Really? No, Really?

This has been sitting in my drafts folder for a while.  I've been trying to come up with a "PC" way of expressing my opinion.  Then I remembered (likely due to the high amounts of cold medication that I'm on), that this is MY blog.  The opinions are MINE and mine alone.  If you don't like it, please present a counter argument in the comments.  So here goes:

A couple of months ago while pumping gas I looked up and saw this:

At first I chuckled, but then I got angry.  Angry enough to take a photo and to (eventually) blog about it.  So what is it that made me so mad?

Young adults these days generally get a bad rap.  They're "entitled" and "lazy" among other things, if you believe the media. This ad completely plays into that stereotype.  "Hey parents, we know your kids are too lazy to get off their butts to apply for a job, so why don't you come in and fill out an application form for them?"

I can just imagine the marketing group in a room trying to solve the low applicant rate, "I know, let's appeal to their parents!"

Truly, shame on you Co-op.  Kids these days are a product of the parenting that they received.  Many have parents who hover and control every moment of their lives.  If that is who you want to hire, then by all means, go ahead.  But you will be missing out on the truly wonderful candidates who are motivated and excited, and who truly want to learn and do a good job.    And if the next time I go to buy my gas and the attendant is ignoring me and being lazy, I will know why - it's because he didn't truly want this job - his mother wanted it for him.

Get Your Résumé in the "Yes" Pile

I counsel university students every day on how to improve their résumé.  By far the biggest comment that I hear from them is "who cares what my résumé looks like, isn't it the content that counts?"

Unfortunately that isn't the case.  Many recruiters see hundreds of applications and résumés on a weekly basis.  A good recruiter is able to quickly scan each one in a matter of 10 seconds(or less) and can determine based on that initial scan if your résumé goes into the "yes" or "no" pile.

What can you do to make your résumé stand out?

First - make it easy to read.  No matter how amazing you may be, if you have a résumé that is cluttered or too "wordy", I'm going to look at it and toss it.  Read every word of a 2 page résumé?  Ain't nobody got time for that!

But there are a few things that you can do that will make your résumé easy to read:

• Use a standard format with the dates separated from the rest of the text so they stand out.
• Tell me what you accomplished rather than what you were "responsible for"
• Use bullet points!
• When you can, use numbers and symbols, these will draw the reader's eyes into your résumé during a quick scan.  E.g. Instead of: Consistently achieved sales targets try instead: Met and surpassed sales goals achieving 150% of monthly targets

One other thing; are you a whizz at word processing? I didn't think so, in fact, I know so.  When I receive a résumé in a .doc format, I click on the "paragraph" button specifically to see if you know how to format.  Usually, you don't.  To avoid this, always submit your application using a .pdf file.

Spelling counts too!

You can thank my grade 3 English teacher, but I am a stickler for proper spelling.  I have seen many applications get tossed because of 1 spelling error.  Use spell check and have a friend proofread your résumé before you send it in.

This is one of my favourite misspellings:
Strong attntion to details

Why So Down on Recruiters?

Recruiters it seems are getting a bad rap.  I can't read an HR/employment blog anymore without coming across at least one negative remark about recruiters.  I don't know where this is coming from.

Sure, like in any industry, there are good and bad recruiters.  So let me break down what it is that a recruiter actually does.

First of all, it needs to be said, that a Recruiter is not there to find you a job.  There, I said it.  Whew!  That feels better.  This is a huge misconception and I think the source of all of the negativity about Recruiters.

A Recruiter, whether corporate or agency, exists to fill vacant positions.  They get paid to source and screen candidates.  They are not paid by the candidates, this would be illegal - at least in Canada.  If you do not have the skills required for the position(s) that they are looking to fill, you will not be getting a call.  It's as plain as that.

A good recruiter is someone who builds strong networks that they then turn to when sourcing.  A good recruiter does not simply throw resumes at a position in the hopes that one candidate will fit the bill.  A good recruiter find her candidates via referral and direct sourcing.  If a recruiter is doing her job properly, it may only take one or two candidates to fill a role.

I know that it can be upsetting to invest an hour of your time speaking or meeting with a recruiter and not get a job.  But you know what?  That's life.  Currently in the USA there are 4 - 6 qualified candidates (not applicants) for each available position.  The odds are not in your favour.  In Calgary (where I live) we are in a labour crunch, but you know what?  Employers are not going to hire you just to fill a seat if you don't meet their needs.

When you meet with a recruiter, use the time to your advantage.  Treat it as good experience.  You should take that time to ask the recruiter for advice on how to improve your job search.  Ultimately it is  you and your skills and abilities, that will get you a job.  A recruiter may be able to get you in the door, but can't get you a job!

Grey Power?

Lately I've heard a lot, both in the news and from clients, that people just don't want to hire a candidate that is over 50.  This is short sighted and wrong, and here's why:

In our culture no one stays in a job for their entire career.  If you can get an employee to stay for 3 - 5 years, you're laughing!  The Millennial generation is even encouraged to switch jobs every 3 years or so to build up their skill set. Penelope Trunk even said that staying at a job for too long is career suicide!  So why are employers afraid to hire someone who is older when they will get no guarantee that a younger candidate will stay any longer?

Knowing that employee tenure is about 3 years, why wouldn't employers be scrambling to hire older workers?  If you know that you can hire someone who is only looking to work for another 5 - 10 years, shouldn't they be at the top of the candidate pile?

One may argue that a younger employee costs less.  In some cases this can be true.  Health benefits aside, a less skilled employee would definitely be at the lower end of the pay scale than a higher skilled employee.  However, if you've been upfront with what your salary range is, and you're paying market value for the role, and the candidate is interested, then what's the problem?

There are 2 types of older workers:  Those who are working because they enjoy it and those who are working because they have to.  That's not to say that they can't be both.  But there are those who have savings and a retirement plan, and who will work until the age of 65 and that's it.  Then there are those who, for many reasons, have no savings and no retirement plan, and need to keep working in order to survive.  Both types can be great employees.  Both can be loyal employees.
 
Plus, think of the maturity that an older person can bring into your office.  Oh sure, you have a "young culture" and you worry that they won't "fit in".  But maybe this is exactly what your office needs.  There's nothing wrong with a little variety.  Many Managers are managing with 4 generations in their workplace.

Ideally we all want to retire - at least I know that I want to retire.  Unfortunately I think that there will not be much "Freedom 55" happening anymore.  So toss out your misconceptions about older workers and give one a chance.  Please, I'm going to be one of them one day!