by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Wed Jan 22, 2020 4:24 pm
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:1. The PRC is not a Communist State, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
2. The CCP is not a Communist Party, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
3. Xi Jinping and his cronies are not Communists, as they have shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
How do we know this? Because the first step toward Communism is Socialism, and none of the aforementioned are even remotely Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
by Tinhampton » Wed Jan 22, 2020 4:28 pm
by Asle Leopolka » Wed Jan 22, 2020 4:30 pm
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:We often hear that it's not what you know, but who you know, that gets you hired. How can we help resolve this? I have two ideas in mind.
A. Require all businesses to publish a formula of objectively measurable credentials; eg. your grades in relevant courses multiplied by this, plus your number of hours worked in similar jobs multiplied by that, etc... such that any hiring decision at odds with that formula will stick out like a sore thumb.
B. Prohibit employment in one's country of birth, or any other country in which you've previously been employed in a separate job. That way you can't use "who you know" from a previous job for employment in the same country as before.
I assume B is unenforceable, though I do hope future generations come up with a way to enforce it; that'll have the added benefit of making people travel and meet people from other countries, instead of clinging to their home countries like nationalists. What about A, though? Is A enforceable? I'm thinking it might be a good placeholder for now until/unless society were to go through with B.
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Wed Jan 22, 2020 4:30 pm
Tinhampton wrote:What point is there in banning somebody from Alaska from seeking employment in Maine because his sister's sister's next-door neighbour's dog's original owner's nephew's grandfather's brother's daughter's next-door neighbour might be working for one of the companies over there?
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:1. The PRC is not a Communist State, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
2. The CCP is not a Communist Party, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
3. Xi Jinping and his cronies are not Communists, as they have shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
How do we know this? Because the first step toward Communism is Socialism, and none of the aforementioned are even remotely Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Wed Jan 22, 2020 4:33 pm
Asle Leopolka wrote:You've obviously never hired (or fired) anybody. If we went off grades and hours worked then a lot of incredibly inefficient people would be hired.
Asle Leopolka wrote:Experience, proven results, and critical thinking are what matters most.
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:1. The PRC is not a Communist State, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
2. The CCP is not a Communist Party, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
3. Xi Jinping and his cronies are not Communists, as they have shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
How do we know this? Because the first step toward Communism is Socialism, and none of the aforementioned are even remotely Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
by Sarzonia » Wed Jan 22, 2020 4:34 pm
by The Blaatschapen » Wed Jan 22, 2020 4:43 pm
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:We often hear that it's not what you know, but who you know, that gets you hired. How can we help resolve this? I have two ideas in mind.
A. Require all businesses to publish a formula of objectively measurable credentials; eg. your grades in relevant courses multiplied by this, plus your number of hours worked in similar jobs multiplied by that, etc... such that any hiring decision at odds with that formula will stick out like a sore thumb.
B. Prohibit employment in one's country of birth, or any other country in which you've previously been employed in a separate job. That way you can't use "who you know" from a previous job for employment in the same country as before.
I assume B is unenforceable, though I do hope future generations come up with a way to enforce it; that'll have the added benefit of making people travel and meet people from other countries, instead of clinging to their home countries like nationalists. What about A, though? Is A enforceable? I'm thinking it might be a good placeholder for now until/unless society were to go through with B.
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Wed Jan 22, 2020 4:53 pm
Sarzonia wrote:There isn't anything you can do to completely remove all subjectivity from a hiring decision.
Yes, there are criteria you can set up that make it unlikely anyone without the required background can even get in the door for a first interview, but once someone gets past the (often electronic) gatekeeper and in front of a hiring manager, anything that isn't objectively quantifiable can be incredibly subjective.
Sure, there are certain qualities and traits any hiring manager wants to see from someone who interviews, but there are intangibles you can never write into a job description.
As far as stamping out nepotism is concerned, I've seen sections of hiring manuals that require the manager to outline specific justifications why the relative, friend, etc. really is the best hire for the job, and not just because his father is the owner's best friend and golfing buddy.
