Why millennials can't land jobs

[Blitzvogel]

I think there is a legitimate cause for concern for millennials as plenty seem undermotivated to actually go out into the world and fend for themselves. I see plenty everyday, but I also deal with plenty of adults who think they are too fragile to handle a rather minor load of items themselves and will gladly let someone else lift and carry it.

While I'm more than happy to label millennials a bunch of narcissistic idiots who feel entitled to everything, I love to label baby boomers as a bunch of lazy assholes who also think they know everything and own the world.

 

[88keys]

Getting paid to do a job does NOT make you a professional. I don't know your age but, your belief is incorrect so, you are not a professional. Look around at work. Every workplace has those individuals who seem to think they should get paid for showing up and breathing for 8 hours. They are not professionals. It doesn't matter what the occupation is.

There is no shortage of lazy and complacent workers and I can tell you that they exist in all ages. Not old, not young. I never said getting paid to do a job makes you a professional. But saying that professionalism is doing a job "because you said you would" is idiotic. Netflix isn't going to send me my movies because they say they will. They'll do it because I pay them to do it. I see my relationship between myself and my employer as a business relationship that's not much different than any other. I perform duties in exchange for wages. I would say that you are displaying rigidity in your thinking by claiming that something like professionalism has one definition and that your opinion is the only one that is correct.

 

[88keys]

Being dressed better than your interviewer is very common; that's the joy of already having a job, you can wear whatever the fuck the dress code is. Looking for a job? Suit the fuck up.

//edit - Misread your original post. Sorry. //

Putting a different spin on it and getting away from the fogeys vs millenials debate, let's take a step back. If I was an unemployed millenial and I read this:



Guess what? Fuck pride, I'm wearing a goddamn suit for my next interview cuz I need a fucking job.

I suppose when you're looking for your first job in a new career; you'll need every advantage that you can get. And that being said; I would probably wear a suit to an interview. Once you get experience, you can dress however you want so long as it's decent and job appropriate.

I still don't think that it should be a disqualifier under normal circumstances.

 

[PieIsAwesome]

I never worse suits to my interviews, and it didn't seem to cause any trouble, but in hindsight it would have been a good idea to wear one. Its an easy thing to do that will help with appearances and will at least protect from those "OMG no suit u has to wear suit no hire! " situations.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

There is no shortage of lazy and complacent workers and I can tell you that they exist in all ages. Not old, not young. I never said getting paid to do a job makes you a professional. But saying that professionalism is doing a job "because you said you would" is idiotic. Netflix isn't going to send me my movies because they say they will. They'll do it because I pay them to do it. I see my relationship between myself and my employer as a business relationship that's not much different than any other. I perform duties in exchange for wages. I would say that you are displaying rigidity in your thinking by claiming that something like professionalism has one definition and that your opinion is the only one that is correct.

You seem to have left out the rest of what I said. In your example, Netflix would indeed be unprofessional if they charged you and didn't send you your movies. I never said professionalism was independent of getting paid, I only said that getting paid alone does not make you a professional. However, you're bright enough to have understood that the first time I said it. So, what is your point?

 

[desura]

Now, I will say that some complaints are legit...like someone who thinks that texting on their phone is more important than the job interview on hand, or brings their parents in for an interview (negative on the self-starter) is certainly bad.

But things like suits, or bringing a paper resume, that's just petty.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Now, I will say that some complaints are legit...like someone who thinks that texting on their phone is more important than the job interview on hand, or brings their parents in for an interview (negative on the self-starter) is certainly bad.

But things like suits, or bringing a paper resume, that's just petty.

The value of those things, unlike professionalism, is indeed in the eye of the beholder but, since the beholder that matters is the interviewer, it would behoove you to 'play the game.'

 

[88keys]

Because you define professionalism as doing a job because you said you would, not because you are paid to do it which is completely unrealistic because that's the only reason 99% of us are in the workforce.

By that definition, nobody would be considered "professional" by your standard.

It really depends on whether or not you do what is expected and what those expectations are. To some people; professionalism means being a company man. To others; it means quality of work.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Plenty of people get higher paying jobs without a suit. That really depends on the job you're looking for. Alot of employers these days won't even take paper resumes so why would you even think to bring a physical copy? Why is that even important if the employer already has one to begin with?
Most places that are worth working for value skills and abilities over superficial nonsense.

A physical copy of your resume is like a parachute; it's better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it. You might not get asked to provide one, but if you have it handy so they can look at it while they discuss your qualifications, it's points in your favor, and every little bit helps in a competitive job market. Throwing that aside because it's "not logical" is assuming that people make hiring decisions based purely on logic, which is completely misrepresenting human behavior.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Because you define professionalism as doing a job because you said you would, not because you are paid to do it which is completely unrealistic because that's the only reason 99% of us are in the workforce.

By that definition, nobody would be considered "professional" by your standard.

It really depends on whether or not you do what is expected and what those expectations are. To some people; professionalism means being a company man. To others; it means quality of work.

You again left out the rest of what I said professionalism was. You are also trying to argue a negative. Just because my motivation for being a professional is my word doesn't preclude me from being paid for it.

Honestly, I've heard "company men " referred in many ways but, I've never heard that implied professionalism.

Now, I've said the same thing with regards to professionalism three times. One more and you're out.

 

[bradly1101]

A friend of mine works in psychotherapy with children and has noticed that there has been a difference in how children learn about consequences and creative/analytical thinking when exposed to technology at a very young age. When she (and I) were kids and we drove our parents nuts there were no game screens or devices to put in front of us. The instruction was always the same, "Go out and play with your friends!"

That led to inventing games, learning socialization, and especially learning about consequences. Video games teach very young kids that you can always backup and replay a section if you get nailed. Life is of course not like that. This can have the opposite effect of what parents want from video games as it can lead to a kid being very headstrong.

Also they don't get the opportunity to invent games which can lead to critical thinking and creativity. In video games you're often on a prescribed path, doing prescribed things. And with little other creative outlets (like Lego or something) a child's mind can be starved of what it needs most at a critical time.

These children often end up troubled and into the hands of my psychotherapist friend. I know I sound like an old coot, but I think we're not doing our kids any favors with all this technology. The 'early age' technology consumers are now young adults. I think I see troubling signs too.

 

[Ruptga]

A friend of mine works in psychotherapy with children and has noticed that there has been a difference in how children learn about consequences and creative/analytical thinking when exposed to technology at a very young age. When she (and I) were kids and we drove our parents nuts there were no game screens or devices to put in front of us. The instruction was always the same, "Go out and play with your friends!"

That led to inventing games, learning socialization, and especially learning about consequences. Video games teach very young kids that you can always backup and replay a section if you get nailed. Life is of course not like that. This can have the opposite effect of what parents want from video games as it can lead to a kid being very headstrong.

Also they don't get the opportunity to invent games which can lead to critical thinking and creativity. In video games you're often on a prescribed path, doing prescribed things. And with little other creative outlets (like Lego or something) a child's mind can be starved of what it needs most at a critical time.

These children often end up troubled and into the hands of my psychotherapist friend. I know I sound like an old coot, but I think we're not doing our kids any favors with all this technology. The 'early age' technology consumers are now young adults. I think I see troubling signs too.

I dunno, it's not insane, but it's just an interesting hypothesis.

Also, games don't always hold your hand until it falls off, in fact they used to reward or even require exploration and thinking, so that bit falls apart somewhat for the current crop of first-time job seekers. But if you're right, I'll hate seeing what happens when today's 14 y/o CoD kiddies become tomorrow's young professionals. They get completely lost when they have to navigate more than ten seconds without a waypoint or something exploding, never mind any sort of actual problem solving.

 

[Veliko]

A friend of mine works in psychotherapy with children and has noticed that there has been a difference in how children learn about consequences and creative/analytical thinking when exposed to technology at a very young age. When she (and I) were kids and we drove our parents nuts there were no game screens or devices to put in front of us. The instruction was always the same, "Go out and play with your friends!"

That led to inventing games, learning socialization, and especially learning about consequences. Video games teach very young kids that you can always backup and replay a section if you get nailed. Life is of course not like that. This can have the opposite effect of what parents want from video games as it can lead to a kid being very headstrong.

Also they don't get the opportunity to invent games which can lead to critical thinking and creativity. In video games you're often on a prescribed path, doing prescribed things. And with little other creative outlets (like Lego or something) a child's mind can be starved of what it needs most at a critical time.

These children often end up troubled and into the hands of my psychotherapist friend. I know I sound like an old coot, but I think we're not doing our kids any favors with all this technology. The 'early age' technology consumers are now young adults. I think I see troubling signs too.

This is just the old "youth of today" complaint put into a modern context.

 

[Veliko]

A physical copy of your resume is like a parachute; it's better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it. You might not get asked to provide one, but if you have it handy so they can look at it while they discuss your qualifications, it's points in your favor, and every little bit helps in a competitive job market. Throwing that aside because it's "not logical" is assuming that people make hiring decisions based purely on logic, which is completely misrepresenting human behavior.

A physical copy of your CV is such an utterly minor thing that it's not even worth mentioning.

If an article writer includes it as part of why 'millenials' are feckless youths it suggests he was desperate for material.

 

[Veliko]

A black suit looks ridiculous in the office. Black suits are evening wear. You may be seeing charcoal suits and thinking they are black. They are not.

Wait, so black suits and charcoal suits look so alike that they're easily mixed up yet at the same time they're so different that one of them looks ridiculous...?

 

[hans030390]

As a millennial, I think a lot of my peers are, well, clueless when it comes to finding and landing jobs. Even knowing which resources to use and how to use them for finding jobs isn't inherently simple. The same can be said for interview etiquette. If they aren't taught it, there's a strong chance they won't know what they're doing.

At my university, there were certain programs that had VERY strong career services departments. Some of these programs even required you take a short course on finding jobs, resume building, interview techniques, etc., and the career service departments were VERY strict about students following proper protocol/etiquette. If you messed up, there were pretty strong consequences. Even some of the turd-students could become polished enough to land jobs (perhaps unfortunately). The Business and Informatics schools were very good about helping students land jobs, but only if you put in the effort.

On the other hand, I have a friend that went through a similar program as me, but not at the same university (IU for me vs IUPUI for him). His career services department was not nearly as involved in helping students (enough so that those less motivated or aware would likely miss it), and he was, as such, pretty clueless about finding jobs. I had to help him with resume building and interview preparation/tips. He's a good, smart guy with strong skills, but landing a job wasn't as easy for him for a while. Even my GF had a lot of trouble finding a job...same university as me, but her program (Biology) did not have a strong career services department, if it even had its own department at all...can't remember.

So, I think part of it is just general cluelessness and not really being aware of that enough to seek help if it doesn't come knocking first. And then some people just suck.

 

[OverVolt]

As a millennial, I think a lot of my peers are, well, clueless when it comes to finding and landing jobs. Even knowing which resources to use and how to use them for finding jobs isn't inherently simple. The same can be said for interview etiquette. If they aren't taught it, there's a strong chance they won't know what they're doing.

At my university, there were certain programs that had VERY strong career services departments. Some of these programs even required you take a short course on finding jobs, resume building, interview techniques, etc., and the career service departments were VERY strict about students following proper protocol/etiquette. If you messed up, there were pretty strong consequences. Even some of the turd-students could become polished enough to land jobs (perhaps unfortunately). The Business and Informatics schools were very good about helping students land jobs, but only if you put in the effort.

On the other hand, I have a friend that went through a similar program as me, but not at the same university (IU for me vs IUPUI for him). His career services department was not nearly as involved in helping students (enough so that those less motivated or aware would likely miss it), and he was, as such, pretty clueless about finding jobs. I had to help him with resume building and interview preparation/tips. He's a good, smart guy with strong skills, but landing a job wasn't as easy for him for a while. Even my GF had a lot of trouble finding a job...same university as me, but her program (Biology) did not have a strong career services department, if it even had its own department at all...can't remember.

So, I think part of it is just general cluelessness and not really being aware of that enough to seek help if it doesn't come knocking first. And then some people just suck.

Pssshhhfftt!

One issue is online applications. Back in the days of paper applications (I got my job via paper application in 2008, a whole 6 years ago!) simply going to HR and talking to them gave you a good idea of the expectations placed upon you. Simply see what HR is wearing and match or slightly exceed that.

It wasn't that long ago (10 years or so) that you had to know someone to apply to a job. The store you grew up next to, that place your friend worked, that placed your uncle used to work, etc. You knew something about these places. You could ask a family friend where to go apply, where to get a paper application from HR.

Online applications have enabled people to just spam applications. Some job across the country because it pays $xyz k per year. Haven't got a damn clue about the business. It drives down wages and drives up competition for jobs, but I firmly believe this is false. These people are not good fits for these jobs. Indeed.com is not your friend if you are competing with millions of people for the same jobs.

The millennials treat online applications like anything else online. Hmmm what jobs can I google for? Odds are if its a top result, everyone else is seeing that job too. Then they go to actually apply. Its online, they treat it like facebook, casually, without really being exposed to 'the game' by visiting various HR offices in person. Then your resume goes into the digital shredder in the sky. With the thousands of others.

 

[shortylickens]

You know what? Fuck the assholes with cushy, pointless jobs who like to judge everyone else.


According to every fucking article on the web I have done EVERYTHING correctly at my last 30 or so interviews. Still not hired.

Maybe it never occurred to them the economy is shit and companies only hire people who are practically perfect for the job at hand instead of someone who's good and can learn.
How the fuck is anyone supposed to advance and gain experience in that kind of system?

 

[shortylickens]

Wait, so black suits and charcoal suits look so alike that they're easily mixed up yet at the same time they're so different that one of them looks ridiculous...?

YOU are mixing them up because you are not observant.
THEY are seeing an obvious difference because they are professionals and they know what other professionals look like.

 

[Veliko]

YOU are mixing them up because you are not observant.
THEY are seeing an obvious difference because they are professionals and they know what other professionals look like.

Professional fashionistas, perhaps.

What does a professional look like?

 

[Pr0d1gy]

I posted in a fascist right wing circle jerk thread!

 

[IndyColtsFan]

You know what? Fuck the assholes with cushy, pointless jobs who like to judge everyone else.

According to every fucking article on the web I have done EVERYTHING correctly at my last 30 or so interviews. Still not hired.

I heard an interesting saying the other day. I don't remember the exact wording, but to paraphrase, it was something like this:

"If the first person you meet today is a jerk, he/she is an asshole; if everyone you meet today is a jerk, well, you're the asshole."

The message here, shorty, is that if you went on 30 interviews and can't find a job, it isn't the employers conspiring against you and you most certainly haven't done "EVERYTHING" correctly. That's bullshit and you know it.

Maybe it never occurred to them the economy is shit and companies only hire people who are practically perfect for the job at hand instead of someone who's good and can learn.

How the fuck is anyone supposed to advance and gain experience in that kind of system?

There is some truth to the first statement, but if that is what is truly happening to you in 30+ interviews, want to take a wild guess how to address it?

 

[SP33Demon]

Plenty of people get higher paying jobs without a suit. That really depends on the job you're looking for. Alot of employers these days won't even take paper resumes so why would you even think to bring a physical copy? Why is that even important if the employer already has one to begin with?
Most places that are worth working for value skills and abilities over superficial nonsense.

This thread is just a bunch of old curmudgeons whose brains have plasticized into a read only organ. They have become the intellectual equivalent of little wind up toys capable of one simple task and never deviating from that. Turn the crank and they walk straight and will continue to proceed in that direction until they encounter an obstacle. At which point they are stuck. For they are so unwilling and unable to change that their problem solving skills are limited to repeating the same actions; which is to continue to walk forward even right into a wall or off a cliff.

Good, don't wear a suit to your next interview and don't bring resumes with you. Don't bring a pen and pad, and while you're at it bring your parents and kick your feet up. I don't give a fuck. Your (and other slacker millenials that follow in the same vein) attitude shows you're not willing to do what it takes to get the job that the next person will. Social intellect and strong work ethic > skillset. I'd hire a fresh out of college millenial over a senior as long as they can show me they're half competent with the material and would go the extra mile to get the job. You don't fit that type, so just move along in your job search after I don't call back.

Sincerely,
Gen Xer

 

[SP33Demon]

A physical copy of your CV is such an utterly minor thing that it's not even worth mentioning.

If an article writer includes it as part of why 'millenials' are feckless youths it suggests he was desperate for material.

BS. If someone gives me their resume on 32lb bond weight paper I'm going to be impressed because that's something not many people do anymore. Additionally, even if the interviewer throws it out, you're still going to make a solid impression with your work of art (resume). If you put that much effort into your resume then people will notice.

It's all about putting your best foot forward and details matter. If the person is paying attention to details, I know they've got their shit together and there's a good chance they'll be well prepared when we meet the client. A person who can't even be bothered to wear a suit when it counts most (first impression), they're not getting the job because I'm going to have to spell it out that they'll have to wear a suit for days when we meet the client. I don't enjoy spelling shit out, I'd rather just hire someone who gets it. Lord knows we have enough applicants, and nobody is irreplaceable (including me). That's why I can appreciate people with good killer instincts, and I'm not seeing this personality type much anymore with the newer generations. They aren't taught to go the extra mile and how to dominate professional settings, I don't know if it's a parenting fail or just the fact that their heads are stuck in a phone/tablet/monitor 24/7. You'd think that since generations usually add 10 IQ points they'd have learned all of this in one of their google searches (having grown up in the "information age") but apparently not.

 

[Veliko]

BS. If someone gives me their resume on 32lb bond weight paper I'm going to be impressed because that's something not many people do anymore. Additionally, even if the interviewer throws it out, you're still going to make a solid impression with your work of art (resume). If you put that much effort into your resume then people will notice.

It's all about putting your best foot forward and details matter. If the person is paying attention to details, I know they've got their shit together and there's a good chance they'll be well prepared when we meet the client. A person who can't even be bothered to wear a suit when it counts most (first impression), they're not getting the job because I'm going to have to spell it out that they'll have to wear a suit for days when we meet the client. I don't enjoy spelling shit out, I'd rather just hire someone who gets it. Lord knows we have enough applicants, and nobody is irreplaceable (including me). That's why I can appreciate people with good killer instincts, and I'm not seeing this personality type much anymore with the newer generations. They aren't taught to go the extra mile and how to dominate professional settings, I don't know if it's a parenting fail or just the fact that their heads are stuck in a phone/tablet/monitor 24/7. You'd think that since generations usually add 10 IQ points they'd have learned all of this in one of their google searches (having grown up in the "information age") but apparently not.

That's a nice rant - it has to be said, you pro-suiters are an angry lot when challenged - but it doesn't actually have anything to do with what I was saying.

If you're going to write an article on how the youth of today are feckless then you're going to have to come up with something a little more concrete than "they didn't bring a copy of their CV to an interview."