First Comment

The first link was sent to me by a co-worker who used to work for Bridgewater Associates from Dealbreaker. "Be the hyena. Attack the Wildebeast" would certainly be a different motto than most companies as will most of the things you'll read in that article.

Next is The Economist which has a very interesting article about "The Difference Engine" and the wisdom of crowds. How can you apply this to your workplace and the co-workers who make up the crowd?

Then to Monster and Yahoo! for 10 job sectors which are in decline...and what to do if your industry is on the way out.

Lastly we go to Investopedia and Yahoo! for 7 jobs companies are desperate to fill...and how you can qualify for those jobs.

Winter Cleaning! I have tons of great links to share with everyone that I will post here at the Astron Solutions blog over the next few days:

The first is from way back in May from ResumeBear and, with the national spotlight on the healthcare, they have a list of the healthiest companies in America.

From back in December about how young entrepreneurs are making their own jobs in this bad job market instead of waiting around to find one from the New York Times.

Then on to ABC News which has tips for interviewing and 5 tips that no one mentions. These are helpful hints not only for the job applier but for Human Resources as well.

Next, from this past week, some advice from TLNT on how you can avoid a people management fiasco at your company like the Juan Williams/NPR case.

Lastly, from FINS we have an article which states there's actually a science behind your employees blowing their bonuses.

When I was finishing up my Masters studies, I scoured Monster.com, Careerbuilder and Craigslist to see who would hire me. I wasn't sure exactly what I wanted to do (I still don't know), but at the time I was just looking for something that sounded fun and exciting. So when I saw an advertisement for a sports marketing firm that was hiring for an executive training program, I was very excited. I was even more excited when I got a call about setting up an interview at the office in New Jersey. I had no clue what I was in store for, though.

I completed my 45 minute commute to the company's offices in an office park and since I was early, I camped out for a little while in my car and read up on what I knew about the company. From their website they seemed to be a large sports marketing company that worked with the New York Yankees--among other accounts. As I was sitting in the car, I saw many young people leaving the building in suits and thought that this seemed like a cool work environment.

I decided to enter the office 15 minutes early and was surprised to find that the area I was ushered into seemed to be a single office. In the waiting room were a ton of other young people like me in suits and looked much like the people I'd seen leaving the building. I checked in and sat in the large waiting area. Someone came out of the office and a name was called and they went in to interview. Seeing about 10 people in front of me, I wondered how I was going to get interviewed any time soon.

My answer came when the door opened 5 minutes later and the person in there left. I thought this was odd, but figured maybe the interview didn't go well and they were just cutting it short. Except the next person had the same time limit--and the next person as well.

I realized there was another room to the right when the receptionist walked over to a door and opened it quickly but she closed it just as quickly as myself and a female candidate tried to look in. When she came out of the room, I got a quick glance inside the room to find out all that was in there was a copy machine. I started to have some alarm bells go off.

My thoughts were quickly interrupted by the hiring manager and the candidate getting into a screaming match in the room. We all turned as the door opened and the hiring manager literally threw the guy out of the office, screaming at him that he "could not believe someone would have so many problems with such a great opportunity" and that the candidate "was an idiot for asking so many stupid questions."

Alarm bells ringing loudly at this point, I realized I was two away from having to go in to interview. The hiring manager finally calmed down when he saw all the scared faces in the room and walked over in his fancy suit to the television and put on the volume for the Yankees game saying "we really should be supporting our client."

Finally it was my turn as I entered the room. A single office, on desk, one picture on the desk (which I figured out was a picture of a car), no computer, no books...really, nothing. We got into the interview and he asked me basically 2 questions, all the while showing no signs he was listening to me. After I finished my second answer, he put a big star on my resume and let me know that I was exactly what they were looking for and he was going to be excited to have me back for a second interview. He said that I looked like someone who would appreciate this position more than that "other idiot who asked so many stupid questions." He then asked me if I had any questions and I of course said no.