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:1. The PRC is not a Communist State, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
2. The CCP is not a Communist Party, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
3. Xi Jinping and his cronies are not Communists, as they have shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
How do we know this? Because the first step toward Communism is Socialism, and none of the aforementioned are even remotely Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
by Ethel mermania » Wed Jan 22, 2020 6:09 pm
by Asle Leopolka » Wed Jan 22, 2020 6:18 pm
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Asle Leopolka wrote:You've obviously never hired (or fired) anybody. If we went off grades and hours worked then a lot of incredibly inefficient people would be hired.
Take it up with the education system, then. They're paying billions of tax dollars for assessment of skill. It's not enough to accuse them of wasting it and then washing your hands of the problem.
Asle Leopolka wrote:Experience, proven results, and critical thinking are what matters most.
Then these things need to be assessed objectively. Which means, "not by a corporation with a financial interest in making them doubt their own worth so they can be underpaid with impunity."
by The Black Forrest » Wed Jan 22, 2020 6:18 pm
by Luziyca » Wed Jan 22, 2020 6:26 pm
by Farnhamia » Wed Jan 22, 2020 6:36 pm
Ifreann wrote:Abolish capitalism?
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:08 pm
Luziyca wrote:Get your family members to change their surnames before you hire them. That way, it won't be as obvious that you're committing nepotism.
Ethel mermania wrote:If I own the company, why not hire my cousins or their kids?
Asle Leopolka wrote:There is no objective measure for this.
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:1. The PRC is not a Communist State, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
2. The CCP is not a Communist Party, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
3. Xi Jinping and his cronies are not Communists, as they have shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
How do we know this? Because the first step toward Communism is Socialism, and none of the aforementioned are even remotely Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
by Ethel mermania » Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:12 pm
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Luziyca wrote:Get your family members to change their surnames before you hire them. That way, it won't be as obvious that you're committing nepotism.
And then a DNA test will get you on nepotism AND on tampering with the evidence thereof.Ethel mermania wrote:If I own the company, why not hire my cousins or their kids?
Because your customers deserve better?Asle Leopolka wrote:There is no objective measure for this.
So it's a "know it when you see it" thing? Sounds like a suspiciously convenient excuse for concealing one's real reasons for one's hiring decisions.
by Heloin » Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:13 pm
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Tinhampton wrote:What point is there in banning somebody from Alaska from seeking employment in Maine because his sister's sister's next-door neighbour's dog's original owner's nephew's grandfather's brother's daughter's next-door neighbour might be working for one of the companies over there?
People travel all over the USA for work all the time, but a near-majority of Americans don't own a passport, which is something you need for overseas work.
This suggests that a lot more Americans have, over the generations, made connections with people on the other side of the country than with people overseas.
by Luziyca » Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:14 pm
by Farnhamia » Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:17 pm
by Aclion » Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:18 pm
by LimaUniformNovemberAlpha » Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:33 pm
Ethel mermania wrote:My customers get the service they pay for, just because my cousins kids may not be the best for their job, they would at least have to be competent for it.
Trollzyn the Infinite wrote:1. The PRC is not a Communist State, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
2. The CCP is not a Communist Party, as it has shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
3. Xi Jinping and his cronies are not Communists, as they have shown absolutely zero interest in achieving Communism.
How do we know this? Because the first step toward Communism is Socialism, and none of the aforementioned are even remotely Socialist in any way, shape, or form.
by Farnhamia » Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:39 pm
LimaUniformNovemberAlpha wrote:Luziyca wrote:The state has far more important things to deal with than petty nepotism.
What's to stop your customers from doing it?Ethel mermania wrote:My customers get the service they pay for, just because my cousins kids may not be the best for their job, they would at least have to be competent for it.
So it's "buyer beware," then?
by Czechostan » Wed Jan 22, 2020 8:57 pm
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Corporate Collective Salvation, Duvniask, Einsiev, Gnark, Google [Bot], Kubra, Nivosea, Ravemath, Singaporen Empire, Spirit of Hope, Statesburg, Stellar Colonies, The New York Nation
Advertisement