A few years ago, I was one of the privileged members of the upper middle class. I was making a six figure income and my family was on a spending spree that makes the one that took us into bankruptcy in 1999 pale by comparison. Oh, the debts are smaller, more or less, and we still have the house, this month, but the situation is far more grim.
I used to sneer at disabled parking, occasionally taking a space because, after all, I was only going to be there for a few minutes. Other people I know do the same or worse – they cheat by using someone else's disabled parking placard when that person is in a different time zone. After all, if you're not disabled, what's a few feet difference walking to and from the store door? It's usually pretty easy to get away with that stuff, and it doesn't really hurt anyone....
I had good health insurance coverage, through my employer, of course, and a 401k and all the "goodies" that go with being employed in a high-tech job.
Than 2000 rolled around, and my world changed completely.
First, I got into politics. Not just rallies on the street corners, or signing protest petitions, no, I got suckered into party politics. I went in, thinking I could change the whole rotten machinery into something that actually represented people and would work to better our society. I had this vague idea that politics is kind of an ass-kissing game, where the best brown-nosers would wind up at or near the top, and I was sort of right. But I also thought that injecting some personal integrity into the grimy sewage would help clear it up. I supported good, progressive candidates who had integrity and guts, and I spent thousands of dollars that would have been better invested in CDs for my kids' college funds or my own retirement fund.
In 2001, I came down with some kind of groin injury, to this day my doctors and I still don't know what. It was a minor inconvenience that just took me out of the one activity that helped keep me in shape – soccer, which I loved to referee, to help the kids and keep mine involved as well. But the pain never went away, and instead it got much worse. By 2005, I had to have a couple of surgeries in hopes that they would fix the problem, and neither did. On top of that, I now have a chronic medical condition that I won't name, but it comes with a whole slew of other medical problems that almost never go away.
Still, I had a retirement account and a good solid job and was still making the same low six figures I had been getting since 2000.
In August 2006, I injured my right foot and almost lost it to amputation. I had excellent medical care (thanks to the aforementioned great insurance that didn't cost me anything significant, and all before taxes) and made a full recovery.
Except....
While I was off work on disability, I was laid off. I found a new job within two months, but that also ended with a layoff after another five. My medical coverage was better, and cheaper, and I was making a little more money to boot, but that died abruptly.
Still, we spent like maniacs, went on a couple of vacations we couldn't afford and blew my retirement to hell staying alive and covering the costs of my disability. It took me ten months to find another job, this one a contract job with insurance coverage that is, to put it nicely, vomitous – more expensive, lower coverage and crappy service.
During this entire time (since summer 2005) I got the treat of seeing how disabled people are treated in our society, and it amazes me how blind I used to be, and most of you probably still are. I'll cover that in a moment.
My last layoff came on December 31, 2008. Happy New Year, good luck finding another job, get out.
That was almost 16 months ago, and I'm still looking.
I have since discovered how poorly most people are aware of their own surroundings. Mostly in stores, they push carts that are off to the side or heading in another direction, without ever looking, and taking up two to three times the amount of space they need. Even parents with young children along do that, and they are more at risk than the parents.
So what?
So that person in the disabled cart who is trying to maneuver around the speedy pedestrians without tripping them or running into them is barely seen, and usually noticed only with resentful or guilty stares. How do I know? It's usually me. At best, it's awkward for both of us.
One of my disabilities is that I can barely walk any more. It is painful to have to make it from one end of the parking lot to the door unless I can actually park close up. And guess what else? A lot of those "ADA compliant" facilities, oh, say like the convention centers where political parties often meet, have lots of elevators and escalators, but they are still enormous, with walks of half a mile or more between meeting rooms. Even good discount stores, like Costco, which I love, is huge, and I can rarely make it all the way around the store on my feet. It's no fun any more when you can't walk without pain or severe muscle strain.
