....lybob Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 So they've extended unemployment benefits again? Great, that is not going to help things at all. I interview pretty much every week and I see anywhere between 10-20 people each week. Our corp HR department screens people and they contact close to 200 every week for me. I have actually heard (and so have our other offices as well as our HR) people say "if you can't offer me as much as I'm making on unemployment I'm not interested." Most of our compensation comes from commissions and fees we charge our clients and we do have a six month salary program that is a bit less than unemployment but also include commissions. This is a career where if you work hard and follow the process you can make great money but these lazy mother effers are driving me crazy. If they had and immediate need for money we'd have to beat them away with a stick. Just like we had to during the last recession when unemployment didn't last two years. Good job motherment. What I've told my HR is that if they say they're rather sit on their ass for unemployment than bust their ass to start a long term career, I don't want them anyway. Maybe your HR department isn't doing a very good job explaining the pay model - or maybe people have been scammed by less legitimate companies, in college I worked some collections and telemarketing and could tell you some horror stories. Give out information of what your people make with your pay model. When I see certain places always hiring I wonder are they expanding or do they have huge turnover because the commissions and bonuses are just pie in the sky. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Maybe your HR department isn't doing a very good job explaining the pay model - or maybe people have been scammed by less legitimate companies, in college I worked some collections and telemarketing and could tell you some horror stories. Give out information of what your people make with your pay model. When I see certain places always hiring I wonder are they expanding or do they have huge turnover because the commissions and bonuses are just pie in the sky. Explaining the plan again won't help these people. It's simple; you get a salary for six months that is a little under unemployment, but you could also earn a substantial commission. It's what is known as a real sales job. Their real income potential is based on how hard and well they work. Those who are good and work hard make bank. Those who don't make squat. Many people don't have the guts to work for commission, so they look at the base pay, ask themselves if they can live on that and decide they can't. He works for a financial company. He's not trying to get them to be a Mona Vie "distributor" for Christ's sake. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Maybe your HR department isn't doing a very good job explaining the pay model - or maybe people have been scammed by less legitimate companies, in college I worked some collections and telemarketing and could tell you some horror stories. Give out information of what your people make with your pay model. When I see certain places always hiring I wonder are they expanding or do they have huge turnover because the commissions and bonuses are just pie in the sky. It's not my HR's job to explain the pay model, it's their job to get them in for an interview. If the first question out of people's mouth is "how much do I get paid" that's not what I'm looking for. And I'm always hiring because I'm expanding a new office. I've got room for 20 reps and I have 8. Way too many people looking for $100k right out of the gate. You're not going to get that anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Way too many people looking for $100k right out of the gate. You're not going to get that anywhere. Well, except working for the federal government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Jim, on the plus side anyone who says "if you can't offer me as much as I'm making on unemployment I'm not interested." isn't too bright in the first place- you might think it but you got to be an idiot to come out and say it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Explaining the plan again won't help these people. It's simple; you get a salary for six months that is a little under unemployment, but you could also earn a substantial commission. It's what is known as a real sales job. Their real income potential is based on how hard and well they work. Those who are good and work hard make bank. Those who don't make squat. Many people don't have the guts to work for commission, so they look at the base pay, ask themselves if they can live on that and decide they can't. He works for a financial company. He's not trying to get them to be a Mona Vie "distributor" for Christ's sake. finance guys, that explains a lot, most of those guys have huge egos - plus it's an economic sector that isn't hurting that bad it's not like those jobs are being exported to Mexico, China, or Vietnam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Jim, on the plus side anyone who says "if you can't offer me as much as I'm making on unemployment I'm not interested." isn't too bright in the first place- you might think it but you got to be an idiot to come out and say it. I don't want them. I'm saying that by extending unemployment it won't help with getting people back to work. If people that have to put on a suit and tie to interview are saying that imagine what's going on with more blue collar workers. There are plenty of jobs out there but if you can continue to suck on the gov't teet for two years what's the motivation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 