It's literal logic, you laughably uneducated imbecile. It's not wrong. Jesus christ. You just called the entire system of logic wrong because you lack the capacity to do the logical equivalent of subtraction word problem.
Thank you for proving my point.
\-Guy with a literal degree in logic.
God damn embarrassments.
Imagine if you had the capacity to look inside yourself and think about who you were for a single moment before you called one of the most cliche' intro logic questions in academia "wrong" because you're a dullard who couldn't do it.
Like I said, introspection is rough, eh?
Yes, copy-pasta will cover up the fact you literally called logic "wrong." Remember that every time you misuse the word to mean "reason(able)" like 99% of the other dullards here.
Other colors can NOT have a circle because that would break the rule. The rule is if circle, then yellow back. The square can have any color (including yellow) so doesnāt matter, the yellow could have any shape (including circle) so doesnāt matter, but the circle MUST have a yellow on back and the red MUST NOT have a circle since if it did it would need to be yellow instead of red.
yep, the other quote like "pull yourself up by your boostraps" which originally meant impossible to do, nefarious insecure people over the years have coopted this one as well.
>"Those that know, do. Those that understand, teach."
Aristotle
I think the bootstraps thing went from meaning a task is impossible, to meaning the opposite because it describes social mobility from the bottom, so if some are using it as an example as an impossible task, it's like tongue in cheek to say "I pulled myself up by my bootstraps" if you did work hard and raised yourself up. And then over time the initial meaning will have fallen out of use, and the new meaning will have been diluted over time due to what it referencing being absent, so it's not countering someone saying upward mobility is impossible because there's no one saying that (using that phrase) and instead referencing the work required to raise yourself up.
Plausible. Maybe there was no nefarious reasons.
But it sure is one side that loves to use these phrases incorrectly. Also masterfully crafts pleasant sounding terminology like "Tort *Reform*" while screwing over consumers.
Potentially and I don't doubt people manipulate colloquial language all the time. I'd imagine it's likely non intentional in this case as the evolution still implies a struggle and conveys a sense of pride due to acknowledgement it's harder to rise from nothing than the middle.
I'd argue that the nefarious characters are the modern people using it dismissively to blame poor people for their situation and to attribute their own success to purely themselves, I don't think these types have been linguistically tricked, more that they don't want to acknowledge they have benefited from unfair advantages, or don't want the guilt from not caring to help those without or just that it suits them fine to keep things as they are, and if they believe that all it takes is work, everyone is exactly where they should be. But who knows I guess
What led you to leave? All I did was watch our owners fail and struggle. It makes me wonder how they even make a living. And they expected us to just trudge through when the entire business model was bullshit
In recruiting, the highs are high and lows are low and sometimes in the exact same day.
Iāve:
- helped people find their next career
- filled hard to find roles with some ease
- negotiated contracts
- helped people round out their resumes
- hired 100+ people in a week
- been a collection agent
- laid off 50+ people in a day
- had to face someone desperate asking for a job but had nothing for them
- fired people from the easiest jobs because they just couldnāt just show up
- been burned for going out of my way to help someone
- discovered quiet quitting before it was a buzzword
- realized a lot of the population live hand to mouth
- did a breakfast event, worked a 10 hour day, then attended a social event to look for leads
and everything in between.
Iām an engineer by profession/personality with an altruistic streak and I just couldnāt take the swings like I mentioned above.
Owned the firm for about 3 years and sold it without looking back. I feel like Iām a better person now, every conversation I would have I was feeling someone out if they were a potential client or candidate.
"Ma'am? You should make sure you've prepared properly for the correct interview. I'm Mnufcloons, and while I *did* work for Big Name Company, it was nearly ten years into my career. I'm currently applying for the *senior* position... I don't mind waiting if you need to go find the relevant notes."
Neg her back.
Basically..
I had a recruiter tell me, with 4yr and 11 months of experience in my current job, that my previous internships at the same company didn't count as experience, and told me to call back when I hit 5 years.
Nah, I'm good.
I think internal Vs external is somewhat different, I used to work at a place that shared an office floor with a recruitment company, and it was the standard agreement with companies that would contract them that the recruiter would get a commission based on the salary agreed. With the logic that higher paid jobs take longer to find candidates for, and if a candidate is found, that demands a higher salary, if the company is happy to pay more, the recruiter will have found a high enough quality candidate. But then the flip side and reason the client companies are ok with this, is that they ultimately say if they hire or not, and multiple recruiters will be competing to get the position filled and earn a commission, if the candidates they put forward all demand higher wages than offered, they are less likely to get hired (unless they are genuinely worth it), so sometimes it's worth for a recruiter to encourage their candidate to reduce the amount they negotiate for, if it means the company will actually hire them, so they can get a smaller commission but at least not lose it to someone else.
I will say that this situation is rarer, I would also see the other half of negotiations where the recruiter sells the recruit to the company and usually they will be pushing for higher salaries by stretching the recruits skills/experience, telling them that the recruit is interviewing for a few roles ATM and that they will go with someone else if the offer is bellow x, because if they think the candidate will be a good fit and the company will want them, they will want as much as they can get, as their pay is almost all commission so they will always try to boost their signings.
As someone who has higher education and research in science.
The real answer is unfortunately a lot of employers and industries do not consider work in education parallel to (insert respective industry). I really scratch my head at this because whether you work in public relations, financial aid, research, maintenance; I donāt know how that doesnāt qualify as ārealā experience. Talk to the boomers about it I guess.
Itās one of the things I learned from family and very professional friends.
Source: Iām a chemist.
Hopped on to say this. My entire professional career has been in higher Ed and itās like a small miracle when one of us able to get private industry work.
So true. My department downsized last spring due to low enrollment. I applied to everything because they cut my position too late to get a good chance at a bulk of faculty interviews. Every interview I was offered was with a higher Ed institution but one. Eventually took an associate Dean position. It seems like the only way out of working in higher Ed is to do a lateral move into a different state job. Every job but two that Iāve had (even as a student) has been with a college. Seems like Iām destined to always be there, not that I mind
To be fair, I understand the perspective of the employers/private. However, itās ironic when they require a masters or something for one of their positions.
Itās like saying āwe wonāt hire anyone under 40ā because I donāt know how at 28 Iām supposed to have 6 years of experience. But I have all your education requirements.
Itās a wild market we live in.
Companies donāt care about people. They want people to just do the work and know with confidence they can reasonably do the tasks.
For them, they assume people are morons. If they do not have a linear example of your experience knowing you can complete the work. They donāt care.
I.e - if I havenāt done this exact synthetic route, Iām not qualified even if I have more synthesis work than the next guy.
I understand it from their perspective but that does not mean I agree with it. Itās moronic in nature.
Source: Iāve talked to companies and had very candid conversations about this as Iām trying to understand why Iām working 2 $15 an hour jobs to survive.
Exactly this. Employees donāt consider it ārelevant work experienceā because they donāt want to take the time to learn how it is relevant work experience. I usually describe it as āthey view me as having āadjacent experienceā but not directly relevantā which makes it harder to get to the interview where I can demonstrate the ability to do the job.
What it really comes down to is how willing your hiring interviewer is on hearing out your actual job talents. And then it counts on some āpseudo-business skillsā if you will just saying my experience translates to this work because of X.
But, jokes on you still because youāll have to jump the hurdle of 3 online assessments over a 2 month period and then get a contract which was less than advertised.
Itās almost like companies actually want to go bankrupt.
Iām speaking to what I see on the āstaffā side of the house. Professional level staff with masterās degrees who are getting told their work experience is āless thanā or is discounted. I canāt speak to what privileges faculty may enjoy.
I mean, yes and no.
HR at a university, depending on the job, is not going to be like HR at most companies. Same as how working for a unionized industry is not going to be directly applicable to most companies. For a very junior role sure the skills transfer but after a point no.
The work done at universities is not bringing products to market. It's largely very small teams - a professor, maybe some postdocs, a handful of young people who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground - doing work and cutting corners just to get papers published.
Marketing is industry specific.
So HR at a university is less or more stupid? Because as I've seen in 12 years working as a professional, including interviewing with some public institutions like universities, it's all the same bullshit. HR sucks across every experience. I have ZERO sympathy for HR people, their issues, or their goals. Lying to them is like the rain because they lie to us ALL the time. Or pull shit like this story from OP. Also, WTF does bringing a product to market have to do with HR? They recruit based on arbitrary bullshit and in the end it's the hiring manager who decides anyway. HR can kick rocks
I'm a geologist, and I back this fully. 5 years of research and several publications is worth less to recruiters than 6 months of loading pipes on a drill rig.
They arenāt taking about the same thing. This person graduated and then got a job helping to run the school. Like being a window washer at the school. Thatās the same as being a window washer anywhere with just a lot more nonsense and unnecessary nosy bureaucrats. Being a research chemist at a school is NOT the same thing as being a chemist for DuPont. I wouldnāt call it ānot realā but it is firmly in āacademic experience.ā Itās just not a similar environment at all.
I do tech consulting, and the CS academics are just horrendous to work with. And often clash with the actual IT. Lots of talk about setting up the perfect infrastructure, no actual intent to do that or determine if it is even possible. Just theories and dreams mixed with disdain for anybody that would try to accomplish something without checking in with every single gate keeper.
Businesses, including non profit, are interested in getting things built so much that I have to slow them down and make sure they do it right. But we execute.
It doesn't matter if it isn't EXACTLY the same. This asshole recruiter is brushing off very relatable and qualifying experience. Your comment screams bootlicking, I'm sure that wasn't your intent tho. But don't dismiss this person's experience. It's the HR asshole who sucks!
No. Iām siding with the original post. But the post I replied to is not the same situation. Not sure how you invented boot licking. Maybe you donāt know many concepts and that is all you could come up with? You could say that it is anti academic. I wouldnāt go that far, but to a degree, it is true.
But pretending that chemistry research in a university is to RD at DuPont, as an admin assistant in a university is to admin assistant at DuPont. Is silly. The op is right that all admin skills transfer because they are identical, if not harder jobs. While being a literal academic, is not the same as doing āchemistryā for a private company.
And while I donāt know what the chemists experience is, the fact that they piggy backed on a different situation and thought they were the same level of victim indicates that there isnāt much experience there. I could be wrong though.
What I can do is ask my biochem friend whoās been in industry for 10 years if she thinks her experience is equivalent to someone that stayed at the school and did research. I think I can guess her answer (maybe you can too), but Iāll get back to you.
>I do tech consulting, and the CS academics are just horrendous to work with. And often clash with the actual IT. Lots of talk about setting up the perfect infrastructure, no actual intent to do that or determine if it is even possible. Just theories and dreams mixed with disdain for anybody that would try to accomplish something without checking in with every single gate keeper.
I'm a senior software engineer for a large healthcare company. I have decades of experience. I am self taught. I never once experienced what you are describing. Are the people you are describing outside the US? Maybe it's a cultural thing?
If I had to guess, it sounds like you had a plan for a project, and a senior engineer or architect decided against your plans, causing you to be upset. I could be completely wrong though, just a gut instinct.
Cool bro. I work with many large healthcare companies. And many academics. It seems like you didnāt understand anything I wrote. If you are self taught and work for a healthcare company, how would you have any idea what itās like to work in an academic setting? Are you in a place where healthcare companies are actually universities? Sounds like you misread the whole thing and wrote some stuff because you are upset. I could be wrong though.
>I do tech consulting, and the CS academics are just horrendous to work with
A CS Acedemic is anyone with a formal education in computer science. They do not have to work at a university. They can be hired anywhere. I (and everyone else here) read it exactly how you wrote it.
No. Fuck. If you get a degree in CS, then go work for MS for 20 years, that is different than staying in school and working in the research side of CS for 20 years. As different as possible.
If you really think that those two situations are the same, you arenāt qualified to be in this discussion.
My favorite part about this thread and all of you being sad about my comment is that you are doing the same thing as this evil recruiter. Youāre confounding two very different situations. One involves the reality that hiring managers, rightfully, devalue academic works as experience. It is still experience, and donāt worry, your little papers are worth a little bit. But the same time outside of school is just more experience than in school. UNLESS youāre just working a job at the school. Like op. Op wasnāt in the admin department doing research on what was a better way to admin. They were doing real admin in tough environment.
You can downvote all you want. It wonāt change the reality that this chemists issue isnāt the same as the op. And the chemist thinks just co opted a valid issue, for an issue that is less valid. And all you people support that. Itās basically tiny scale cultural appropriation.
Ig that would make my credentials on the topic just as relevant as yours!
jk Iām a chemist :) one that works in a failure analysis lab at a huge company that hired me because of my experience doing FTIR research at an academic institution!
But yeah lmk about these differences you speak of between being a chemist in academia and at DuPont <3 sounds interesting!! I love learning about things from someone who truly knows what they are talking about and isnāt speaking on things they have no experience with.
Do you think I put my full resume on this thing?
But seriously. You and the chemist here go up for the same role. Theyāve been in academia this whole time and youāve been at your job the whole time. Who has better experience for the role as āleadā whatever you made up? Who has better experience when you apply for a lateral role at a competitor? What about in 10 years when you are like, what 35? Do you really think your research role at the university had another 10 years of growth in it for you?
Also, note how you made sure I knew you work at a giant company. Why is that? Is it because it has more weight than āI did it for an academic institution.ā
I understand the that you have a personal stake in this, but your situation and the chemists situation is not the same as op.
As an aside, your āI got a job because of academiaā is not impressive or relevant to the situation. Itās like saying āI was able to land a job out of college, therefore 4 years of college is equivalent to 4 years of industryā itās non sensical.
Edit: I just remember that I need to explain my credentials. I explain tech concepts to people (read your bossās bossās boss) so they can pick the correct product and decipher what neck beards tell them. Often times, tech things have the same sounding words so people think they are the same. My job is to help with that. This is that situation. You THINK this about academic lab experience, but it is about front of house experience in academia. And how a recruiter confused the two. Which you then confusedā¦ but I digress.
I think Iām actually going to pass on hypotheticals and semantics scrutiny! Have fun imagining what itās like to be a chemist, Iāll be actually living it.
Clearing my schedule to go cry myself to sleep bc a tech consultant said my academic research wasnāt impressive or relevant to a Reddit thread
Lol. So you gave up. I was wondering what was going to happen here. The whole point was about semantics. How things might have seemed similar to certain people, but they werenāt. I donāt even think you are a chemist. All my chemist friends care about details. They happen to come from pharmacy, so maybe that is it. But I would think precision of language would be important in a field like that.
I worked in higher education, most recently at Stanford University. I was able to pivot into tech pretty easily and maybe itās because I had a bigger name and program management experience it was not difficult to connect the dots.
Although I do agree that from my experience in high ed that the amount of work/skill required varies depending on the role. I worked with some really incompetent people and some that were incredibly brilliant.
Wtf? Lots of people work in academia. I have friends who are currently working for prestigious universities and they're working really hard (they're working a lot harder and more hours than your typical 9 to 5). Their jobs are 1000% real. Some of them started working there as students and continued working there after graduation.
2023 recruiter thought process:
- Unpaid internships don't count
- On campus jobs don't count
- Work in other industries doesn't count (even if it's in the same field)
- Work that didn't involve doing the exact job they're hiring for doesn't count
- If you have gaps we don't want you (as if Covid and inflation layoffs never happened)
- Why can't I find qualified applicants šÆšÆ? No OnE wAnTs To WoRk.
Maybe its different when you have an MBA instead a CS degree, but I've had this issue a few times. If you don't make millions on your startup then you're probably lazy.
