How to slam down on nepotism?

[Ethel mermania]

The law only requires competence tests for certain professions. Let's say I have a hair dressing shop in NY. NYS law requires that anyone cutting hair be licensed and to get that license you have to pass a competency test. If my cousins kid passes the test, she is competent according to state law. So even if I dont hire the best possible hairdresser, I am hiring someone the state certified as competent.

Do you really want state licensing tests for all jobs?

And how do you think your customers would feel, if you told them outright that you were only doing the bare minimum?

Why would I tell them that?
. If I owned Vidal Sassoon's shop that might matter if I owned a supercuts franchise it wouldn't matter at all

And you sidestepped the question I asked you.

Do you want competency tests for all jobs? Burger flippers, retail clerks, stockroom personnel?

[Aclion]

The best way to slam down on nepotism is to have a robust legal institution which can fairly enforce property rights, right to contract and liability. Nepotism usually crops up in place where these institutions are lacking, and people resort to leveraging other social institutions to replace them, like family, religious groups or tribes.

Usually, it is the government that fairly enforces this. Of course, if your government is a family business, like a monarchy, or the Trump administration, things might get tricky.

Yep, Monarchism are basically Nepotism personified, and it's no coincidence that in the days of kings people had to rely on other institutions to get justice that wasn't tilted by the politics of the nobility.

No-fun fact: the origins of modern antisemitism come from this. In much of medieval Europe the jews were among the few people who could lend money in large enough networks to fund large enterprises and still expect those agreements to be honored. As a result many nobles would take large loans from them, and then organized pograms against the whole jewish community, to avoid paying their debts.

[Aclion]

The best way to slam down on nepotism is to have a robust legal institution which can fairly enforce property rights, right to contract and liability. Nepotism usually crops up in place where these institutions are lacking, and people resort to leveraging other social institutions to replace them, like family, religious groups or tribes.

Usually, it is the government that fairly enforces this. Of course, if your government is a family business, like a monarchy, or the Trump administration, things might get tricky.

Yep, Monarchism are basically Nepotism personified, and it's no coincidence that in the days of kings people had to rely on other institutions to get justice that wasn't tilted by the politics of the nobility.

No-fun fact: the origins of modern antisemitism come from this. In much of medieval Europe the jews were among the few people who could lend money in large enough networks to fund large enterprises and still expect those agreements to be honored. As a result many nobles would take large loans from them, and then organized pograms against the whole jewish community, to avoid paying their debts.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

And how do you think your customers would feel, if you told them outright that you were only doing the bare minimum?

Why would I tell them that?
. If I owned Vidal Sassoon's shop that might matter if I owned a supercuts franchise it wouldn't matter at all

And you sidestepped the question I asked you.

Do you want competency tests for all jobs? Burger flippers, retail clerks, stockroom personnel?

Yes. I thought it was obvious enough how I felt from the question I chose to ask in response.

Customers are paying for the quality of service.

If they're getting what they paid for, that means the education system their tax dollars already paid for is partly responsible for the quality, and that the amount the employer invested in training them "on the job" (which again, incentivizes them to make would-be quitters underestimate their value) made up the rest.

If they're not, they're getting screwed over.

No more half-measures. Compare a company's hiring decisions with an outside observer's assessment of skill.

[Asle Leopolka]

Why would I tell them that?
. If I owned Vidal Sassoon's shop that might matter if I owned a supercuts franchise it wouldn't matter at all

And you sidestepped the question I asked you.

Do you want competency tests for all jobs? Burger flippers, retail clerks, stockroom personnel?

Yes. I thought it was obvious enough how I felt from the question I chose to ask in response.

Sooooo a job interview, then? Those already exist.
An applied skills test? Those already exist as well. I had to take one with my current job and I make my candidates take one as well. Obviously this varies by job function and industry, but requiring ALL jobs to take skills tests is insane. Hiring is already long and expensive enough as it is. If I'm a grocery store hiring cashiers I'm not going to time a candidate or ask them what the optimal scanning motion is. And if I did I'd never have a full staff and start automating the checkout process, which reduces the number of available jobs and causes a much worse problem.

Customers are paying for the quality of service.

If they're getting what they paid for, that means the education system their tax dollars already paid for is partly responsible for the quality, and that the amount the employer invested in training them "on the job" (which again, incentivizes them to make would-be quitters underestimate their value) made up the rest.

If they're not, they're getting screwed over.

No more half-measures. Compare a company's hiring decisions with an outside observer's assessment of skill.

What the hell does that even mean? Being educated does not mean being competent. I've hired and fired Ivy grads and people with experience in other big name companies who cannot get the job done or cut so many corners that it delays delivery and reduces our revenue.

Why would we WANT to have our hiring measures standardized or utilize an "outside observer's assessment of skill?" We pride ourselves on blowing the competition out of the water in our selective industries and have the patents and accolades to back it up. Whatever we're doing is working and we'll be damned if we let someone outside the organization know what we look for only to have them use our strategies when assessing our competitors' candidates.

And please, for the love of god, why would on the job training "incentivize [employees] to underestimate their value?" If you're approaching that like it's a bad thing or that on the job training somehow makes people have a reduced image of themselves then you obviously have never hired, trained, or been a part of real training, and you are factually wrong (Source 1, Source 2). We get training all the goddamn time to keep up with emerging technologies, protocols, and novel ways of problem solving. Plus, on the job training is considerably cheaper than hiring a new staff. We'd be extremely stressed out and overwhelmed without it.

I must seriously wonder if you've ever worked a real job outside of some low-wage part time gig. Because you sound like you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about and if you interviewed me I'd withdraw my application and lose trust in whatever company you work for.

[South Ccanda]

So basically, we can refuse service to anyone we please, but we can't refuse or offer the hire to anyone we please. makes sense.

/s

P.s. Op, where are you getting all these topics? A holy cow? Holy cow.

[Ethel mermania]

Why would I tell them that?
. If I owned Vidal Sassoon's shop that might matter if I owned a supercuts franchise it wouldn't matter at all

And you sidestepped the question I asked you.

Do you want competency tests for all jobs? Burger flippers, retail clerks, stockroom personnel?

Yes. I thought it was obvious enough how I felt from the question I chose to ask in response.

Customers are paying for the quality of service.

If they're getting what they paid for, that means the education system their tax dollars already paid for is partly responsible for the quality, and that the amount the employer invested in training them "on the job" (which again, incentivizes them to make would-be quitters underestimate their value) made up the rest.

If they're not, they're getting screwed over.

No more half-measures. Compare a company's hiring decisions with an outside observer's assessment of skill.

The state has better things to do than assess the ability of a 16 year old to pump gas.

[The Blaatschapen]

Yes. I thought it was obvious enough how I felt from the question I chose to ask in response.

Customers are paying for the quality of service.

If they're getting what they paid for, that means the education system their tax dollars already paid for is partly responsible for the quality, and that the amount the employer invested in training them "on the job" (which again, incentivizes them to make would-be quitters underestimate their value) made up the rest.

If they're not, they're getting screwed over.

No more half-measures. Compare a company's hiring decisions with an outside observer's assessment of skill.

The state has better things to do than assess the ability of a 16 year old to pump gas.

It doesn't have to be the state.
CISCO has training on their products and then certifies the people who pass their test. TOEFL does it for the English language, etc.

[Page]

Yes. I thought it was obvious enough how I felt from the question I chose to ask in response.

Customers are paying for the quality of service.

If they're getting what they paid for, that means the education system their tax dollars already paid for is partly responsible for the quality, and that the amount the employer invested in training them "on the job" (which again, incentivizes them to make would-be quitters underestimate their value) made up the rest.

If they're not, they're getting screwed over.

No more half-measures. Compare a company's hiring decisions with an outside observer's assessment of skill.

The state has better things to do than assess the ability of a 16 year old to pump gas.

Sounds like someone lives in New Jersey or Oregon, as there isn't anywhere else where 16 year olds (or anyone of any age) pump gas as a job.

[Saiwania]

It doesn't have to be the state.
CISCO has training on their products and then certifies the people who pass their test. TOEFL does it for the English language, etc.

Having a certification however, doesn't necessarily translate to a job offer, worse is the fact that it has to be almost constantly renewed. Cisco is of course, not going to be in a position to hire someone just for having one or more of their certifications. Even if someone can do the work they want done, they'll probably be turned away if they don't get past the biases of their HR in terms of "fit" and don't have the right work history they'd be impressed by.

Certifications aren't all that, in that its often a lose lose situation. Its not worth paying lots of money for that test if you lose your money either way if you fail to secure a job with it assuming you pass it. There is no point in going for it if you can't benefit from it in the short term. Internships/apprenticeships or "learn as you earn" schemes are way more valuable.

[Ethel mermania]

The state has better things to do than assess the ability of a 16 year old to pump gas.

It doesn't have to be the state.
CISCO has training on their products and then certifies the people who pass their test. TOEFL does it for the English language, etc.

A Cisco cert is only for Cisco products it does not certify you with juniper routers. It also is not a regulated job requirement for router jobs with cisco or without. A job can or can not ask for cisco certification.

[Ethel mermania]

The state has better things to do than assess the ability of a 16 year old to pump gas.

Sounds like someone lives in New Jersey or Oregon, as there isn't anywhere else where 16 year olds (or anyone of any age) pump gas as a job.

Lived or driven through, yes.

[Page]

Sounds like someone lives in New Jersey or Oregon, as there isn't anywhere else where 16 year olds (or anyone of any age) pump gas as a job.

Lived or driven through, yes.

Every time I've been in New Jersey I forgot about it and then I was very shaken by the realization. My parents let me get out of the car and pump gas when I was 9, it's strange to think that adults in Jersey think they wouldn't be able to handle it.

[Ethel mermania]

Lived or driven through, yes.

Every time I've been in New Jersey I forgot about it and then I was very shaken by the realization. My parents let me get out of the car and pump gas when I was 9, it's strange to think that adults in Jersey think they wouldn't be able to handle it.

Its job protection, yes. I also like it as that means there is someone around to help people who dont know better or cant because of disability, check their tire pressure or oil.

[The Blaatschapen]

It doesn't have to be the state.
CISCO has training on their products and then certifies the people who pass their test. TOEFL does it for the English language, etc.

Having a certification however, doesn't necessarily translate to a job offer, worse is the fact that it has to be almost constantly renewed. Cisco is of course, not going to be in a position to hire someone just for having one or more of their certifications. Even if someone can do the work they want done, they'll probably be turned away if they don't get past the biases of their HR in terms of "fit" and don't have the right work history they'd be impressed by.

Certifications aren't all that, in that its often a lose lose situation. Its not worth paying lots of money for that test if you lose your money either way if you fail to secure a job with it assuming you pass it. There is no point in going for it if you can't benefit from it in the short term. Internships/apprenticeships or "learn as you earn" schemes are way more valuable.

Not the argument I was making, that you're counterarguing against. Merely, that qualifications exist that are not done by the state.

[Katganistan]

Why shouldn't my uncle employ my cousin at his business?

[The Black Forrest]

Why shouldn't my uncle employ my cousin at his business?

The claims of nepotism usually don't come up with family owned businesses.

[Ethel mermania]

Having a certification however, doesn't necessarily translate to a job offer, worse is the fact that it has to be almost constantly renewed. Cisco is of course, not going to be in a position to hire someone just for having one or more of their certifications. Even if someone can do the work they want done, they'll probably be turned away if they don't get past the biases of their HR in terms of "fit" and don't have the right work history they'd be impressed by.

Certifications aren't all that, in that its often a lose lose situation. Its not worth paying lots of money for that test if you lose your money either way if you fail to secure a job with it assuming you pass it. There is no point in going for it if you can't benefit from it in the short term. Internships/apprenticeships or "learn as you earn" schemes are way more valuable.

Not the argument I was making, that you're counterarguing against. Merely, that qualifications exist that are not done by the state.

Ah, your arguement is more subtle than i am taking it. And in fact if i were to be fair. I would mention There are even private ones that are legally required to have the job (Very few in the total amount of jobs out there, but i know the securities industry has a few)..

But i am not going to be fair and mention it

[Ethel mermania]

Why shouldn't my uncle employ my cousin at his business?

The claims of nepotism usually don't come up with family owned businesses.

The OP has not made that distinction. My concession that nepotism does not belong in the public sector has been ignored

[The Black Forrest]

The claims of nepotism usually don't come up with family owned businesses.

The OP has not made that distinction. My concession that nepotism does not belong in the public sector has been ignored

That's true. The op is missing the distinction. Nepotism really doesn't belong in the public sector. Even my last company; the qualified people were far less then the people you was ask "why the hell is he here????"

[Ethel mermania]

The OP has not made that distinction. My concession that nepotism does not belong in the public sector has been ignored

That's true. The op is missing the distinction. Nepotism really doesn't belong in the public sector. Even my last company; the qualified people were far less then the people you was ask "why the hell is he here????"

In the case we had in our organization. Father - son. The thing is The kid wasn’t bad, he knew what he was trying to do. I worked with them on a small comms project. The problem was they didn’t disclose he was the kid when he interviewed For the job and that is considered lying on the job app. So they and two other folks who were in on it were walked out the door,

[Saiwania]

Not the argument I was making, that you're counterarguing against. Merely, that qualifications exist that are not done by the state.

At best, its a less effective way to improve your resume/skills and at worst, its a scam. Why do you think certain businesses charge $1,000+ for some test? It doesn't really cost that much to administer one test to one person, so its a load of BS. Private businesses are basically preying upon gullible or desperate people who're chasing the economic opportunities or tangible "skills improvement" it promises, but its a false one more often than not.

I have enough firsthand knowledge of certifications to know that I hate the concept from start to finish. It sucks. There are huge sunk costs involved because of the need to keep renewing. There are so many problems with that approach. You're wasting so much time learning and re-learning a subject matter as opposed to simply doing it.

[Katganistan]

The claims of nepotism usually don't come up with family owned businesses.

The OP has not made that distinction. My concession that nepotism does not belong in the public sector has been ignored

My parents, both retired teachers, worked for the city.
I work as a teacher for the city.

I contacted my hs English teacher, who contacted his old chairperson, who interviewed me and said he didn't have a job for me but suggested I interview with someone he'd once worked with. I then had to interview with the principal.

I had the license, I had the certification tests, I had the diploma and a high GPA, plus a giant binder with one year's worth of lesson plans.

Was there anything wrong with that?

[US-SSR]

It's not who you know. It's not what you know. It's what you know about who you know. Verb sap.

[Asle Leopolka]

The OP has not made that distinction. My concession that nepotism does not belong in the public sector has been ignored

My parents, both retired teachers, worked for the city.
I work as a teacher for the city.

I contacted my hs English teacher, who contacted his old chairperson, who interviewed me and said he didn't have a job for me but suggested I interview with someone he'd once worked with. I then had to interview with the principal.

I had the license, I had the certification tests, I had the diploma and a high GPA, plus a giant binder with one year's worth of lesson plans.

Was there anything wrong with that?

Absolutely not. At the end of the day, networking and knowing the right people gets jobs. If you think that's unfair then get off your ass and attend networking events.

It's not who you know. It's not what you know. It's what you know about who you know. Verb sap.

Yup. There are people who I would never interview or hire because of shit I'd seen them do in college/grad school.