Home Politics & Debate

up for hire live

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
is anyone else watching this? it's on bbc3 at 9pm.

it's hosted by some tool called richard bacon who asks stupid questions like 'do you get annoyed when graduates apply for jobs that don't require a degree?'

most of it seems to be slagging off degrees as well as students.

the most annoying part of it last night was when this woman, a contestant from the apprentice stood up like she was some pariah and proclaimed that 'media studies and social science degrees are "mickey mouse" and pointless'. which is hugely ironic because i'm guessing most of the production staff behind the apprentice have a media related degree.

anywho it's on again tonight, same time. if anyone wants to get extremely pissed off tonight then i reccomend this show.
«13

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It seems to be totally geared uo to making people feel bad about not having a job.

    Theres a girl who was saying that she wouldn't move away from the surrey/london area for a job because she gets her support from her family. Its a totally valid point, she should isolate herself for the sake of a job, and she's probably in the best place anyway, and some jumped up arse is saying that she's wrong.

    They aren't really addressing the real issues thats stopping people from getting jobs. Plus they're showing complete pratts on all sides of the story....

    BBC really does have a conservative agenda these days.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Thankyou! What a jumped up tit. Smug because he got lucky. If you can call working for the only way is essex lucky.. And i loved the woman from britains next top models unbelievable critcism that the 4 young people between them weren't fluent in french, spanish or italien. Awful show
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I've only watched the first episode but grrr! They seem to have automatically taken the "you're not trying / you're lazy" stance.

    I swear they even criticized one girl for *wanting* a job that she liked! She said that she wanted a job in the area of her degree, but was willing to do any other work as proven by what she had already done, but they even managed to find something wrong with that!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sounds like trolling for ratings. A lot of media outlets are catching on that a good way to get ratings is to piss people off, that's pretty much the modus operandi of american TV for example.

    Not going to waste my time getting mad.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I watched a bit of it then already saw what kind of show it was going to be. Even in the mid-advertisement breaks promoting the show. People just seem to think unemployed people should just settle for any job, regardless of how degrading it is or how incompatible it is with their desires, just as long as it gets them off benefits and paying taxes. That's perfectly fine, but people shouldn't just setlle for anything, what happened to always being told "do what you want to do, its your life".
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Agree and disagree. I'm not sure what you mean by:
    JavaKrypt wrote: »
    People just seem to think unemployed people should just settle for any job, regardless of how degrading it is or how incompatible it is with their desires, just as long as it gets them off benefits and paying taxes.

    What kind of jobs do you see as degrading? If I was asking you to pull tagnuts out of my anal beard for 50p a gramme, then maybe, but if you mean shelf stacking in Morrisons I have to disagree in the strongest possible sense. Also, if I have "desires" to be a international playboy, should it be legit that I turn down - or not apply for at all - any job that doesn't further me achieving that goal?

    "Do what you want to do, it's your life" is what you tell to a child. The practicalities of reality are quite different.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I got a 2.1 from a top 10 uni, recently didn't apply for a position for hazardous waste handler (e.g. binman) as what I want to do is go on to train to be an accountant.

    Should I have gone for it in your opinion?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ShyBoy wrote: »
    I got a 2.1 from a top 10 uni, recently didn't apply for a position for hazardous waste handler (e.g. binman) as what I want to do is go on to train to be an accountant.

    Should I have gone for it in your opinion?

    First off, I'm not really fussed if you graduated top of your Astrophysics class at Harvard. I don't really seem what relevance it has, other than posturing maybe.

    Should you have gone for it? It would depend on your specific circumstances. For example: if you're starting accountancy training in two months then it doesn't make a right lot of sense for you to be applying for any long-term job that, at most, you might spend six weeks in. If you're planning on starting accountancy training in eighteen months as you've not had any luck applying to accountancy firms with your current qualifications, then yeah, you should take whatever work is available while you're waiting for your course to start - you ain't above it just because you borrowed a dick-load of money and went to uni.