On my way out I asked the receptionist where the rest of the office was. She asked "excuse me?" and I quickly decided to thank her and leave. I walked down the hall and checked out the rest of the offices around there was not a single occupied office. It was all empty, Boiler Room-type offices behind every door. I left the building with another candidate and he seemed to think we got duped into interviewing for a fake company.

I went home and Googled the company name and after scrolling through the results, realized he was right. There were a ton of negative reports on this company and it ends up that the company had three different names in three years because negative reports kept on being written about them. There are a ton of these companies out there. They either run like a pyramid scheme where they tell you that it's an executive management training position and the sole goal is to work you like a dog in menial tasks and then train you to start your own and share your profits with the other company. Or they bait-and-switch telling you that you're working for a prestigious sales or marketing company only to have you go out and sell something like Verizon Fios door-to-door. Most of them require employees to give them cult-like devotion and cover all expenses including any car costs and gas expenses. All of them fall under a category of companies called "Mutli-Level Marketing companies". While multi-level marketing companies could be legit, these companies are far from it.

These are shameful people who prey on those who are young and inexperienced in the job world (they won't interview you if you have more than a year of experience) and try to exploit their eagerness to make an impression in the job world. When I got a call back from this company, I politely declined the second interview--and then was called again a week later to find out why. I wasn't exactly truthful, but then again, I know they hadn't been either.

I am reminded of that today because someone I know was contacted by one as well. I knew right away to search their name on Ripoff Report, a great resource for figuring out if the company is legitimate or not. There are also many guides on the internet to figure out if any type of multi-level company is right for you. Hopefully these companies continue to be given a bad name because it hurts real companies who try to recruit out in the market. The burden of proof for some companies is becoming higher after fakes like these continually pop up. But hopefully that just creates more honesty out there in the market so that people don't have to make the same mistake I made.

We've all been rejected. Whether it be in high school on the person we had a crush on, when we were applying to college, when we've interviewed for jobs, or even when some of us have been let go from that a job that we've all been told, at one point or another: "no". But there's many different ways to say no and doing it in the right way in both the hiring and firing process, a company can help candidates and former employees as well as helping their own self-image. Let's take a look at the three types of candidates and how is a bad and a good way to say N-O.

External Job Candidate

These are the easiest people to say no to out of the three groups we'll talk about, but there are still proper ways to go about this. I know one former classmate who was told they had a prestigious position at an investment bank coming out of business school only to have that invitation revoked once the company hit some skids. How did this person find out they weren't going to be employed at this large bank? The news. Seriously. Instead of calling/e-mailing/writing the candidates to let them know their signed offers were not going to be honored, they instead let the news organizations reporting the story know and the classmate found out by reading about the company online. That's rough--and wrong.

The best way to go about it was done a few years back for me. I applied for a job that was I pretty sure I was under-qualified for--but I really liked the company, job, pay, and thought it would be worth it to apply. After speaking with the Human Resources representative for a few minutes on the phone the day I applied, she told me they were sifting through applications and she would get back to me. She did get back to me--later that evening and told me that they were not going any further with my application. Instead of just not calling me back (which is happened to many people I know plenty of times recently), she called me on her drive home to discuss why they were going elsewhere. She talked me through the strong points in my resume and where they felt I may not fit for the job. She also told me they would keep my resume on file and I shouldn't hesitate to reapply in the future. I was shocked by this phone call and certainly appreciated it. "No" didn't sound like "no" that time.

Internal Job Candidate

Probably the most difficult person to say no to out of the group. At least when you're laying off someone you're ushering them out the door and outside job candidates you don't know from Adam usually--but internal job candidates who don't get the job are still going to be walking around those same floors every day. The worst way to do it is to do it impersonally and/or string that person along. Most internal job applications require a candidate to tell his or her boss and/or human resources representative. Then they need to interview at the same company they already work (which usually is accompanied by a good deal of inter-company gossip). To say the least, these people are sticking their necks out and putting their jobs on the line. Many bosses probably are not so happy with a candidate saying they're looking for another job in the company and if they don't get hired by the new hiring manager, fear of retribution from the original manager can be strong.

