Slashdot Mirror


What Do You Want in a Job Website?

antifoidulus asks: "After reading some complaints about monster.com from both the perspectives of job seekers and employers it struck me as how, even in 2006, most job sites are incredibly poor at what they do. So I ask my fellow Slashdot readers, both job seekers and employers, what do you really want in a jobs web site? What features are totally lacking in the current crop? Also, what aspects of the current systems do you love/hate?"

14 of 642 comments (clear)

  1. To be blunt... by B5_geek · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Jobs not recruiters..

    --
    "The price good men pay for indifference to public affairs is to be ruled by evil men." ~Plato (427-347 BC)
    1. Re:To be blunt... by needacoolnickname · · Score: 5, Funny

      I couldn't find a moderation category for Hell Yeah!

    2. Re:To be blunt... by basic0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I couldn't agree with this more. I won't even look at job postings by recruiters. If an employer is serious about hiring, I fully expect them to be involved in the hiring process from the start. This Homer Simpson "can't someone else do it?" attitude completely turns me off of whatever job it may be.

      On a related note, I wonder how long it'll be until the job recruiters are outsourcing their positions overseas so even THEY are barely involved. I hear capitalism works pretty well when jobs disappear and nobody can afford to buy anything.

  2. I want... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    A job that pays me to tastes coffee and doughnuts with a good wage, benefits and an early retirement plan.

  3. Sanity checking? by PornMaster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm sick of seeing "open" or "market" for salary ranges.

    I'm sick of seeing job postings that want someone to be experts in Cisco, Windows administration, Exchange, AD, Linux, Solaris, Oracle, SAP, and perl scripting experts for $60k.

    I'm sick of seeing job postings with technology contradictions, including requiring more years of experience with a technology than it's been around.

    I'm sick of seeing job postings for jobs that don't exist -- find a way to penalize recruiters who post non-existant jobs for resume collection.

    I'm sick of seeing job postings which misclassify jobs entirely. Find standardized ways of describing a position, like using SAGE's job descriptions -- http://www.sage.org/pubs/8_jobs/core.mm

  4. Cluefullness for job requirements by Alien54 · · Score: 5, Funny
    none of these jobs that go like this:

    Entry level position, must have 5 years experience in .net 2.0, 4 years in perl 6, ....

    and so on for an absurd laundry list of arbitrary skils which tell me that the people hiring are either clueless or insane.

    --
    "It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
  5. Blunt reviews from current employees... by mayhemt · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The job descrptions should include the reviews/comments from current employee/s (could be anonymous) who is/are working in the same position as the seeking title. That would clearly tell the aplicant what to expect or how many years to stick with the company. Forget about the description of jobs posted by original head hunter. they dont know the field work, nor the results of the job. just some lazy ass manager sends them requirements & headhunters add some bells & whistles & post on sites/newspapers. we need honest comments from current employees.

  6. As a contractor.. by BlueBoxSW.com · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... I really don't use job sites, but I've poked around a bit.

    1) ban recruiters
    2) manditory salary ranges
    3) must include company name so I can do research
    4) use a good set of standard tags (travel, COBOL, PMI, etc)
    5) list when you're deciding to award the job

  7. Less experienced openings by tcjohnson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    As in, things for a bright college student to do, without needing 10 years of experience in everything. I mean, I get the point, but I *know* that I'm capable of doing a few things here and there.

  8. Re:I want... by themoodykid · · Score: 5, Funny

    Hmmm. Have you considered a career in Law Enforcement?

  9. Here's what I dislike about Monster by JourneyExpertApe · · Score: 5, Informative

    1. Their main revenue source these days seems to be from student loan refinance companies.
    2. They allow bogus "professional training" companies to masquerade as employers.
    3. They don't make it clear how much information others can learn about you (e.g., can a complete stranger find your name, address, phone number, etc.? Can your current employer see that you recently posted your resume?)