I have continuously looked for new employment since my last job ended, but thanks to Wall Street and its lovely money pit that Congress keeps throwing money at because it's too big to fail (who could give out millions of dollars in bonuses without all that help from our pockets, via Congress?), employment in my industry is only now beginning to recover, and the vast majority of it is in a newer direction than where it was two years ago. (That's good, but it means I need new skills, too – more money to feed the beast.)
I have exhausted all of my available resources and am "supporting" my family on borrowed money that, if things don't change soon, I won't ever be able to pay back.
My unemployment runs out in six weeks, and it's about 1/3 of what I really need in order to support my family. My creditors, the ones I'm still talking to, are hesitant to renegotiate my loans, even though there are huge (to me, not to Wall Street or the DoD) federal stimulus packages to "encourage" them to do so (because we just can't tell a corporation to be fair to the people they've screwed and ruined in the last two years, now can we? That wouldn't be "free" enterprise!).
When that time comes, I don't really know what I'm going to do, except maybe starve – oh, wait, there are food stamps, except I won't have a place to store any because I won't have a house any more, or insurance, or medicines, or clothes....
See, in our society, our great, free-enterprise democracy, we are all able to shoot for the stars and become anything we want to become. Unless that happens to include just having a decent standard of living, a living wage, guaranteed health care, all those candy-ass "giveaways" that we just don't do here in the US of A (even though we forced Germany and Japan to do them after WWII, and guess who has the stronger economies today), and every other industrialized nation on the planet has those guarantees with more industry, less poverty, less misery and, oh, that's right – less military, less crime and less war (unless we're in there) than we have here.
So what's my point?
I'm not asking for handouts, or pity, or even sympathy. Don't need that.
Here's what I would like to see:
Everyone needs to recognize once and for all that politics is a money pit for us and the grand giveaway to the rich and our politicians (their lackeys) – from us, from huge corporate slush funds and the straight-out corrupt ultra-rich 0.5% who own the rest of us, lock, stock and two burning barrels. Trillions of dollars (literally) go into politics and hedge funds and credit default swaps and the industry of war and killing and imperialism and subjugation of anything non-white, but we only see a pittance of that to help the poor, the uneducated and the elderly in this country, white or not. (I'll do another editorial on the elderly later – how we treat our senior citizens is shamefully contemptible, and that's the good part.) California is no better than anywhere else in this regard, just more expensive (except for Hawaii).
As for me, I program computers and I write. I prefer to write fantasy, but, in the final analysis, is that really any different than political editorialization? (Yes, it is – fantasy adventures are more fun to read, and write, and not usually as depressing.)
If you know anyone who is looking for a C software developer, tell them about me, or just send them my blog or email address and let them know I'm available. If you know an agent looking for a new, unpublished writer of fantasy epics, poke them my way. I can take it from there.
If nothing else, send me your prayers – every little bit helps.
God willing, that will be enough.
Showing posts with label unemployment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label unemployment. Show all posts
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
The Machine Is Stacked Against You
This isn't a complaint as much as it is a report of how our current economic system works against us. I'd like to see it differently, but this is how it looks right now to me.
I've been unemployed for one day short of fifteen months straight now. I used to make a lot of money, and with some help from the family, I managed to spend nearly all of it. All right, all of it, and then some. My savings are gone, my retirement no longer exists and I'm working with the state of California to get me back to work, as well as fielding offers of interest from whoever reads my resume on Dice or wherever else it shows up online. Want one? :-)
One of my goals in my quest for work at this point is to broaden my field, so I'm looking at what the state can offer me in terms of training, just to do that. They have some really great programs available, but the devil is in the details, as they say.
In Orange County, where I live, you can't get a place to live for one person for less than around $1000 per month. That's just a fact of life around here. If you are the sole supporter of a family, the costs are the same, but the expenses are higher. If you happen to "own" a home (i.e., you bought a house and live in it but the house isn't paid off yet), it costs more.
According to information I have, I'm getting the top rate that unemployment pays out - roughly 2/5 of what I actually need to cover all my ongoing bills and expenses, so of course I am cutting corners, borrowing from pretty much anyone who will loan me money, gratefully accepting donations (note the donation button to the right of this post - hint, hint :-), returning CRV redemptible cans and bottles, even the glass ones I used to avoid because they weigh a ton and aren't worth all that much for the weight - pretty much scraping together anything I can to get by.
In its infinite wisdom, Congress was able to get through a nifty little (and I mean that literally) bill called the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, or ARRA for short, that creates opportunities for the unemployed to find a way back to work. This includes some money for training if you want to broaden your field of expertise and have a reasonable expectation of being successful in the changed field.
There are some restrictions on the money: to qualify for it, you have to be dead flat broke and yet still be able to support your family on the pittance that you get from unemployment AND go to school to get your new classes completed. For me, this is really quite simple: lose my house and the attendant 60+% of my bills that go with it, along with a huge majority of my personal property that has little or no market value, move in with someone else and hope my unemployment will actually cover our survival needs until I can finish the classes and get back to work.
In other words, in order to benefit from the generosity of our Congress and President, who are amazingly willing to spend Hundreds of Billions of dollars killing people all over the planet, TRILLIONS of dollars to help bail out the richest people on the planet (Wall Street and the too-big-to-fail banks), I need to be below the poverty level of income and still support my family to afford to take advantage of this government "handout."
Isn't that completely upside down?
Doesn't it make more sense to invest TRILLIONS of dollars getting a productive economy back in order, putting people back to work and letting the ultra-rich 0.5% who own the rest of us flounder to find their own way without gouging the taxpayers (which they are NOT) for the next ten generations?
Doesn't it make more sense to stop wasting Hundreds of Billions of dollars manufacturing and using devices whose sole purpose is to obliterate themselves and anyone who happens to be within the blast radius (or live in it later on for millennia to come in the case of radioactive weapons like "depleted uranium" ammunition, which is about as safe as living inside the active part of an X-ray machine) and instead devote even a significant fraction of that amount in genuine living support for tens of millions of citizens who are the fastest growing segment of our population (the unemployed, like me)?
Okay, I guess that last part was complaining. The rest before that was how it works. Just the facts.
I realize that there are other options, and I don't mean leaving the country, which you need a passport to do, and guess what? That costs money, too. Come to think of it, pretty much all the other options also cost money, and credit is a little tight right now because the banks haven't figured out a way to use up all that bailout money before they deign to loan out the pennies that are left to the rest of us, and Exxon-Mobil is making so much profit they don't know what to do with all those billions, either. They've already bought everything they didn't own before....
The middle class, that segment of society that makes it work and which was growing from the late 1930s until the early 2000s, is dying of starvation. The rich like it that way, and the poor - get more numerous. Even given the dark sneaky stuff that the government has been pulling right under our noses and behind our backs during that same time frame, America was strongest when the middle class was growing, and corporations took care of their employees.
Instead of continuing and expanding that power and building ourselves up to be completely indomitable and unassailable, we funded the Germans and the Japanese who "lost" WWII, and they learned the lessons that apparently we did not. Despite all of their weaknesses, they now have the strongest economies in the world, while we have the richest and poorest and are sinking faster than anything or anyone else.
How many times do we really need to learn the lessons of the 1929 depression? Apparently at least one more, because we're spiralling down into that same kind of situation, but many times worse and on a global scale.
The machine is stacked against us. We need to work to reverse this insanity.
I've been unemployed for one day short of fifteen months straight now. I used to make a lot of money, and with some help from the family, I managed to spend nearly all of it. All right, all of it, and then some. My savings are gone, my retirement no longer exists and I'm working with the state of California to get me back to work, as well as fielding offers of interest from whoever reads my resume on Dice or wherever else it shows up online. Want one? :-)
One of my goals in my quest for work at this point is to broaden my field, so I'm looking at what the state can offer me in terms of training, just to do that. They have some really great programs available, but the devil is in the details, as they say.
In Orange County, where I live, you can't get a place to live for one person for less than around $1000 per month. That's just a fact of life around here. If you are the sole supporter of a family, the costs are the same, but the expenses are higher. If you happen to "own" a home (i.e., you bought a house and live in it but the house isn't paid off yet), it costs more.
According to information I have, I'm getting the top rate that unemployment pays out - roughly 2/5 of what I actually need to cover all my ongoing bills and expenses, so of course I am cutting corners, borrowing from pretty much anyone who will loan me money, gratefully accepting donations (note the donation button to the right of this post - hint, hint :-), returning CRV redemptible cans and bottles, even the glass ones I used to avoid because they weigh a ton and aren't worth all that much for the weight - pretty much scraping together anything I can to get by.
In its infinite wisdom, Congress was able to get through a nifty little (and I mean that literally) bill called the American Reinvestment and Recovery Act, or ARRA for short, that creates opportunities for the unemployed to find a way back to work. This includes some money for training if you want to broaden your field of expertise and have a reasonable expectation of being successful in the changed field.
There are some restrictions on the money: to qualify for it, you have to be dead flat broke and yet still be able to support your family on the pittance that you get from unemployment AND go to school to get your new classes completed. For me, this is really quite simple: lose my house and the attendant 60+% of my bills that go with it, along with a huge majority of my personal property that has little or no market value, move in with someone else and hope my unemployment will actually cover our survival needs until I can finish the classes and get back to work.
In other words, in order to benefit from the generosity of our Congress and President, who are amazingly willing to spend Hundreds of Billions of dollars killing people all over the planet, TRILLIONS of dollars to help bail out the richest people on the planet (Wall Street and the too-big-to-fail banks), I need to be below the poverty level of income and still support my family to afford to take advantage of this government "handout."
Isn't that completely upside down?
Doesn't it make more sense to invest TRILLIONS of dollars getting a productive economy back in order, putting people back to work and letting the ultra-rich 0.5% who own the rest of us flounder to find their own way without gouging the taxpayers (which they are NOT) for the next ten generations?
Doesn't it make more sense to stop wasting Hundreds of Billions of dollars manufacturing and using devices whose sole purpose is to obliterate themselves and anyone who happens to be within the blast radius (or live in it later on for millennia to come in the case of radioactive weapons like "depleted uranium" ammunition, which is about as safe as living inside the active part of an X-ray machine) and instead devote even a significant fraction of that amount in genuine living support for tens of millions of citizens who are the fastest growing segment of our population (the unemployed, like me)?
Okay, I guess that last part was complaining. The rest before that was how it works. Just the facts.
I realize that there are other options, and I don't mean leaving the country, which you need a passport to do, and guess what? That costs money, too. Come to think of it, pretty much all the other options also cost money, and credit is a little tight right now because the banks haven't figured out a way to use up all that bailout money before they deign to loan out the pennies that are left to the rest of us, and Exxon-Mobil is making so much profit they don't know what to do with all those billions, either. They've already bought everything they didn't own before....
The middle class, that segment of society that makes it work and which was growing from the late 1930s until the early 2000s, is dying of starvation. The rich like it that way, and the poor - get more numerous. Even given the dark sneaky stuff that the government has been pulling right under our noses and behind our backs during that same time frame, America was strongest when the middle class was growing, and corporations took care of their employees.
Instead of continuing and expanding that power and building ourselves up to be completely indomitable and unassailable, we funded the Germans and the Japanese who "lost" WWII, and they learned the lessons that apparently we did not. Despite all of their weaknesses, they now have the strongest economies in the world, while we have the richest and poorest and are sinking faster than anything or anyone else.
How many times do we really need to learn the lessons of the 1929 depression? Apparently at least one more, because we're spiralling down into that same kind of situation, but many times worse and on a global scale.
The machine is stacked against us. We need to work to reverse this insanity.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Employment Opportunities
I've been unemployed now for more than a year, and I've been meaning to say something about this for a few weeks now. Actually, this subject is one that inspired me to create a blog to share with all you fans, interested people, enemies and so on.
One of the great things about being unemployed is that I have been privileged to see lots and lots of job openings and how they're written, and why they don't work. I can tell you right here that the main reason they don't work is that they are not written for the job seeker at all, they're mostly written from the employer's HR perspective, and that really hurts.