So it's not a surprise that I shook my head at one story I heard recently of how an internal job candidate was strung along for a month and half only to not got the job. Worse yet, instead of the hiring manager or human resources representative letting the candidate know they weren't going to get the job, they received a call from the home offices from someone they never spoke to before who was in charge of breaking the bad news to them. Not only does this person have to run into the people who didn't want to hire them every day, but they also had to deal with the fact that none of them would have the common courtesy to tell the candidate themselves.

Instead, internal candidates should be met with an open and honest process. Companies should clamor to keep good employees and if an employee is looking for a new position internally, it's a good bet they're looking externally as well. Even if the candidate is ultimately not hired, he or she needs to be given every form of support possible to make sure that they don't become angry, resentful or disenfranchised with the company. Sometimes this can be done in the form of offering the candidate more training to improve their skills or some sort of financial incentive to thank them for trying to stay but keeping them satisfied all at the same time.


Letting Go Of An Employee

In this economy, almost every company has at least had to think about cutting back on employees. The recession has hit every industry hard and difficult personnel decisions have had to be made all across the United States and the globe. But there is a right way and a wrong way about doing things. One prestigious investment bank--which has been in the news a lot recently for other unethical practices--certainly did this the wrong way. Instead of letting employees know that there would be some layoffs coming, they leaked it out to a few internal members and let them spread around the rumor. Hysteria set in for a day but no one was let go. The next day, when people tried to swipe their key cards to come into the building, some of the employees had key cards that didn't work. It wasn't a glitch--those employees had their key cards shut off because they had been laid off. How embarrassing must it have been for those people to stand in the lobby of this large building as their still-employed co-workers are passing by? How confusing must this have been for many of them. When these people went to security to find out why their badges weren't working, they were each handed an envelope with severance information and a number to call if they had questions. That's just awful.

I also heard of other companies doing right by their employees. There were stories of small business owners who knew they had to shut down operations and instead found creative ways to stay open--sometimes even getting the employees to sacrifice some benefits so that everyone could keep their jobs. There were stories of CEOs who instead of taking a fat paycheck for reducing payroll, took that fat paycheck and put it back into employees salaries so that no one would be let go. But when employees have had to be let go, there were right ways to do this too. Some companies offered long severance packages, vested previously unvested retirement investments, provided job search support or future job training, and some even kept the door open for rehiring. While sometimes there's very little way to avoid it, you want people to leave your company with the least sour taste in their mouth as possible.

So what way do you use to say no to employees? What are best practices that you've established? What about any horror stories you may know of? Let us know in the comments below

Yesterday we talked about the hiring freeze thawing and the Wall Street bonuses growing, and today we have two more topics to discuss with you.

Investopedia via Yahoo! Finance has an interesting look at the three industries hardest hit by job losses and the job loss market as a whole (H/T Wendy). The amazing part is that since I started working in my current role in December of 2007, unemployment has almost doubled from 7.7 million Americans to 14.8 million. To make matters worse, the article says that the number of workers unemployed for 27 weeks or longer has soared to a record 6.3 million people. And 661,000 have just dropped out of the labor market entirely. These people don't count against the unemployment rate which means that even more people are not working than the unemployment percentage shows.

The three biggest industries hit by jobs losses are construction, transportation and warehousing, and manufacturing. There are only a few industries which have seen an increase in their employment. The temporary help services industry saw a bump as well as health care and the federal government (mostly due to the upcoming census). This proves that while jobs seem to continually be disappearing, looking in the right places shows that hiring is occurring.

Our second article, from The Guardian, looks at the actual tax rates of different US states (H/T Jay). It starts with the premise that many people are complaining at California taxes but California comes in 6th at an average of 10.5% on an average per capita income of $47,706 (2008). The real problem is in the Tri-State Area. New Jersey is #1 with 11.8% on $56,116, New York is #2 with 11.7% on $55,032. Connecticut is #3 with 11.1% on $63,160, with Maryland and Hawaii rounding out the top 5 (unfortunately I get taxed by both New York and Connecticut...eek!).

Massachusetts surprised the author of the post (and me) by coming in at 23rd. The South, while a lower tax rate in many states, also has a lower average per capita income. Wyoming seems to be the best bet to keep the most of your high salary with only 7% on $53,163. Some things to think about when relocating for a job!

Picture from Select Leaders

Happy Squirrel Appreciation Day!

When I applied to college, I was happy to find out a school I was applying to used the "Common App". For those unfamiliar with it, this is basically a general college application that you could fill out once and then submit to all schools that would accept it. It saved me time and energy and focused me on finding the schools I was really interested in rather than worrying about what their application requirements were.

The other day I got to wondering: why can't we do this for job searches? Maybe we can call it the "Professional App". Really, why can't there be one generic job application that someone could fill out and submit to any companies that accepted it? Every job application a person fills out has the same information: Name, Address, Past Employment, Education. But for every job one applies to, they need to fill out a separate job application, manually inputting all the same information. Why can't this be standardized into one form? For each company you want to apply to, you can submit this form but still can personalize your cover letter and attached resume. And like the college-bound Common App, the Professional App could have specific answers for specific jobs as well, but keep the common information the same (in college apps these are essays, but in the Professional App, it could be specific questions for the job one would need to do). 

For a company receiving applications, there could be benefits as well. They wouldn't have to spend as much money to host their own job application site. The companies would be able to receive applications in an easy-to-use format and would be able to differentiate between candidates easily. And companies should receive more candidates to choose from because of the ease of applying. They may get a few more "lazy" applicants, but with a cover letter still to write and interviews still to do, the talent pool would certainly grow.

Thoughts? Do you think this would work? Would your company use it?

We all know the job market isn't good. Despite any numbers to the contrary, we are pretty sure we'll see 10% unemployment very soon and all of us know at least one person who is currently out of a job. I know of almost 20 people who have been laid off. It's not pretty out there.

The Wall Street Journal says that it will be years before lost jobs return. And some may never return. 7.2 million jobs have just disappeared since December 2007 and there will be many Americans left standing on the sidelines once their unemployment runs out. Sad times.

The New York Times tells the story of a pair of identical twins who are living in New York City, 17 months out of college and are looking for a job--any job at all. There story isn't unlike others that I've heard from peers who are only a few years out of college; the jobs just aren't there.

Lastly, also from The Wall Street Journal, an article about law-firm hires whose first task is finding an interim job. I know some people who have been fortunate enough to receive an offer from a law firm only to have that offer deferred. Banks have also been doing this, much to the chagrin of recent college (and graduate school) graduates. With the tough hiring environment, a deferred job is better for some than no job at all.

While watching football this weekend, I saw a few commercials from Hyundai touting their new "Hyundai Assurance" (click here). In this new ad campaign, Hyundai goes after a consumer segment looking for an "out clause" in tough economic times. The ad tells buyers “we’re all in this together” and proceeds to give car buyers the security they need in a time of job uncertainty. This out clause allows the buyer to return the Hyundai if they lose their income within a year.

This seems to be a great idea for a large amount of Americans who are worried about buying a new car for fear they may lose their jobs. I wonder how successful the campaign will become, but judging from the amount of people I watched football with who seemed to respond positively to the ad, it could definitely work. It'll be also very interesting to see how many other companies copy this idea. Would a real estate company having a tough time selling condos try this? Or Best Buy selling you a new High Definition television? Interesting food for thought...

Last night I watched CSI: Miami. During the show, a tease came on for the 11 PM news. One of their lead stories was people getting plastic surgery or other cosmetic procedures to make themselves more viable in this new job market. Of course I had to stay up for this story – I couldn’t believe what I was hearing!

According to the piece, people who go this route most often opt for Botox or other filler type procedures, followed by surgery. The two women profiled in the story said that using Botox would make them a more viable candidate in the job market because they appear younger.

This got me thinking. It’s undeniable that there is a quiet appearance bias in America. However, I find it hard to believe that a small wrinkle near the corner of someone’s mouth would prevent him or her from getting a job. What happened to the strength of one’s résumé and experience? Given the choice between a great looking candidate and one who has the knowledge and experiences I need for the position, I’m opting for the latter.

After all, laugh lines often come along with wisdom and experience.

It'll be interesting to see the fallout in the job market from the current financial crisis, but some effects are already seen...

The first article is from the New Jersey Law Journal and probably won't work for most of you...but the important part is just to read the title and then find a way to get your hands on the article: Pru Appeals in Suit Charging it Paid Off Plaintiffs' Lawyers: click here

Next, an interesting lesson from Yahoo! News via the AP on what can happen with mergers/takeovers and job layoffs as HP surprises Wall Street in this article: click here

(H/T to Wendy for those)

The Wall Street Journal (with a nice, new look) continues with an article sure to cause a little head scratching to most of America...the Executive job market is still healthy: click here and a video here

Next from the Journal is a very interesting article about trying to get Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's employees to stay as the mortgage giants go through some difficult times: click here

Going quickly to the Boston Globe's, Boston.com Monster.com HiringHub HR Center HR Blog, word that this isn't your father's job fairs--something new is in the air: click here

Lastly, in an article form the Journal, we learn that GMAT scores are being canceled...a lesson to employers that sometimes test scores aren't really all that reliable: click here

We've also added a great new feed from the WSJ on our right: click here

Many lament that financial industry salaries continue to grow at abnormal rates through bad economic cycles, but loyal reader Wendy sends in this article from Institutional Investor Magazine which says that fixed-income buy-side analysts are beginning to see the effects of this downturn...at least a little bit: click here

Update 11:50 AM: Missed it, but thanks for pointing out...sell-side also has information: click here

New data just released...click here

It's certainly a buzzword according to the New York Times (click here) and, well, the Washington Post has been using it since 2005 (click here)...but what does it mean?

The Washington Times has some answers here (click here), but the Orlando Business Journal just reported that fewer than 1 in 10 Americans actually plan staycations (click here)

It's one way of offsetting the high gas prices, and the Arizona Republic has some other ways that employers can help in that process: click here

And, lastly, Thomson Reuters came out with some job data today which says that the job market is softening like the polar ice caps (they left out the part about the polar ice caps, however): click here

:)

We got some great articles today from the Wall Street Journal as we again go from Wall Street to Main Street

First, an article about a new type of downsizing occurring, further obscuring the precarious job hunt--either by the combination of junior and senior positions in a job description and giving it a junior pay or by hiring new senior level employees but also giving them the work that was once done by their subordinates: click here

This is a tricky tightrope for Human Resources to walk...you don't want to be seen as "tricking" someone (as the article seems to suggest).

Next, the Relocation Blues from the Journal's "90 Days" column tells you how to cope with forced relocation (or, as HR, a nice way you can provide suggestions and work along your employees when this occurs for them): click here

Also from the Journal's Career Journal column "Pay Grade", tackling sustainability-related projects: click here

Lastly, from the Johns Hopkins University Gazette, rethinking the future of HR: click here

This info from WorldAtWork, when taken in tandem, doesn't look all that great...

Average annual medical premium costs increased 6% this past year: click here

Pay increases on a national level are going to be 3.9% for this year: click here

(Doesn't seem to be a very good combination...)

Here are the results of the survey on a state/province level...

TABLE 1. Average Salary Budget Increases by Major Metropolitan Area (U.S.)

	Actual 2008	Projected 2009
NATIONAL	3.9%	3.9%
Atlanta	3.8%	3.8%
Baltimore	3.8%	3.8%
Boston	3.9%	3.9%
Chicago	3.8%	3.8%
Cincinnati	3.7%	3.8%
Cleveland	3.8%	3.8%
Dallas	3.8%	3.8%
Denver	3.9%	3.9%
Detroit	3.7%	3.8%
Houston	3.9%	3.9%
Los Angeles	3.8%	3.9%
Miami	3.8%	3.8%
Minneapolis	3.7%	3.7%
New York	3.8%	3.8%
Philadelphia	3.8%	3.9%
Phoenix	3.8%	3.8%
Pittsburgh	3.7%	3.8%
Portland	3.8%	3.8%
San Diego	3.8%	3.9%
San Francisco	3.9%	3.9%
San Jose	3.8%	3.8%
Seattle	3.8%	3.8%
St. Louis	3.7%	3.8%
Tampa	3.8%	3.8%
Washington, D.C.	4.0%	3.9%

TABLE 2. Average Salary Budget Increases by State (U.S.)

	Actual 2008	Projected 2009
NATIONAL	3.9%	3.9%
Alabama	3.8%	3.8%
Alaska	3.7%	3.8%
Arizona	3.8%	3.9%
Arkansas	3.7%	3.7%
California	3.9%	3.9%
Colorado	3.9%	3.9%
Connecticut	3.9%	3.9%
Delaware	3.7%	3.8%
Florida	3.8%	3.8%
Georgia	3.8%	3.8%
Hawaii	3.8%	3.8%
Idaho	3.7%	3.8%
Illinois	3.8%	3.8%
Indiana	3.6%	3.7%
Iowa	3.8%	3.9%
Kansas	3.8%	3.8%
Kentucky	3.7%	3.8%
Louisiana	3.9%	3.9%
Maine	3.8%	3.9%
Maryland	3.8%	3.8%
Massachusetts	3.8%	3.9%
Michigan	3.7%	3.8%
Minnesota	3.7%	3.8%
Mississippi	3.8%	3.8%
Missouri	3.8%	3.8%
Montana	3.7%	3.8%
Nebraska	3.8%	3.8%
Nevada	3.8%	3.8%
New Hampshire	3.7%	3.8%
New Jersey	3.8%	3.8%
New Mexico	3.9%	3.9%
New York	3.9%	3.8%
North Carolina	3.7%	3.7%
North Dakota	3.9%	4.0%
Ohio	3.8%	3.8%
Oklahoma	3.8%	3.8%
Oregon	3.8%	3.8%
Pennsylvania	3.8%	3.9%
Rhode Island	3.7%	3.8%
South Carolina	3.7%	3.7%
South Dakota	3.8%	3.9%
Tennessee	3.7%	3.7%
Texas	3.9%	4.0%
Utah	3.8%	3.8%
Vermont	3.8%	3.8%
Virginia	3.8%	3.9%
Washington	3.8%	3.9%
Washington, D.C.	4.0%	3.9%
West Virginia	3.7%	3.8%
Wisconsin	3.8%	3.8%
Wyoming	3.9%	3.9%

TABLE 3. Average Salary Budget Increases by Major Metropolitan Area (Canada)

	Actual 2008	Projected 2009
Calgary	4.0%	3.9%
Edmonton	4.0%	3.9%
Hamilton	3.8%	3.9%
Montreal	3.6%	3.6%
Ottawa	3.8%	3.8%
Quebec	3.6%	3.5%
Toronto	3.7%	3.7%
Vancouver	3.8%	3.8%
Winnipeg	3.9%	3.8%

Let's just say it doesn't look good...click here

Somebody's got a case of the Mondays!

Here's a list of seven employee complaints for this Monday:

1) Your employer is watching over you...even as you work at home (an article about telecommuting surveillance from the Wall Street Journal's Career Journal): click here

2) Your former employer is delighting in your layoff (well this Workforce Management article says that if they do, they're going to hell -- Management hell): click here

3) Your former employer is suing you (this may turn out really, really poorly according to the Laconic Law Blog): click here

4) My employer is making me copy on both sides of the paper among other money-saving operations (Fistful of Talent talks about Budweiser's integration into InBev...a good article also about combining cultures in company's and HR's responsibility in that): click here

5) The superstar employee on my team is getting $20-$25 million in severance (while this is probably not your company, this article is an interesting view on the Brett Favre situation in Green Bay from the HR Capitalist and how they blow the term "Golden Parachute" totally out of the water): click here

6) My young co-workers are hopping from job to job and making more money than me (Perfect Labor Storm 2.0 has an article confirming job hopping among Gen Y/The Millenials): click here

7) I just have lots of complaints (well About.com's Human Resources blog compiled a list of the top ten employee complaints): click here