Searching \ for '[OT]Hmm now what do they really mean.' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=hmm+what+they+really
Search entire site for: 'Hmm now what do they really mean.'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT]Hmm now what do they really mean.'
2009\01\14@215252 by cdb

flavicon
face
An interview rejection form an NZ job agency.

" Thank you for taking the time to apply for this position, we have
had a very high calibre of applicants, therefore I wish to advise that
you have at this stage been unsuccessful. "


I take it they mean my qualifications and experience are crap?


Colin
--
cdb,  on 15/01/2009



2009\01\14@223142 by Vitaliy

flavicon
face
> An interview rejection form an NZ job agency.
>
> " Thank you for taking the time to apply for this position, we have
> had a very high calibre of applicants, therefore I wish to advise that
> you have at this stage been unsuccessful. "
>
>
> I take it they mean my qualifications and experience are crap?

Pretty much. :)

You wouldn't want to work for them, anyway.


2009\01\14@224218 by cdb

flavicon
face


:: Pretty much. :)
::
:: You wouldn't want to work for them, anyway.

Yes, so the question is why are they now advertising the same position
again as of this afternoon.

Who wants to work in Hamilton anyway, flights from Oz are almost non
existent.

Colin
--
cdb, spam_OUTcolinTakeThisOuTspambtech-online.co.uk on 15/01/2009

Web presence: http://www.btech-online.co.uk  

Hosted by:  http://www.1and1.co.uk/?k_id=7988359







2009\01\14@225428 by solarwind

picon face
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 9:52 PM, cdb <.....colinKILLspamspam@spam@btech-online.co.uk> wrote:
>  An interview rejection form an NZ job agency.
>
> " Thank you for taking the time to apply for this position, we have
> had a very high calibre of applicants, therefore I wish to advise that
> you have at this stage been unsuccessful. "
>
>
> I take it they mean my qualifications and experience are crap?
>
>
> Colin

That's a pretty retarded response. I bet the company sucks.

--
solarwind

2009\01\15@122728 by M. Adam Davis

face picon face
They're just covering themselves legally.  They may have not chosen
you for a variety of reasons, but the only reason they can put down on
paper without legal reprisal is if they claim you don't meet the
requirements, or claim the other applicants are better.

They set the bar pretty high (on paper) so you could be considered a
"high calibre" applicant but not "very".

Regardless of how they say it, keep in mind that the rejection is only
from this particular firm for this particular position with the
particular interviewers you had.

No matter how good you are there are a ton of little things that you
have no control over that will doom the interview.

So when you get rejected, don't take it personally.  You're going to
get rejected by many more companies than you'll get accepted by - this
is normal for everyone.

-Adam

On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 9:52 PM, cdb <colinspamKILLspambtech-online.co.uk> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

> -

2009\01\15@123725 by M. Adam Davis

face picon face
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 9:52 PM, cdb <.....colinKILLspamspam.....btech-online.co.uk> wrote:
> " Thank you for taking the time to apply for this position, we have
> had a very high calibre of applicants, therefore I wish to advise that
> you have at this stage been unsuccessful. "

I would have written it differently if I were doing this (though in
large companies such form letters must always be approved by lawyers,
so I don't know how much of my personality would actually make it
through) but keep in mind that there are lots of people in the world
that are brisque in their manner of speach.

They may not mean offense, but they see no reason to beat around the
bush and simply state things in a factual, if rather blunt and heavy
handed, way.

-Adam

--
Please rate and vote for my contest entry:
mypic32.com/web/guest/profiles?profileID=50331

2009\01\16@153527 by Peter

picon face
M. Adam Davis <stienman <at> gmail.com> writes:
> They set the bar pretty high (on paper) so you could be considered a
> "high calibre" applicant but not "very".

Setting the bar 'high' by specifying certain nearly impossible sets of
qualifications in a job description and testing is usually a sign that that job
is reserved for someone who actually has those qualifications (literally exactly
those qualifications), and that the firm goes through the motions of
'advertising and testing sufficient potential candidates' - often through a HR
firm - to satisfy union laws and laws that control the hiring of certain
foreigners, such that the can eventually 'legally' hire exactly whom they were
planning to hire in the first place. And, no, this is not paranoia on my side,
there are very specific cases that occurred and some even wound up in court (and
in US congressional hearings related to H1B visas and the loss of jobs in the
'west' to outsourcing and H1B-ing).

Peter


2009\01\16@154406 by Peter

picon face
M. Adam Davis <stienman <at> gmail.com> writes:
> They may not mean offense, but they see no reason to beat around the
> bush and simply state things in a factual, if rather blunt and heavy
> handed, way.

Or *NOT*. Please see my other posting on this thread for why. Eventually they
have to give the 'unsuccessful' (by design) applicants that they failed. They
can't say 'we f**d you, now smile', so they have to architect some politically
correct bs that will not be attackable in court. The answer I like most is the
one connected with 'compensation' being 'above the acceptable industry figures'.
The 'acceptable figures' being set by H1B-s and their equivalents in other
countries, but of course they do not say that. It has never happened to me (I do
not work in US-CAN) but I did my homework on this and on other things.

Apparently there is a whole dictionary of 'politically correct' keywords for
various types of job inacceptability communication. Some of the things I have
read have raised my hair on end. Researching these things might also help
avoiding becoming the 'they used my time and patience in a useless interview to
prove that they tried other candidates to the union/foreign work regulators'
part of the equation.

Peter


More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2009 , 2010 only
- Today
- New search...