vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
In the US, if you have fewer than 15 employees, the main discrimination laws don't apply. You don't have to hire certain races if you don't want to. Of course, you might still get taken to court, since some people might not know that, and you might still get bad pr.
"The answer is simple - those six people represent the *company* and their best interests.  They retain all of the records of why they've fired 200+ people, and have every T dotted and I crossed.  When it comes to lawsuit time, they will be there to make sure the *company* comes out on top.   I know it says ""Human resources"" but read those words closely....you are a resource, human.   They are there to manage obtaining that resource until it is no longer useful.    It's sad, but it's also true.  HR is not your friend."
if you put a mcdonald's job on your resume and you are over the age of 25 in a non-white collar position, i guarantee 95% of hiring managers will never call you back. well-paying jobs these days are mostly office based, and hiring managers have a hell of a bias against your non-middle income and above demographic
Isn't it swell? But honestly, this situation is no different than if someone wouldn't hire a black person, an old person, a woman, etc. If hiring managers are stupid enough to ask questions like this, and openly discriminate in their hiring methods, the company is going to get what's coming to them.
"Actually I think the TL;DR is ""Don't rush to fill a position out of desperation, wait for someone who's the right fit. Hiring the wrong person quickly is way more costly than waiting.""  It is a click-baity title, but I think the most glaring offense for me is actually the idea that they're glorifying someone who's personally interviewed every person at the company, which incidentally is only 70 people. For as many people out there that think this is an amazing feat of entrepreneurism - really getting in there with his hands on even the fine grained details - you can find just as many people who will think this is quaint and know it won't scale.  When he's at 500 or 1000 employees is his time really best spent doing this?  I actually think the diversity you'd get by allowing a team freedom to hire after a certain point would be more beneficial provided they have a grasp on corporate culture."
The least amount of experience that a company has, the least it will be prepared to offer its clients. Audio Visual Hires can accompany a number of components such as lighting, sound, staging, custom set designs, plasma screens, and projectors.
Permanent employees are the distinct opposite of contractors. Upwork can easily have business entities (limited liability company equivalents) in multiple countries, and it can make payments between them. Or they can merely use existing payment infrastructure (paypal, amazon) to accomplish the same thing. Their corporate structure is a red herring and most likely unrelated to what they've accomplished.
Is he? Specifically relating to his comment on tech / programming firms; good ones hire you for your problem solving abilities, your networking skills, or so-forth. They don't want to hire a tool for one specific problem if they can hire one that fits many.   This mentality fits many other trades. Why hire a tradesman for your company who has 5 - 10 years of experience of roofing and only roofing, when you can hire one with 3 years experience of roofing, plus 6 years in various other areas? What happens when you don't have a roofing job for 2 months, and the specialist roofer needs training or instruction?  This isn't distilling personality and reward out of the workforce, it's gathering assets that are useful in an ever-changing environment.
Yes and H1B is NOT CHEAPER for companies to employ.  Companies end up paying the H1B salary, the H1B holder, the lawyers, and so on.  H1B's have a skillset that the locals do not. If people do not like it then just get the skillset. This isn't that hard to understand...but the mainstream media just wont explain it.  Great post btw.
Software Contractors are not employees of the company that is procuring the software. Software Contractors necessarily work for another legal business entity. There is a business to business relationship between the procurer of the software and the entity producing the software. Therefore, the company procuring the software is not required to pay a minimum wage, or adhere to any other employment law. When any individual or company orders a software product and agrees to pay for it, that is a fixed priced contract. This happens millions of times a day. The amount of time taken to produce the software has no direct bearing on price. For instance, there is no minimum price for Microsoft Word based on the number of hours taken to produce it. Generally a Software Contractor will be a director and shareholder of a limited liability corporation. Directors are exempt from the standard protection offered under employment law. If the company producing the software was employing non-directors to produce the software, rather than sub-contracting to another business then employment law would apply.
"That's not the case where I'm located. Techs are hired ""temp to hire"" on contract. They are paid less than permanent employees. They aren't given any of the benefits of permanent employees. They are, just as the article says, treated like second class employees. Even third class at one company I worked for. And they are strung along with ""we just aren't hiring right now"" lines and told ""we'll extend your contract again and see if we are hiring at the end next time"". I was laid off from a full time position because we were bought out by another company. I spent 7 months unemployed. I got a call for contract work and it only lasted two weeks. I was paid significantly less than my previous full time job and was not offered any kind of benefits at all. When that contract was up I was offered a contract at another company. Again, I was paid significantly less than I was making before and I was strung along by that company for two years before another contract offered me more money. With that contract I was finally getting paid what I was getting paid at my last permanent position, but again I did not receive the same benefits as a full time employee. That contract let me go after 18 months due to policy that they couldn't string contractors along. I was told that I could wait 6 months and be hired again, though! I then spent four months unemployed until I found my next contract which then hired me full time after 6 months. I've been full time for 2 years here now, but who knows how long that'll last. I've seen companies suddenly ""restructure"", which means they bring in H1Bs. And I can't even blame this on me being a low level tech with no marketable skills. I've been in IT professionally for just a few months shy of 20 years. I've done everything from technical support, to security, to software QA, to system administration. I'm now in a job specializing in hardware. I have a resume that could be pages long with many different skill sets and roles. This is typical for nearly all of the contractors I know in this area.
There are a lot of union jobs like that.  I once was a union worker at a plant.  The company had 11 plants, of which two were union.  The two union plants were not coincidentally the lowest producing plants the company had.  My buddy who got me hired there and I kept getting told to slow down and not work so hard.  While I was there, the company fired a worker for sleeping and drinking on the job.  The company had filmed him doing these things.  He fought it.  The union backed him and he won on the grounds that the company had singled him out - there were apparently other people doing these things, but he was the worst so they had picked on him first.  The company was forced to re-hire him.  A few months later, the company shut down the plant and *everyone* lost their jobs.    Go union.
Wouldn't that cause more problems in hiring.  If small companies that can't afford a fine for not hiring the right race probably won't hire anyone at all.  Now we only have big companies that can afford a discrimination lawsuit will be able to grow.  If we want more jobs we need to make less law on hiring people not more.  Every time to add anther barrier between employers and employees we are going to get less of both.  Only the big companies that know how the systems works will win.
Is Zellers was such a quality company, it would not have been bought out.  So the company, stock and locations were valuable. The staff might hae been part of the problem. In addition most of the jobs do not require any type of skills. This is called entry level work.  This is what you start doing when you have no skills,  get more experience, go to a college or trade school to get more knowledge to become more valuable.
When you want to hire personal assistants, you must be sure that you are hiring in a trusted company or the person you talk to have been proven by a lot of people. You must be wise in choosing one because these people will handle some of your personal things and data.
"More like sales ""guidelines"". The company asks employees to hit certain upsell goals, i.e. selling as many machines with AppleCare (extended warranty) as possible. No specific dollar amounts per employee, however each store as a whole is ranked against all other stores.   They don't really get rid of people. If you are repeatedly late, you're gone. If you're a no show, you're gone. If you are like me and revealing corporate secrets, you're gone. But they don't really can you for not being a sales beast."
"Of course you don't have to pay them - you just might not like the result. As a matter of law - given that I am not a lawyer - I am not aware of any requirement for a company to pay employees business-related expenses. An example might be having a cell phone, and according to this article companies aren't required to pay for you to have a cell phone even if they require you have one and use it as part of your employment. The primary areas where law does exist relates to company uniforms with a logo (in a very limited number of US states) and necessary personal safety equipment (in California and maybe only few other states). All other tool requirements for a job are not prohibited by law, so long as they are not illegally discriminatory (such as requiring people of a certain race or sex to buy something but no one else, etc). So a company can require all sorts of things, from having an internet connection to cell phone to laptop to specialty tools and equipment of all sorts, and they are even allowed to deduct the cost of some things from your pay - just so long as you still get paid minimum wage after the deductions. With all that said, the company's previous payments of fees and willingness to pay a monthly internet fee does not obligate them to pay other fees too, such as moving/installation/etc. They may even decide to no longer provide internet service at their expense and just require you to provide it as a condition of employment. You can insist on it with your employer, and if you don't have an employment contract that forbids it they can fire you or possibly even deduct it from your pay anyway (and this reason might not be one that allows you to collect unemployment insurance benefits - but you'd need to check with an expert on that). You can refuse to pay AT&T directly, and they can cancel the internet service - and your employer can then do the same as in the previous condition. Or you can choose to pay it - or ask your employer to split the cost over a few checks if it is rather high - and that's about it.
&gt;While these workers don't need college degrees, they need at least two years of specialized training plus strong math, reading and writing skills.  Ever hear of training? How about promoting from within? Any company who doesn't hire anyone even when they need manpower because they have a set of mandatory requirements is a dumb company. They reap what they sow.
Tesla has 30,000 employees.  The bottom 1.3% of any company are going to be pretty crappy employees.  I know I work with people I think should be fired for laziness, nastyness or incompetence.  It's not the company's job to pay people if they can't do the job.  Good companies get rid of bad employees or they don't remain good companies.  A key problem with most unions is they protect the bad employees and discourage outstanding performance.
A lot of companies now do credit checks before employment. They may decide that you are untrustworthy by having shoddy credit after a foreclosure/bankruptcy. The past 2 jobs I have they did a credit check. I wonder how companies use that information in the hiring process.
Ask someone in Human Resources. I seriously doubt you are the first person to ask this question for their company and they should be more than happy to help.
Yeah, we had a guy do something similar at my job with a 'back problem' He kept pushing off his return date later and later because of 'new issues and new tests'. Eventually the bosses got tired of dealing with it and filled his position, so as soon as he finally comes back to work he'll get a pink slip.   This is the #1 reason I can see businesses not wanting to hire women of 'childbearing age', to quote the article. It's an expense they can easily avoid. Why pay thousands of dollars for an employee who isn't there, when you can hire someone who (probably) won't leave for as long/cost the company as much. Logically they have no incentive to hire the women, because the company sees them as a liability.
"When employers can get everybody and their dog to apply for a given job, you need to have that four-leaf clover (or at least a referral, which, lucky me, I don't in almost all cases).   Or the best skills.  If you aren't at the top of your game, you probably won't get hired when there are 10 other people that are just as good.  You need to think of ways to creatively differentiate yourself from the competition.  ""And that terrifies me when I think about it that way.""  unsuccessful people generally think this way.  Everything happens to you rather than you being able to change it yourself.  ""Of course, all I can do is keep applying""  All of my best jobs came through my network for friends/acquaintances.  If you aren't getting any interviews, start going  to meetup groups in your industry and make friends.   This is another problem: people don't want to leave the comfort of their keyboard.  Sometimes you just need to get out there."
Top recruitment firms in India fills up the gap between the job seeker and the Company. Other than its own data source it brings together with several job sites such as Naukri, time jobs, jobs ahead and monster India and sources applicants from them for choosing professionals. This way, they support both the job hunter and the company. The reach of these professional search firms is far and wide so the information is rich and very valuable for the company.
The staff of such companies should be highly experienced in their job and updated with latest developments and they should be aware of different kinds of garbage and, especially the hazardous ones.Moreover, they should be trained to deal with different kinds of hazardous substances Sydney and have the knowledge of the risks associated with them.
The very link the OP provided focuses on a group of people who lost their jobs to H1B imports.  The people coming in had no special skillset and the people who lost their jobs were required to spend months training their replacements or forfeit their severance pay.
"That actually sounds somewhat familiar. I looked them up and the first job on their site that looked like Amazon not only was, but was listed as ""Direct Hire"", and linked directly to what's probably an Amazon-operated site, so I don't know what's going on there. Presumably they just happen to have links for both kinds of hiring.  I'd be curious to know what circumstances you've seen contractors at Amazon warehouses. I know there are a couple of situations where we lean heavily on part-time and temporary employees, and I'm far from familiar with the details, but I'm of the understanding that the core workforce at FC's like this one are generally proper employees like I said."
Companies pay their employees in stocks and stock options, so they have an incentive towards increasing a company's share price. There are many elements that go into a stock's price. For example, if you hold a stock for eternity you should be indifferent if the expected present value of all its future dividends (i.e. earnings) equals the price you paid for it. Also, buy-back policies and voting rights determine stock price as well. The theory is that since shareholders want return on their investments they would promote company executives in such a way that their incentives are aligned to increase the share price.
Those are the categories of *federal* protection from discrimination. It is illegal in most states' laws to fire someone for exercising their legally-protected rights, including voting  In this particular case, the company being discussed is based in Florida where is is illegal to fire an employee based on who they vote for under Florida state law Title IX, Ch. 104, § 104.081. (The company also has offices in various other states.)
I agree that if you have 4999 employees you're going to think long and hard about hiring employee number 5000, and probably hold off as long as you can but eventually if you need more employees you're going to do it.  I also don't think a company with, say, 10,000 employees is going to suddenly fire half of them to get to under 5000.  AKA:  they still have an incentive to grow, you can still make more money by growing a slight increase in taxes doesn't change that
"From the perspective of a small business owner:  First there are no entry level positions.  There are only lower paying positions and higher paying positions.  Get the idea that employers are supposed to be your post secondary education out of your mind.  Replace that with working your ass off and impressing employers with your skill set.  The reality is I make a hiring decision based first on these two accounting factors. #1 How much do I have to invest in this person to make them effective #2 How long until this person is covering his/her own overhead and begin to turn a profit. Then you get into ""is this person going to fit with my team"" etc..  I am always going to choose the person that has the best return formula for my business.  Here's a hint, it's the same formula for choosing vendors and making capital purchases.  It's also the very same formula that my customers use when they consider buying from me.  Even a single person in my organization that doesn't fit that formula will cost me business through the loss of customers or not getting a customer we're going after.  For me it works, for candidates looking for a career guidance councilor, it does not. In the capitalist economy my job is to make sure the lights are on, the products or services are good, and your paycheck clears.  If you like me doing my job, then your job is to make me more money, keep my customers happy, and bring new customers to the company.  Entry level doesn't do that so there are no entry level jobs in my company."
In my mind, HR doesn't come into it.   HR is the discipline of hiring, firing, and paying employees. A project manager or project director is not an HR person, and only once/twice a year gets involved with HR related tasks (annual reviews and evaluation etc.).
If we're talking about a very small business (I'm picturing an office with 10-15 employees), I wouldn't want to work in any small business environment where I was unwanted.  And for businesses that small it doesn't make any sense to try to legally force them to hire someone they don't want to work with everyday.  If I'm a non-white person, I wouldn't want to work somewhere where they're so racist they didn't want to hire me because of my skin color.  Actually I wouldn't want to work there as a white person either.
1. Pick hotels/restaurants/bars with your ideal clients.  2. Offer to take/pick up employees to or from work (receptionist/manager/bartender/owner) once a week for free. Anyone who is customer facing can be a great opportunity for your business but try and be smart about this.  3. Build relationships with these people. show them you are kind, courteous, professional, and make it obvious that you speak English well. Smile. This is your opportunity to show them the quality of your service.  4. Ask them for referrals. Give them your business card and make sure there is English on the card. Bring them a snack or a drink the first and second time they send a customer your way.  5. Build stronger relationships with the people who are driving more business to you, and focus your effort on these people. If you get no referrals from someone, then kindly stop giving them free rides.  good luck :)
"It's all good. The statement that someone has to move out of the way for someone else is a different discussion. If you want to be hired as a CEO, the most likely path to get ""hired"" is an Ivy League education and very strong background in your own company. http://www.bestcolleges.com/features/colleges-with-highest-number-fortune-500-ceo-graduates/ If that is not possible, the second choice is going to be being highly skilled in your field and working your way up. That's going to take skill, networking, luck, and a very strong drive to not just be the best in your field, but the best in the industry for the job. Tim Cook (AAPL) is a graduate of Duke and Auburn. Jack Welch commanded GE with an education from UMass and the University of Illinois. They both showed an intense passion for the companies they worked in. The third choice is going to be starting your own company with your own passion and intelligence and backing that with other people who share your passion. Take everything from column A, column B, and marry yourself to your passion and you find this list. Reed Hastings, Micheal Dell, Steve Jobs (post Pixar was learning and failing spectacularly), Larry Ellison, Jean Paul Dejoria (guy has a really cool story about coming up. http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevenbertoni/2013/10/28/business-tips-from-once-homeless-billionaire-john-paul-dejoria/), Sheldon Adelson (He made me over a million by bringing LVS back from 1.50 to 77. I wish I'd bought more), Howard Shultz (Starbucks), The list goes on and on and on. When it is time for them to exit, they pick from the first two examples to fill the position. Smaller companies have several different exit strategies they can employ. There is one thing you will find with every Fortune 500 and Fortune 50 company. They don't do it for the money. The money happens, but by the time you have established yourself as CEO, you have more than you will spend and you know it.
as a company owner in Europe, that is correct. the employee would be gone with (iirc) 80% pay for a full year.  fuuuuuuuck that...  edit: what employees also mostly don't realize, a bunch of similar ages females create a lot of drama. seriously, I'm far from sexist, but it always turns out like that. if you have 3+ girls sitting together there will always be drama at some point. and I mean bad vibe karma that makes you so angry you just want to fire them all out of frustration.   but let me clarify, I do hire women, and I pay them the same amount I would pay a male employee. if you can work like a man, and there is no reason you can't, you're paid the same and you're treated the same.   I just got hyper selective of the characters I hire.
This has been going on for a while.  This is a result of the american idol mentality that hiring managers and HR have.  They want to line up like judges.  Saying there is a skills mismatch is ridiculous.  There are plenty of qualified people out there.  If anything, it says something about how shitty the managers are.
Alright, but why does it take so damn many of them. Unless we really just have that many skeletons in the closet that it takes 6 to keep them contained! I wonder if there is a magic formular for how many HR staff per employees you need.