For one thing, we seekers are looking for something that describes a position where we would feel competent, capable, contributory and challenged to do well. Most of the job descriptions I've seen are so idealistic that they would not be available at all if the ideal candidate existed. (In other words, if that employer could find a candidate like that, they would already be employed and not looking for a job.)
I say this because I've seen a whole lot of job openings that are easily jobs where I could perform well and contribute a lot, and with over 30 years in my field now, I can learn what I don't already know. But most of the job descriptions are written as if the candidate has to fit perfectly, and my take on that is - if that person existed, they wouldn't be looking at the description to find a new job, they'd already have it.
I should probably also say that I have yet to find a job description that fits me that well, but, then, I'm not employed, either.
I'm going to go through a few actual job postings I've seen right here, so I can make it clear what I'm saying and you, the employer or seeker reading this blog, will have no trouble understanding what I mean.
These are actual job listings taken from CalJobs, LinkedIn and a few other places, with names and other unique identifiers removed so as not to make it too obvious who goofed (especially if that would be me).
Here's one from LinkedIn:
"Looking for talented PHP developer - for company in Israel 2+ years experience"
This is one I like: it tells me what the company is looking for and where it's located, right up front. In fact, most of the postings I've seen on LinkedIn are really good. The ones that are not either don't include the location or have other deficiencies in common with the rest, which I will now proceed to cover.
I'm registered for searches at CalJobs, a free job listing service provided by the California Employment Development Department, with a resume built in their system using their forms, designed to get me a job in software development in C or C++ on UNIX or Linux systems, applications server-side or system level (except that I don't do device drivers, but there's no way to say that), OR providing PC services. Their search engine doesn't have a lot of flexibility, so my primary area of focus is software applications development.
Here are four from CalJobs:
(Column four is the rate of pay, if you didn't guess....)
These aren't too bad, although the job titles are kind of bland and unrevealing. Let's take a closer look at the job descriptions themselves.
COMPUTER SOFTWARE ENGINEER
"Providing pre-sales technical and business support Work closely with Sales Delivery Teams Manage project timelines, scope, budget, risk and resource allocation and scheduling Help Project teams and assist resources in the technical development Manage POCs Conduct Presentations and demos Participate in information gathering, define work problems, and design programs and procedures to resolve problems. Gather, understand and document client requirements. Prepare for and actively participate in client meetings when required Other Build a Microsoft Business Intelligence Practice working under the auspices of the BI Program Manager"
(The format is also an artifact of the CalJobs system - it's pretty flat and, thus, a little tricky to read, but that's not what wrong with this entry.)
To begin with, a software engineer is a person who engineers, or in plain English, develops, software. This position is for someone in pre-sales and technical support. In fact, there is nothing in this job description that even relates to the profession of software engineering.
Okay, so maybe the listing employer has something a little different in mind from me when they call this a "computer software engineer" position. However, that makes it no less a complete waste of my time because I am a computer software engineer and this is nothing like what I do. I could do it, but it's not what I want or in my areas of expertise, and the misleading title makes it look like something it is not. Foo.
SOFTWARE SOLUTION ARCHITECT
(Let me say up front that I knew from this title it wasn't what I'm looking for, but it is such a broad-scope title it could mean anything. Let's take a look....)
"Providing pre-sales technical and business support Work closely with Sales Delivery Teams Manage project timelines, scope, budget, risk and resource allocation and scheduling Demonstrates architecture and design expertise in the area of Microsoft BI and SharePoint Help Project teams and assist resources in the technical development Manage POCs Conduct Presentations and demos Participate in information gathering, define work problems, and design programs and procedures to resolve problems. Gather, understand and document client requirements. Prepare for and actively participate in client meetings when required Build a Microsoft Business Intelligence Practice working under the auspices of the BI Program Manager"
Hold on a minute - isn't that almost verbatim what the Computer Software Engineer position said? It's pretty close, but the names make them seem worlds apart. I think this is the same company, and that worries me, too. Here's the one distinction between these two positions:
"Demonstrates architecture and design expertise in the area of Microsoft BI and SharePoint"
So what was the point of all that other stuff that was word-for-word the same between these two positions? Why was it buried in the middle?