    Maybe this is now veering off into a topic more suited for P&D, but there's a definite whiff of entitlement and unfounded self-aggrandizing in the air at the moment. People certainly have the right to feel jipped after going to uni if they were lead to believe it is all riches and champagne at the other end of their course, but the notion of being "above" or "degraded" by honest work sticks in my craw.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Think this would be a good one for P&D....

    I'm kind of mixed on the issue.

    On the one hand, I think that people who spend 3 years working damn hard at uni (and often hard outside of university as well to fund their degree) aren't being unreasonable to want to be able to get a job above what they would have been able to obtain before going to university, and in the general area that they want to work in. However, I guess there just aren't the jobs there... and so people shouldn't expect to walk right out of uni into a job. So I guess the ideal thing would be for someone to pretty much apply to most things they think they could do. However there will always be jobs that don't suit some people, and I don't think they should be forced to do them, and this is irrelevant of qualifications. For example somebody with really low self-confidence being a clown, or a vegetarian working in a butchers (OK these are shit examples but hope you get my drift....).

    I guess I don't actually even understand how it works because my degree doesn't really work like that... are people really fed the idea that they will have a job at the end because of the degree they've done?

    I also think of some people I know and think about how they spent their time at uni... (I won't mention courses or whatever because most likely I'll just end up offending people) and I think, is it really fair that these people who actually didn't work that hard at university, and spent most of their time sleeping through lectures think that they are above someone the same age who may have spent the last 3 years seriously grafting?

    I think part of it is the difference between courses, and the the difference between the same courses at different universities. Somebody said to me "I think I did less work in my whole first year then you guys have done in the past 4 weeks". Should it really be like that? But I guess that is a different issue..... As I've said I don't really know much about it because it's not how mine works, but I think it is a bit unfair that one person can do a course at one university, work their arse off, and be on the same level as someone who although they officially have a degree, they've not really done anything but drink for 3 years. Don't get me wrong, I think there is more to uni than just learning, but is it really fair that that person considers themselves above someone who has worked really hard at an entry job for 3 years. I'm just not sure I guess....
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    First off, I'm not really fussed if you graduated top of your Astrophysics class at Harvard. I don't really seem what relevance it has, other than posturing maybe.

    Perhaps it indicates that I have slightly more capability than the average joe to do specific kinds of work? Even if you personally don't understand the distinction, the link between ability to pass professional exams and a level results / degree results is quite strong, which is why employers often limit their intake to those with high results.

    I understand what you're saying, and understand why your perception of 'too good for that job' gets your back up - and if it's good, honest work, I'll go for it. But a lot of work is stuff literally anyone can do, you're kept on short term contracts so they can get-rid whenever they feel like it, the hours are often variable depending on the needs that week, and all in all it doesn't offer a whole lot more than being on benefits if you include the opportunity cost of potentially better roles.

    Honestly, I have been told I am overqualified even for basic accounts assistant work - accounting HR people have told me they ideally pick someone up from GCSE / a level because they have no real wage expectations, and they can teach them to do the job and leave them to do that every day 9-5. I've gone to Uni, understand the insides and outsides of accounting (but obviously not all of the obscure laws and regulations and the application which you simply just need to learn on the job) and they would expect my salary expectations to be higher. So starting at 18 instead of minimum wage. There are no dreams here or with any grads I know to start at some crazy 6 figure salary. You are simply not perceiving the mindset of graduates correctly, at all. I have friends working for no payment right now.

    I have applied for accounting firms and I have done quite well, but there is simply a case of too many graduates for the positions. When I'm in group interviews - and I've actually done an accounting degree - there are people there with history, english, sociology degrees (and fair play to them); everyone needs a job post-uni and everyone is having a punt at every grad job going. So, I agree I need to be realistic, and I'm happy to do a decent days work for an honest wage. But I have a specific 'training' for a specific job, so when do I give up on that job and do something else instead? The opportunity cost of going for literally every job I could physically do means I might miss out on a job that I'm better suited to. You complain at me not wanting to apply for jobs that have literally zero suitability for my career path, but really there are plenty of people signing on each week who just can't be fucked to go paint some fences for the council.

