-NJF- A response to a YT video about money in politics:

This was an informative and poignant video. What are some ways America can take the money out of politics and still keep corporate money in the country? I think a great presidential platform would be: 1) make the military more efficient and use the cost saving to fund infrastructure and education; 2.) making railway and public transportation more accessible/effective; and 3.) overhauling the power grid whilst installing a fiber optic network large and powerful enough to handle the next 50 years of dramatic digital economy growth/cyber security. I don't see anyone trying to garner meaningful information or contemplate what the Trump campaign actually means; they simply bash it for being racist, xenophobic, and farcical (which it is). While Trump's campaign success is indeed a damning indictment of the American political system, it's almost as important what it means about the current state of the American public. Americans are concerned about where the country is headed. We are concerned about immigration, personal freedom, and to put it simply: keeping America Great. Personally, I don't think we can be great without proper education and equality of opportunity but other people think it revolves more around immigration and enacting policies that stifle American growth. The rest of the world is not going to shutter expansion for the benefit of the environment or corporate transparency. Developing countries around the world are not going to enact restrictive growth policies to avoid deteriorating the already dilapidated environment. The goal of reaching "American" success is too fervent. So we need to reach a balance where we are leading the the way, setting the standard, and empowering the change that needs to take place in order to make the country and its role in the global village a prominent one. However, we need to also make it easy and efficient for companies to find business in America attractive and people to feel like hard work will actually get you somewhere. I know this because I am a perfect example of the negative consequences of the current state of things. I am an accountant with a graduate degree and 4 years of experience. I work for less than $18 ph for one of the largest QSR management companies in the country and I do 110% of my predecessors work with 80% of the time. By the end of this year I will have saved the company more than 115% of my salary in the form of credits due from timely filing of taxes and that responsibility occupies less than 25% of my time. Management here is populated by grandfathered in accountants with degrees 20 years old and a lack of technological know-how that is downright appalling. But this has been the environment at every single job I have had since grad school. Young, smart, and capable people are having their careers stifled because we live in a time where the bratty sons of men who inherited companies built during an era of American prosperity have the ability to screen thousands of applicants which causes the illusion that talented individuals are a dime a dozen. Why invest in this guy when I have a hundred others chomping at the bit to do his job. Frankly, it sucks and something needs to change.

A Door Closes; A Window Opens...

A Door Closes; A Window Opens…

     So, I just concluded my last position as an accountant and I am revving up my career search once again. It was an all too familiar tale; the role was supposed to be for a few weeks but ended up turning into a few months because instead of working just hard enough no to get yelled at, instead of taking advantage of my status as a “temporary” employee, I took the opportunity to set my desires aside and put my career into laser focus. For me, the goal is always to bolster the potential for better future positions and in order to do that I had to sacrifice a livable wage for an experience that might provide me with better opportunities in the future. This is something that needs to be done because if you don’t have a safety net to fall back on; if you don’t have parents to move back in with; if you don’t have the luxury of taking time off to figure out what you want to do with your life; then you have to choose a path and run full-steam towards the finish.

     A day after completing graduate school I left my parent’s house with $400 to my name and all my worldly possessions. I slept in my car in the bitter cold for a week, hustled my ass off to find a job by spending countless hours at the library, and when I found a shitty apartment for $200 a month surrounded by smokers and drug addicts I jumped on the opportunity. Within a week I found a temporary job assisting with AR and when the AP manager had to go out on medical leave I was an obvious choice by management to fill the gap and I did so at an efficiency almost up to par with the AP manager who had ten years and a much higher salary to figure things out.

     I was paid slightly above a minimum wage salary and as the acting AP manager when I eventually processed my own paycheck, I was not-so-shocked to learn that the company was paying the temp agency almost double what I was making per hour so they could avoid hiring a new employee. Nowadays if you want to get to the next level in your career you have to be willing to take low pay/high profile jobs so you can accumulate the ammunition necessary to fire back at the next employer who wants to fuck you and while the whole experience didn't make my wallet any fatter, it’s something that needs to be done in order to progress to the next level. This is a concept a lot of people in my life right now don’t seem to understand: Why sacrifice making money to waste time at a no-growth position? The answer is a bit more intangible than a stack of dollar bills.

     In today’s sanguinary job market employers are looking for the proverbial “purple squirrel.” An employee that provides high-level competency at the lowest salary possible. And it seems for my generation we either have to settle for a few years of this or face an indefinitely extended wallowing within the confines of the lower middle-class. For people between the ages 20 to 35 it is no longer possible to be lackadaisical with building your career. Taking time to start a family, pursue dreams, or soul search may end up constricting the possibility of obtaining a position that can actually provide for those things. For us, it’s much more difficult to get to a point where we can become economically viable because if you’re not constantly working towards stepping up your game with each new job, if you’re not relentlessly pushing towards advancement, then you are merely running in place and by the time you get going again it will be too late. Employers want the cream of the crop and they don’t want to pay for it so you can either push from job to job gaining experience along the way making yourself the best candidate possible, or you can settle for the safety of mediocrity. 

-NJF-

    

Accounting at Market Basket and The International Space Station/Raptor Preserve: How Employers Have Become the Bully in the Playroom

     So, I was contracted by Accountemps to conduct general accounting work for DiCicco, Gulman, and Company LLP in the midst of this whole Market Basket debacle and I`m excited to report that things are going well. I`ve been working independently and with a team to help clean up GL, AP, and AR accounts for a 2+ billion dollar company and it's interesting to see how said company conducts its accounting work. In short: awfully. The draconian system is highly inefficient and lugubrious. Information comes in from over 70 stores often in a jumbled mess that needs to be resorted, reevaluated, and reorganized 3 or more times before it gets entered into the system which, by the way, is so out of date it doesn't use decimal places. Yes, that's correct: accounting software that doesn't use decimal points! The whole process is in need of a reboot so bad Michael Bay is in talks with the CFO. In an age of lighting fast connection accros international borders it's interesting to see these older companies cope with the changing times. In less than 2 days I am brimming with ideas on how to reduce redundancy and increase efficiency for this company but it seems an unfortunate byproduct of being my age is lack of concern; concern for my ideas, concern for my abilities, and most importantly concern for my untapped potential. 

     Why is it that in the Internet Age nobody, even recruiters, are concerned about the vast amounts of untapped potential coming out of this county's prestigious universities and colleges? The reason is...THE INTERNET! I don't know how many times I have been posting resumes or in an interview/phone screening and felt like one single misstep would lead to disqualification. It seems that in an era where one can post 50 resumes in just as many minutes, employers have become so bombarded with "talent" they became hunters of the elusive purple squirrel. That is, a candidate who perfectly matches ALL requirements of the position and makes NOT ONE mistake in the process. I remember once I was in a phone screening and I`d been out of work for a few weeks, got in with Accountemps, and received my first bite from a company that was interested in me. I was so excited and prepared; I had notes on why I was good for the company, why the company was good for me, how I could benefit them with my skill-set, and how I could grow with time, problems, issues, etc etc etc...When I finally got the call I was flabbergasted by the questions I was asked. Things like, “where do you see yourself in five years?” and “how would you rate you performance at your last job?” I felt like I was getting the same question 500+ other candidates were getting in the hope that one of them might instill a little intrigue for the recruiter.

     Why is my job search reliant on the intrigue of an often times unrelated third party? What has happened to this country when employers are so saturated with applications they lost all concern for making an investment in their employees? You know, I don’t have the greatest skin, I`m a bit quirky, and I am still wearing dress pants from my days in catholic high school but I damn sure am smarter, more competent, and more capable than 90% of the applicants applying for the same entry-level accounting job as I. But it’s my messy haircut and old clothes that get me disqualified because the employer is so concerned with a total package they forgot about what it takes to build a house. You don’t build a house from the top down; you build it from the inside out. I have the educational foundation and at 29 I have the need/want/desire to establish a strong career, but it seems all anyone wants nowadays is a complete addition. They want to install the submarine bay to the international space station/raptor preserve instead of building it from scratch. Look employers, it’s no fun playing with Legos if the international space station/raptor preserve has the submarine bay already attached. If you want to have a kick-ass time you need to use a little imagination and invest in your creation. If you’re not ready to step on a few bricks to make a masterpiece then what are you even doing in the playroom?

What about Joining the Service?

One month will mark my fifth anniversary since graduating college in 2009 and I am seriously considering military service. In an era where the evisceration of the middle class by corporate America has left our college graduates engulfed by a miasma of baseless inequity I found this Yahoo question and answer to be pretty informative:

About to graduate college, should I join the military? 

Hello to all who read this,

I am currently a graduating senior, set to receive my diploma in 9 days. I will be graduating with a B.A. in Biological Sciences, with a Psychology minor.