    A good job website would work like this. Job seekers can post one or two resumes online for free. Employers can search all resumes for free. They can contact job seekers for a small fee. Job seekers should be able to choose which employers can see their contact info. Any "employer" offering job seekers anything other than a real job or internship should not be allowed to use the site. Predatory student loan refinancing companies should be completely excluded from the site.

    --
    If you can read this sig, you're too close.
  10. Re:More Real Jobs by mthreat · · Score: 5, Informative

    Indeed.com is a good step in the right direction. (disclaimer: I work there)

    Indeed currently has 3.4 million jobs from the last 30 days. It lets you search jobs from thousands of sites in one place. And it has a cool job trends tool.

    Oh yea, and it has a site for Canadian jobs, too.

  11. I second that... by Vellmont · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There's nothing I hate more than having to go through some recruiter (who often turns out to be a scumbag). What I want in a jobsite is an actual connection between job seekers and employers, with no middlemen getting in the way. The recruiters are a problem in more ways than I can count.

    --
    AccountKiller
  12. I'm not yet convinced by Presence1 · · Score: 5, Informative

    You have a point that a degree, even from an Ivy League institution, does not automatically confer common sense, an ability to solve problems in the real world in real time, or even a guarantee that the person knows how to think well.

    It is also sadly the case that many schools and so-called professors are a complete waste of time (and that is being generous).

    I also think that most HR people and recruiters suck -- they don't really understand the real requirements, and just match lists of requirements and capabilities (and usually badly at that).

    I have an Ivy degree, and was self taught in the computing field, so I know the value of both. In fact, I feel that being self-taught can be a distinct advantage, because one's thinking might not be as constrained as it would be with a formal education.

    Yet, as an employer (running software companies), I always started my basic requirements for all positions, even front-office support type positions, with a requirement for a four-year degree or commensurate experience. I have occasionally used the "commensurate experience" exception, and was well rewarded with excellent employees, but the hurdle was high.

    Requiring a degree gave me two things as an employer. First, I knew that the applicant had passed the admissions filter and had demonstrated some ability to think and complete work over a period of years. Yes, it is VERY imperfect, but it is something. Second, an education, especially a liberal arts education which we strongly preferred, can dramatically extend your ability to think in different ways; the student should have been systematically exposed to many more modes of thinking than are encountered in ordinary life. All too often this means nothing, and I must still evaluate each case, but my odds are much improved over the pool of the un-degreed.

    The next thing I do with all applicants is to read their writing and resumes as a work product unto itself. How well are they doing the task at hand (of applying for a job)?

    You, unfortunately, would have already failed this screening, even with a degree. Your third sentence jumped out and hit me over the head with the fact that you don't know the difference between possessive and plural, or between "there" and "their", and these are repeated errors. It is not merely being a 'grammar-nazi'. How you communicate matters -- do you expect the computer or someone else to debug your code? You are asking them to do it with your writing.

    I would have to ask two questions: First, if you are this careless or uneducated with your primary language of communication, how careful or educated will you be with a computer language? Second, I will have to worry about every memo leaving your desk making my organization look questionable? Every good thinker I know uses English as a primary tool, does it well, and immediately recognizes the difference in those that do and do not.

    Moreover, I would need to see more than just 'I'm so much better than Jack and Joe with their degrees'. I see good enthusiasm and 'get it done' attitude, but I'd need to see more evidence of precision, rigor and forethought in your work (not that it doesn't exist, but it is not evident here).

    If you want to do well being hired by others, I'd suggest getting a good degree, and being absolutely ruthless with your instructors. Accept nothing less than clear, rigorous instruction. Seek out the instructors others call tough. You are paying for an education -- demand the best. Because, frankly, the degree itself isn't worth crap -- there are plenty of degreed people I wouldn't hire to sweep the floors.

    Alternatively, start your own company. That way, you can hire yourself without a degree, and the people that hire you (your customers) will be more focused on what you can do for them now than what you did in the past. But again, be rigorous -- ask the question "would you hire yourself?", and do whatever it takes to answer that question "Yes" before you start.

    Good luck in whatever path you choose.