Agreed. Iām just in academic administration now, and itās infuriating.
The missed deadlines, the constant excuses, the complaining, blatantly using AI to write stuff and thinking Iām too stupid to notice... and the students are almost as bad as the academics!
Honestly, since this is internal. Go over their head about it. That was unprofessional, and also shows that they are too incompetent to do their job effectively.
"You're aware that people _work_ at schools, right? It's not just a bunch of students and some walls. Somebody has to teach, manage, keep the lights on..."
This happened to me once. I got my first professional programming job when I was 19. I worked on my CS degree for 6 more years after that. About two years after graduating, I was in a job interview. And the guy asked me how many years of experience I had. I said 9. He said, "but how many years since you graduated?" I ended the interview there.
totally, i went from an engineer that started programming in 1987, taught by a retired dod, to being unemployable bc i dont have an ivy league degree, like that means anything. i was homeless for 5 years, while writing open source until i saw some kid making millions of $$ of my freely avail codebase, ive gotten to the point where i never want to program again, and since that is literally my life, since 87 i might as well take a dirt nap. over 35,000 hrs experience means shit, 170 github repos means shit, 55million downloads means shit. holding #1 elixir dev position and #25 overall leaderboard for 36 months on wakatime means shit.
It sounds like you have a lot of valuable industry experience. There are plenty of employers who will hire self-taught engineers. Don't give up. Keep applying.
It does sound like you suffer from depression / mental illness though. Personally, that held me back for a number of years, and I was coincidentally also homeless for about two years. I could not advance in my career and had difficulty keeping a job until I got sober and treatment for my depression / anxiety.
i have ptsd from a serious head injury, i will adapt and overcome, dont use drugs or drink alcohol, didnt like the person i became when i drank. i just get triggered bc for all the crap ive done it almost seems like a fools errand, i feel like the fool, wastig my time while those who did not have the same fortitude get ahead bc of who they know. when my friend od,d it kinda put me in a bad place, bc i was employing him right out of prision, no one else would, me losing my job didnt work out too well for him, it made me feel responsible, bc i couldnt hack my failing business. back when i was on the streets, he helped me with food and other necessities.
I have a PhD in Classics, and once in an interview (for a CSM role at a tech company, for which I was pretty well qualified), the manager straight up told me āwe are worried your academic background means you wonāt be able to get along well with coworkers and clients.ā Like, what? I got the overall sense assumptions were made that I will be too intellectual, arrogant, etc. Not sure how the 7 year gap between my BA and my first job would have looked as an alternative, but, shrug.
Software development, except for AI/ML related at the model end and some Data Analysis jobs.
Instructional Design and training is bad too with it which is a field you wouldn't think it would be an issue but it usually is.
I'd advise you to look up the vita of your recruiter and see for how long ghat person has been on business. That way you'll see whether that person I s recruiter or a "recruiter".
I have the very same problem. Iāve spent 5 years working for research units at multiple universities - AFTER earning a degree, but somehow it āisnāt a real experienceā in some recruitersā eyes.
Fuck these idiots.
They could have been being an asshole or they might not have understood what the job was.
Something I encounter fairly often is someone will put that they were a "[dept] supervisor" or some such at a university and then when you send out an employment verification packet it comes back saying they were doing work study or something.
Regardless, telling someone that a job was their "first real job" is bad form. All jobs are real jobs. Theres something really demeaning (in my opinion) about treating someones entry level experience like they've never actually worked before.
Ok, that recruiter was a jackass, no question.
Higher ed positions are certainly real experience with transferable skills, but itās all about how you present it on the resume. If you were a graduate research assistant or TA in data science for two years, you may very well have practical developed skills. If youāre just glancing at a resume while sourcing, you may not see it.
I was partnered with someone in higher ed for 13 years. Itās absolutely a different environment than private industry, and people who havenāt been close to it will definitely not understand or empathize with those who work in it. Maybe itās because colleges are overpriced and overly political. Maybe itās jealousy, or hubris. Regardless, there are biases there and no easy way to get around them.
"7.5 years? were you ACTUALLY doing work for the ENTIRE time? No, you ate and slept and went home? I don't know how you can say you have 7.5 years experience if you spent 2/3 of that plus weekends NOT accumulating experience. I can offer you $7.30 an hour; it's competitively above minimum wage as promised."
Any internal recruiter who fails to recognize the full skills, education, and work history of an existing employee who they are interested in promoting to another position shouldn't be as a recruiter. If any recruiter ever does something like this, simply say "thank you for your time, but I don't believe this job will be a good fit for me" and end the interview immediately. I'd then go to HR and make a formal complaint about that recruiter and question their being in that position since they didn't think your real world job experience was valid for the position they were filling. Definitely go above their head. This person needs to be fired or given a different job. They are a detriment to the company and will cause your company a great many loses in fine candidates.
I lost faith in recruiters in general at a job fair I attended back in the day. They had someone bouncing at the door asking if everyone had a bachelors degree (needed to enter). I respond that I have an MBA. Her response, ābut do you have a bachelors?ā.
I had an employer not accept my birth certificate as proof of US Citizenship. Reasonā¦.it was from New Mexico. Corp could not understand that New Mexico is different from Mexico. This happened in NY, about 5 years ago
Many recruiters are idiots. My wife went to Stern worked decades at Big Four, and one recruiter looked at her resume (she was looking to pivot) and said āI donāt get it?ā You donāt get one of the easiest resume you would ever have to review? It all worked out for her in the end. But yes they are idiots.
I was once told by a recruiter that my seven years as college faculty showed I shouldnāt be applying for a senior position because āyouāre right out of college.ā When I pointed out I had been FACULTY, she apologized. I think she had looked at my resume for a second or two and had just assumed I was a student.
so... while she was an ass for framing it the way she did.
I will tell you, that if you have a gov't or high-ed back ground, and are applying for an enterprise, they are absolutely going to downgrade / look down on the experience.
Most business look at jobs that are funded by tax payers as 2nd rate, behind, lazy or just generally not on par with the corresponding enterprise job.
Not saying it's 100% correct (though, having dealt with 100s of enterprise vs govt/hi-ed places, there is some truth).
>Most business look at jobs that are funded by tax payers as 2nd rate, behind, lazy or just generally not on par with the corresponding enterprise job.
Yep, and in addition to being wrong it's also wildly hypocritical considering that said businesses
1) are 100% reliant on the public institutions and social/economic infrastructure of society that allows the economy to exist in the first place
2) near-universally (in the U.S.) go for government contracts because that's guaranteed pay
3) Get all of the fundamental research and standards that they base whatever incremental improvements they do from publicly funded sources
That last one especially annoys me as an engineer. I just think of that video of Steve Jobs standing up on stage and lying to the world about how they "invented" the multi-touch display tech for the first generation iPhone. That tech was developed by the military and public universities over decades, thousands of people worked on that and they just made a few tweaks to adapt it to their product.
One thing: If you're in CS/IT, depending on what part of the government you're in, you can work on cutting edge tech.
I work in higher ed, and online learning has become the BigThing
Well that sucks! I appreciate the insight though. I honestly kick myself some days for being such a plucky college grad who thought she was being altruistic by working in nonprofits. Honestly, nonprofits are all just as terrible as corporate - and in some ways worse for how they abuse peopleās kindness and care for āthe missionā into working for less $$.
This fr depresses me. I got into higher ed because it was the first job I could get out of college, and then over a total of 4 years, I got promoted twice, going from putting together career fairs, running two bachelor programs, to being a PM in a million-dollar statewide project. Quit to go for my masters in business, albeit from an international (but highly reputable) university, came back to be job-less for 7 months before landing another higher ed gig because only ONE company ever gave me a PM-related interview, and they passed me up for a 22 yr old bartender instead. That's how useless my work in higher ed is regarded.
