Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Question for y'all that know about jobs/hiring etc.


  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1 mylightning2

mylightning2
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,771 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 02:52 PM

So I'm casually looking for a job pouring booze or throwing food on a table a couple nights a week. Anyway, I had 2 interviews with a place that has been taken over by a bank and is being run by a mgmt. co. out of Jackson Hole. Anyway, this was over a month ago and they called me back to say that they were still thinking about it. Just poking around this morning and every single job that they were hiring for back when I first walked in the door is still available.

I called the HR person a few minutes ago and they were cordial and said they'd look into things and get back to me in a day or so.

I'm beginning to think that these people in HR, and maybe the entire property really aren't doing a damn thing b/c it's owned by the bank, run by a mgmt. co thousands of miles away, and because it seems like a losing battle to even try to save a sinking ship with a gaping hole in the hull.

Maybe I should call the headquarters in Wyoming and tell them i'd be more than happy to do the HR person's job since they aren't.

Understand, I really don't care one way or the other, but I know plenty of people need work so if I went in there and staffed the fucking joint in a week, i'd be helping everyone. I'd make myself a lil scratch, get people jobs, and save the bidness. Hey, worst case, I could get a free trip to Jackson Hole, do a little fishing, play golf, eat elk, and drink beer:funny1:.

Is this possible? I mean any of my crazy thoughts here.

#2 B. Diddy

B. Diddy
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,812 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 02:55 PM

Start a thread. :thumbup:

#3 mylightning2

mylightning2
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,771 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:06 PM

Oh, you again:rolleyes:

I don't speak your language, splain yourself. I'm perceiving your "remark" as general nastiness, maybe i'm wrong. If i'm wrong, sorry. If you are being nasty, let me know and we'll go from there. Alrighty then, take care of yourself, ya hear?

#4 Spidergawd

Spidergawd
  • VibeTribe
  • 14,527 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:12 PM

+5 points for using the term "gaping hole". :funny1:

#5 mylightning2

mylightning2
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,771 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:17 PM

Give it a try - what do you have to lose?


Well, you do make a good point K. I don't have much to lose at all. Actually, I'd rather not upset the restaurant folks as it is a nice quiet place to go for beverages and light snacks by the pool. I guess that's what I stand to lose.

Quite frankly i'd rather have the trip to The Rockies (I think that's The Rockies) than either job.

Nice place, really too bad they're letting it go to hell. They've lost 2 good chefs (from what I hear) since I've been here.

Yo, I heard Trapp's is starting to slide on paying their bills and I know a bunch of folks that have jumped ship over there in the past few weeks. I think Fat Mountain Lodge is putting a mega resort beat down on these places :undecided:.

#6 moed_over

moed_over

    He saw the spinning lights he knew it was a sign....

  • VibeTribe
  • 2,158 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:19 PM

Most likely, the HR personnel have some directive that is keeping them from finalizing the hiring for this place. I doubt that going to their headquarters will change the situation in any way, and most likely will lower your chances of being hired to wait tables or bartend. They will see your actions as strange and unusual, placing you in the category of less desirable applicant.

#7 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,351 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:22 PM

I think there is a part of the latest attempt at stimulus that gives incentives to businesses that advertise for, and have jobs
"available". What I have found over the course of the last few years is exactly as you describe quite often across the sphere of employment: Posting a job they really have no interest in filling. It is there to be measured in a numbered scale in order to make it appear as though economic growth is greater than it truly is.

Sort of in the same vain as unemployment being percentaged at around 9.something %, while in reality the number is more closely 22-23%.

I could totally be off here on your take and my thoughts. But after many years of job hunting, this is how I currently view it.

#8 mylightning2

mylightning2
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,771 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:27 PM

wtf are you talking about?


:funny1: Apparently nothing.

Thanks Gawd! (Oh hey Dude, Dopapod Saturday! You flying out or what?)

I really gotta get my act together and get to the pool before I don't get anything accomplished here at all.

The goddamn bar on the rec. path is closed for renovations. I ended up skipping rocks on the river yesterday. They gotta pull this place together.

Yeah boat drinks!:crazy:

#9 MeOmYo

MeOmYo
  • VibeTribe
  • 7,276 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:31 PM

I always thought the hot chick from Ireland had a pecker. :lol:

#10 Deadshow Dan

Deadshow Dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,882 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:37 PM

I think there is a part of the latest attempt at stimulus that gives incentives to businesses that advertise for, and have jobs
"available". What I have found over the course of the last few years is exactly as you describe quite often across the sphere of employment: Posting a job they really have no interest in filling. It is there to be measured in a numbered scale in order to make it appear as though economic growth is greater than it truly is.

There are plenty of reasons that company have jobs listed that they aren't filling, including


  • making the company look like it's doing well, growing
  • Fishing
  • Having a stable of people ready, so you can hang it over the heads of the workers
  • Incompetence
However what most of corporate America is NOT doing is trying to make things look like economic growth is better. Instead they are trying to make things worse, so they can blame the guy you blame

#11 mylightning2

mylightning2
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,771 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:44 PM

Most likely, the HR personnel have some directive that is keeping them from finalizing the hiring for this place. I doubt that going to their headquarters will change the situation in any way, and most likely will lower your chances of being hired to wait tables or bartend. They will see your actions as strange and unusual, placing you in the category of less desirable applicant.


The F&B Dude is married to the assistant director of my Daughter's daycare. He might have gotten word that I am strange from his wife. I'm one of those parents that gives a shit about my daughter wearing her shoes on the right feet, wearing sunblock, a sun hat, and sunglasses.

Like I said though, I don't really care about the job anyway.

I do appreciate your advice Bro, most people do care and for them I think it's sound thinking. I should care, I just have a whole different set of values than most. I really don't look too far into the future. Not smart, but i'm working on 4 decades here and if I combined all hours worked it adds up to about 5 years so maybe it's time I put out a newsletter.

They did call me in for 2, maybe 3 interviews though, so I don't know.


I think there is a part of the latest attempt at stimulus that gives incentives to businesses that advertise for, and have jobs
"available". What I have found over the course of the last few years is exactly as you describe quite often across the sphere of employment: Posting a job they really have no interest in filling. It is there to be measured in a numbered scale in order to make it appear as though economic growth is greater than it truly is.

Sort of in the same vain as unemployment being percentaged at around 9.something %, while in reality the number is more closely 22-23%.

I could totally be off here on your take and my thoughts. But after many years of job hunting, this is how I currently view it.


I like your thinking. I'm gonna use this rationale on the puppeteers later on. All over my case the last few days.:funny1:

#12 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,351 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 03:53 PM

There are plenty of reasons that company have jobs listed that they aren't filling, including


  • making the company look like it's doing well, growing
  • Fishing
  • Having a stable of people ready, so you can hang it over the heads of the workers
  • Incompetence
However what most of corporate America is NOT doing is trying to make things look like economic growth is better. Instead they are trying to make things worse, so they can blame the guy you blame


Those are good reasons. Like i said, I believe (i have not researched this but will now that it is on the table) that there are incentives to making positions look available.

My gripe with the commander and chief has more to do with escalating wars, making new ones and boldly breaking promises he swore as a campaigner he would not. More war from a peace prize recipient is pretty ridiculous.

His failed economic stimulus' is just sprinkles...

#13 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 22,096 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 05:31 PM

Banks are not in the business of owning foreclosed properties or running businesses in foreclosed properties, especially high-risk business such as bars.

#14 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 22,096 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 05:31 PM

Is the establishment even open for business?

#15 Deadshow Dan

Deadshow Dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,882 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 05:55 PM

His failed economic stimulus' is just sprinkles...

The economic stimulus was a wild success. Hundreds of thousands of jobs were saved/added. The auto industry was saved

We need more of it.

#16 TEO

TEO

    VibeGuide

  • VibeGuide
  • 22,096 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 05:58 PM

Matter of perspective.

#17 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,351 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:08 PM

The economic stimulus was a wild success. Hundreds of thousands of jobs were saved/added. The auto industry was saved

We need more of it.


Shovel ready program failed, mang. 800 billion in waste. it created no job and did not address any of the infrastructure woes. Can you point me to where you draw your conclusion there?

#18 Deadshow Dan

Deadshow Dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,882 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:15 PM

Shovel ready program failed, mang. 800 billion in waste. it created no job and did not address any of the infrastructure woes. Can you point me to where you draw your conclusion there?

What you say is obviously based on some lie you were told
"it create no job"
that's a steaming pile

Here ya go: http://tinyurl.com/6edjq2h

in fact, let me amend what I wrote to: millions of jobs were created/saved (1)

#19 B. Diddy

B. Diddy
  • VibeTribe
  • 4,812 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:19 PM

Why do you guys need to turn every thread into the same old debate? You will never convince each other the other is right. Can you not just say "I believe the lefty propaganda." or "I believe the righty propaganda", and agree that we're all screwed no matter who is in power, because they're just different flavors of the same shit we all have to eat?

Thanks.

#20 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,351 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:20 PM

http://www.nytimes.c...ics/02jobs.html
From your Google funny search result. Second item in.....

Meh, according to the NY Times, that's not correct at all and in fact, is completely the opposite.

Obama himself went on to snicker and have a laugh over the fail of the "shovel ready" program.

#21 Deadshow Dan

Deadshow Dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,882 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:26 PM

Why do you guys need to turn every thread into the same old debate? You will never convince each other the other is right. Can you not just say "I believe the lefty propaganda." or "I believe the righty propaganda", and agree that we're all screwed no matter who is in power, because they're just different flavors of the same shit we all have to eat?

Thanks.


You're repeating TaSB's way of thinking.

You're wrong, but thanks for playing

#22 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,351 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:28 PM

Not at all. I don't buy either parties propaganda machine. It isnt my way of thinking what so ever.

#23 Deadshow Dan

Deadshow Dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,882 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:28 PM

http://www.nytimes.c...ics/02jobs.html
From your Google funny search result. Second item in.....

Meh, according to the NY Times, that's not correct at all and in fact, is completely the opposite.

Nope, they're saying jobs saved or created, like I did

Obama himself went on to snicker and have a laugh over the fail of the "shovel ready" program.

misrepresentation

#24 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,351 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:29 PM

PM me how so. I'd love to hear it.

#25 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,351 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:33 PM

the $787 billion stimulus package that was designed to create or save 3.5 million jobs over two years.

Over the weekend, in fact, the administration released the latest figures showing the impact of the stimulus package on jobs, announcing that nearly 600,000 jobs had been financed directly in the fourth quarter of 2009. But it changed the definition of those jobs, making it hard for Congress or the public to keep score and learn how the stimulus is doing.

From February to September, the administration had said, more than 640,000 jobs were saved or created. But in the final quarter of 2009, the administration no longer asked recipients whether all of those jobs were actually created or saved by the stimulus money or whether some of those jobs might have existed without the stimulus money.
Instead, it now simply counts all existing jobs paid for with stimulus money as saved jobs, whether or not they would have been lost without the money.

The new, more expansive definition will make it more difficult to isolate the effects of the stimulus law, which is officially called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, but should make it easier for states and employers to calculate jobs. But the new definition also means that the new tally of 599,108 jobs reported in the fourth quarter cannot be compared with the earlier figures from 2009.

Figuring out whether jobs were actually created or saved by the stimulus ultimately proved too subjective, officials said. The Obama administration originally asked states and employers receiving stimulus money to file reports detailing how many jobs they had created, and how many jobs they had been able to retain “that would not have continued to be filled” without the stimulus money.

But when the recipients filed their first reports last fall, some decided to count nearly every job that was paid for with stimulus money as a “saved” job, while others only counted the jobs that would have actually been lost without the money. Their job tallies varied wildly, even for similar work paid for with similar amounts of money.

#26 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 18,351 posts

Posted 21 June 2011 - 06:56 PM

Lastly, dang it! :bang:

i always get roped into these discussions! :undecided: