Job Search Frustration As Well 1

[5150]

I am currently employed but I am looking to make a move due to lack of growth and opportunity. I have been in the IT field for about 10 years now and most of the job postings nowadays want people to have certifications. What I am not understanding is why? Wouldn't a company want to hire someone that has the experience than have a cert? I am also wondering just how bad the market is out there as well....do any of you see it starting to comeback?

Thanks

 

[Onyxpurr]

I haven't seen much. My company posted for an IT Mgr position justrecently and received a stack of apps about 8 inches tall.

As far as I can tell, the certs at least guarantee an employer who doesn't have very good computer skills or just general skills, what exactly you do know. It's much asier to say someone should have certain certs then listing out each area seperately.

News I have heard says the economy in starting to go up again, but personally I wouldn't start looking yet.

Good luck!!!

 

[RoguePoet01]

The certification is a "CYA" move, usually. "Cover Yer Arse." They do it so that if some major FUBAR occurs, the person that hired you won't have somebody say, "Why did you hire that person? They weren't even certified!"

I'm going to try to save up and get a cert for MS networking if I can. I see a lot of people asking for that.

But the job market is bad all over right now in America. It's like fishing in a depleted sea. Persistence and luck are about the only things that will get you through these days...that, and to keep trying new bait.

 

[jrbarnett]

RoguePoet01,

I have been looking around doing some training courses and in the UK where I am, there are several training providers that do bundles of courses together for a lot less than doing them all separately. There are probably similar things in the US.
Remember to check though if exam fees are included in the deal, because if not you will find you are paying more to sit the exams afterwards.

John

 

[RoguePoet01]

Thanks jrbarnett.

 

[cryptogro4]

I think the job availabilities are based on where you live, education, experience, skills, abilities, communication, personability, etc.

There are plenty of jobs available but depends if you will move, or rather where you live, etc.

When I was let go (downsized), I found a job 2 months after that day. However, for 1 month I did absolutely nothing, except go to the movies during the day, bum around, etc. And I had job offers from more than one place.

Just reading a study by the BLS this morning (or some other gov org, don't remember), but it said jobs are available for experienced and professional people, even in this sluggish economy. The study says that 48/50 of the highest paid jobs through 2010 will require an undergraduate degree at a minimum. Also three-fourths of all job growth will be in the computer/mathematical fields, followed by health care, education, training, and library services.

Even though there was a stack "8 inches high" for an IT manager shows many are looking, but the main thing to get from that is how many are truly qualified for the position? I am sure that half can probably be thrown out because of education, another half because they have never handled the required responsibilities (budget size, # of employees, etc), and on.

Look at all the data and from multiple sources because if you rely on the newspaper or magazine or tv, etc., they may have an agenda that shows nothing but doom and gloom to meet their desired goals.

Point is - if you are qualified and confident (and competent!) then you will be the one selected from that large pile.

 

[jrbarnett]

I would add though that for organisations that you may well end up spending a lot of money with, they don't seem too quick off the mark.
For example, communicating via email to 2 separate places around here:
* One was quite happy to email me a brochure and details of prices, and was done so within about an hour of sending in the request. However, when I returned an email with some questions relating to what I read in the brochure a couple of hours after receiving it, I am still waiting for a response, 48 hours later.

* Another I sent in a request for information, which I have still not received via email, 72 hours later, - and they would have to send it via email because I didn't give my phone number or postal address.

Finally, I went to visit one on Monday and actually spoke to one of the trainers. He was unaware that those who had MCSE NT4 status lost their certification last December unless they had taken the upgrade course and passed the exam.

John

 

[RoguePoet01]

crypto,

Forgive me if I seem combative, but I can't help it. And please don't take it personally.

Your take on the current American economy would make Pollyanna proud. That, or it's flat out delusional.

For the past three years, jobs have been growing more scarce, not more plentiful, in every field.

The point is that many of the people in that stack of resumes "8 inches thick" were previously employed, and many if not most of them were probably doing a fine job of it.

Now they have no health care, no retirement, and are probably in the very real and horrifying predicament of losing their homes.

A "jobless" economic recovery is no recovery at all.

 

[cryptogro4]

Granted, there is a concern for jobs that are gone forever, yet there will be new jobs created in the future. And the stats even say that a lot of those new jobs will be service sector jobs, which are low paying, and nobody could ever raise a family with that as their primary job.

Yes, those who lost their jobs were previously employed, I was too, but lost it and found another. What I am saying of those "8-inch thick" resumes, and you say, "...probably doing a fine job of it" (I don't deny that) - but, what are their qualifications?

It is possible, because of the booming late-90's that anyone with a pulse would get a high salary for no reason other than they had blood coursing through their bodies.

Yes, some IT people have been out of a job for long periods of time, but what was/is their qualifications? Were they a programmer that got a job in the late-90's yet they never went to college? Were they the most technically literate in the office at that time and everyone told them "you are so knowledgable," so they take that and get an IT job?

There are too many factors to just take a statement at face value that everyone will have a hard time finding a job.

One fact that prevails over all others is that the more education you have the better your chances for always having or finding employment. With an information economy education is more important than ever.

 

[jrbarnett]

Well,

I have a bachelors degree, graduated 4 years ago. I have 2 years experience in professional software development and database admin, as well as a further 2 years in IT support. I have worked in Novell and Microsoft environments.
I have been described as a "Genius" and "Computer Doctor" by many people, including medical doctors and colleagues, I am a published author and my work has been praised for its clarity and ease of understanding, not waffling on.
I have been out of work for approaching 16 months, have only had 1 days paid work during that time, which was obtained by being in the right place at the right time.

From what I have heard from recent interviews, all of which were unsuccessful, receiving 500 applicants per post in the UK is not unusual, and many receive far more.

The reason I help on tek-tips is because I need to keep my skills up to date, and it gives me the chance to do that. If my skills start slipping, others will tell me - and they do.
I am trying to teach myself Javascript and CSS at the moment, with the eventual aim of redesigning my website, but I am learning by doing, not by asking in the appropriate forums, because I understand that by letting others do the work for me, I don't learn anything.

John

 

[cryptogro4]

Many, many things play into hiring and getting a job in these times. What I said in my first post (education, communication, location, etc.) I stand by.

There were many let go from my last employer, and of a team that had 20-25 people, 3 of us were downsized. Of the 3 of us, one had a job in a month (moved out of state), one had a job in 3 months (never moved), and I had a job in 2 months (looked a month).

If one has common skills then it is stronger competition. However, the last employer was Fortune 500 and we all worked on enterprise systems. I work on HPC systems, which fewer people work on. After accepting my current position I had an employer call me from a city of 2 million. They were looking for an IBM SP2 Sys Admin who knew TSM, DB2 and WebSphere; yet they couldn't find anyone who knew all of them. Some knew apps in different combo's: TSM or DB2 and WebSphere, yet to know all the apps they couldn't find. Plus, they couldn't find the biggest fish of all - an SP2 admin! I have worked on all of them for many years and my HPC specialty is SP2 systems and Regatta's.

It depends on many factors. But as I mentioned, we all found jobs quickly in a bad economy.

 

[lespaul]

And no matter how qualified, everybody needs a little luck or an "in" to get a job. I was one of several qualified applicants for the position I currently have. One of the reasons I was picked over the other applicants was because in a previous interview, the panel was very impressed with my interview, however, I wasn't qualified for the position. The main interviewer offered to pass my resume around, which would have been awesome, but since she knew the manager of the IS division where I had already applied, she put a good word in for me before my interview. Later I asked my boss if that had influenced his decision, he responded "Absolutely!".

Leslie

 

[RoguePoet01]

During the late 90's, people were getting laid off from companies that were reporting record profits.

Recently, many employees of every stripe have been asked to take pay cuts only to find that management and shareholders gave themselves a raise.

Yes, education helps, but it's not the whole enchilada.

Connections, luck, and what can only be described as classism often accounts for how people really get their jobs.

 

[cryptogro4]

It is interesting mentioning luck, because last weekend I read an article that was done on the research of "luck."

To give the gist of the article, it stated that so-called luck was very much a factor of one's attitude and knowing what they want instead of what one attributes to luck.

Those who knew what they wanted and had a positive attitude were more often "lucky" compared to others.

 

[RoguePoet01]

Hi crypto,

I'd like to read that report.

I agree that attitude makes a difference. I even think it has some sort of synchronistic causal effects.

Let me put it this way: people who have an easy time finding jobs are fortunate. If they don't think that they are, then fate could well be waiting in the wings to teach them that lesson. Remember the Peter Principle?

Being overqualified is, at times, just as detrimental as being underqualified, especially when one reaches the point in one's life where the people who would hire him are younger than he is.

 

[cryptogro4]

Rogue,

I would like to be able to tell you exactly where I read the article, however, I read a lot last weekend - books and magazines ("Digital Fortress" is a good, fast-reading book) - and I don't recall which magazine had the article that referenced the research study. It was a University study but I don't even remember which institution.

Also, sometimes I am busy and don't read a magazine in the month I receive it, and it could have been from a month or two ago.

Maybe if I keep that positive attitude, (and know what I want), then maybe I can date Britney!

 

[RoguePoet01]

crypto,

Ha ha ha!

Thanks for the tip about "Digital Fortress." I checked out Amazon and it looks like a good read.

I'm a "New Yorker" man myself. If you've never read Malcom Gladwell's work, check him out. He could make dirt seem interesting.

Among other things, I'm reading Errol Flynn's autobiography, which is genuinely fascinating.

 

[RoguePoet01]

Here's an interesting article:

"The sober truth is that cutting costs is the only route to profits salvation these days. Most costs, directly or indirectly, are labor. And that means more layoffs."

"These announcements just keep coming. Sprint, for instance, said on Nov. 24 it would lop 2,000 workers, 2.9% of its payroll. The latest manufacturing employment numbers (six months through October) show a 1.4% drop, about in line with a year ago. The average time someone spends unemployed is longer lately, a fact that isn't encouraging for the future: It hit 19.4 weeks in the May-October period, up from 17.0 in the same period in 2002. "

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=64&e=7&u=/fo/42c5aaadaf663fe6dca5471ed5ba2266

 

[cryptogro4]

Rogue,

Thanks for the hints on reading (Gladwell). Always looking for new and good authors.

Yeah, it is tough in the job market. One needs everything they can to keep a job, not just getting one.