both parties. I'm sure your skill set allows for a more selective process on your part but to avoid negative perception on the part of the potential employer I would say try to acquire all information before applying, and it will save you the time of filling out tedious applications. Good luck on your job hunt and hopefully you can settle on the right fit for you.

Good idea in theory, but hard to do in practice. I have tried several times and usually end up no where. There seems to be way too much secrecy around jobs/descriptions/companies, etc. Alot of jobs specifically say "no calls about this position". Some of them are hired through third party recruiters that arent allowed to even tell you the company they are hiring for.......thus no idea where the location/drive time is at. (IE: columbus is a big city, a job on the north side of town is a 40 minute drive, a job on the south or west end.....easily an 1:15-1:20 drive. MAkes a huge difference). Some companies, with multiple locations in the states, its impossible to find a local number for. Only an 800 number for corporate, and then you play phone leap frog trying to find someone or a number for someone at the local site to answer some simple questions about the job, And more often than not....they want a name and callback number. So that totally blows the being anonymous part.

Have you tried working with a recruiter? My background is in computers, and I don't know how common it is in other areas. They can help avoid wasting each other's time without offending the employer. A good one should only call you with a pretty good fit.

Yes. I'd say about 50% of the positions in my field, in this area, are hired by any one of a few dozen recruiting agencies. They are always the ones that want you to fill out one of "their" applications in person. Usually never offer to do it via e-mail/online. And they always seem to have very limited knowledge of the position they are actually hiring for. All they know is "yes" the offer benefits (but no details at all), and they know what the pay is starting out (usually significantly reduced), but no idea what pay will jump to once in the door and off probation. I have seen some places start people out a few dollars an hour less til you prove yourself and get off probation, I have seen others start people out 9-10 dollars an hour less. If they dont know the end game....Im not interested. I have no issue taking a temporary pay cut down to ~17-18 per hour. IF and only IF after a 3 month probation period the potential is there to jump to $27-$28/hour.....but if the jump is only to $20-$22....no thanks.