So they've extended unemployment benefits again? Great, that is not going to help things at all. I interview pretty much every week and I see anywhere between 10-20 people each week. Our corp HR department screens people and they contact close to 200 every week for me. I have actually heard (and so have our other offices as well as our HR) people say "if you can't offer me as much as I'm making on unemployment I'm not interested." Most of our compensation comes from commissions and fees we charge our clients and we do have a six month salary program that is a bit less than unemployment but also include commissions. This is a career where if you work hard and follow the process you can make great money but these lazy mother effers are driving me crazy. If they had and immediate need for money we'd have to beat them away with a stick. Just like we had to during the last recession when unemployment didn't last two years. Good job motherment. What I've told my HR is that if they say they're rather sit on their ass for unemployment than bust their ass to start a long term career, I don't want them anyway. I worked part time salary for almost a year. The pay was barely higher than unemployment, but I got a few holidays and PTO days, better health insurance, the possibility of becoming full time, and I could get up in the morning and go to work three days a week instead of *looking* for work five days a week. (very frustrating) Out of curiosity, what kind of jobs are you talking about? Many of the job opportunities I have seen that pay about $10 an hour to start do not have much promise of a future. I AM looking for a career not just a minimal paycheck, and I am glad the extension of UI benefits was passed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I'm curious, at what point is it not an emergency to extend Unemployment benefits? Which metric do you use, time? At 99, 120 maybe 150 weeks? Or do you base it on the unemployment rate? 9%, 8% or 7%? And once we reach this target, wouldn't the extension of Unemployment benefits still be needed by the millions of people that are unemployed. I mean, if conservatives are being criticized for not being compassionate for wanting to extend the emergency unemployment benefits (which is a fallacy btw), then once the emergency unemployment benefits program expires, what happens to all those unemployed people. Where's the compassion? What, they are forgotten about? Sort of reminds me of the Health Care debate. Remember all the anectodal stories in how John from Ohio or Mary from Pennsylvania needed this health care bill to pass, or else they wouldn't receive care (which is another fallacy as well), and consequently die. Remember? Funny how there was so much urgency to get this bill passed or else thousands of people would die, yet the bill wouldn't cover these instances for another 5 years or so down the road. Hmmm, in other words, sell fear and urgency and then once you score your political points, these people that were used as props suddenly become inconsequential. Funny how that works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I'm curious, at what point is it not an emergency to extend Unemployment benefits? Which metric do you use, time? At 99, 120 maybe 150 weeks? Or do you base it on the unemployment rate? 9%, 8% or 7%? And once we reach this target, wouldn't the extension of Unemployment benefits still be needed by the millions of people that are unemployed. I mean, if conservatives are being criticized for not being compassionate for wanting to extend the emergency unemployment benefits (which is a fallacy btw), then once the emergency unemployment benefits program expires, what happens to all those unemployed people. Where's the compassion? What, they are forgotten about? Sort of reminds me of the Health Care debate. Remember all the anectodal stories in how John from Ohio or Mary from Pennsylvania needed this health care bill to pass, or else they wouldn't receive care (which is another fallacy as well), and consequently die. Remember? Funny how there was so much urgency to get this bill passed or else thousands of people would die, yet the bill wouldn't cover these instances for another 5 years or so down the road. Hmmm, in other words, sell fear and urgency and then once you score your political points, these people that were used as props suddenly become inconsequential. Funny how that works. Well, if there isn't a crisis to exploit and use for you own political advantage, just create one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I worked part time salary for almost a year. The pay was barely higher than unemployment, but I got a few holidays and PTO days, better health insurance, the possibility of becoming full time, and I could get up in the morning and go to work three days a week instead of *looking* for work five days a week. (very frustrating) Out of curiosity, what kind of jobs are you talking about? Many of the job opportunities I have seen that pay about $10 an hour to start do not have much promise of a future. I AM looking for a career not just a minimal paycheck, and I am glad the extension of UI benefits was passed. Mainly entry level to financial advisors. It's a tough start with a big learning curve but you work hard, follow the process it can be very rewarding. I've been doing this for about 9 1/2 years. It was a major career change (I was a chef) but here I sit a Regional VP making good money with the prospects of cashing it all in hopefully in my mid 50's (I'm now 49). But I will tell you it's not for everyone and that is why I interview so much. I have to go through 10-15 people to find one