You're volunteering to apply though...
this post was submitted on 20 Oct 2024
19 points (82.8% liked)
Crazy Ideas
269 readers
1 users here now
Just crazy ideas!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Right, because "if you don't get a job, you get to live in a cardboard box under a bridge" isn't duress at all.
I'm not saying I'm for OP's plan. I'm still thinking it through. But there's nothing "voluntary" about working for a paycheck, or about applying to do so.
Right... we aren't free. Much like the past, and perhaps even in the future. You cannot get hung up on something that is out of your control. We may live and die 10,000 more times before humanity can know true peace.
The best we got right now is "maybe you to could exploit the working class if you grind hard enough".
Sad as fuck considering our level of technological development. Gatekeeping necessities from people to drive them to do what you want. The extra steps to feudalism is not doing it for me.
That's what unemployment is for. :) It's not on the business to pay applicants.
The last time I had unemployment, it was a lousy $64 per week, and only for 3 months no less. Unemployment is a joke.
Depends on your income before you were unemployed... My wife is drawing it right now and it's something like $450 a week for her.
Ah yes, only 17% what I make in a week at a job. Surely that'll keep my household running efficiently
I was working for 6 days a week, 6 hours a day, for $10 per hour, for over 2 years. Yes, $10 an hour sounds like chump change these days, but this was back in like 2007.
Still..
Yes, true that. I was more specifically refering to the interview part, being a pure waste of time if you're rejected. And if it was an in-person interview, you've not only wasted time, but very likely have burned gas going there and back.
You know the saying "When you don't have a job, your only job is to get a job"? Yeah, I think that saying is about a load of horse shit. If looking for a job is considered a job itself, then I feel people should get paid for their wasted time.
Or, ya know, don't have a system where someone files 73 job applications only to get basically nowhere.
In Germany, they all pay for travel expenses, at least.
I don't know if that's the law, but it certainly isn't what I'd consider a Crazy Idea.
Much like looking for housing, we should all be using one service so you only have to enter this information once and there is less of a chance to get scammed.
I have to go to dozens of sites, entering my data into each one manually hoping it's not a scam website.
looks around
checks environment
No....no, I am still on Lemmy. Just had to double check if I somehow was on one of the corporate sites.
I just wasn't expecting all this pro-centralized services talk here. Not that I disagree. I was just expecting some user unfriendly approach.
Ok......but now what if I just start applying at really really high paying jobs, thus getting 1 hour at 4000 dollars an hour for a CEO position, while I have no experience in that field, and a GED.
And then I just apply for 40 jobs I'll never get simply by mass applying. On indeed you just need to upload your resume once, and then click a button. 20 resumes in an hour wojldn't be hard, but now you have 20 hours of billable time. So I work one day every 2 weeks, and never have a job.
Google and Indeed apparently files my job application responses as spam. Fuck online applications, I wanna talk to a human, in person.
This doesn't encourage application processes to be simplified. If anything it will dramatically increase the difficulty in applying for jobs and provide more economic incentives for nepotism.
There are laws against nepotism, at least in the USA.
https://www.mspb.gov/studies/studies/Preventing_Nepotism_in_the_Federal_Civil_Service_1315054.pdf
Granted those laws apparently apply only at the federal level (plus I'm no expert in the subject), nepotism should outright be illegal across the board.
Everyone should have a fair and equal chance to gain employment, without all the bullshit many suffer while seeking an honest job.
Meıbı ė pṙſent v it ƿᵫd bı moṙ vuıėbėl. Ðiſ ƿᵫd krıeıt ė precṙ f kėmpenız t dju̇ſt limit ð nu̇mbṙ v æplikeıcėnz Ðı'l teık.
spoiler
Maybe a percent of it would be more viable. This would create a pressure for companies to just limit the number of applications they'll take.