What you don’t realize, dear, is that people don’t get interviewed/hired for lots of things, many of which are beyond their control. This was just another case of that.
I once didn’t hire a guy because he had these really, really thick glasses that made his eyes look absolutely huge when he looked directly at me.
Another time I didn’t hire a female because she was too damn attractive to work in IT. Following the interview, I heard lots of comments from people on her looks. I could that was going to be an issue with her performing the job as it was.
Sorry for a little dose of reality there, toots.
Now, to address you directly about the statement you made, and my reasoning behind it.
Did you ever stop to think that sometimes people don’t put things on their resumes? If the system administrator from HERE were looking for a job and he put this place down as one of his experience, don’t you realize that all a prospective employer needs to is spend 15 minutes here to find out that he’s likely unqualified (be it talent, time management skills, or lack of the “I need to fix it” factor) for any real systems administrator job? Any one with a brain wouldn’t put this place down if they wanted to show how well they can perform as a systems administrator. See, the serious IT people don’t stop working (just because it’s 5 pm or weekend) unless whatever they’re doing is working as it should.
I’m not taking the gamble; not with this economy and the number of resumes I’m getting. You can carefully scrutinize every ink drop on his resume when it comes across YOUR desk. Maybe hire him, because, you know, you’re just such a god damn good person. Then you can feel all philanthropic and shit.
Who cares? Seriously. Who cares? There are 17 others to choose from, and some of those will be disqualified for equally stupid reasons. It’s the way it goes.
Besides, I’m not looking for brilliance. Brilliant systems administrators are pains in the ass. I prefer very smart with a good disposition toward the users. Every brilliant sysadmin I’ve ever worked with (peers, subordinates, managers alike) have always been bad with the users.
At first, I thought Dudley Garrett’s original statement about not hiring someone just because they share a name with someone else he doesn’t like was a big whoosh. Since this appears not to be the case, I really hope his location field is accurate, as I wouldn’t want to think I was less than 2,000 miles away from him. Funny shit, though.
No, not bimbo, you ass. I really don’t know how you read it like that.
It’s kind of the latter, but you paint it in such a different picture than reality.
Problems with a hot IT woman:
The pervs will always call asking for her to help them.
The not-so-hot women will be especially catty toward her.
The sexless IT goons who work for me (I say that affectionately) would definitely have a hard time with it, I think. People aren’t robots, you know. And regardless of beautiful, orderly, and professional you think the corporate world is, it’s not. Guys talk about women all the time, just not when women are around. Guys fart when women aren’t around. There are lots of things that happen within sub-groups that larger groups are oblivious to.
Sorry, man. I thought the same thing before I became a manager of people in IT. It’s awfully rare for a hot woman get along well with male-dominated environments. I’m not saying it’s not possible, but it’s definitely rare. And it’s not because of her, it’s the dysfunctional people around her. It sucks and it’s unfair.
I have always worked in mixed-sex environments. When one of the female staff has been particularly attractive - yes, the men take a little time to ‘adjust’ to her looks; but they do. Life goes on. And the same applies when an attractive man appears on the scene: the women will ogle him. But if someone is incapable of doing his or her job because of how attractive someone else is, they would have to look for another job.
I really don’t understand how your work environment seems to be.
ETA: And I’ve worked in IT related businesses, and yes, there have been geeks, who have lacked some social skills, but, eventually, somehow, they managed. Or moved on.
So fire the people who prove that they can’t get work done when she’s around. Don’t punish the victim.
e: I mean, I can kinda understand where you’re coming from. There’s a good-looking girl where I work, and she has to put up with a lot of staring, and also this one creep catalogues every time her and I talk ( ) and exactly how long we do so, then runs around telling everyone. That’s creepy as hell, but I’m trying to help her work with management to deal with it. It sure as hell isn’t her fault, and she shouldn’t be the one to suffer.
Those are all problems you have with your male employees, not your female employees. Quite frankly, my company doesn’t get a whole lot of females interested in the kind of work I do, but I’m not the only female in the division where I work.
And though our employees, both male and female, go from 1 to 10 on the attractive scale, everybody does their job or they don’t work here anymore.
I third or fourth the “sack the people who can’t do two things at once.” In my experience the ones who can’t keep their mouth out of the gutter tend to be the most incompetent as well.
By all means, yes! Fire half the IT dept of male antisocialites because this one female might be a good fit for the company after spending the resources to train her and the whole crew of replacements!
Except, y’know, if she were a good fit for the company, she would’ve been hired.
It’s such a shame that the brilliant minds here who think experienced workers can be turned around instantly at a new job aren’t making hiring decisions all over the place!
Jesus. I’ve been on the shit end of hiring decisions, too, but at least I have the good sense to see that there are more than just a couple of factors, and that potential new hires are never, EVER worth upending the entire workforce of established warm bodies.
And, to get back on track, CL has had years of members paying them for what amounts to crap service with more ads than most free boards on the net. We’ve begged them to take some IT advice, let us know what Jerry’s work schedule is like, or at least provide some feedback on where those years of dues were going, since they certainly didn’t look like they were going to help the board’s performance. Defending CL’s decisions because we “don’t know Jerry’s task list” is downright inane. We don’t know shit because the people whose services we were until recently paying for refused to tell us shit.
(Of course, I’m using ‘us’ in a broad sense - I’ve only paid for a year, but I’ve lurked since well before the boards went premium.)
) and exactly how long we do so, then runs around telling everyone. That’s creepy as hell, but I’m trying to help her work with management to deal with it. It sure as hell isn’t her fault, and she shouldn’t be the one to suffer.