[remotemass (OP)]

I wrote the following letter to a job recruiter and did send a carbon copy of the email to many media outlets.
Would really appreciate your comments and to start a discussion on how the scientific community can help improving the current job recruitment process. This is not directly related to Science and there may be more pressing questions to be answered by Scientists, but hopefully, some will be more available for a discussion and/or to leave a few of their thoughts and comments.

Dear J.,

Usually, I don't reply to emails from job recruiters or just tell them, yes sure, and send them a link to the following video:

But for some reason, I felt like giving you a proper reply.

I am an engineer and although I work as a webdesigner my dream job is working with LabVIEW with all the equipment that I want or require. I don't have that. I don't even have LabVIEW software, since it is not free, and I would possibly hate to work with LabVIEW in a laptop on my bed, as I do in most of my activities all day.

Also, I could have a good job as a web developer and be very happy with it but from my experience, living in London since 2004, the job recruitment process is so unfair and sucks so much that I don't give a sh1t about it.

The first thing is that I think it should be illegal to have more than one CV and should be illegal to send it to anyone by post or by email. The law should be clear: you are not allowed to send your CV to anyone and cannot have multiple CVs. The only CV you have must be the CV you have at the Job Centre in the UK. If you need to make changes to it you need the Job Centre to make those changes.

Job recruiters and job matching websites could still operate and make business but they could only rely on your Job Centre CV and profile. This would mean that if you were not looking for job, not available in the job market, they would promptly and automatically know that and be binded by that information. Also having just one CV instead of having different CVs for different job applications would make the CV more reliable and would avoid annoying people with CVs piling as soon as someone opens a vacancy and avoid the problem of having no way of stop receiving them when the vacancy is no longer available.

On the other hand. I think it is ultra unfair that qualified people, with all the required skills, qualifications and even with a degree, may spend one or more than one day, preparing for the interview, dressing up, etc. without having to be paid. As you know, one day of work as a Software Engineer in London is at least £350/day. But Google Engineers earn easily 6 figures a year, so, I would probably ask at least £500 for a one day interview and if they wanted the old-fashioned business of going to a second interview they would have to pay me £1000 in advance for me to consider even talking with them for 5 minutes on the phone or send them my CV, that as I said, should be made by the Job Centre and should be just one. Updated when required, if new informations or changes where proved necessary and true. On top of not being paid we have to answer million dollar questions, for free...

Also, I think job interviews should be audited by independent authorities so that discrimination of minorities and any kind of unfairness could be easily spotted. You should get a mark everytime you went to a job interview and that mark would be audited by the independent job interview auditing authorities, that would obviously be obliged to be report it all to the Job Centre so that it could better understand each case of the job seekers needs.

On top of that, there should be a randomness factor in every job pick. I will not apply to a job if I think I will never be the best candidate for that position or if I think I will be told that I have too much skills for that position. As you know, every-time a company opens a job vacancy it gets dozens of applications, sometimes hundreds. The CEOs and CTOs know that very well. And they are so afraid of being flooded with emails with CVs and Covering Letters that they almost beg, or even pay, job recruiters for them not to say they need qualified professionals and have positions to fill. The result is that we have most companies afraid of opening job vacancies. Of course there are much more places to be filled than the vacancies that are open and listed on the job recruitment world. But the reality is that it is terrifying the idea of starting to get hundreds of emails asking for job interviews, when you barely have time to read a few of the hundreds of CVs you start receiving, much less going for face-to-face or phone interviews.
The randomness factor should be as fair as possible. The best candidates for a job position should have much higher chances to get the position but still, the randomness factor would make sure that even if you had the bare minimum of eligibility for that position you would still have at least a tiny, but fair, chance of winning the position. And if you did you would get the job for the probation period being paid or be paid that probation period (usually 3 months) exempt of the need to work or attend at all if the employer didn't want you and did not have much luck.

I am a scientist and have a bachelor's with honours in computer engineering, in the UK. I am affiliated with the "Institution of Engineering and Technology" (theiet_org) and with the Engineering Council (engc_org_uk).
I have been advocating, namely writing to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and to other Engineers of Universities where I did study, that all Engineers in the UK should be granted an annual Universal Basic Income for Engineers in the UK.

Unfortunately, that would probably be as costly as the surveillance systems we have and would unlikely be funded by the unfair and corrupt money of the Oil Industry. Or by the Industry of Plastics, of Natural Gas, Nuclear Power, Cold Fusion, National Ignition... you name it. The money of cow's beef and milk maybe would sponsor it, if we used as much marketing and advertisement as they do. Or if we all used our heads.

Kind regards,
Daniel Alexandre
London, UK

PS: I reserve the right to use this message or send it, anywhere and to whomever I want.

[Bored chemist]

I would possibly hate to work with LabVIEW in a laptop on my bed, as I do in most of my activities all day.

That's not something I would want on record for prospective employers to see.

I think job interviews should be audited by independent authorities so that discrimination of minorities and any kind of unfairness could be easily spotted.

Did you ask the relevant  enforcing authority about this?
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en

The law should be clear: you are not allowed to send your CV to anyone and cannot have multiple CVs.

That's really stupid; it practically prevents a change in career.

I have earned a living in  chemistry and in IT.
If I applied for a chemistry job, I wouldn't want to force a potential employer to plough through lots of irrelevant IT stuff or vice versa.

they are so afraid of being flooded with emails with CVs and Covering Letters that they almost beg, or even pay, job recruiters for them not to say they need qualified professionals and have positions to fill.

That's an odd thing to say to a recruiter who wants to get paid to do that- it's their job.

[alancalverd]

Substitute "athlete" or "musician" for "software engineer" and see if it makes sense.

Why does a pub entertainer get £50 for a night's work, and a successful pop star or orchestral conductor get £5000?  Because you are worth exactly what others are prepared to pay for your services.

I don't see any inherent human right to be employed at all. There are legal rights to prevent exploitation, slavery, discrimination, etc., but there is no class of person or corporation charged with a duty to employ others. If I choose to employ or contract someone to do something, it's up to me how I go about finding the person I want (subject to discrimination legislation etc.) 

It's worth noting that the guys who earn most and/or have the most fun doing it, are self-employed.

And also that university education in the UK nowadays has nothing to do with demand for qualified employees - it's a scam to reduce the unemployment statistics and saddle the taxpayer with unsettled student debt instead of dole payments.

If you don't like wearing a suit, don't apply for office jobs. Learn a trade, wear overalls, and sell your skills from door to door - carpentry, bricklaying, sparks, maintaining and driving HGVs and site machines.... all vital, well paid, and offering the possibility of being your own boss.

[vhfpmr]

Why does a pub entertainer get £50 for a night's work, and a successful pop star or orchestral conductor get £5000?

Economist Prof. Robert Frank would have it that it's the winner-take-all effect.

His argument:
Once upon a time each music hall had a resident singer, some were a little better than others but there were enough music halls and audiences to provide work for lots of singers. Then along comes recording technology, and now all of a sudden everybody can listen to recordings of the very best singers, so you quickly end up with a handful of singers being millionaires, whilst the rest are singing in pubs and clubs for beer money even though the difference in talent might be negligible.

[Bored chemist]

Why does a pub entertainer get £50 for a night's work, and a successful pop star or orchestral conductor get £5000?

Economist Prof. Robert Frank would have it that it's the winner-take-all effect.

His argument:
Once upon a time each music hall had a resident singer, some were a little better than others but there were enough music halls and audiences to provide work for lots of singers. Then along comes recording technology, and now all of a sudden everybody can listen to recordings of the very best singers, so you quickly end up with a handful of singers being millionaires, whilst the rest are singing in pubs and clubs for beer money even though the difference in talent might be negligible.

Interestingly, the same is true of sports.
The clever bit is to sell the same performance, not just to a room full of a paying audience, but to the whole world.

[Bored chemist]

I have been advocating, namely writing to the Secretary-General of the United Nations, and to other Engineers of Universities where I did study, that all Engineers in the UK should be granted an annual Universal Basic Income for Engineers in the UK.

It's sometimes hard to know where to start.
You can't say "namely" like that without giving a name (not a description) of the sort of advocacy you undertook.
It's unrealistic to think that anyone at the UN thinks that their remit includes the UK's benefits system; even less so that the head of the UN hasn't got better things to do.
And, of course, there's nothing special about engineers.
If you guarantee a UBI it has to be UNIVERSAL.

So, what you did was send a letter to recruiters that they probably passed round the office, had a good laugh at and then put in the bin.
You should hope they don't recall your name.

[alancalverd]

Interestingly, the same is true of sports.
The clever bit is to sell the same performance, not just to a room full of a paying audience, but to the whole world.

Way off the subject, but much more interesting, I beg to differ from my learned friend (now there's a surprise).

You can't sell the same performance in sport! I remember some superb coaching films (pre-video days!) of Peter May and Colin Cowdrey  executing classic shots, and the 1966 World Cup Final gets dusted off whenever any team member dies (a bit late for collecting royalties) but in general Test Match Highlights and Goal of the Month have the currency of yesterday's newspaper. Apart from prize money you can only earn as much as people are prepared to pay to watch you do it live next time.

At the other end of the spectrum, Mick Jagger made a serious point in a radio interview a couple of years ago. He pointed out that for thousands of years the only way to make a living  from music was by writing, teaching, or doing live gigs. Then Edison came along and for 100 years you could play a song or a symphony once and make a fortune for all concerned - right up until the 1980s, when anyone could share and download anything for free, so the only way to make a living nowadays is by writing, teaching, or playing live gigs.....

And as for "negligible" difference in talent, every amateur really should do one gig with a professional.  Amateurs practice until they can get it right, professionals practice until they can't get it wrong. "The Voice" is great fun until one of the judges gets to sing, and it's clear that there is a yawning gulf between the wannabees and even the hasbeens.

And not just in music. In my student days we recruited a young pro soccer player for the annual match against the staff. He said to the captain "if you want me to score, clap your hands". Every time, from every position, no problem.