I did well at the interview. I produced not one but two different solutions to the test problem that was given to me, with time to spare. Today, I receive an e-mail where they say that they are afraid they can't provide me with 'conditions suitable for my level of knowledge and skills'.
How in the world am I supposed to get re-employed if I get rejected from entry-level jobs because of my overcompetence, but don't have the job experience in the area where I can work long-term for the non-entry-level jobs?
I love crapitalism. /s
Lie about your job experience, every company is different anyway so if you have a good grasp of the basic skills and tools you need for you field just lie.
I'm sorry, but I am a terrible liar. That will simply not work for me.
You're gonna have to figure it out if you want to pay for food and rent eventually
Aw, no that's not what I meant 😭
You can use the hexbear phone repository to give you fake references. When you make your resume - lie. You figured out the two solutions, right? You have the skills and knowledge for better but they've arbitrarily decided "oh also you should've been in a FAANG the past couple years" or whatever. So lie.
hexbear phone repository
Huh? There is one?
Nevertheless, I don't have much of a hope in that regard, as I don't find it likely that there are people from my city here (IDK how I would claim that I worked in another city), let alone ones who would help me with this.
idk if there's really a phone repository, but my husband and I are happy to lie for any of you ❤️
we just have a small engine repair business, so might have to be creative about how we worked with you - maybe we knew you in another job, maybe you did some consulting, idk
but yeah, anybody who wants a reference, please feel free to DM me
Huh. Consulting for an American company... That might be useful someday. Thanks for the offer xdddd
Yeah i don't like it either but it's not something you're allowed to be bad at. Think of it like youre talking to a pig. You never tell em the truth, you play the game. It's not lying, this a dance with moves both parties know. Bow your head, say the lines, play the part. I promise you the interviewer is doing the same. Don't make the mistake thinking you're making a human connection. Both sides just need to fit the role someone else wrote for them, and both sides will be happy if you play your part well.
Dont think of it as lying, it's more than that. It's an elaborate play and you need to fulfill your role
No i don't like it either, but i am good at it. I always feel like shit after but i get to contemplate suicide with a full belly in my own bed.
Yeah i don't like it either but it's not something you're allowed to be bad at
I am not neurotypical enough to be good at lying. At the very least, lying creatively, i.e. coming up with falsehoods.
Think of it like youre talking to a pig. You never tell em the truth
I do tell pigs truth, even though they don't understand me. Pigs are nice and smart, just like all the other cats.
I promise you the interviewer is doing the same
I'm aware. I am still horrible at lying.
Ah, well then i am not sure what to say. You can't prepare false answers to expected questions before-hand? I am sorry, that sounds very difficult to deal with. Wish i had another idea
What's the barrier to applying to higher level jobs? Is it the requirement for "years of experience"?
Yes.
And yeah, I have started claiming my time as a developer of an open-source project as relevant experience, which it quite literally is.
Not that I've been in a situation to "do" what I'm about to suggest but ignore "years of experience" as best as you can when applying for a job.
If you've got the skill set, the interest in doing the job, apply anyways. Don't even need to justify not having the "years of experience".
I'd bet that the "years of experience" is only mentioned to arbitrarily reduce the number applicants.
I do get asked explicitly how many years of experience I have.
However, I did get offered a job that requires 3 years of experience, and they are currently considering my candidacy. Have to wait and see how that will work out.
I'm not saying that you can't answer the question when asked in an interview or that you need obfuscate it on your CV. I'm saying to not let the "you must have x years of experience" in a job posting scare you away from applying if the only thing that you're lacking is having "x years of experience".
If you're sitting down for an interview, the interviewer isn't all that likely to immediately end the interview once they realize that you don't have the arbitrary number of years experience posted in the job description.
I mean, one you've learned how to do something like add 1 and 1 to get 2 it doesn't matter that you've been doing if for 1 year or 50 years.
Thing is, you won't know which interviews you are supposed to be the dummy and which you are supposed to be competent. Its astounding that OP even got any input on why they were rejected.
They probably had some other reason not to hire you and just gave an excuse
No, I've been on the other side of hiring committees and seen this argument. Along with other stunningly dumb ones like "if she isn't job hopping and has 8 years rising the ranks in her previous job she can't be "hungry" enough to work here"
and
"this person is too up to date with processes, it's like they're already looking for a new job when they get the old one.
Companies actively select out what the Soviets called "Shock-workers" in favour of ones that appear to work. Adjust behaviour accordingly.
Roughly a decade ago, my boss at the time had declined to hire a hatted chef (the Australian equivalent of a Michelin Star chef) for our pub so this is definitely a thing that happens.
But I think it's because they don't want to have someone that could easily leave if overworked and/or underpaid. They're less exploitable.
It's because you knew 0.999...=1, wasn't it? There are some things humanity was never meant to know.
Here is the honest answer from someone who has hired people.
If you are over qualified for the job, the deal is that you will keep looking and quickly switch to a job better suited for your talents.
That means, I need to spend a bunch of time and money looking for a new candidate and spend money and time on training and getting them up to speed.
Hiring someone is extremely time consuming and pretty expensive. There are tons of no tangible things that go into considering who to hire.
Crapitalism is amazing, isn't it? Guess I'll have to die because the system is set up in a way to both force working-class people to constantly look for work, but also to make it so that people who are viewed as capable of finding work elsewhere to be denied employment.
"sorry, we only hire desperate people for this position. Go become more desperate."
Bit idea: apply to jobs with the express desire to get hired and ghost them after two weeks
today is my first day at seventeen new jobs. half of them i will show up to and leave at lunch, the other half i will never show up to at all. why? the world may never know.
Wait, what if you hired someone to represent you in an interview? You could have a professional interviewer who paints the applicant in the best light possible. Take 10% of every paycheck for the first 6 months if they get hired, call it a day.
I hate to kick you while your down but as a potential suitor I must also reject you on the grounds of overcompetence.
