"152 Apprentices Required in Victorian Railways"
http://imgur.com/kHNz2zc
Examine the ad. What's the difference between then and now?
An Australian Job Ad from 1937
DeafMutePretender on 23/12/2015 - 22:48
Comments
Must have 5 years experience of Windows Server 2012
and 2 yr with Windows 10 and Windows 2016 Server
That's the joke.jpg
a degree
I assume you mean bachelor's degree? Pfft, a bachelor's degree is this generation's high school qualification (ie. I expect everyone to have one).
As an employer/human resource manager, for me to even consider your application and subsequent unpaid internship (paid employment afterwards not guaranteed [even if I do employ you, it will be at minimum wage]), I expect a minimum of all of the following:
- You must have a decade of work-related experience
- You must have a masters degree WITH honours WITH a high distinction average/GPA WITH icing and a cherry on top.
- You must be involved in diverse extra-curricular activity (volunteering in war-torn nations, cleaning up poop in remote farms, regular blood and sperm donation, successfully climbing Mount Everest [without the guidance of sherpas… and climbing equipment], being a guinea pig for medical research, etc)
- You must have graduated from a prestigious university (if your university is not regularly on the top 20 lists, then don't even bother, pleb)
- If I spot a single typo, spelling mistake, incorrect usage of apostrophes or if I see fonts that I do not find visually appealing, then your resume will be binned.
- You must be a good "fit" in our company culture (eg. You must not be unattractive. You being ugly and employed by us is a bad reflection on our company. You must not have a foreign-sounding name and you must not have the wrong kind of foreign-looking face. You must not be born from poverty. You might have gone from rags to riches but as far as I'm concerned, inside, you're still the lower class. Try applying for our company again if you believe in reincarnation and in your next life, you are born into old money/royalty/aristocrat.)
- If by any chance, you do make it to the interview stage (there are a total of 10 interviews and each is 10 hours long), then congratulations. In addition to any of the usual tests of aptitude conducted in the interviews, there will also be another criteria you must meet: do I like you, or not. I decide whether I like someone in the first minute I meet them so first impressions count! There will be no second chances, there will be no second impressions. If I don't like you, I won't tell you because I enjoy watching applicants go through all ten interviews without knowing they never stood a chance.
Any resumes that do not have the above will be immediately binned. Good luck!
Hmm… no wonder I don't get any call backs… -_-'
Better luck next life/reincarnation, buddy.
(profanity) hate how this country has transformed. so many scumbag job ads on SEEK that demand 7+ years of experience in a recent field with a degree - cuts out most 20 something applicants.
Its where we are headed.
Worldwide actually. Have a read through at some of the job postings on Stack Exchange.
The big employers have no idea what they are looking for when what they are really doing is: List a lot required skills, find out that no one has all the skills, so then they complain of a IT skill shortage.And this is a wonderful one I saw months ago:
A strong understanding of computer science. Degrees are nice, but not mandatory. You don't need to be able to recite the different between an AVL Tree and a Red-Black Tree, but you do need to be able to impress our CTO in a 2-hour interview.
Nine to fivers need not apply.
Two hour interview is pretty tough IMO…
The nine-to-fivers need not apply is also a hint that you'll be working for a lousy startup company that expects you to put a gruelling 50+ hours a week.
They were not asking for "indigenous applicants encouraged to apply" only
Probably because of the unspoken "whites only" policy.
They actually list job numbers rather than just "testing the field" for potential positions
I dont think it was easier but it definitely told you what you needed to know! Ads like this make me mellow up
We were actually making things. Which benefits many.
(Instead of importing the train through some overpriced backhanded deal). Which benefits just a few - at the expense of many
They're saying anyone over 18 wouldn't be considered unless they are leaving uni or whatever intermediate cert is and even then they can't be over 19. Age discrimination!
Compared to the ads from now tho… I think I prefer the old school ones lol
At least they're honest.
I think the issue with recruitment today is ignorance by organisations and practices of third party recruiters. I don't understand how private recruiters are not regulated and how they continue to rip companies off and expect to get paid 12% of the salary just for forwarding resumes (I understand there are exceptions to this but for the most part this is what the industry has become). These recruiters play a numbers game so they post ads on seek demanding a lot of experience so they have more chance of getting the candidates they put forward placed to earn their commission because they have no other measure of how good a candidate is because they are useless. I also don't understand companies that regularly have more than 6-7 hires a year would not do the recruiting in-house because the commission they pay would be more than a FTE to do the same thing.
The experience on paper is also what gets me. I'm in a technical role in IT with about 3 years experience. I am very good at what I do and do a ton personal development in my spare time - doing courses, reading textbooks and reading blogs to stay up to date with the best practices in the industry etc. Now the (profanity) that sits next to me at work gets paid $600 a day because he has 10 years experience even though he's an idiot and completely useless. I delivery four times as much as he does, and my solutions actually work and require little maintenance but I can't get paid any more than I do because I don't have the experience on paper even though I'm comparable in terms of ability with other senior technical staff. Basically the world is telling me don't put in any effort because you will still have to wait and the guys that did nothing will be in the same boat as you because they waited too and you are basically the same because experience is the same.
TLDR; Roles should be filled measuring a candidates ability to perform the functions of the job and not the experience they have on paper. Also recruiters should actually provide value or just completely (profanity) off.
So you expect to get the same wage as the guy with 10 years experience because you imagined to yourself that your work is better - and not just better, amazingly better! - and because generally your just more important than him. According to you lel.
The point I was trying to make was the value of experience. You could spend 10 years doing nothing in your role which is worthless but on your resume you have 10 years experience which looks good to potential employers.
In a way you just prove my point - I said he was an idiot, completely useless and doesn't deliver any work but you still think he's worth more because of the 10 years experience.
Also just FYI I'm not arrogant - I regularly receive feedback from my superiors on the work I do and the value I provide and have been compared to other senior technical staff. I know where I stand.
Interesting how the purported 1937 advertisement makes use of fonts that have not been designed for at least another 60 years. ;-)
Difference is today this job ad will be advertised in the Philippines and China for 457 workers.
We have newspapers from the 40s+ at work :P they're fun to read.
Asking for apprentices and not demanding a decade of experience and a degree in an irrelevant field.