person who fits what I'm looking for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Explaining the plan again won't help these people. It's simple; you get a salary for six months that is a little under unemployment, but you could also earn a substantial commission. It's what is known as a real sales job. Their real income potential is based on how hard and well they work. Those who are good and work hard make bank. Those who don't make squat. Many people don't have the guts to work for commission, so they look at the base pay, ask themselves if they can live on that and decide they can't. He works for a financial company. He's not trying to get them to be a Mona Vie "distributor" for Christ's sake. Some of us suck at sales. I have been looking at various careers "outside my comfort zone" and do not rule anything out. I have no problem working for salary plus results. BTW: In an interview, I NEVER bring up salary (or overall compensation) at all. That would be the same as asking them "what can YOU do for me". I will discuss it in a general way only if the employer asks me a question. If they make me an offer, I want to make sure I understand their expectations of me and my compensation, preferably in writing (I got burned badly once). By the time we are discussing those items, we have usually mutually decided "I want you". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 Mainly entry level to financial advisors. It's a tough start with a big learning curve but you work hard, follow the process it can be very rewarding. I've been doing this for about 9 1/2 years. It was a major career change (I was a chef) but here I sit a Regional VP making good money with the prospects of cashing it all in hopefully in my mid 50's (I'm now 49). But I will tell you it's not for everyone and that is why I interview so much. I have to go through 10-15 people to find one person who fits what I'm looking for. I interviewed with a major financial company, and if I had the proper background/experience I would have a job. They did not have time to train me in the specifics, and over 100 had applied for the job - and only ten were being interviewed. I have heard that the average scan time on a resume now is from three to ten seconds before the decision is made to read more or shred it (from an HR guy at Paychex). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I interviewed with a major financial company, and if I had the proper background/experience I would have a job. They did not have time to train me in the specifics, and over 100 had applied for the job - and only ten were being interviewed. I have heard that the average scan time on a resume now is from three to ten seconds before the decision is made to read more or shred it (from an HR guy at Paychex). I went to a head hunter and took one of those career assessment test and they came up with financial advisor. I interviewed with the company I'm with plus two others, one of which was Merrill Lynch. ML didn't hire me because I had no sales or investing experience. My company hired me because I didn't. Guess who has the best training program? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I have heard that the average scan time on a resume now is from three to ten seconds before the decision is made to read more or shred it (from an HR guy at Paychex). Not all of them. Just yours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim in Anchorage Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 So they've extended unemployment benefits again? Great, that is not going to help things at all. I interview pretty much every week and I see anywhere between 10-20 people each week. Our corp HR department screens people and they contact close to 200 every week for me. I have actually heard (and so have our other offices as well as our HR) people say "if you can't offer me as much as I'm making on unemployment I'm not interested." Most of our compensation comes from commissions and fees we charge our clients and we do have a six month salary program that is a bit less than unemployment but also include commissions. This is a career where if you work hard and follow the process you can make great money but these lazy mother effers are driving me crazy. If they had and immediate need for money we'd have to beat them away with a stick. Just like we had to during the last recession when unemployment didn't last two years. Good job motherment. What I've told my HR is that if they say they're rather sit on their ass for unemployment than bust their ass to start a long term career, I don't want them anyway. If you are so rich why are you renting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDS Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 I went to a head hunter and took one of those career assessment test and they came up with financial advisor. I interviewed with the company I'm with plus two others, one of which was Merrill Lynch. ML didn't hire me because I had no sales or investing experience. My company hired me because I didn't. Guess who has the best training program? was it the Birkman method? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted July 22, 2010 Share Posted July 22, 2010 If you are so rich why are you renting? Because I haven't figured out where I want to buy yet. And I'm not sure where you got the idea I was rich. was it the Birkman method? I have no idea what it was. It was about 10 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rockpile Posted July 24, 2010 Share Posted July 24, 2010 Not all of them. Just yours. Maybe I should remove ass-clown from my mission statement? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts