And so, finally, 30 days into 2010, I actually get around to the part 
where I actually sit down and look at jobs.



Man, if I threw together a CV saying "I am great good at teh computering 
of in systems", employers would take one look at it and toss it in the 
bin! And yet, a quick search online turns up gems like this:

"Key skills and experiences required for this role are:

Unix, Windows, Linux, Red Hat, Solaris, OS environments. [...]"

Newsflash: Linux *is* Unix. Red Hat *is* Linux. And ALL of the above 
*are* "OS environments". Learn basic English! :-P

(I'm guessing whichever recruitement droid tapped this in didn't 
actually have any clue what they're talking about, they just copied it 
from somewhere.)



Another amusing moments include:

"Company name
RecruitementCons"

...?!

"ultants.com"

...ah. OK.



Anyway, at the moment the worrying thing is that a basic search for my 
chosen target area turns up only jobs a significant physical distance 
away, and all with salaries of £30,000 or higher [so, presumably beyond 
my experience level]. I guess the lower stuff just gets put in the local 
paper or something rather than on Monster?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

...and I fail at even getting the subject line correct. >_<

Another mouse-click, another gem:

"Systems Administrator - IT Infrastructure MS Windows Server 2003/​2008, 
Exchange Server, Active Directory, Citrix, SQL Server, Global Financial 
Investment Company are looking to recruit an experienced Systems 
Administrator to design, implement, support, document and perform day to 
day administration of all the companies Global Wintel Infrastructure.​"

That's one biiiig sentence, right there. And I'm pretty sure that's "all 
company's Global Wintel Infrastructure". (Why is that a propper noun?)

"The successful candidate will be proficient in the following 
technologies:.​ MS Server 2003/​2008.​ MS Exchange Server.​ MS Active 
Directory.​ Citrix Infrastructure.​ SQL Server In addition "nice to 
have" skill sets would include, VMware, MOM, SharePoint and SCOM.​ These 
skills are an advantage but by no means essential.​"

Is this just copy-pasted from somewhere? It looks like that was 
originally a bullet-point list, and somehow got brain-dumped as plain 
text. But there really *should* be a full stop before the "In addition" 
part. (At least there's a capital letter there! Otherwise it could be 
quite unparsable...)

"This is a fantastic opportunity to join a growing organisation with 
clear objectives and deliverables for 2010.​ The company offers 
excellent career progression with varied and exciting projects.​"

Shouldn't *every* company have clear objectives and deliverables for 
2010?? Sorry, I'm not too impressed by the workmanship of this advert.

"Please apply with CV at first instance for immediate consideration.​"

English really isn't your native language, is it?

I mean, seriously, this entire blurb is only a few lines long, and 
you've still managed to get it wrong. And you expect me to put together 
a 2-page CV which is immaculate and free of all error?

And I'm not supposed to hold *you* to the same standards because...?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

It's a laugh a minute in here...

"A degree is essential, not advantageous but essential."

...? It's not an advantage, but it is essentially? Perhaps you mean that 
it's not merely advantageous but actually essential? You're not 
explaining yourself very well.

"Ideally you will have 1 year as a team lead of managing projects."

Team lead of managing projects? I get what you mean, but that's some 
very strange grammar.

"The position is for someone who is interested in the progression to 
full team leader capacity. Hands on and hands off."

No idea what that last is supposed to mean. It's not even a complete 
sentence!

"We're ideally looking for someone who hasn't come from a small company 
and are used to large infrastructure."

"Someone" is singular, "are" is plural. Your grammatical numbers do not 
agree.

"Please apply asap to Tony Chapman. "

I'm reasonably sure initialisms are supposed to be capitalised.



I could spend all day just cateloguing all the grammatical issues I've 
found, but the overall impression is one of carelessness and 
unprofessional people. If you place an ad worded as badly as these, what 
does that say to people about your company?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> Anyway, at the moment the worrying thing is that a basic search for my 
> chosen target area turns up only jobs a significant physical distance 
> away, and all with salaries of £30,000 or higher [so, presumably beyond 
> my experience level]. I guess the lower stuff just gets put in the local 
> paper or something rather than on Monster?

Of the jobs returned, only the first 8 or so are actually for system 
administrator jobs. The result are all sales administrators, financial 
administrator, one cryogenics administrator (?!), and all fairly far 
away. The ones that were the right thing were all high-salary stuff for 
experts.

Plan B: Try the local paper...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

"Orchid XP v8" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:4b6442e1$1@news.povray.org...

>[...]
> I could spend all day just cateloguing all the grammatical issues I've
> found, but the overall impression is one of carelessness and
> unprofessional people. If you place an ad worded as badly as these, what
> does that say to people about your company?

You are wasting time looking at these IT jobs. Your true calling is as a
PCCC (Professional Critic and Chronic Complainer).

Post a reply to this message

somebody wrote:

> You are wasting time looking at these IT jobs. Your true calling is as a
> PCCC (Professional Critic and Chronic Complainer).

Heh. If it were somehow possible to get paid money for complaining about 
things, my mother would be a millionaire by now! ;-)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> Unix, Windows, Linux, Red Hat, Solaris, OS environments. [...]"

> Newsflash: Linux *is* Unix. Red Hat *is* Linux. And ALL of the above 
> *are* "OS environments". Learn basic English! :-P

  Maybe it means "Unix operating systems in general, but especially Linux
and Solaris, and from all Linux distros especially Red Hat". In other words,
if from all your Unix knowledge you have first-hand experience with Red Hat
in particular, that's a plus.

  Also, being experienced in Unix and Windows doesn't necessarily mean that
you have knowledge and experience about operating systems in general (most
people don't, even if they are fluent in *using* both Windows and Linux).

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> It's a laugh a minute in here...

> "A degree is essential, not advantageous but essential."

> ...? It's not an advantage, but it is essentially? Perhaps you mean that 
> it's not merely advantageous but actually essential? You're not 
> explaining yourself very well.

  Maybe the person who wrote the sentence got the two words mixed up and
really meant "a degree is advantageous, not essential but advantageous".

> "Ideally you will have 1 year as a team lead of managing projects."

> Team lead of managing projects? I get what you mean, but that's some 
> very strange grammar.

  Isn't "lead" often used a synonym for "leader"? But the sentence clearly
misses the word "experience" between "year" and "as".

> "The position is for someone who is interested in the progression to 
> full team leader capacity. Hands on and hands off."

> No idea what that last is supposed to mean. It's not even a complete 
> sentence!

  Those British figures of speech... Who could understand them?

> "We're ideally looking for someone who hasn't come from a small company 
> and are used to large infrastructure."

> "Someone" is singular, "are" is plural. Your grammatical numbers do not 
> agree.

  "Infrastructure" ought to be in plural as well.

> "Please apply asap to Tony Chapman. "

> I'm reasonably sure initialisms are supposed to be capitalised.

  I suppose that "asap" has practically become a word on its own right
in vernacular English.

> I could spend all day just cateloguing all the grammatical issues I've 
> found, but the overall impression is one of carelessness and 
> unprofessional people. If you place an ad worded as badly as these, what 
> does that say to people about your company?

  That they are trendy young people?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On 30-1-2010 15:16, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> Anyway, at the moment the worrying thing is that a basic search for my 
> chosen target area turns up only jobs a significant physical distance 
> away, and all with salaries of £30,000 or higher [so, presumably beyond 
> my experience level]. 

So you are looking or a job that pays more than your current one, but 
not too much more?

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Shouldn't *every* company have clear objectives and deliverables for 
> 2010?? 

Indeed! That's why they're saying you want to work there. They actually *do* 
have that.

> English really isn't your native language, is it?

You would be surprised how many people do HR because they're too incompetent 
for whatever reason to do anything else.

> And I'm not supposed to hold *you* to the same standards because...?

Because you're the one looking for a job. :-)

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
   I get "focus follows gaze"?

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> "The position is for someone who is interested in the progression to 
> full team leader capacity. Hands on and hands off."
> 
> No idea what that last is supposed to mean.

It means a team leader involved in doing the work (hands on) and a team 
leader who merely provides directions (hands off).

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
   I get "focus follows gaze"?

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   Maybe it means "Unix operating systems in general, but especially Linux
> and Solaris, and from all Linux distros especially Red Hat".

In my experience, no, it just means the person putting together the list 
doesn't know what they're talking about, literally. They have a pile of 
paper with a list of skills different people told them they were looking 
for, so they wrote them all down. I suspect if you asked the person who 
wrote the ad what kind of software each of those was, they'd say "I don't 
know", even tho the answer is listed on the same line.  Either that, or 
they're optimizing for search engines, just plugging in what everyone might 
search for.

I've been turned down for jobs because they were advertising for ISO and TCP 
networking and I wrote I know both the OSI and the IP stack.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
   I get "focus follows gaze"?

Post a reply to this message

Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
> Warp wrote:
> >   Maybe it means "Unix operating systems in general, but especially Linux
> > and Solaris, and from all Linux distros especially Red Hat".

> In my experience, no, it just means the person putting together the list 
> doesn't know what they're talking about, literally.

  Hey, I was just giving the author the benefit of the doubt. No need to
be a cynic in everything... :P

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:
>   Hey, I was just giving the author the benefit of the doubt. 

Fair enough. :-)

> No need to be a cynic in everything... :P

It's only cynicism when it's not true. ;-)

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
   I get "focus follows gaze"?

Post a reply to this message

>> Anyway, at the moment the worrying thing is that a basic search for my 
>> chosen target area turns up only jobs a significant physical distance 
>> away, and all with salaries of £30,000 or higher [so, presumably 
>> beyond my experience level]. 
> 
> So you are looking or a job that pays more than your current one, but 
> not too much more?

If a job pays £30,000, you're going to be in charge of an entire 
department or something, which is beyond my skills and experience.

But hey, some of the other jobs I saw today offered £50,000 or more. (I 
hadn't realised that there are real people out there who actually earn 
this much money. And yes, in retrospect that sounds kinda silly...)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Warp wrote:

>> "We're ideally looking for someone who hasn't come from a small company 
>> and are used to large infrastructure."
> 
>> "Someone" is singular, "are" is plural. Your grammatical numbers do not 
>> agree.
> 
>   "Infrastructure" ought to be in plural as well.

Well.. that one's more debatable. "I'm used to large infrastructure" is 
about as valid is "here are lots of sheep". (I.e., "sheep" doesn't have 
a plural.) But if you wrote infrastructure as plural, that would be 
correct also.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On 30-1-2010 23:08, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>> Anyway, at the moment the worrying thing is that a basic search for 
>>> my chosen target area turns up only jobs a significant physical 
>>> distance away, and all with salaries of £30,000 or higher [so, 
>>> presumably beyond my experience level]. 
>>
>> So you are looking or a job that pays more than your current one, but 
>> not too much more?
> 
> If a job pays £30,000, you're going to be in charge of an entire 
> department or something, which is beyond my skills and experience.

Once I did a quick computation on how much you would get if you would 
accept an offer to work in my group. I can not find that e-mail but IIRC 
it was in that ballpark. Offer is not valid yet, we still haven't got 
the project.

The point is that £30,000 does not surprise me for that sort of work.

If you are paid significantly less now, you are underpaid. But we have 
been through that already.

Post a reply to this message

>> If a job pays £30,000, you're going to be in charge of an entire 
>> department or something, which is beyond my skills and experience.
> 
> Once I did a quick computation on how much you would get if you would 
> accept an offer to work in my group. I can not find that e-mail but IIRC 
> it was in that ballpark. Offer is not valid yet, we still haven't got 
> the project.
> 
> The point is that £30,000 does not surprise me for that sort of work.
> 
> If you are paid significantly less now, you are underpaid. But we have 
> been through that already.

I currently get £14,000 a year. Which isn't a lot of money. OTOH, I've 
never [knowingly] met anybody who earns anywhere near £30,000 a year. 
Hypothetically such people probably exist, but I don't think I've ever 
met one.

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
 > I currently get £14,000 a year. Which isn't a lot of money.

Dude, that's not even minimum wage here.

> never [knowingly] met anybody who earns anywhere near £30,000 a ye
ar. 

You definitely need to move. That's not even college graduate money here.


-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
   I get "focus follows gaze"?

Post a reply to this message

On 31-1-2010 18:38, Darren New wrote:
> Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>  > I currently get £14,000 a year. Which isn't a lot of money.
> 
> Dude, that's not even minimum wage here.

Minimum wage here is £14,373.74 (€=alt-0128 £=alt-156 and ü=alt-129 but 
that was not the question) if I computed it right

>> never [knowingly] met anybody who earns anywhere near £30,000 a year. 
> 
> You definitely need to move. That's not even college graduate money here.

Seconded. Feeling like talking to a wall.

Post a reply to this message

>>> I currently get £14,000 a year. Which isn't a lot of money.
>>
>> Dude, that's not even minimum wage here.
> 
> Minimum wage here is £14,373.74 (€=alt-0128 £=alt-156 and ü=alt-129 but 
> that was not the question) if I computed it right

Doesn't it vary depending on how many hours you work?

(Note that my wages are not *precisely* £14,000, that's just the nearest 
round figure. I don't know the precise figure off the top of my head.)

>>> never [knowingly] met anybody who earns anywhere near £30,000 a year. 
>>
>> You definitely need to move. That's not even college graduate money here.
> 
> Seconded. Feeling like talking to a wall.

Well, everybody else in this city seems to not have a problem finding a 
job, so...

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

On 31-1-2010 19:06, Orchid XP v8 wrote:
>>>> I currently get £14,000 a year. Which isn't a lot of money.
>>>
>>> Dude, that's not even minimum wage here.
>>
>> Minimum wage here is £14,373.74 (€=alt-0128 £=alt-156 and ü=alt-129 
>> but that was not the question) if I computed it right
> 
> Doesn't it vary depending on how many hours you work?

sure, that is full time. 38 or 40 hours per week.
Are you working full-time?

> (Note that my wages are not *precisely* £14,000, that's just the nearest 
> round figure. I don't know the precise figure off the top of my head.)
> 
>>>> never [knowingly] met anybody who earns anywhere near £30,000 a year. 
>>>
>>> You definitely need to move. That's not even college graduate money 
>>> here.
>>
>> Seconded. Feeling like talking to a wall.
> 
> Well, everybody else in this city seems to not have a problem finding a 
> job, so...
> 
Sorry, what *city*?

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:
> Doesn't it vary depending on how many hours you work?

I calculated based on 2000 hours, i.e., 8 hours x 5 days x 50 weeks.

> Well, everybody else in this city seems to not have a problem finding a 
> job, so...

No, those that couldn't find a job *left*. :-)

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
   I get "focus follows gaze"?

Post a reply to this message

>> Doesn't it vary depending on how many hours you work?
> 
> sure, that is full time. 38 or 40 hours per week.
> Are you working full-time?

I am. I was just clarifying the point that there's a dependence there.

>> Well, everybody else in this city seems to not have a problem finding 
>> a job, so...
>>
> Sorry, what *city*?

...?

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message

> If a job pays £30,000, you're going to be in charge of an entire 
> department or something,

Err, no.  FWIW the starting salary for graduates at our place wasn't much 
below that several years ago.  For someone with a degree and 5 years 
relevant experience I'd say 30k was easily achievable and you wouldn't be 
expected to be in charge of anyone.

> But hey, some of the other jobs I saw today offered £50,000 or more. (I 
> hadn't realised that there are real people out there who actually earn 
> this much money.

I don't think I've ever had a boss that earned less than 50K.  I think you 
have a totally skewed view of salaries because you are paid so little in 
your current job.

Post a reply to this message

> I currently get £14,000 a year.

I guess you put an extreme amount of value on familiarity.

Post a reply to this message

Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> Plan B: Try the local paper...

Well, that worked a little better. Of the 27 jobs returned from my 
search, 7 of them were actually what I asked for (rather than some 
superficially similar-sounding job), and I was able to apply to 2 of them.

OTOH, it's the local paper. They get two or three computer jobs *per 
month*. o_O And that's for web design, data entry, technical support and 
every other computer-related category put together, not just the one 
specific area I'm looking at.

Oh dears.

Post a reply to this message

>>   Maybe it means "Unix operating systems in general, but especially Linux
>> and Solaris, and from all Linux distros especially Red Hat".
> 
> In my experience, no, it just means the person putting together the list 
> doesn't know what they're talking about, literally. They have a pile of 
> paper with a list of skills different people told them they were looking 
> for, so they wrote them all down.

This seems to be my experience too.

I briefly mentioned on one CV that one of the programs I wrote deleted 
various temp files, including the "web cache". And I got some recruiter 
calling me up claiming that I was ideal for a role because I "know 
cashae", which apparently is some niche programming language used in the 
healthcare system. Way to completely fail to comprehend what I wrote, man!

> Either 
> that, or they're optimizing for search engines, just plugging in what 
> everyone might search for.

That too. Lots and lots of these things start with a long list of search 
terms before the [vaguely] human-readable part starts.

Reading these adverts, one gets the impression of some underpaid nobody 
hurridly scribbling down text all day without the slightest clue what 
they're talking about, and without bothering with such niceties as 
spelling and grammar.

Post a reply to this message

>> If a job pays £30,000, you're going to be in charge of an entire 
>> department or something,
> 
> Err, no.  FWIW the starting salary for graduates at our place wasn't 
> much below that several years ago.

*Starting* salary?

Most of the "graduate jobs" I can find say something like £18,000 or 
maybe even £20,000 if you have a 1st degree [which I don't].

> For someone with a degree and 5 years relevant experience

[7 years]

> I'd say 30k was easily achievable and you 
> wouldn't be expected to be in charge of anyone.

Really? I find that quite surprising.

Hell, my sister is an accountant and she doesn't earn nearly that much. 
And my dad has over 30 years experience as a parmacutical analyst 
[that's highly skilled, specialist work that's difficult to hire for] 
and he earns less than that.

>> But hey, some of the other jobs I saw today offered £50,000 or more. 
>> (I hadn't realised that there are real people out there who actually 
>> earn this much money.
> 
> I don't think I've ever had a boss that earned less than 50K.  I think 
> you have a totally skewed view of salaries because you are paid so 
> little in your current job.

Hmm, thinking about it... I vaguely "know" our CEO. He must surely be on 
a bit more than 50K. I "know" our Director of IT [who no longer works 
here as of Friday], and he probably earns a tad more than 50K too.

I guess most managers just don't make a habit of telling everybody how 
much more money they earn than you do...

Post a reply to this message

> *Starting* salary?

Yes!  I just did a search on monster for "graduate software" and nearly 
every result had a salary range somewhere between 20 and 30K as a *starting* 
salary.  The same is true of "graduate engineer".  Heck, two of my best 
friends from University (both did computer science) got a job with this 
company writing software for internet routers and their starting salary was 
30K.  My starting salary was closer to 20K than 30K, but that was 7 years 
ago, I know now they are offering new graduates closer to 30K.

> Most of the "graduate jobs" I can find say something like £18,000 or maybe 
> even £20,000 if you have a 1st degree [which I don't].

According to prospects.ac.uk the average graduate starting salary ranges 
from 20 to 25k depending on who you ask.  I would imagine that having a 
computer science degree would put you above the average.

>> For someone with a degree and 5 years relevant experience
>
> [7 years]
>
>> I'd say 30k was easily achievable and you wouldn't be expected to be in 
>> charge of anyone.
>
> Really? I find that quite surprising.

How come? Even if you started on 20K, a 50% pay increase over 7 years is not 
surprising.

> Hell, my sister is an accountant and she doesn't earn nearly that much.

If she is working for a reputable accountancy firm, has done the 
qualifications and has more than 7 years experience (IIRC she is older than 
you?) then that seems pretty poor pay to me.

> Hmm, thinking about it... I vaguely "know" our CEO. He must surely be on a 
> bit more than 50K.

Probably a big "bit" more.

> I "know" our Director of IT [who no longer works here as of Friday], and 
> he probably earns a tad more than 50K too.

You'd think so.

> I guess most managers just don't make a habit of telling everybody how 
> much more money they earn than you do...

You can easily estimate it though, by looking at similar jobs at other 
companies, how your internal pay structure works etc.  For example I know 
that my manager must be earning more than a "lead engineer", which must be 
earning more than I do.  I know roughly what % increase you get for 
promotion, so my manager must be on about 60-70K.  I can also then guess 
that the director of my department is on about 80-90K, and the MD probably 
110-130K.  This ties in well with job adverts I've seen for similar 
positions in other companies, and from talking with other people.

Post a reply to this message

>> *Starting* salary?
> 
> Yes!  I just did a search on monster for "graduate software" and nearly 
> every result had a salary range somewhere between 20 and 30K as a 
> *starting* salary.  The same is true of "graduate engineer".  Heck, two 
> of my best friends from University (both did computer science) got a job 
> with this company writing software for internet routers and their 
> starting salary was 30K.  My starting salary was closer to 20K than 30K, 
> but that was 7 years ago, I know now they are offering new graduates 
> closer to 30K.

Writing software for Internet routers sounds like pretty specialist 
stuff. (It's basically writing security-critical software for an 
embedded platform.) I'd be surprised if somebody with no qualifications 
other than a degree could actually get a job like that. Especially if it 
was just an average degree, not a spectacular one.

> According to prospects.ac.uk the average graduate starting salary ranges 
> from 20 to 25k depending on who you ask.  I would imagine that having a 
> computer science degree would put you above the average.

Hmm. This is completely at variance with my experience, so something's 
wrong somewhere. Not sure where exactly...

>>> I'd say 30k was easily achievable and you wouldn't be expected to be 
>>> in charge of anyone.
>>
>> Really? I find that quite surprising.
> 
> How come? Even if you started on 20K, a 50% pay increase over 7 years is 
> not surprising.

Er... OK, I may have got my maths wrong here, but if we assume that you 
get pay increases as large as 0.5% every single year, that still works 
out to only about 3.55% over 7 years. Which is nowhere even close to 50%.

>> Hell, my sister is an accountant and she doesn't earn nearly that much.
> 
> If she is working for a reputable accountancy firm, has done the 
> qualifications and has more than 7 years experience (IIRC she is older 
> than you?) then that seems pretty poor pay to me.

She's younger. She hasn't been in accounting for 7 years, and doesn't 
have her qualification *yet*. (She gets her final exam results this 
month IIRC.)

>> Hmm, thinking about it... I vaguely "know" our CEO. He must surely be 
>> on a bit more than 50K.
> 
> Probably a big "bit" more.

Yes, that was a typically British understatement. I realise that might 
not come across in NNTP. ;-)

>> I guess most managers just don't make a habit of telling everybody how 
>> much more money they earn than you do...
> 
> You can easily estimate it though, by looking at similar jobs at other 
> companies, how your internal pay structure works etc.  For example I 
> know that my manager must be earning more than a "lead engineer", which 
> must be earning more than I do.  I know roughly what % increase you get 
> for promotion, so my manager must be on about 60-70K.  I can also then 
> guess that the director of my department is on about 80-90K, and the MD 
> probably 110-130K.  This ties in well with job adverts I've seen for 
> similar positions in other companies, and from talking with other people.

Damn, you really have your finger on the pulse, don't you? :-)

I guess as you say, the problem is that I only know people with quite 
low incomes. It seems incongruous to me that somebody without a PhD in 
astrophysics [or simply an enterprising genius] could actually earn 
decent money.

Post a reply to this message

> "Key skills and experiences required for this role are:
> 
> Unix, Windows, Linux, Red Hat, Solaris, OS environments. [...]"
> 
> Newsflash: Linux *is* Unix. Red Hat *is* Linux. And ALL of the above 
> *are* "OS environments". Learn basic English! :-P

They might have meant OS/2 variants. According to wikipedia
OS/2 is in use in various cash machines and ticket machines.

Post a reply to this message

Tim Attwood wrote:

>> Unix, Windows, Linux, Red Hat, Solaris, OS environments. [...]"
> 
> They might have meant OS/2 variants.

OK. But they didn't *say* that, did they? Which would still qualify this 
as badly written. ;-)

Post a reply to this message

> Writing software for Internet routers sounds like pretty specialist stuff. 
> (It's basically writing security-critical software for an embedded 
> platform.) I'd be surprised if somebody with no qualifications other than 
> a degree could actually get a job like that.

They were only taking graduates, so obviously they were going to give 
training, they weren't expecting you to walk in on Monday and start 
programming routers.  The same way as my employer wasn't expecting me to 
walk in on my first day and design an LCD.  Hint, if it has "graduate" in 
the job title it probably means they aren't assuming anything more than a 
typical university course.

>> How come? Even if you started on 20K, a 50% pay increase over 7 years is 
>> not surprising.
>
> Er... OK, I may have got my maths wrong here, but if we assume that you 
> get pay increases as large as 0.5% every single year,

I assumed you'd get about about a 4% raise per year and maybe a single 
10-20% raise for a promotion during those 7 years.

If you're only getting 0.5% per year (last year or two can be excepted for 
obvious reasons) then that is really bad, inflation is usually 2-3% so 
you're actually getting a pay *cut* each year.  Never heard of that unless 
your company is in big trouble or doesn't want you any more.

> She's younger. She hasn't been in accounting for 7 years, and doesn't have 
> her qualification *yet*. (She gets her final exam results this month 
> IIRC.)

By the time she's passed her qualifications and got 7 years experience I 
would expect her to be over 30K.  Then you'll know someone :-)

> I guess as you say, the problem is that I only know people with quite low 
> incomes. It seems incongruous to me that somebody without a PhD in 
> astrophysics [or simply an enterprising genius] could actually earn decent 
> money.

I don't think you need to have a PhD in anything to earn decent money, or be 
amazingly clever.

Post a reply to this message

>> Writing software for Internet routers sounds like pretty specialist 
>> stuff. (It's basically writing security-critical software for an 
>> embedded platform.) I'd be surprised if somebody with no 
>> qualifications other than a degree could actually get a job like that.
> 
> They were only taking graduates, so obviously they were going to give 
> training, they weren't expecting you to walk in on Monday and start 
> programming routers.  The same way as my employer wasn't expecting me to 
> walk in on my first day and design an LCD.  Hint, if it has "graduate" 
> in the job title it probably means they aren't assuming anything more 
> than a typical university course.

Hmm, I hadn't tried doing any searches for graduate positions recently. 
Maybe I should try that, if only for completeness. Dr Pepper.

I'd bet even a graduate position would require a strong understanding of 
C though (and probably lab experience of writing firmware and flashing 
it onto microcontroller boards or similar). And at any rate, I don't 
suppose there are too many people hiring for this sort of thing. (In 
other words, they can pick the best of the best of the best, and if that 
isn't you, you needn't even apply.)

>>> How come? Even if you started on 20K, a 50% pay increase over 7 years 
>>> is not surprising.
>>
>> Er... OK, I may have got my maths wrong here, but if we assume that 
>> you get pay increases as large as 0.5% every single year,
> 
> I assumed you'd get about about a 4% raise per year and maybe a single 
> 10-20% raise for a promotion during those 7 years.

20% seems like a really rather large riase. (Unless you, like, 
single-handedly revolutionised an entire department or something.) Then 
again, having never received or met anybody who received a promotion, I 
guess I wouldn't know.

> If you're only getting 0.5% per year (last year or two can be excepted 
> for obvious reasons) then that is really bad, inflation is usually 2-3% 
> so you're actually getting a pay *cut* each year.  Never heard of that 
> unless your company is in big trouble or doesn't want you any more.

I don't think there's ever been a raise here of an entire percent. Most 
years there's no raise at all, but sometimes we get 0.25% or something. 
And when we do, everybody complains [which always seemed odd to me]. 
They say what you said "this is a pay cut". Personally, I would have 
thought *not* getting a raise would be worse... but what do I know?

Currently my employer loses around four million USD per year. You may 
remember there was recently some talk of the company globally handing 
out a 4% pay cut "temporarily". There used to be a time when the UK 
division was the only profitable site, but AFAIK now all sites are 
running at a loss of some size or other.

But hey, we've hardly had a single order on our books (i.e., the UK) for 
about a year and a half now. It costs money to pay people to stand 
around doing nothing. Seems like there's more activity happening in the 
lab recently though. I don't know if this is a trend or a fluctuation.

My plan, of course, is to not stick around to find out. ;-)

>> She's younger. She hasn't been in accounting for 7 years, and doesn't 
>> have her qualification *yet*. (She gets her final exam results this 
>> month IIRC.)
> 
> By the time she's passed her qualifications and got 7 years experience I 
> would expect her to be over 30K.  Then you'll know someone :-)

Heh, well, I guess we'll see.

Of course, she lives in Guildford, where the cost of living is 
apparently very much higher, so she'll probably still be fairly "poor".

>> I guess as you say, the problem is that I only know people with quite 
>> low incomes. It seems incongruous to me that somebody without a PhD in 
>> astrophysics [or simply an enterprising genius] could actually earn 
>> decent money.
> 
> I don't think you need to have a PhD in anything to earn decent money, 
> or be amazingly clever.

Right. Well then I guess it's just that everybody I've met happens to be 
fairly poor then.

Post a reply to this message

Plan C:

http://www.google.co.uk/intl/en/jobs/uk/
http://www.nokia.com/A41199604
http://www-05.ibm.com/employment/uk/
http://h10055.www1.hp.com/jobsathp/content/home/home.asp?area=GB&Lang=ENen
...

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:

> Most of the "graduate jobs" I can find say something like £18,000 or
> maybe even £20,000 if you have a 1st degree [which I don't].
> 

A 1st degree is a Bachelor's whatever the class of it (2.1, 2.2, Richard
etc) which is not the same as a First (ie a First Class degree)
You have a 1st degree and should therefore be earning in the 20K+ range.

John
-- 
Cogito sum,|| wbu### [at] tznvypbz (rot'ed) || GPG Key Fingerprint:
ergo sum,  ||   These opinions are mine alone,   || 0D9BCF4CF1B71CA2F5F7
cogito     ||     others can find their own      || BFBBCBC34EDEAEFCE453

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:16:42 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> Linux *is* Unix

No, it isn't.  Linux is at best a derivative of Minix.  It's UNIX-like, 
perhaps, but it's not Unix.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:16:42 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> and all with salaries of £30,000 or higher [so, presumably beyond my
> experience level].

Don't let that be an inhibitor.  Let the prospective employer decide if 
you have the right amount of experience.  Don't pre-filter - apply for 
jobs you're interested in and let them decide if you're qualified.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> Linux *is* Unix
> 
> No, it isn't.  Linux is at best a derivative of Minix.  It's UNIX-like, 
> perhaps, but it's not Unix.

Care to explain that one?

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:24:45 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> I mean, seriously, this entire blurb is only a few lines long, and
> you've still managed to get it wrong. And you expect me to put together
> a 2-page CV which is immaculate and free of all error?
> 
> And I'm not supposed to hold *you* to the same standards because...?

Because you're the one looking for the job.  The quality of some 
recruiter's writing skills isn't necessarily representative of the entire 
company, but the quality of your writing skills is representative of 
you. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:53:46 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> somebody wrote:
> 
>> You are wasting time looking at these IT jobs. Your true calling is as
>> a PCCC (Professional Critic and Chronic Complainer).
> 
> Heh. If it were somehow possible to get paid money for complaining about
> things, my mother would be a millionaire by now! ;-)

Technical editor, proofreader, or writing editor. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> And I'm not supposed to hold *you* to the same standards because...?
> 
> Because you're the one looking for the job.

Seems there's an echo in here...

(But does it comply with RFC 862?)

> The quality of some 
> recruiter's writing skills isn't necessarily representative of the entire 
> company, but the quality of your writing skills is representative of 
> you. :-)

Ha! Well, we'll see... ;-)

Post a reply to this message

>> Heh. If it were somehow possible to get paid money for complaining about
>> things, my mother would be a millionaire by now! ;-)
> 
> Technical editor, proofreader, or writing editor. :-)

FILM CRITIC! :-D

Post a reply to this message

Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> >> Linux *is* Unix
> > 
> > No, it isn't.  Linux is at best a derivative of Minix.  It's UNIX-like, 
> > perhaps, but it's not Unix.

> Care to explain that one?

  By that definition there is no Unix OS in existence today.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

On Sat, 30 Jan 2010 22:08:06 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

> If a job pays £30,000, you're going to be in charge of an entire
> department or something, which is beyond my skills and experience.

Not necessarily - that's about $48,000 here in the US; I made more than 
that at my last IT job and I had no direct reports and the project I 
worked on had a project manager who wasn't me.  I was paid for my 
technical skills only.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

>> and all with salaries of £30,000 or higher [so, presumably beyond my
>> experience level].
> 
> Don't let that be an inhibitor.  Let the prospective employer decide if 
> you have the right amount of experience.  Don't pre-filter - apply for 
> jobs you're interested in and let them decide if you're qualified.

Well, maybe.

Here's the thing I don't get: On one of these sites, when you fill out a 
search form, you're required to specify the minimum AND MAXIMUM salary 
you will accept.

Why the **** would you have a *maximum* salary? WTF?

Post a reply to this message

On Mon, 01 Feb 2010 10:07:32 +0000, Invisible wrote:

> I guess most managers just don't make a habit of telling everybody how
> much more money they earn than you do...

At least here in the US, salary information is considered confidential 
and isn't supposed to be discussed with anyone other than your boss, HR, 
and payroll.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

On Sun, 31 Jan 2010 20:33:01 +0000, Orchid XP v8 wrote:

>>> Doesn't it vary depending on how many hours you work?
>> 
>> sure, that is full time. 38 or 40 hours per week. Are you working
>> full-time?
> 
> I am. I was just clarifying the point that there's a dependence there.
> 
>>> Well, everybody else in this city seems to not have a problem finding
>>> a job, so...
>>>
>> Sorry, what *city*?
> 
> ...?

He's asking what city you're in.

Jim

Post a reply to this message

Invisible wrote:
> Most of the "graduate jobs" I can find say something like £18,000 
or 
> maybe even £20,000 if you have a 1st degree [which I don't].

You're looking in the wrong place. I made something like $35k *after* tax
es 
upon graduating from college, at a company no better off than yours. In 
1985. And this wasn't in a big bustling city either.

> I guess most managers just don't make a habit of telling everybody how 

> much more money they earn than you do...

Very true.

There are web sites that will give you average salaries for different job
s, 
you know.

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   Forget "focus follows mouse." When do
   I get "focus follows gaze"?

Post a reply to this message