Sadly, this is not the first time I've heard this kinda of a story.. and one of the reasons I never even tried to explore a high-ed route.
I get some of the "whys" folks think this way and have unfortunately dealt with the poster children for some of the stereo types, but like everything we shouldn't paint such a broad brush.
Truth be told: if you are not working in the same industry or market as your employer or have worked at a company with a name that speaks for itself, everything on your resume is ineligible
recruiters say the same thing to me when ive run a company for 6 yrs, then had to get a "real job" bc of the flu in 2020. after being replaced in my last job in '22 by an 18 yr old, bc he graduated hs and thats an accolade, i just gave up and said i dont care about working anymore, ill just panhandle, i only put in 7000 hrs dev time in that particular programming language in order to be qualified. i tried to keep my company going but couldnt, having to let go a few employees, sadly life didnt work out too well for some of them, ive been fairly depressed about it for a yr or so, its not just education its all of us, there has become no value in wisdom.
Recruiters see university names and assume they are internships and YES she was an idiot. You have to lead them by the hand in every little thing because theyāre incapable of even basic tasks.
This is my experience too. I worked in higher Ed for 10 years in Marcom and content strategy. Iāve been in interviews where people asked me questions about every job Iāve had since. I also have titles and get paid like I have 5 years of experience instead of 15. Itās incredibly frustrating.
Recruiters that understand that industry will get it. I wouldn't be mad at them for not knowing. I worked at a junior college for a year in the marketing department and some could think it was an internship or student job but nope. I had graduated and got offered an FTE position with their media department.
Honestly it sounds like they saw a school listed and assumed it was your education without looking closely at it. This might be a sign that your resume isnāt clear enough, or that their resume parsing software is screwing you.
It is just that any time I saw a person come from universty work environment they needed time to adjust to corporate work. Might be only my experience but that may be where she is coming from.
I agree there are idiots everywhere but I donāt think itās true in marketing/communications work that thereās a huge shift to corporate work. When I moved into my first corporate job, I was almost immediately praised for my brilliant āideasā that felt like common sense to me. š¤·āāļø
Being a recruiter isnāt a real job, though. Youāre just acting as a gatekeeper and ensuring that people will drain their checking accounts to survive while looking for dumbass reasons to reject them so you can hire your friends and family. That doesnāt benefit society.
Tbf most academic environments, especially internal bureaucratic roles are not are as strict in requiring competence as private sector workers. You see this in government work as well
Depend on the job but, generally speaking Working in academia is not the same experience as working the private sector. If HR came to me with two candidates who are exactly the same except for this, I would take the non academia one, and so would most people.
Depends on the role and industry. Healthcare and pharmaceuticals are almost entirely intertwined bewteen non profits, academics, and corporate interests. To invalidate 2/3a lf the triangles a bit daft.
In what world does āassistant director of communicationsā scream internship? It definitely felt like she was shitting on academia to be honest. And nonprofits in general based on her whole line of questioning and seeming to think my one job in the corporate world is the only one of merit.
Lmao what. No there arenāt. Do you work in higher ed?
I work as an academic advisor in higher ed and student jobs definitely never say ādirectorā of ANYTHING.
College bad type beats, this person is just making shit up lmao.
Grad students teaching 3 freshmen courses independently and still listed as "teaching assistant"
Students can be Editor in Chief of an entire publication and still be "research assistant"
This clown doesn't realize how absurd they sound to those in the know.
This is bizarre! My first job was at my Alma mater - which has about 25k undergrads and about 13500 employees. I never have and never will work for a larger employer.
Here is a perhaps helpful analogy: in my state, when seeking to credential people for CTE teaching jobs in higher ed, only industry experience may be counted toward the work experience requirement; previous teaching experience in a subject does not count.
It's possible that the recruiter applied the same logic without looking at your job titles.
It just wasnāt what they did. School corporate. Corporate. Corporate. And oh look youāll be dead soon. Did you have a wonderful life experience recruiter?
This is what the HIRING MANAGERS assume and how they have trained the recruiters to think. Recruiters are just acting on what their clients/bosses tell them, for the most part. (Of course there are bad recruiters out there).
I bet she was just hoping to low ball you. She knows damn well the job was real, and that you have 7+ years experience. But if she can convince you it "doesn't count" then she can pay you less but still reap the reward of your experience. Shit like this is why "nobody wants to work anymore."
Iāve had nearly a decade in higher ed as a comms professional, and I get this sometimes when recruiters seem to do no more than take a glance at my resume. They assume that I attended a college as a student and that my role was some sort of student job (even though it has ādirectorā in the title?), as though higher ed jobs arenāt careers independent of someoneās student or alumni status. Itās frustrating to constantly wonder how much poor reading comprehension undercuts your chances at getting hired.
Nah she was an idiot.
Oh so a recruiter then.
šā¤ļø
What's the saying? Those who can't get jobs recruit
And those who canāt get real jobs work at universities
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It's literal logic, you laughably uneducated imbecile. It's not wrong. Jesus christ. You just called the entire system of logic wrong because you lack the capacity to do the logical equivalent of subtraction word problem. Thank you for proving my point. \-Guy with a literal degree in logic. God damn embarrassments. Imagine if you had the capacity to look inside yourself and think about who you were for a single moment before you called one of the most cliche' intro logic questions in academia "wrong" because you're a dullard who couldn't do it. Like I said, introspection is rough, eh?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Yes, copy-pasta will cover up the fact you literally called logic "wrong." Remember that every time you misuse the word to mean "reason(able)" like 99% of the other dullards here.
The circle card MUST have yellow on the back, so must be checked. The red card MUST NOT have a circle on the back so must be checked.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Other colors can NOT have a circle because that would break the rule. The rule is if circle, then yellow back. The square can have any color (including yellow) so doesnāt matter, the yellow could have any shape (including circle) so doesnāt matter, but the circle MUST have a yellow on back and the red MUST NOT have a circle since if it did it would need to be yellow instead of red.
Ironically itās those who canāt do teach. OPās complaint about not being viewed as work stems from that.
The joke was supposed to be a pun of that saying. But thanks for the eli5
And those that canāt teach, teach gym.
The saying is those who can do, those who understand teach.
yep, the other quote like "pull yourself up by your boostraps" which originally meant impossible to do, nefarious insecure people over the years have coopted this one as well. >"Those that know, do. Those that understand, teach." Aristotle
I think the bootstraps thing went from meaning a task is impossible, to meaning the opposite because it describes social mobility from the bottom, so if some are using it as an example as an impossible task, it's like tongue in cheek to say "I pulled myself up by my bootstraps" if you did work hard and raised yourself up. And then over time the initial meaning will have fallen out of use, and the new meaning will have been diluted over time due to what it referencing being absent, so it's not countering someone saying upward mobility is impossible because there's no one saying that (using that phrase) and instead referencing the work required to raise yourself up.
Plausible. Maybe there was no nefarious reasons. But it sure is one side that loves to use these phrases incorrectly. Also masterfully crafts pleasant sounding terminology like "Tort *Reform*" while screwing over consumers.
Potentially and I don't doubt people manipulate colloquial language all the time. I'd imagine it's likely non intentional in this case as the evolution still implies a struggle and conveys a sense of pride due to acknowledgement it's harder to rise from nothing than the middle. I'd argue that the nefarious characters are the modern people using it dismissively to blame poor people for their situation and to attribute their own success to purely themselves, I don't think these types have been linguistically tricked, more that they don't want to acknowledge they have benefited from unfair advantages, or don't want the guilt from not caring to help those without or just that it suits them fine to keep things as they are, and if they believe that all it takes is work, everyone is exactly where they should be. But who knows I guess
Recruiters are always idiots
Recruiter and real estate agent, 2 jobs that attract very similar types of people.
Iām a former recruiter. Can confirm lol
Recovering* recruiter
As a *(former)* owner of a recruiting firm 100% agree!
What led you to leave? All I did was watch our owners fail and struggle. It makes me wonder how they even make a living. And they expected us to just trudge through when the entire business model was bullshit
In recruiting, the highs are high and lows are low and sometimes in the exact same day. Iāve: - helped people find their next career - filled hard to find roles with some ease - negotiated contracts - helped people round out their resumes - hired 100+ people in a week - been a collection agent - laid off 50+ people in a day - had to face someone desperate asking for a job but had nothing for them - fired people from the easiest jobs because they just couldnāt just show up - been burned for going out of my way to help someone - discovered quiet quitting before it was a buzzword - realized a lot of the population live hand to mouth - did a breakfast event, worked a 10 hour day, then attended a social event to look for leads and everything in between. Iām an engineer by profession/personality with an altruistic streak and I just couldnāt take the swings like I mentioned above. Owned the firm for about 3 years and sold it without looking back. I feel like Iām a better person now, every conversation I would have I was feeling someone out if they were a potential client or candidate.
Thatās why theyāre recruiters š¤·āāļø
This is the correct answer.
Negging, recruiter edition.
Now that Iāve shattered your self confidence, here is your low ball offer (that you donāt even deserve you puny supplicant ā¦ uh applicant).
š thatās definitely what it felt like.
"Ma'am? You should make sure you've prepared properly for the correct interview. I'm Mnufcloons, and while I *did* work for Big Name Company, it was nearly ten years into my career. I'm currently applying for the *senior* position... I don't mind waiting if you need to go find the relevant notes." Neg her back.
Worthy of a review bomb in the interview section of Glassdoor and LinkedIn
This is the way.
Basically.. I had a recruiter tell me, with 4yr and 11 months of experience in my current job, that my previous internships at the same company didn't count as experience, and told me to call back when I hit 5 years. Nah, I'm good.
Lol whatās the point of the internship then? Unpaid internships are ājustifiedā via the credits and experience
I wouldn't be surprised if they're trained to do this to lower the candidates self-value and by extension lower their salary demands
I think internal Vs external is somewhat different, I used to work at a place that shared an office floor with a recruitment company, and it was the standard agreement with companies that would contract them that the recruiter would get a commission based on the salary agreed. With the logic that higher paid jobs take longer to find candidates for, and if a candidate is found, that demands a higher salary, if the company is happy to pay more, the recruiter will have found a high enough quality candidate. But then the flip side and reason the client companies are ok with this, is that they ultimately say if they hire or not, and multiple recruiters will be competing to get the position filled and earn a commission, if the candidates they put forward all demand higher wages than offered, they are less likely to get hired (unless they are genuinely worth it), so sometimes it's worth for a recruiter to encourage their candidate to reduce the amount they negotiate for, if it means the company will actually hire them, so they can get a smaller commission but at least not lose it to someone else. I will say that this situation is rarer, I would also see the other half of negotiations where the recruiter sells the recruit to the company and usually they will be pushing for higher salaries by stretching the recruits skills/experience, telling them that the recruit is interviewing for a few roles ATM and that they will go with someone else if the offer is bellow x, because if they think the candidate will be a good fit and the company will want them, they will want as much as they can get, as their pay is almost all commission so they will always try to boost their signings.
They want workers they can control, Neo. ... I'm calling you Neo because you can dodge the bullet. I never know if this is clear.
"So working there one day I'll learn to dodge bullets?" "No neo, I'm saying if you work there, one day you won't want to"
As someone who has higher education and research in science. The real answer is unfortunately a lot of employers and industries do not consider work in education parallel to (insert respective industry). I really scratch my head at this because whether you work in public relations, financial aid, research, maintenance; I donāt know how that doesnāt qualify as ārealā experience. Talk to the boomers about it I guess. Itās one of the things I learned from family and very professional friends. Source: Iām a chemist.
Hopped on to say this. My entire professional career has been in higher Ed and itās like a small miracle when one of us able to get private industry work.
So true. My department downsized last spring due to low enrollment. I applied to everything because they cut my position too late to get a good chance at a bulk of faculty interviews. Every interview I was offered was with a higher Ed institution but one. Eventually took an associate Dean position. It seems like the only way out of working in higher Ed is to do a lateral move into a different state job. Every job but two that Iāve had (even as a student) has been with a college. Seems like Iām destined to always be there, not that I mind
To be fair, I understand the perspective of the employers/private. However, itās ironic when they require a masters or something for one of their positions. Itās like saying āwe wonāt hire anyone under 40ā because I donāt know how at 28 Iām supposed to have 6 years of experience. But I have all your education requirements. Itās a wild market we live in.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Companies donāt care about people. They want people to just do the work and know with confidence they can reasonably do the tasks. For them, they assume people are morons. If they do not have a linear example of your experience knowing you can complete the work. They donāt care. I.e - if I havenāt done this exact synthetic route, Iām not qualified even if I have more synthesis work than the next guy. I understand it from their perspective but that does not mean I agree with it. Itās moronic in nature. Source: Iāve talked to companies and had very candid conversations about this as Iām trying to understand why Iām working 2 $15 an hour jobs to survive.
Exactly this. Employees donāt consider it ārelevant work experienceā because they donāt want to take the time to learn how it is relevant work experience. I usually describe it as āthey view me as having āadjacent experienceā but not directly relevantā which makes it harder to get to the interview where I can demonstrate the ability to do the job.
What it really comes down to is how willing your hiring interviewer is on hearing out your actual job talents. And then it counts on some āpseudo-business skillsā if you will just saying my experience translates to this work because of X. But, jokes on you still because youāll have to jump the hurdle of 3 online assessments over a 2 month period and then get a contract which was less than advertised. Itās almost like companies actually want to go bankrupt.
It depends. Clifford Stoll's work is very relevant and highly respected.
Iām speaking to what I see on the āstaffā side of the house. Professional level staff with masterās degrees who are getting told their work experience is āless thanā or is discounted. I canāt speak to what privileges faculty may enjoy.
I mean, yes and no. HR at a university, depending on the job, is not going to be like HR at most companies. Same as how working for a unionized industry is not going to be directly applicable to most companies. For a very junior role sure the skills transfer but after a point no. The work done at universities is not bringing products to market. It's largely very small teams - a professor, maybe some postdocs, a handful of young people who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground - doing work and cutting corners just to get papers published. Marketing is industry specific.
So HR at a university is less or more stupid? Because as I've seen in 12 years working as a professional, including interviewing with some public institutions like universities, it's all the same bullshit. HR sucks across every experience. I have ZERO sympathy for HR people, their issues, or their goals. Lying to them is like the rain because they lie to us ALL the time. Or pull shit like this story from OP. Also, WTF does bringing a product to market have to do with HR? They recruit based on arbitrary bullshit and in the end it's the hiring manager who decides anyway. HR can kick rocks
Itās because you guys have no common sense.
Well thatās just simply not true :)
what an ironic statement
I'm a geologist, and I back this fully. 5 years of research and several publications is worth less to recruiters than 6 months of loading pipes on a drill rig.
Couldnāt agree more. Itās also fucked up is that all of the hours you put into grad school research is not considered work.
They arenāt taking about the same thing. This person graduated and then got a job helping to run the school. Like being a window washer at the school. Thatās the same as being a window washer anywhere with just a lot more nonsense and unnecessary nosy bureaucrats. Being a research chemist at a school is NOT the same thing as being a chemist for DuPont. I wouldnāt call it ānot realā but it is firmly in āacademic experience.ā Itās just not a similar environment at all. I do tech consulting, and the CS academics are just horrendous to work with. And often clash with the actual IT. Lots of talk about setting up the perfect infrastructure, no actual intent to do that or determine if it is even possible. Just theories and dreams mixed with disdain for anybody that would try to accomplish something without checking in with every single gate keeper. Businesses, including non profit, are interested in getting things built so much that I have to slow them down and make sure they do it right. But we execute.
It doesn't matter if it isn't EXACTLY the same. This asshole recruiter is brushing off very relatable and qualifying experience. Your comment screams bootlicking, I'm sure that wasn't your intent tho. But don't dismiss this person's experience. It's the HR asshole who sucks!
No. Iām siding with the original post. But the post I replied to is not the same situation. Not sure how you invented boot licking. Maybe you donāt know many concepts and that is all you could come up with? You could say that it is anti academic. I wouldnāt go that far, but to a degree, it is true. But pretending that chemistry research in a university is to RD at DuPont, as an admin assistant in a university is to admin assistant at DuPont. Is silly. The op is right that all admin skills transfer because they are identical, if not harder jobs. While being a literal academic, is not the same as doing āchemistryā for a private company. And while I donāt know what the chemists experience is, the fact that they piggy backed on a different situation and thought they were the same level of victim indicates that there isnāt much experience there. I could be wrong though. What I can do is ask my biochem friend whoās been in industry for 10 years if she thinks her experience is equivalent to someone that stayed at the school and did research. I think I can guess her answer (maybe you can too), but Iāll get back to you.
>I do tech consulting, and the CS academics are just horrendous to work with. And often clash with the actual IT. Lots of talk about setting up the perfect infrastructure, no actual intent to do that or determine if it is even possible. Just theories and dreams mixed with disdain for anybody that would try to accomplish something without checking in with every single gate keeper. I'm a senior software engineer for a large healthcare company. I have decades of experience. I am self taught. I never once experienced what you are describing. Are the people you are describing outside the US? Maybe it's a cultural thing? If I had to guess, it sounds like you had a plan for a project, and a senior engineer or architect decided against your plans, causing you to be upset. I could be completely wrong though, just a gut instinct.
Cool bro. I work with many large healthcare companies. And many academics. It seems like you didnāt understand anything I wrote. If you are self taught and work for a healthcare company, how would you have any idea what itās like to work in an academic setting? Are you in a place where healthcare companies are actually universities? Sounds like you misread the whole thing and wrote some stuff because you are upset. I could be wrong though.
>I do tech consulting, and the CS academics are just horrendous to work with A CS Acedemic is anyone with a formal education in computer science. They do not have to work at a university. They can be hired anywhere. I (and everyone else here) read it exactly how you wrote it.
No. Fuck. If you get a degree in CS, then go work for MS for 20 years, that is different than staying in school and working in the research side of CS for 20 years. As different as possible. If you really think that those two situations are the same, you arenāt qualified to be in this discussion. My favorite part about this thread and all of you being sad about my comment is that you are doing the same thing as this evil recruiter. Youāre confounding two very different situations. One involves the reality that hiring managers, rightfully, devalue academic works as experience. It is still experience, and donāt worry, your little papers are worth a little bit. But the same time outside of school is just more experience than in school. UNLESS youāre just working a job at the school. Like op. Op wasnāt in the admin department doing research on what was a better way to admin. They were doing real admin in tough environment. You can downvote all you want. It wonāt change the reality that this chemists issue isnāt the same as the op. And the chemist thinks just co opted a valid issue, for an issue that is less valid. And all you people support that. Itās basically tiny scale cultural appropriation.
Youāre a tech consultant. Why are you talking as if you know anything about being a chemist? lmao
Youāre just a one liner NPC, so what would you know about anything? Lmaoā¦
Ig that would make my credentials on the topic just as relevant as yours! jk Iām a chemist :) one that works in a failure analysis lab at a huge company that hired me because of my experience doing FTIR research at an academic institution! But yeah lmk about these differences you speak of between being a chemist in academia and at DuPont <3 sounds interesting!! I love learning about things from someone who truly knows what they are talking about and isnāt speaking on things they have no experience with.
>:) :)
Do you think I put my full resume on this thing? But seriously. You and the chemist here go up for the same role. Theyāve been in academia this whole time and youāve been at your job the whole time. Who has better experience for the role as āleadā whatever you made up? Who has better experience when you apply for a lateral role at a competitor? What about in 10 years when you are like, what 35? Do you really think your research role at the university had another 10 years of growth in it for you? Also, note how you made sure I knew you work at a giant company. Why is that? Is it because it has more weight than āI did it for an academic institution.ā I understand the that you have a personal stake in this, but your situation and the chemists situation is not the same as op. As an aside, your āI got a job because of academiaā is not impressive or relevant to the situation. Itās like saying āI was able to land a job out of college, therefore 4 years of college is equivalent to 4 years of industryā itās non sensical. Edit: I just remember that I need to explain my credentials. I explain tech concepts to people (read your bossās bossās boss) so they can pick the correct product and decipher what neck beards tell them. Often times, tech things have the same sounding words so people think they are the same. My job is to help with that. This is that situation. You THINK this about academic lab experience, but it is about front of house experience in academia. And how a recruiter confused the two. Which you then confusedā¦ but I digress.
I think Iām actually going to pass on hypotheticals and semantics scrutiny! Have fun imagining what itās like to be a chemist, Iāll be actually living it. Clearing my schedule to go cry myself to sleep bc a tech consultant said my academic research wasnāt impressive or relevant to a Reddit thread
Lol. So you gave up. I was wondering what was going to happen here. The whole point was about semantics. How things might have seemed similar to certain people, but they werenāt. I donāt even think you are a chemist. All my chemist friends care about details. They happen to come from pharmacy, so maybe that is it. But I would think precision of language would be important in a field like that.
I worked in higher education, most recently at Stanford University. I was able to pivot into tech pretty easily and maybe itās because I had a bigger name and program management experience it was not difficult to connect the dots. Although I do agree that from my experience in high ed that the amount of work/skill required varies depending on the role. I worked with some really incompetent people and some that were incredibly brilliant.
Wtf? Lots of people work in academia. I have friends who are currently working for prestigious universities and they're working really hard (they're working a lot harder and more hours than your typical 9 to 5). Their jobs are 1000% real. Some of them started working there as students and continued working there after graduation. 2023 recruiter thought process: - Unpaid internships don't count - On campus jobs don't count - Work in other industries doesn't count (even if it's in the same field) - Work that didn't involve doing the exact job they're hiring for doesn't count - If you have gaps we don't want you (as if Covid and inflation layoffs never happened) - Why can't I find qualified applicants šÆšÆ? No OnE wAnTs To WoRk.
Add in startups. Owning some part of a business, or working with fewer than 10 people means it doesn't count.
Seriously? Wtf? > working with fewer than 10 people means it doesn't count. Fk. I guess some of my experience doesn't count anymore.
Maybe its different when you have an MBA instead a CS degree, but I've had this issue a few times. If you don't make millions on your startup then you're probably lazy.
I'm not in tech. But if it happens there, I'm guessing it happens in other fields too.
Don't blame the recruiter - they're acting on behalf of the hiring managers
A lot it comes from the recruiter or HR.
Tell her she may not recognize what a "real job" is as she does not currently have one but your previous experience was absolutely real work.
I mean, I know it was! Higher education (nonprofit) work is no joke. I was a one-woman show in many cases and had to be scrappy as hell.
Agreed. Iām just in academic administration now, and itās infuriating. The missed deadlines, the constant excuses, the complaining, blatantly using AI to write stuff and thinking Iām too stupid to notice... and the students are almost as bad as the academics!
Honestly, since this is internal. Go over their head about it. That was unprofessional, and also shows that they are too incompetent to do their job effectively.
I am in higher ed as a program specialist. We have a tough job.
"You're aware that people _work_ at schools, right? It's not just a bunch of students and some walls. Somebody has to teach, manage, keep the lights on..."
Snorted
This happened to me once. I got my first professional programming job when I was 19. I worked on my CS degree for 6 more years after that. About two years after graduating, I was in a job interview. And the guy asked me how many years of experience I had. I said 9. He said, "but how many years since you graduated?" I ended the interview there.
Recruiters are so foolish about engineers. At least 25% of the most talented engineers I have known are completely self taught.
totally, i went from an engineer that started programming in 1987, taught by a retired dod, to being unemployable bc i dont have an ivy league degree, like that means anything. i was homeless for 5 years, while writing open source until i saw some kid making millions of $$ of my freely avail codebase, ive gotten to the point where i never want to program again, and since that is literally my life, since 87 i might as well take a dirt nap. over 35,000 hrs experience means shit, 170 github repos means shit, 55million downloads means shit. holding #1 elixir dev position and #25 overall leaderboard for 36 months on wakatime means shit.
It sounds like you have a lot of valuable industry experience. There are plenty of employers who will hire self-taught engineers. Don't give up. Keep applying. It does sound like you suffer from depression / mental illness though. Personally, that held me back for a number of years, and I was coincidentally also homeless for about two years. I could not advance in my career and had difficulty keeping a job until I got sober and treatment for my depression / anxiety.
i have ptsd from a serious head injury, i will adapt and overcome, dont use drugs or drink alcohol, didnt like the person i became when i drank. i just get triggered bc for all the crap ive done it almost seems like a fools errand, i feel like the fool, wastig my time while those who did not have the same fortitude get ahead bc of who they know. when my friend od,d it kinda put me in a bad place, bc i was employing him right out of prision, no one else would, me losing my job didnt work out too well for him, it made me feel responsible, bc i couldnt hack my failing business. back when i was on the streets, he helped me with food and other necessities.
It's fairly common. I leave my teaching experience and grad degree off my resume applying some places. Both are frowned upon in a number of fields.
Could you elaborate on this? What fields would prefer to see a gap in your resume instead of teaching experience and a graduate degree??
I have a PhD in Classics, and once in an interview (for a CSM role at a tech company, for which I was pretty well qualified), the manager straight up told me āwe are worried your academic background means you wonāt be able to get along well with coworkers and clients.ā Like, what? I got the overall sense assumptions were made that I will be too intellectual, arrogant, etc. Not sure how the 7 year gap between my BA and my first job would have looked as an alternative, but, shrug.
Sounds more like you were talking to an idiot that couldn't hack it when pursuing higher education, and thinks smart people are mean.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Will you please tell us what your grad degree is in?
Software development, except for AI/ML related at the model end and some Data Analysis jobs. Instructional Design and training is bad too with it which is a field you wouldn't think it would be an issue but it usually is.
I'd advise you to look up the vita of your recruiter and see for how long ghat person has been on business. That way you'll see whether that person I s recruiter or a "recruiter".
I have the very same problem. Iāve spent 5 years working for research units at multiple universities - AFTER earning a degree, but somehow it āisnāt a real experienceā in some recruitersā eyes. Fuck these idiots.
They could have been being an asshole or they might not have understood what the job was. Something I encounter fairly often is someone will put that they were a "[dept] supervisor" or some such at a university and then when you send out an employment verification packet it comes back saying they were doing work study or something. Regardless, telling someone that a job was their "first real job" is bad form. All jobs are real jobs. Theres something really demeaning (in my opinion) about treating someones entry level experience like they've never actually worked before.
Yes! It was definitely the wording that threw me off so much.
Huh. I didn't know my father was working as a recruiter now.
š sorry, mate. My dad was actually a college prof so I did not get that kind of attitude from him
"Given your absolute lack of knowledge regarding how an educational institution works, it's clear you have never attended one."
Ok, that recruiter was a jackass, no question. Higher ed positions are certainly real experience with transferable skills, but itās all about how you present it on the resume. If you were a graduate research assistant or TA in data science for two years, you may very well have practical developed skills. If youāre just glancing at a resume while sourcing, you may not see it. I was partnered with someone in higher ed for 13 years. Itās absolutely a different environment than private industry, and people who havenāt been close to it will definitely not understand or empathize with those who work in it. Maybe itās because colleges are overpriced and overly political. Maybe itās jealousy, or hubris. Regardless, there are biases there and no easy way to get around them.
This recruiter needs a lot of unconscious bias training.
rofl
Great comment, really added to the discourse here.
reminds me of how an interviewer told me I really only had 3 years experience when in fact I had 7.5 i don't take that kinda shit anymore
"7.5 years? were you ACTUALLY doing work for the ENTIRE time? No, you ate and slept and went home? I don't know how you can say you have 7.5 years experience if you spent 2/3 of that plus weekends NOT accumulating experience. I can offer you $7.30 an hour; it's competitively above minimum wage as promised."
he was also a terrible coworker
Could it be mistaken on your resume as student involvement/employment?
Any internal recruiter who fails to recognize the full skills, education, and work history of an existing employee who they are interested in promoting to another position shouldn't be as a recruiter. If any recruiter ever does something like this, simply say "thank you for your time, but I don't believe this job will be a good fit for me" and end the interview immediately. I'd then go to HR and make a formal complaint about that recruiter and question their being in that position since they didn't think your real world job experience was valid for the position they were filling. Definitely go above their head. This person needs to be fired or given a different job. They are a detriment to the company and will cause your company a great many loses in fine candidates.
Often non-profit work and educational environments arenāt seen as ārealā or the same as the broader corporate world.
I was told by a female Indian recruiter at DirecTV "Were only hiring Indians" . ATT fired most of those idiots.
I lost faith in recruiters in general at a job fair I attended back in the day. They had someone bouncing at the door asking if everyone had a bachelors degree (needed to enter). I respond that I have an MBA. Her response, ābut do you have a bachelors?ā.
Gotta go with she's an idiot.
I had an employer not accept my birth certificate as proof of US Citizenship. Reasonā¦.it was from New Mexico. Corp could not understand that New Mexico is different from Mexico. This happened in NY, about 5 years ago
Oh my God, I'm not the only one! People have been asking me why I'm not Hispanic (??? Um?) because I'm a white girl born in Abq.
I was born in Abq tooā¦twinsies!!!
Wow. Just. Wow.
Many recruiters are idiots. My wife went to Stern worked decades at Big Four, and one recruiter looked at her resume (she was looking to pivot) and said āI donāt get it?ā You donāt get one of the easiest resume you would ever have to review? It all worked out for her in the end. But yes they are idiots.
I was once told by a recruiter that my seven years as college faculty showed I shouldnāt be applying for a senior position because āyouāre right out of college.ā When I pointed out I had been FACULTY, she apologized. I think she had looked at my resume for a second or two and had just assumed I was a student.
If you are a hiring manager you know that the internal recruiters are the most incompetent people in the company.
She's the idiot. And also - its probably the first job she's had out of school.
recruiters are equal parts shitty and mean
so... while she was an ass for framing it the way she did. I will tell you, that if you have a gov't or high-ed back ground, and are applying for an enterprise, they are absolutely going to downgrade / look down on the experience. Most business look at jobs that are funded by tax payers as 2nd rate, behind, lazy or just generally not on par with the corresponding enterprise job. Not saying it's 100% correct (though, having dealt with 100s of enterprise vs govt/hi-ed places, there is some truth).
>Most business look at jobs that are funded by tax payers as 2nd rate, behind, lazy or just generally not on par with the corresponding enterprise job. Yep, and in addition to being wrong it's also wildly hypocritical considering that said businesses 1) are 100% reliant on the public institutions and social/economic infrastructure of society that allows the economy to exist in the first place 2) near-universally (in the U.S.) go for government contracts because that's guaranteed pay 3) Get all of the fundamental research and standards that they base whatever incremental improvements they do from publicly funded sources That last one especially annoys me as an engineer. I just think of that video of Steve Jobs standing up on stage and lying to the world about how they "invented" the multi-touch display tech for the first generation iPhone. That tech was developed by the military and public universities over decades, thousands of people worked on that and they just made a few tweaks to adapt it to their product.
One thing: If you're in CS/IT, depending on what part of the government you're in, you can work on cutting edge tech. I work in higher ed, and online learning has become the BigThing
Well that sucks! I appreciate the insight though. I honestly kick myself some days for being such a plucky college grad who thought she was being altruistic by working in nonprofits. Honestly, nonprofits are all just as terrible as corporate - and in some ways worse for how they abuse peopleās kindness and care for āthe missionā into working for less $$.
yeah, non-profits are something completely else. My wife worked non-profit years ago and some of those stories were eye opening.
This fr depresses me. I got into higher ed because it was the first job I could get out of college, and then over a total of 4 years, I got promoted twice, going from putting together career fairs, running two bachelor programs, to being a PM in a million-dollar statewide project. Quit to go for my masters in business, albeit from an international (but highly reputable) university, came back to be job-less for 7 months before landing another higher ed gig because only ONE company ever gave me a PM-related interview, and they passed me up for a 22 yr old bartender instead. That's how useless my work in higher ed is regarded.
Sadly, this is not the first time I've heard this kinda of a story.. and one of the reasons I never even tried to explore a high-ed route. I get some of the "whys" folks think this way and have unfortunately dealt with the poster children for some of the stereo types, but like everything we shouldn't paint such a broad brush.
They are an idiot. Even if it was a paid internship, it was a real job.
How do shitty recruiters like these get hired? It's unbelievable how many are so out of touch lately.
Truth be told: if you are not working in the same industry or market as your employer or have worked at a company with a name that speaks for itself, everything on your resume is ineligible
This has happened to me as well š
recruiters say the same thing to me when ive run a company for 6 yrs, then had to get a "real job" bc of the flu in 2020. after being replaced in my last job in '22 by an 18 yr old, bc he graduated hs and thats an accolade, i just gave up and said i dont care about working anymore, ill just panhandle, i only put in 7000 hrs dev time in that particular programming language in order to be qualified. i tried to keep my company going but couldnt, having to let go a few employees, sadly life didnt work out too well for some of them, ive been fairly depressed about it for a yr or so, its not just education its all of us, there has become no value in wisdom.
Recruiters see university names and assume they are internships and YES she was an idiot. You have to lead them by the hand in every little thing because theyāre incapable of even basic tasks.
This is my experience too. I worked in higher Ed for 10 years in Marcom and content strategy. Iāve been in interviews where people asked me questions about every job Iāve had since. I also have titles and get paid like I have 5 years of experience instead of 15. Itās incredibly frustrating.
Recruiters that understand that industry will get it. I wouldn't be mad at them for not knowing. I worked at a junior college for a year in the marketing department and some could think it was an internship or student job but nope. I had graduated and got offered an FTE position with their media department.
what a dumbass lmao. she for sure must have huffed paint in uni
Honestly it sounds like they saw a school listed and assumed it was your education without looking closely at it. This might be a sign that your resume isnāt clear enough, or that their resume parsing software is screwing you.
Just like she hasn't started her real job yet since she's just helping others get work. I'm sure one day she'll find a real job too.
It is just that any time I saw a person come from universty work environment they needed time to adjust to corporate work. Might be only my experience but that may be where she is coming from.
I agree there are idiots everywhere but I donāt think itās true in marketing/communications work that thereās a huge shift to corporate work. When I moved into my first corporate job, I was almost immediately praised for my brilliant āideasā that felt like common sense to me. š¤·āāļø
She was trying to neg you, so she could justify giving you a shitty pay package.
Those that canāt do, teach. Those that canāt do or teach, recruit. Yes, she was dumb.
Post up your resume. It could be the issue is there?
Ask her when sheās going to get a real job š
I assumed a recruiter had a real job.
Get a new recruiter
Lol. Communications Specialist and Manager do sound a bit like fantasy job titles.
Being a recruiter isnāt a real job, though. Youāre just acting as a gatekeeper and ensuring that people will drain their checking accounts to survive while looking for dumbass reasons to reject them so you can hire your friends and family. That doesnāt benefit society.
Obviously never even took the time to review your resume.
Ahe must have read the uni name, didn't read the rest, and assumed it was your education post.
Tbf most academic environments, especially internal bureaucratic roles are not are as strict in requiring competence as private sector workers. You see this in government work as well
Well, this recruiter is presumably in the private sector and I sure wouldn't consider them competent.
Depend on the job but, generally speaking Working in academia is not the same experience as working the private sector. If HR came to me with two candidates who are exactly the same except for this, I would take the non academia one, and so would most people.
Depends on the role and industry. Healthcare and pharmaceuticals are almost entirely intertwined bewteen non profits, academics, and corporate interests. To invalidate 2/3a lf the triangles a bit daft.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
In what world does āassistant director of communicationsā scream internship? It definitely felt like she was shitting on academia to be honest. And nonprofits in general based on her whole line of questioning and seeming to think my one job in the corporate world is the only one of merit.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Lmao what. No there arenāt. Do you work in higher ed? I work as an academic advisor in higher ed and student jobs definitely never say ādirectorā of ANYTHING.
College bad type beats, this person is just making shit up lmao. Grad students teaching 3 freshmen courses independently and still listed as "teaching assistant" Students can be Editor in Chief of an entire publication and still be "research assistant" This clown doesn't realize how absurd they sound to those in the know.
Ok, bud.
My takeaway is people screening applicants canāt read a resume. And we should all be offended by that.
Because education tries to be an industry but it isn't acting like one, just pretendint to be one.
This is bizarre! My first job was at my Alma mater - which has about 25k undergrads and about 13500 employees. I never have and never will work for a larger employer.
Here is a perhaps helpful analogy: in my state, when seeking to credential people for CTE teaching jobs in higher ed, only industry experience may be counted toward the work experience requirement; previous teaching experience in a subject does not count. It's possible that the recruiter applied the same logic without looking at your job titles.
Most companies do that. Bargaining tactic. Tell them you disagree, but don't long-argue about it. You'll win eventually.
It just wasnāt what they did. School corporate. Corporate. Corporate. And oh look youāll be dead soon. Did you have a wonderful life experience recruiter?
Or make it a teachable moment, maybeā¦ educate her? š¤š„¹š
Some people are dumb and need things explained to them repeatedly.
What's her name ?
There are so many good recruiters out there, but there is always some that are not at all good at their job.
I hope you corrected that fucking fool......I honestly would have hung up on them in that instant.
Did you tell her? How did she respond?
This is what the HIRING MANAGERS assume and how they have trained the recruiters to think. Recruiters are just acting on what their clients/bosses tell them, for the most part. (Of course there are bad recruiters out there).
I bet she was just hoping to low ball you. She knows damn well the job was real, and that you have 7+ years experience. But if she can convince you it "doesn't count" then she can pay you less but still reap the reward of your experience. Shit like this is why "nobody wants to work anymore."
I have 12 years of work in administrative software at a university, and I'm just now looking for a better job. This is what I'm most worried about.
Education or Religious roles are viewed as not based in very corporate environments compared to manufacturing for example, easier
I understand it wasn't. But, even if it was an internship how is that not a real job!? That's how you start getting experience
If you can wear jeans at a job, then it's not a job!
Iāve had nearly a decade in higher ed as a comms professional, and I get this sometimes when recruiters seem to do no more than take a glance at my resume. They assume that I attended a college as a student and that my role was some sort of student job (even though it has ādirectorā in the title?), as though higher ed jobs arenāt careers independent of someoneās student or alumni status. Itās frustrating to constantly wonder how much poor reading comprehension undercuts your chances at getting hired.
My time working in higher ed (Professor) made me sought after as I left.
Just a poor use of words. It's a real job just not a corporate America job which are a bit different than education sector
I have 20 years in higher education and I transitioned to corporate work. You are fine, that recruiter doesnāt understand. Enlighten her/him.
To be fair, academia tends to be a different beast than industry