Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #6881 > unrolled thread

If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers

Back to article view | Back to comp.misc

Contents

  If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers Rich <rich@example.invalid> - 2015-03-02 23:59 +0000
    Re: If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2015-03-02 18:15 -0800
    Re: If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-03-03 13:47 +1100
    Re: If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> - 2015-03-03 04:13 +0000
      Re: If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-03-03 16:03 +1100
        Re: If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers RS Wood <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2015-03-03 10:31 +0000
        Re: If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-03-03 13:58 +0200
          Re: If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-03-04 14:42 +1100
            Re: If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-03-04 12:59 +0000
              Re: If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2015-03-04 15:32 +0200
                Re: If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-03-04 14:26 +0000
                  Re: If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-03-05 12:22 +1100
        Re: If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2015-03-03 18:40 +0100
          Re: If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2015-03-04 14:00 +1100
      Re: If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers DD <usenet.xyzzyx@spamgourmet.com> - 2015-03-03 05:12 -0800
      Re: If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2015-03-03 18:34 +0100

#6881 — If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/carpenters-were-hired-like-programmers-barry-vredevoort?midToken=AQEoeDfAmKtLKQ&trk=eml-b2_content_ecosystem_digest-recommended_articles-165-null&fromEmail=fromEmail&ut=3bhUUKsCF1uSE1

Quoting from the URL above:

   If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers

   Interviewer: So, you're a carpenter, are you? Carpenter: That's right,
   that's what I do.

   Interviewer: How long have you been doing it? Carpenter: Ten years.

   Interviewer: Great, that's good. Now, I have a few technical questions
   to ask you to see if you're a fit for our team. OK? Carpenter: Sure,
   that'd be fine.

   Interviewer: First of all, we're working in a subdivision building a lot
   of brown houses. Have you built a lot of brown houses before? Carpenter:
   Well, I'm a carpenter, so I build houses, and people pretty much paint
   them the way they want.

   Interviewer: Yes, I understand that, but can you give me an idea of how
   much experience you have with brown? Roughly. Carpenter: Gosh, I really
   don't know. Once they're built I don't care what color they get painted.
   Maybe six months?

   Interviewer: Six months? Well, we were looking for someone with a lot
   more brown experience, but let me ask you some more questions.

   ...

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#6882

On 2015-03-02 23:59:52 +0000, Rich said:

> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/carpenters-were-hired-like-programmers-barry-vredevoort?midToken=AQEoeDfAmKtLKQ&trk=eml-b2_content_ecosystem_digest-recommended_articles-165-null&fromEmail=fromEmail&ut=3bhUUKsCF1uSE1 
> 
> 
> Quoting from the URL above:
> 
>    If Carpenters Were Hired Like Programmers
> 
>    Interviewer: So, you're a carpenter, are you? Carpenter: That's right,
>    that's what I do.
> 
>    Interviewer: How long have you been doing it? Carpenter: Ten years.
> 
>    Interviewer: Great, that's good. Now, I have a few technical questions
>    to ask you to see if you're a fit for our team. OK? Carpenter: Sure,
>    that'd be fine.
> 
>    Interviewer: First of all, we're working in a subdivision building a lot
>    of brown houses. Have you built a lot of brown houses before? Carpenter:
>    Well, I'm a carpenter, so I build houses, and people pretty much paint
>    them the way they want.
> 
>    Interviewer: Yes, I understand that, but can you give me an idea of how
>    much experience you have with brown? Roughly. Carpenter: Gosh, I really
>    don't know. Once they're built I don't care what color they get painted.
>    Maybe six months?
> 
>    Interviewer: Six months? Well, we were looking for someone with a lot
>    more brown experience, but let me ask you some more questions.
> 
>    ...

Back when I wasn't self employed I was always looking for a better job. 
 It was amazing to me to see how many jobs required five or more years 
of experience in technologies or environments that had been invented 
much more recently.

Nowadays, I have enough work.  When I encounter a prospective customer 
who wants more years of experience in a technology than that technology 
has existed, I do not pass up the chance to make sarcastic remarks.  I 
have found that these kinds of customers are always a huge pain in the 
ass in the end, so I am not hurting myself by making fun of them.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6883

On 3/03/2015 10:59 AM, Rich wrote:
> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/carpenters-were-hired-like-programmers-barry-vredevoort?midToken=AQEoeDfAmKtLKQ&trk=eml-b2_content_ecosystem_digest-recommended_articles-165-null&fromEmail=fromEmail&ut=3bhUUKsCF1uSE1
>
> Quoting from the URL above:

>     Interviewer: Six months? Well, we were looking for someone with a lot
>     more brown experience, but let me ask you some more questions.
>

I used to imagine them wanting experience with left-hand thread screws.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6884

On 02/03/15 23:59, Rich wrote:
>    Interviewer: Yes, I understand that, but can you give me an idea of how
>    much experience you have with brown? Roughly. Carpenter: Gosh, I really
>    don't know. Once they're built I don't care what color they get painted.
>    Maybe six months?

I recently saw a local government recruiter specify that applicants must
have a "working knowledge of who colleagues are and what they do". The
effect, which is presumably intended, will be to keep the same staff
doing the same work but change their job titles. I wonder if it is
connected with the city electing a mayor with a penchant for grandiose
statements, broken promises, and impulsive policy changes (not to
mention swearing, speeding and nepotism). (ADHD?)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6885

On 3/03/2015 3:13 PM, Hils wrote:
> On 02/03/15 23:59, Rich wrote:
>>     Interviewer: Yes, I understand that, but can you give me an idea of how
>>     much experience you have with brown? Roughly. Carpenter: Gosh, I really
>>     don't know. Once they're built I don't care what color they get painted.
>>     Maybe six months?
>
> I recently saw a local government recruiter specify that applicants must
> have a "working knowledge of who colleagues are and what they do". The
> effect, which is presumably intended, will be to keep the same staff
> doing the same work but change their job titles.

Or a rather thinly veiled attempt to circumvent a rule requiring that 
external candidates be considered.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6886

On Tue, 03 Mar 2015 16:03:38 +1100
Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:

> Or a rather thinly veiled attempt to circumvent a rule requiring that 
> external candidates be considered.
> 
> Sylvia.
> 

I agree with Sylvia.  Not even that thinly veiled, in my opinion!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6887

Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>:

> On 3/03/2015 3:13 PM, Hils wrote:
>> I recently saw a local government recruiter specify that applicants
>> must have a "working knowledge of who colleagues are and what they
>> do". The effect, which is presumably intended, will be to keep the
>> same staff doing the same work but change their job titles.
>
> Or a rather thinly veiled attempt to circumvent a rule requiring that
> external candidates be considered.

When you are applying for an employment-based Green Card in the US, you
must demonstrate that no American resident is willing and able to do the
job. It is not difficult for the employer to tailor the job posting so
that only one individual in the known universe fits the bill.

However, the DHS fights back with silliness of their own: when you apply
for a Green Card for an H1B visa holder (who might have been in the
country for 5 years), you are not allowed to mention on the job posting
any requirements that the H1B holder didn't satisfy prior to their H1B
stint.

IOW, the H1B holder has to demonstrate that no US resident is willing
and able to take a job that the H1B holder was willing and able to take
five years before.

At least, that's how things were a decade ago.


Marko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6894

On 3/03/2015 10:58 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
> Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>:
>
>> On 3/03/2015 3:13 PM, Hils wrote:
>>> I recently saw a local government recruiter specify that applicants
>>> must have a "working knowledge of who colleagues are and what they
>>> do". The effect, which is presumably intended, will be to keep the
>>> same staff doing the same work but change their job titles.
>>
>> Or a rather thinly veiled attempt to circumvent a rule requiring that
>> external candidates be considered.
>
> When you are applying for an employment-based Green Card in the US, you
> must demonstrate that no American resident is willing and able to do the
> job.

Which is a fiction anyway unless the job is truly extraordinary. What it 
really means is that the employer cannot find someone at a price they're 
willing to pay, and prefers to undermine the earning power of people in 
the relevant profession by importing lower priced workers from elsewhere.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6896

In article <clnda3F97bkU1@mid.individual.net>, Sylvia Else
<sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:

>On 3/03/2015 10:58 PM, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
>> Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address>:
>>
>>> On 3/03/2015 3:13 PM, Hils wrote:
>>>> I recently saw a local government recruiter specify that applicants
>>>> must have a "working knowledge of who colleagues are and what they
>>>> do". The effect, which is presumably intended, will be to keep the
>>>> same staff doing the same work but change their job titles.
>>>
>>> Or a rather thinly veiled attempt to circumvent a rule requiring that
>>> external candidates be considered.
>>
>> When you are applying for an employment-based Green Card in the US, you
>> must demonstrate that no American resident is willing and able to do the
>> job.
>
>Which is a fiction anyway unless the job is truly extraordinary. What it 
>really means is that the employer cannot find someone at a price they're 
>willing to pay, and prefers to undermine the earning power of people in 
>the relevant profession by importing lower priced workers from elsewhere.

Not always. In my case I was a University employee working at a US DoE
Lab. So I was paid on the same scale as everyone else. My job was
advertised in Datamation (i.e., nationwide in the US).

-- 
"I love the way that Microsoft follows standards. 
 In much the same manner as fish follow migrating caribou."
                                               - Paul Tomblin, ASR

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6897

Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net>:

> In article <clnda3F97bkU1@mid.individual.net>, Sylvia Else
> <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:
>> Which is a fiction anyway unless the job is truly extraordinary. What
>> it really means is that the employer cannot find someone at a price
>> they're willing to pay, and prefers to undermine the earning power of
>> people in the relevant profession by importing lower priced workers
>> from elsewhere.
>
> Not always. In my case I was a University employee working at a US DoE
> Lab. So I was paid on the same scale as everyone else. My job was
> advertised in Datamation (i.e., nationwide in the US).

Yes, but without you, everyone else would be paid ten times as much.

It has to do with labor elasticity (<URL:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elasticity_%28economics%29>). If you
restrict the number of specialists below an inelastic demand, the wages
shoot through the roof.

And the other way round: if you train or import an oversupply of
specialists, the wages plummet.

In conditions of inelastic demand, tiny changes in the supply can cause
huge swings in prices, as was visible in the electricity disaster in
California a decade back.


Marko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6899

In article <877fuw28hi.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net>, Marko Rauhamaa
<marko@pacujo.net> wrote:

>Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net>:
>
>> In article <clnda3F97bkU1@mid.individual.net>, Sylvia Else
>> <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:
>>> Which is a fiction anyway unless the job is truly extraordinary. What
>>> it really means is that the employer cannot find someone at a price
>>> they're willing to pay, and prefers to undermine the earning power of
>>> people in the relevant profession by importing lower priced workers
>>> from elsewhere.
>>
>> Not always. In my case I was a University employee working at a US DoE
>> Lab. So I was paid on the same scale as everyone else. My job was
>> advertised in Datamation (i.e., nationwide in the US).
>
>Yes, but without you, everyone else would be paid ten times as much.

You are obviously completely clueless as to how pay scales are set in
US Government Labs (or indeed government labs anywhere). Since you are
likely to persist in your fantasies, I'll leave you to it.

-- 
"If you're not able to ask questions and deal with the answers without feeling 
that someone has called your intelligence or competence into question, don't 
ask questions on Usenet where the answers won't be carefully tailored to avoid
tripping your hair-trigger insecurities."                  - D M Procida, UCSM

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6901

On 5/03/2015 1:26 AM, Tim Streater wrote:
> In article <877fuw28hi.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net>, Marko Rauhamaa
> <marko@pacujo.net> wrote:
>
>> Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net>:
>>
>>> In article <clnda3F97bkU1@mid.individual.net>, Sylvia Else
>>> <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:
>>>> Which is a fiction anyway unless the job is truly extraordinary. What
>>>> it really means is that the employer cannot find someone at a price
>>>> they're willing to pay, and prefers to undermine the earning power of
>>>> people in the relevant profession by importing lower priced workers
>>>> from elsewhere.
>>>
>>> Not always. In my case I was a University employee working at a US DoE
>>> Lab. So I was paid on the same scale as everyone else. My job was
>>> advertised in Datamation (i.e., nationwide in the US).
>>
>> Yes, but without you, everyone else would be paid ten times as much.
>
> You are obviously completely clueless as to how pay scales are set in
> US Government Labs (or indeed government labs anywhere). Since you are
> likely to persist in your fantasies, I'll leave you to it.
>
The Government ultimately competes for workers just like everyone else. 
They can set pay scales all they like, but unless those pay scales are 
attractive to workers, they won't be able to fill the positions.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6891

On 2015-03-03, Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:
> On 3/03/2015 3:13 PM, Hils wrote:
>> On 02/03/15 23:59, Rich wrote:
>>>     Interviewer: Yes, I understand that, but can you give me an idea of how
>>>     much experience you have with brown? Roughly. Carpenter: Gosh, I really
>>>     don't know. Once they're built I don't care what color they get painted.
>>>     Maybe six months?
>>
>> I recently saw a local government recruiter specify that applicants must
>> have a "working knowledge of who colleagues are and what they do". The
>> effect, which is presumably intended, will be to keep the same staff
>> doing the same work but change their job titles.
>
> Or a rather thinly veiled attempt to circumvent a rule requiring that 
> external candidates be considered.

Yes but at least they are being honest.  Anyone who doesn't qualify under
those conditions doesn't need to waste their time applying.


-- 
Don't ever use the last two versions of GCC in serious stuff :)
              -- fortune cookie seen on GCC Bugzilla – Bug List

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6893

On 4/03/2015 4:40 AM, Paul Sture wrote:
> On 2015-03-03, Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:
>> On 3/03/2015 3:13 PM, Hils wrote:
>>> On 02/03/15 23:59, Rich wrote:
>>>>      Interviewer: Yes, I understand that, but can you give me an idea of how
>>>>      much experience you have with brown? Roughly. Carpenter: Gosh, I really
>>>>      don't know. Once they're built I don't care what color they get painted.
>>>>      Maybe six months?
>>>
>>> I recently saw a local government recruiter specify that applicants must
>>> have a "working knowledge of who colleagues are and what they do". The
>>> effect, which is presumably intended, will be to keep the same staff
>>> doing the same work but change their job titles.
>>
>> Or a rather thinly veiled attempt to circumvent a rule requiring that
>> external candidates be considered.
>
> Yes but at least they are being honest.  Anyone who doesn't qualify under
> those conditions doesn't need to waste their time applying.
>
>
Or they can kick up a stink over the blatant breach of the rules.

Sylvia.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6888

Hils wrote:
> a mayor with a penchant for grandiose
> statements, broken promises, and impulsive policy changes (not to
> mention swearing, speeding and nepotism). (ADHD?)

Sounds more like pathological narcissism (narcissistic personality disorder) to 
me, based on having an ex-stepfather with the damned disorder...  ADHD would 
just make the mayor easily distracted and unable to sit still without making a 
huge effort.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#6890

On 2015-03-03, Hils <hils@saynotospam.net> wrote:
> On 02/03/15 23:59, Rich wrote:
>>    Interviewer: Yes, I understand that, but can you give me an idea of how
>>    much experience you have with brown? Roughly. Carpenter: Gosh, I really
>>    don't know. Once they're built I don't care what color they get painted.
>>    Maybe six months?
>
> I recently saw a local government recruiter specify that applicants must
> have a "working knowledge of who colleagues are and what they do". The
> effect, which is presumably intended, will be to keep the same staff
> doing the same work but change their job titles.

My father had to go through something like this due to the 1970s
reorganisation of local government boundaries in the UK.

In a nutshell had to apply for his own job because it now covered a greater
area.  I know he was worried whether or not he would get it, but he was
successful and got a decent pay rise to cover the extra responsibility.

> I wonder if it is connected with the city electing a mayor with a
> penchant for grandiose statements, broken promises, and impulsive
> policy changes (not to mention swearing, speeding and nepotism).
> (ADHD?)

If you were in charge of a department which functioned reasonably well,
wouldn't you want to keep the same staff rather than start afresh with
unknowns?

-- 
Don't ever use the last two versions of GCC in serious stuff :)
              -- fortune cookie seen on GCC Bugzilla – Bug List

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.misc

csiph-web