    It's a judgement call at the end of the day. I don't expect a great job to land in my lap. A lot of graduates now are being encouraged to do unpaid internships - literally working for nothing. I got a phonecall last week about a company who wanted me to work there doing an admin job for 2 months, 9-5, for free. I don't get any training or any perks - this is simply because a company wants to freeload off the employment crisis.

    You really need to understand the wider context that there is a fine line between 'doing an honest days work' and 'being exploited the fuck out of'.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    on in 5 mins! shyboy watch it! it's good to get angry sometimes.

    im waiting for an almighty conclusion where they point out how well the non-graduate young people did as opposed to the graduates thus proving uni is a waste of time and only for lazy people.... because 4 young people are indicative of a generation.

    oh the anticipation.

    oh and i agree with riot and java to the extent that it is definitely gearing up towards a political agenda/ current way of thinking about benefits and being jobless
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It sounds like we see eye-to-eye on this subject, broadly speaking.
    ShyBoy wrote: »
    Perhaps it indicates that I have slightly more capability than the average joe to do specific kinds of work? Even if you personally don't understand the distinction, the link between ability to pass professional exams and a level results / degree results is quite strong, which is why employers often limit their intake to those with high results.

    A 2:1 from a good university shows you have academic proficiency in a particular field. With a little research into the university, and specifically that course at the university, an employer might be able to glean more about your potential suitability for their job. I'm not sure I'd go as far as to say it means you have a higher capability of performing the job, as after all freshly graduated person hasn't done the job.
    But a lot of work is stuff literally anyone can do, you're kept on short term contracts so they can get-rid whenever they feel like it, the hours are often variable depending on the needs that week, and all in all it doesn't offer a whole lot more than being on benefits if you include the opportunity cost of potentially better roles.

    I think you're mixing a few issues here. I'm not advocating that you should go for jobs that are egregiously exploitative or that hold no guarantees of providing you with the stability your current situation may demand - if you've got rent to make then taking a job which holds the possibility of not supplying you with enough hours to make the rent is irresponsible.

    I've never understood the argument "going to work will leave me little better off than staying on the dole". Work experience is often invaluable, and choosing not to do a job because you'd be almost as well off on benefits is choosing to ask other people to shoulder your responsibilities.
    Honestly, I have been told I am overqualified even for basic accounts assistant work - accounting HR people have told me they ideally pick someone up from GCSE / a level because they have no real wage expectations, and they can teach them to do the job and leave them to do that every day 9-5.

    I understand this and sympathise.
    But I have a specific 'training' for a specific job, so when do I give up on that job and do something else instead? The opportunity cost of going for literally every job I could physically do means I might miss out on a job that I'm better suited to. You complain at me not wanting to apply for jobs that have literally zero suitability for my career path, but really there are plenty of people signing on each week who just can't be fucked to go paint some fences for the council.

    This seems a little polemic for me. The alternative aren't pursue your career or work at McDonald's and "give up". Of course there's a balance to be struck with whatever your current situation is, but because you've educated yourself with a particular career in mind doesn't mean you're entitled to do that job and nothing else: that's just not realistic. I myself, as well as a number of my friends, did a number of unskilled jobs post-uni while trying to break into our chosen careers, and I don't know anyone who considered not working a job unless it was the one they wanted.
    You really need to understand the wider context that there is a fine line between 'doing an honest days work' and 'being exploited the fuck out of'.

    Again I think you're engaging in hyperbole and polemics here. I've not suggested you should take an exploitative job.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Some of my comments were a little hasty, being unemployed is making me grouchy.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Agree and disagree. I'm not sure what you mean by:



    What kind of jobs do you see as degrading? If I was asking you to pull tagnuts out of my anal beard for 50p a gramme, then maybe, but if you mean shelf stacking in Morrisons I have to disagree in the strongest possible sense. Also, if I have "desires" to be a international playboy, should it be legit that I turn down - or not apply for at all - any job that doesn't further me achieving that goal?

    "Do what you want to do, it's your life" is what you tell to a child. The practicalities of reality are quite different.

    Disagree, 'Do what you want to do, it's your life' is actually a good philosophy to carry with you in life, I'm not suggesting people should think of themselves as too good for certain jobs or turn down jobs for the sake of it, they shouldn't. Hell, I didn't even go to uni, and I'm not bitter over the fact either.
    What I am telling you is that the 'any job's better than no job' shtick is cast iron guaranteed what UK employers want the labour force to believe, because it ensures they have a easy source of pliant workers who are willing to get screwed over for the sake of getting/keeping the job.

    Why do you think the Tories are so fixated on welfare reform?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm going to move this over into Politics and Debate now as it seems to be going that way :thumb:
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    What I am telling you is that the 'any job's better than no job' shtick is cast iron guaranteed what UK employers want the labour force to believe, because it ensures they have a easy source of pliant workers who are willing to get screwed over for the sake of getting/keeping the job.

    I really don't agree with this.

    If someone can work then they should be working, or at least attempting to find work. Welfare benefits should be there as a safety net for those who genuinely cannot work or for those who genuinely cannot find work.

    I've worked some shitty jobs since leaving university in order to pay the bills. I've collected trollies in Tesco's car park, I've worked night shift at the sorting office, I've done some exceedingly boring and badly paid data entry jobs. And you know what? It is right and proper that I got off my arse and took a job rather than sitting around on the dole waiting for my dream job to land in my lap. Why should other people pay for me to sit on my arse and watch Jeremy Kyle when there are no shortage of low-level vacancies waiting to be filled?

    There should be appropriate employment law protection in place for all- especially for those at the bottom- but that's a separate argument to welfare reform.

    Why shouldn't a single mother be forced to find work during school hours? Why shouldn't a disabled person be assessed on what work they can do and be forced to look for that type of work? Benefits should be a safety net, a last resort; benefits should be the breadline and nothing more, with the exception of DLA. I work damn hard and I don't see why my taxes should be spunked away on people too lazy to get off their fat arses and get a sodding job.

    If someone cannot find work- as many disabled people cannot- then they should be protected providing they can prove they're working flat out to find a job. I think the JC+ should be able to ask for copies of application forms- I've seen several forms for menial work filled in by people determined to screw up their chance of being interviewed- and people who don't apply for jobs genuinely should have their benefits stopped.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    It's driving me mad at the moment not being able to find work. I'm getting rejected for the most menial, temporary retail jobs, and I'm not without experience. It gets harder and harder to write applications and I've only had two interviews since leaving university in July. I want to work, and I just feel stupid and dull.
  • SkiveSkive No discipline. No morality. No respect. New ForestPosts: 15,169 Skive's The Limit
    I really don't agree with this.

    If someone can work then they should be working, or at least attempting to find work. Welfare benefits should be there as a safety net for those who genuinely cannot work or for those who genuinely cannot find work.

    I've worked some shitty jobs since leaving university in order to pay the bills. I've collected trollies in Tesco's car park, I've worked night shift at the sorting office, I've done some exceedingly boring and badly paid data entry jobs. And you know what? It is right and proper that I got off my arse and took a job rather than sitting around on the dole waiting for my dream job to land in my lap. Why should other people pay for me to sit on my arse and watch Jeremy Kyle when there are no shortage of low-level vacancies waiting to be filled?

    There should be appropriate employment law protection in place for all- especially for those at the bottom- but that's a separate argument to welfare reform.

    Why shouldn't a single mother be forced to find work during school hours? Why shouldn't a disabled person be assessed on what work they can do and be forced to look for that type of work? Benefits should be a safety net, a last resort; benefits should be the breadline and nothing more, with the exception of DLA. I work damn hard and I don't see why my taxes should be spunked away on people too lazy to get off their fat arses and get a sodding job.

    If someone cannot find work- as many disabled people cannot- then they should be protected providing they can prove they're working flat out to find a job. I think the JC+ should be able to ask for copies of application forms- I've seen several forms for menial work filled in by people determined to screw up their chance of being interviewed- and people who don't apply for jobs genuinely should have their benefits stopped.

    :yes:

    The longest I've been unemployed since leaving education is 2 months, and that's not because I've been in the same job, I've had several. I just hate not working.

    After leaving college I went through several jobs where I didn't use any of the qualifications I'd gained, some of them were shit jobs too (factory, Tesco, Mcdoanlds) but it kept me working.
    I've also suffered a redundancy from one job I liked, and had to go back to shelf stacking whilst looking for another job I truly wanted

    It's so important to work and keep busy, I think being unemployed makes you feel more shit than doing a job you think is beneath you. At least you're keeping busy. Being unemployed is soul destroying, it takes all your energy and self worth and you can become easily depressed leaving it even harder to find a job.

    Better to be in a shit job whilst looking for a good job.
    Yesterday is history
    Tomorrow is a mystery
    But today is a gift
    That’s why it’s call the present
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Sounds like I got out of the country at the right time.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why shouldn't a single mother be forced to find work during school hours? Why shouldn't a disabled person be assessed on what work they can do and be forced to look for that type of work? Benefits should be a safety net, a last resort; benefits should be the breadline and nothing more, with the exception of DLA. I work damn hard and I don't see why my taxes should be spunked away on people too lazy to get off their fat arses and get a sodding job.

    :eek2: Bad day at work?

    Remember the dole pays vastly less than the minimum wage, those who seem to be making a good living on the dole are either on the fiddle or getting themselves into consumer debt by buying goods on credit.

    The idea of "no work, no money" might be fine if we lived in times of full employment, unfortunately we don't and there are about five applicants for every job vacancy. The reality is that if crack the whip and tighten the welfare system yet again, it will not encourage people to magic themselves into non-existent jobs but is more likely to lead to more poverty and insecure jobs in the "grey" economy, which no one wants.

    We could possibly deal with the better off tax-evaders for a start which are costing the country a lot more than the legitimately unemployed.

    People should realise that we have approx 2.5 million unemployed people who are claiming, that is about to rise by at least 1 million over the coming year. There may be some out their that work the system, but most people don't. The government will never try to get the country into full employment for the simple reason that it would mean people could ask what they want for in pay. The more people there are out of work means the less you need to pay people who you employ.
    As for someone's remark about getting all able bodied people to work, this government intends on doing that, the only problem is that they will get people doing the work that at present is someone else's livelihood, causing more unemployment.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    To give context to the situation: spoke to a recruiter today who said with my CV 4 years ago she would have been able to get me 5 interviews in a week, but now there is a combination of a lack of new jobs (instead of making redundancies many companies just don't hire newbies) and also a surplus of graduates going for each position.

    The unfortunate advice is 'you were born in the wrong generation' or 'work for free / accept exploitative labour'. The retail / warehouse jobs are in even more competition than that and again a similar pattern - retain old staff, don't hire new staff. This inevitably means young people are losing out in the employment game.
  • SkiveSkive No discipline. No morality. No respect. New ForestPosts: 15,169 Skive's The Limit
    Don't know what it's like everywhere else but my local Mcdonalds is always recruiting staff. Good job it is too.
    Yesterday is history
    Tomorrow is a mystery
    But today is a gift
    That’s why it’s call the present
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Been at McDonald's before, it is a good job once you get into it - that is if you get the hours you need to support yourself because they work on a work when you're needed basis, even though they hire more staff than they need, liquidating the hours more.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Firstly, the economy is shit at the moment - that's life; you may think the Government could have taken other courses (I don't, but that's a different matter), but you need to deal with the world as it is,not how you'd like it to be. We might have to compromise and not get our dream job, but sometimes we do have to meet real life half-way.

    And smart, intelligent graduates will take longer to enter the jobs market - I graduated during the 90's recession, I had friends temping and do entry level jobs for four-five years; but they did move on to graduate jobs - just not as quick as they'd have liked. It'll be the same this time...

    But you can make it quicker and easier; given the choice between a grad trainee who's done six months lugging bins and six months one who's not done anything - it's the former who's going to get it. If nothing else they're acclimatised to the idea you need to get out of bed at a certain time and stagger into work. I wouldn't turn up my nose at voluntary work either; if you unemployed you want to beef up your CV and anything is better than that awful blank space that when you're been looking at people to employ just says 'waster'; whether that's fair or not you're trying to impress when your potential employer has got dozens of applications.

    I'd also say several of my uni friends started on crap jobs which led to something better, one was a postie and through that got into the Royal Mails grad management scheme, another worked at Woolies and was fast-tracked into their management scheme


    Also the chances are that, as a grad, in twenty years time you're going to be on way above average earnings and in a more stimulating and interesting jobs than many of the population. I don;t think it does any harm to see how other people live and how crappy dead-end jobs are before you head on a career trajectory which allows a new car every few years and foreign family holiday a year

    That's my advice, take or leave as you wish.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The idea of "no work, no money" might be fine if we lived in times of full employment, unfortunately we don't and there are about five applicants for every job vacancy.

    I'm not sure that anyone is advocating that, in fact I'd I'd say that they are advocating something different. They are advocating a benefits system and welfare state.

    The key element of any welfare system should always be that it is a safety net for those who cannot find work, or are physically unable to do so. Not wanting to do a job because it's demeaning or degrading is not acceptable IMHO.

    There are plenty of jobs out there which fall into that category and yet there seems to be an assumption that it's alright for people without a degree to do them. Sorry, but if it's okay for them, then it's okay for anyone.

    That isn't to disregard the fact that many employers will see someone with a degree as "over qualified". For me that's a fallacy. If you want the job, and could do the job, then you're perfectly qualified IMHO.
    We could possibly deal with the better off tax-evaders for a start which are costing the country a lot more than the legitimately unemployed.

    My view isn't based on the ""cost" of the welfare system. It's based on the whole basis of a welfare system.

    I'd echo your comments about tax-evasion and extend it to "legitimate" loopholes too.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    FWIW I am applying for grad schemes, spending out speculative CVs and contacting recruitment agencies. Just everything takes time, so its whether to focus 100% of my time on the jobs I want, or 50% on those jobs and 50% on bread+butter jobs.

    edited to add: also, plenty of the career moves I think would definitely land me in good stead even if its not what I want long long term (armed forces, paramedic [which previously you could start as and then work your way up but now you need to go do a training course for ages like nurses]) are decent commitments in terms of time.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    ShyBoy wrote: »
    FWIW I am applying for grad schemes, spending out speculative CVs and contacting recruitment agencies. Just everything takes time, so its whether to focus 100% of my time on the jobs I want, or 50% on those jobs and 50% on bread+butter jobs.

    edited to add: also, plenty of the career moves I think would definitely land me in good stead even if its not what I want long long term (armed forces, paramedic [which previously you could start as and then work your way up but now you need to go do a training course for ages like nurses]) are decent commitments in terms of time.

    To be honest only you can answer whether its worth your time to do 100% on looking for that dream job or spenidng time putting in effort just to get work. What I would say is that in the longer term you have a better chance of getting a decent job if you've got something on your application form to show you've been doing something (to say nothing of the grind of applying and getting nothinfn can be soul destroying, just having a reason to get up and do something, even if its a couple of days a week helping in an Oxfm shop, can be a great way to keep yourself motivated).

    Personally I'd also question the value of speculative CV and whther its worth your time doing them - the chances of a firm just needing someone just as you send it in is remote and in most cases it's worth the firm do a proper advertising process and getting in lots of applications from which they can choose. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I've never heard of anyone getting job above pretty casual Saturday work through spec CVs.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Personally I'd also question the value of speculative CV and whther its worth your time doing them - the chances of a firm just needing someone just as you send it in is remote and in most cases it's worth the firm do a proper advertising process and getting in lots of applications from which they can choose. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I've never heard of anyone getting job above pretty casual Saturday work through spec CVs.
    I got a really good job as a research assistant in laboratory when I was 18 getting paid a good salary full time through doing this and got offered another similar role in another lab through this method of applying. It does happen.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,324 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Was actually advised to pursue speculative CVs by a an advisor at a recruitment agency. Dunno whether that counts for anything though.
Sign In or Register to comment.