Here is my dilemma. Although I am graduating after a challenging 4.5 years of college, where I feel as though I have accomplished a great deal, had unforgettable experiences and made many friends, I am not excited to graduate. I have learned recently (in the last year or so) that with my degree I will have a difficult time finding a worthwhile job without furthering my education in a graduate school program. However, to be completely honest, I am burned out on school. I am sick of classrooms, laboratories, and studying countless hours for tests. I'm also sick of hearing the excuse of "Just go to grad school, because you're not going to get a job right now". Being the kind of person I am, I know that if I am not motivated to do something, I will not give %100 effort and will most likely be miserable doing something that I know my heart is not in. So, I have ruled out grad school at this point.

The other option I have is to enter the job market. I have already spent hours on job search sites, which are taking me nowhere. Not only are there are extremely sparse number of jobs that I qualify for with just my degree, most companies only want to hire someone with 1-5 years of experience already. I am baffled as to how a college graduate is supposed to get started in a career if companies only want to hire people with years of experience already! So, needless to say I am feeling extremely discouraged and not feeling very positive at all about finding a job.

Here is my question- is the military a good option for me at this point? I know that I will not make as much money as someone might in the civilian world (and I'm ok with that), but would the experience and training that military would provdide me benefit me in getting a job later in the civilian world? I'd also like to state that joining the military has always been something that I have wanted to do, even since I was a little kid. Despite this, I decided to not participate in ROTC during college because I wanted to live the carefree lifestyle of a college student, which I did and don't regret at all. However, I feel as though I have an obligation to serve my country, and even a sort of obligation to my family. See, my grandfather was a WWII veteran of the 101st Airborne (did everything the 'Band of Brothers' series covered, if you've seen it. He just wasn't in the 506th regiment). I have a desire to be a part of something bigger than I am, where I will find the motivation I need to succeed. Also, I'd like to add that if I do join, regardless of what branch I decide upon, I will be following the Officer path.

Yet another question (sorry, I didn't intend for this to be this long, guess i'm just sort of venting), I have at least narrowed my decision down to either Army or Marines. I'd love to be a part of the Marines, with their history, reputation and overall bad-assness, but I have heard that there are less opportunites in the Corps and that becoming an officer is harder to accomplish (as in, its harder to secure a spot for officer school). Is this true? Are the job opportunites and benefits significantly different between the Army and Marines?

Well, I suppose I have asked enough questions for one submition. Those who choose to answer don't have to respond to all my questions, just the ones that you feel you can help me the most with. I appreciate any and all responses and I thank you all in advance!

Best Answer

• Tom answered 4 years ago

Navy Ocs and Air Force Ots are very competitive at the moment. Air Force Ots only had one selection board in 2010 and it was only for rated slots(flight school applicants.) The selection rate was 20%. Navy Ocs has had selection rates as low as 8% in certain designators such as Supply and Intelligence. Unlike the Navy and Air Force, Army and Marine Ocs applicants do not apply for a particular branch(Army) or Mos(Marines) except Marine Ocs Aviation applicants are awarded Aviation contracts as Ocs Officer Candidates and Army Ocs Officer Candidates have to pre qualify to branch Aviation prior to arriving at Ocs. Army Branch selection takes place at Ocs according to class rank at Ocs. Marine Officer Ocs selection takes place after commissioning at TBS for all Marine officers except those who arrive with Aviation or Jag contracts.
The Army has been running thousands of Rotc Cadets short nationwide and has had to increase the percent of officers commissioning through Ocs from the 20% rate the Army prefers to around 40%. Both the Marines and Army have been expanding while the Navy and Air Force have been contracting. All Marine Officer Commissioning programs require a 1st class Marine PFT, 225+, though many Oso's will not forward an application to a Selection Board with a PFT less than 240.
As far as income, you may not have considered the tax free housing allowance, BAH, which varies with location. O-1 to O-2 in 18 months. O-2 to O-3 in another 24 months. Change the location to calculate the level if compensation;
http://militarypay.defense.gov/mpcalcs/C...
The benefits for all are essentially the same. Ocs/Ots commissioned officers are eligible for full GI Bill educational benefits with 36 months of active duty service. That includes 36 months of tuition at the rate charged to state residents by the most expensive public university in the state plus 36 months of tax free E-5 with dependents BAH. Yellow Ribbon Schools add to the benefits from their own funds.
Marines Occ:
http://www.dcmarineofficer.com/officerca...
http://www.dcmarineofficer.com/pdf/mosha...
http://officer.marines.com/marine/making...
Army Ocs:
https://www.benning.army.mil/infantry/19...
http://www.goarmy.com/ocs.html
Navy Ocs:
http://www.cnrc.navy.mil/noru/orojt3/gen...
http://waynesdyno.net/generalofficer.htm...
Air Force Ots:
http://www.airforce.com/opportunities/of...
Coast Guard Ocs:
http://www.gocoastguard.com/find-your-ca...
Good Luck!

The 3 Factors Necessary for a Co. to Achieve Global Awareness in the Internet Age

     As the world pushes ever forward towards a globalized economy, it is becoming increasingly important that international corporations develop global awareness. Global awareness can be stratified into two different competencies. One characteristic of the globally aware is the tolerance of cultural differences. Business customs that might appear foreign and bazaar must be tolerated for the benefit of a successful business relationship. The second stratum of global awareness is the knowledge of cultures, history, world market potential, global socioeconomics, and political trends (Cateora, Graham 17). With a firm knowledge of these vital aspects of global awareness the international businessperson can better relate to people from different cultures. Tolerance of foreign business practices can greatly benefit working relationships because those who buy are often hesitant to adjust to those who sell. A globally aware businessperson is more adept to understanding the cultural, historical, and political nuances that may significantly benefit a working international relationship and help the person buying his or her product feel more comfortable.

     For example, “Shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, Secretary of State Colin Powell, concerned about rising anti-Americanism abroad, hired Madison Ave. maven Charlotte Beers to blitz the Middle East with pro-American advertising and PR campaigns (Risen).” The PR campaign, which was “was nothing less than to rebrand American foreign policy,” failed miserably in the United Arab Emirates because Charlotte Beers, the PR manager in charge of the campaign, did not understand the Arabic socioeconomic environment (Risen). “The efforts echoed the propaganda efforts of Nazi Germany and other authoritarian regimes,” wrote Naomi Klein, a columnist at The Nation and the author of “No Logo.” Without an understanding of Arabic culture, or global awareness in general for that matter, the ad campaigns failed because the PR manager only used her own self-reference criterion to create the ads. Cultural understanding is one of the most fundamental aspects of global awareness and often the deciding factor in the success of an international ad campaign.

     This international marketing failure could have been avoided in several ways. The first step to achieving global awareness is to select individual managers specifically for their demonstrated global awareness. After doing some research on Charlotte Beers it turns out she has had an impressive career in marketing but it is almost certain that her primary focus was on advertising to developed, modern nations. The Middle East has a very lush and diverse history and that history largely defines modern Middle Eastern culture. With even a brief glance at this history I think Beers would have dramatically restructured her approach to “rebranding America in the Middle East” because history is such a large factor in the beliefs of contemporary Middle Eastern society. 

     A second approach to achieving global awareness is to develop personal relationships in other countries. Doing long-term business in a country is a great way to establish business relationships but in many countries personal relationships are often more important than business relationships. In Latin America for example, personal ties with a business partner are considered more important than economic ties. An American manager attempting to do business in Brazil might have to avoid business conversations for several days just to gain the trust of the Brazilian businessperson.

     The final and most effective method of achieving global awareness is to have a culturally diverse senior executive staff. If the people behind the scenes making the decisions are of many cultural backgrounds then they can better collaborate on effective means of entering a foreign market. Collin Powell and the executive staff making the decisions on the repositioning of America in the Middle East were most certainly old, wealthy, white Americans with little to no cultural understanding other than a vehement love for America. This is probably the reason behind the PR campaigns failure—rich white Americans tend to have no cultural understanding whatsoever. 

ChattyJobs Virtual Career Fair sponsored in part by my Alma Mater, Champlain College.

http://chatty.jobs/

Employers: The Major Problem in Our Economy

Y! Big Story: Why you can’t get that job

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/trending-now/y-big-story-why-t-job-210829464.html

"Wanted: Someone exactly like my last boyfriend (see list of qualities), only better. Demonstrate success in a proven relationship, preferably a current one. You should know what I want without my telling you."

There wouldn't be enough 10-foot poles to poke at a dating ad like that. Replace that mating call with a job posting, though, and that's what many employers are asking for these days—and more.

The latest hiring numbers made markets skitter and economists gloomy. Yet this time, attention also focused on commitment-phobe employers, who can't seem to bridge the gulf between unemployed workers and job vacancies. The growing consensus—which won't surprise frustrated job seekers—is that fickle companies in a surplus labor market are demanding perfect candidates without paying market wages or investing in training. Worse, some discriminate against the unemployed, figuring if they're not taken, they must be tainted goods. And because employees are taking their sweet time sifting through so many potential suitors, they're piling the workload on existing staffers, who are often ready for a breakup.

It's not me, it's you. Dismal hiring numbers stem from plenty of sound reasons, among them fears of a Euro-thrashed market and uncertainty in an election year. Yet the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics counted about 3.7 million job openings in March—still below the 4.4 million jobs posted when the recession began, but "up significantly from a year earlier." Plus, those vacancies have been piling up since mid-2009. The reason? The supposed skills shortage of our shiftless, undereducated, out-of-touch American workforce.

Peter Cappelli, who just released his book "Why Good People Can't Get Jobs," dismisses the idea of a skills gap. Instead, the Wharton management professor says "inflexible" employers are "the real culprits."

[O]nly 15% of employers who say they see a skill shortage say that the issue is a lack of candidate knowledge, which is what we'd normally think of as skill. Instead, by far the most important shortfall they see in candidates is a lack of experience doing similar jobs... They want experienced candidates who can contribute immediately with no training or start-up time. That's certainly understandable, but the only people who can do that are those who have done virtually the same job before, and that often requires a skill set that, in a rapidly changing world, may die out soon after it is perfected. (June 4, Time)

Employers aren't just choosy about white-collar desk jockeys. Cappelli's favorite example is the cotton candy machine operator ad that required "prior success in operating cotton candy machines."

Job reportsCodependent relationships. If no applicant is good enough, then employers make do with what they have and spread the workload around. A few of those overburdened employees may have quit in a healthy economy. Instead, they cling on, slowing the normal turnover process. Companies then resort to layoffs to deal with the perceived dead weight.

In the fourth quarter of 2008, the number of layoffs exceeded the number of resignations for the first time in the history of the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey. It is interesting to note that the increase in layoffs roughly matches the decline in resignations in the fourth quarter of 2008 and the first quarter of 2009, leaving total separations essentially flat during those quarters. (Employment dynamics over the last decade, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics)

Next page...Next page...Despite the trend, layoffs have been used as a management tool, rather than as a measure of last resort, since the 1980s. Codependency doesn't mean you're faithful, just fearful; that fear can turn into employee restlessness or resentment.

MetLife's 10th annual survey of employee benefits, trends and attitudes released in March puts employee loyalty at a seven-year low. One in three employees, the survey says, plans to leave his or her job by the end of the year. According to a 2011 Careerbuilder.com report, 76% of full-time workers, while not actively looking for a new job, would leave their current workplace if the right opportunity came along. (May 9, Knowledge@Wharton)

Worse, some workplaces don't even sense the fallen morale: USA Today reported that "employers think [employees] are just as loyal as they were three years ago." In the long run, underestimating loyalty is expensive.

Multi-taskingUnforgiving standards (and software):Technology has made applying for jobs online easier, which can flood companies with applications. But in many cases, it has also made it too hard, booting out job seekers who may not exactly fit the often vague and sprawling descriptions. In Cappelli's book, one staffing company president described the process as "looking for a unicorn."

Managers pile all the credentials and expertise into the job description to minimize the risk that the candidate will fail, making it virtually impossible to find anyone who fits. ("Why Good People Can't Get Jobs")

The H1B visa: Solution or servitude? Businesses insist there's a skills gap in STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mechanics) jobs, and outsourcing or importing labor keeps Americacompetitive.

A report by the Technology Policy Institute in March 2009 found that in the absence of green card and H1B visa constraints in the 2003-2007 period, roughly 182,000 foreign graduates of U.S. colleges and universities would likely have remained in the country and raised the gross domestic product (GDP) by roughly $13.6 billion. (Feb. 1, ABC News)

Critics point to the current setup as 21st-century indentured servitude. UC Davis computer science professor Norm Matloff, who supports the Durbin-Grassley bill, which seeks to reform the H1-B process, has noted that "the vast majority [of H-1B hires] are ordinary people doing ordinary work"—but who are paid below-market wages.

There is no tech labor shortage. No study, other than those sponsored by the industry, has ever shown a shortage... Employers hire only a tiny fraction of those who apply. HR departments routinely exclude CVs of applicants they deem "too expensive"—those that are over age 35. (So managers never see these CVs and mistakenly believe there are no applicants.) (Professor Norm Matloff's H-1B Web Page)

Employee appreciation time: Cappelli says that while companies are good at tracking costs, "most have little if any idea of the value each employee contributes to the organization." Understanding value—and that a job can change to suit a person's skills—would go a long way in making a good match.