Another really big point here is that both of these descriptions clearly involve Microsoft expertise, but neither one of them includes that tiny little tidbit ("MS") up front in the job title. In fact, a whole lot of the CalJobs and other job search listings leave out this rather salient fact that could be called out in the title with just two letters. In general, I haven't done a lot of Windows-specific development, and my expertise is in UNIX and Linux, not Microsoft, so these little distinctions are extremely important in my field.
Let's try number three:
SENIOR ENGINEER
"Participate in the architecture and development of software utilities and tools that are used to develop, validate and support Western Digital disk drives. Provide technical guidance for developing applications in the Windows and Linux environments. Develop driver, kernel and application level solutions with SAS, SATA, legacy ATA, and serial IO drivers. Under moderate supervision, write drive testing tools for CPU architecture, including PPC, ARM x86-64, and perform system-level programming in Linux with Slax, Fedora, Ubuntu and RedHat. Interface with other groups to define and develop new tools and enhance existing software utilities. Perform PCI device driver development utilizing T10/1760-D SAS and T10/1826-D SAT-2 protocol. Implement the Linux driver stack for storage devices. Write software applications that interface directly with hardware in C/C++ and Java with the aim of optimizing operational efficiency. Support Western Digitals integration of advanced features into new drive products. Required skills include: System-level programming experience in Linux: Slax, Fedora, Ubuntu and RedHat; Linux driver stack for storage devices; PCI device driver development; C/C++ and Java; writing software applications that interface directly to hardware; SAS ,SATA, legacy ATA, and serial IO driver; writing drive testing tools for CPU architecture, including PPC, ARM x86-64; and T10/1760-D SAS, T10/1826-D SAT-2 protocol. Education and experience requirement: Bachelors degree in Electrical Engineering or Electronics Engineering or Computer Science + 5 years progressively responsible and post-baccalaureate experience. Will also accept a Masters degree in one of the same fields + 3 years experience."
When you get through all of that, what it boils down to is a senior-level Linux device driver writer (okay, engineer). This is more of a hard engineer position than the average software engineer and it is a low-level, close-to-the-hardware kind of job. The question is, how do I get that from the title "Senior Engineer?" I don't, and neither do you. Why? Because "Senior Engineer" is an HR title for a particular level of technical developer in this company's internal parlance. I was a "Senior Engineer" early in my career, for two years after I had been an "Engineer" for a year and a half and before I became "Principal Engineer" for at least two years after that. In all that time, I never once wrote a single device driver (nor since, but I digress) - I was a key software engineer in the development of a brand new operating system, and I loved that job.
Here's one more chance:
SOFTWARE ENGINEER
"This engineer will design, code and test medium to large software modules as they apply to a specific product. Will also create the requirements analysis, functional design, and detailed design specifications as they relate to the implementation of the software. Essential Functions: Designs, codes, and tests medium to large software modules Participate in short term planning of IT projects and programs Participate in group design meetings Analyze, interpret and make decisions affecting work methods and procedures within an overall program Participates in the development of larger modules which may also include requirements analysis, architectural design, or detailed design tasks under the direction of a more experienced engineer Will write technical documentation Develop software using at least one programming language and platform Will utilize source control tools and related build mechanisms Will install and configure software development tools and/or operating systems Will debug and correct problems in existing software Estimates the complexity of a certain task and an appropriate schedule Will create the requirements analysis, functional design, and detailed design specifications as they relate to the implementation of a software module Will provide direction to less experienced engineers Can resolve complex software problems/bugs via advanced debugging techniques Will follow all company standards, including the software coding standards document Additional Functions: Must be able to work independently with little supervision. Must practice regular continued self-education. Exercise troubleshooting and problem solving skills. Must have a willingness to teach others. Requirements: Candidate must be experienced with OO concepts and have a working knowledge of Java. B.S. Computer Science or equivalent experience. Strong understanding of object oriented analysis, design and programming. At least 4 years of Java programming experience, object oriented analysis, design and programming. Ability to work both individually and in team environments is essential. The individual must be articulate and communicate effectively, both in written and oral formats. Experience in a J2EE application server environment. Experience in Ajax, JSP, hibernate Experience in an enterprise transactional environment, a plus. Experience in XML, UML and SQL a plus. Real time programming or other thread management, a plus. Box Office Management or other ticketing experience, a plus. Experience as a group Leader a plus. All other duties as assigned."
Wow, now that's a mouthful - 363 words. Here's the sad part - the first mention of what this job is really about doesn't occur until word number 243, 2/3 of the way through the description. What is that? "OO" which is computer parlance for Object Oriented, followed a few words later by a really important key word, Java. Do you remember what I said earlier about what I do? I develop software in C or C++. No mention of Java.
So, what, Mark? For crying out loud, what do you want, anyway?
See, there are lots of languages used in programming computers, a.k.a., developing software. Some are similar, some are so different you wouldn't know they even fall into the same class of anything unless you happen to know the field anyway.
My point is this: what this company is looking for is a Java Developer, not just any software developer. This routinely excludes people who specialize in C, LISP, COBOL, PHP or any other 4GL, SQL - in fact, it pretty much excludes anyone who doesn't know Java specifically, or, at the closest, C++ or C#. As a job seeker, I not only want to know this up front, I need to know it, for their benefit as well as mine.
There are just a couple more things I'd like to go through here, and they're pretty simple.
PRINCIPAL SOFTWARE ENGINEER - [COMPANY] CLIENT DEVELOPMENT - [unique identifier]
"Location(s) US - California - IrvineTitle Principal Software Engineer - [Company] Client Development - [omitted]Job Description [Company]’s software utilizes patented data de-duplication technology to backup data once – and only once – on a global basis. [Company] identifies redundant data segments at the source, thereby reducing the amount of network bandwidth used and data stored. Using this and other patented [Company] technology, customers can achieve an industry leading 300:1 daily data reduction in real-world applications. [Company] already leverages [---]’s broad portfolio of offerings, such as [unique identifier] as a target for disk-based backup. For customers that require both disk- and tape-based data protection solutions, [Company] wants to talk to candidates interested in the position of Principal Software Engineer located in our Irvine, CA facility.Principal Software Engineer - [Company] Responsibilities* Software engineer to work on development and support of an advanced, multi-platform, disk-based backup system. Work on a small development team in Irvine, CA on a dynamic and fast growing product within a large, stable, publicly traded company.* Development tasks: designing, developing and maintaining multi-threaded, client/server C++ code, correcting bugs, handling field escalations, etc.* Possibly acting as a project leader or liaison in coordinating communications between development teams, QA & Customer Support.Skills* Experience with development of Unix/Linux and Windows software products highly desired* Experience with backup, data compression and filesystem internals highly desired* Experience with databases (Oracle, SQL Server, Exchange, DB/2, etc.) or multiple operating systems (Windows, Linux, Solaris, MacOSX, HP-UX, AIX, Netware, etc.) highly desired* Understanding of requirements for Enterprise-class software products highly desired* Very good problem-solving analytical skillsExperience /Education* B.S. (or better) in Computer Science* 8+ years industry level software experience* Skilled in C++ programming* Excellent English communication and writing skills* Enjoys working on a team and helping others [EOE disclaimer, etc.]"
I know this company, I interviewed there a few years ago, when they were looking for this exact same position. I didn't get the job then, which always left me a little mystified, but I know it's one I could not only do and well, but excel at - it's in my area, I'm familiar with the technologies, and so on. My suspicion is that it's one of those openings where they want an exact fit, and the sad part is that they won't find one. After this many years and still having the same opening, anyone they hired between then and now didn't work out, for whatever reason, and they're either too picky or they don't really need this position filled. Either way, it's a lose-lose for them. (BTW, I did apply, haven't heard back, may apply again with a better cover letter - we'll see....)
To make the rest short, I saw a whole slew of listings on another job search site for "Software Developer III," "Software Developer IV," "Software Engineer II" and the like. Do you have any idea what those are? Don't they sound a lot alike?
In fact, they are not (of course), and for the same reasons I noted above about those positions, too.
So, what's the point?
Employers: if you have a job opening for a Java Applications Developer, please call it that, not just "Software Engineer." If you're looking for a hardware engineer, please do not call it "Applications Engineer" - yes, I saw a few like that. If you can just step a word or two outside your HR title boxes, you make it easier for those of us looking for work to find a good fit and benefit you.
Job Seekers: remember that the majority of employers don't do what I just asked, and be patient. Above all, don't expect the perfect description you find to be a perfect fit. If you should happen to find a really good fit, make sure you write a really good cover letter that says so. Otherwise, your resume will wind up with every other not-quite-perfect match - in the HR file for "future prospects" or just the circular file....
One of the great things about being unemployed is that I have been privileged to see lots and lots of job openings and how they're written, and why they don't work. I can tell you right here that the main reason they don't work is that they are not written for the job seeker at all, they're mostly written from the employer's HR perspective, and that really hurts.
For one thing, we seekers are looking for something that describes a position where we would feel competent, capable, contributory and challenged to do well. Most of the job descriptions I've seen are so idealistic that they would not be available at all if the ideal candidate existed. (In other words, if that employer could find a candidate like that, they would already be employed and not looking for a job.)
I say this because I've seen a whole lot of job openings that are easily jobs where I could perform well and contribute a lot, and with over 30 years in my field now, I can learn what I don't already know. But most of the job descriptions are written as if the candidate has to fit perfectly, and my take on that is - if that person existed, they wouldn't be looking at the description to find a new job, they'd already have it.
I should probably also say that I have yet to find a job description that fits me that well, but, then, I'm not employed, either.
I'm going to go through a few actual job postings I've seen right here, so I can make it clear what I'm saying and you, the employer or seeker reading this blog, will have no trouble understanding what I mean.
These are actual job listings taken from CalJobs, LinkedIn and a few other places, with names and other unique identifiers removed so as not to make it too obvious who goofed (especially if that would be me).
Here's one from LinkedIn:
"Looking for talented PHP developer - for company in Israel 2+ years experience"
This is one I like: it tells me what the company is looking for and where it's located, right up front. In fact, most of the postings I've seen on LinkedIn are really good. The ones that are not either don't include the location or have other deficiencies in common with the rest, which I will now proceed to cover.
I'm registered for searches at CalJobs, a free job listing service provided by the California Employment Development Department, with a resume built in their system using their forms, designed to get me a job in software development in C or C++ on UNIX or Linux systems, applications server-side or system level (except that I don't do device drivers, but there's no way to say that), OR providing PC services. Their search engine doesn't have a lot of flexibility, so my primary area of focus is software applications development.
Here are four from CalJobs:
| COMPUTER SOFTWARE ENGINEER | Irvine | 92612 | Not stated | Long Term | 1/15/2010 |
| SOFTWARE SOLUTION ARCHITECT | Irvine | 92612 | Not stated | Long Term | 1/15/2010 |
| SENIOR ENGINEER | Lake Forest | 92630 | Not stated | Long Term | 1/15/2010 |
| SOFTWARE ENGINEER | Costa Mesa | 92626 | Fair market | Long Term | 1/15/2010 |
(Column four is the rate of pay, if you didn't guess....)
These aren't too bad, although the job titles are kind of bland and unrevealing. Let's take a closer look at the job descriptions themselves.
COMPUTER SOFTWARE ENGINEER
"Providing pre-sales technical and business support Work closely with Sales Delivery Teams Manage project timelines, scope, budget, risk and resource allocation and scheduling Help Project teams and assist resources in the technical development Manage POCs Conduct Presentations and demos Participate in information gathering, define work problems, and design programs and procedures to resolve problems. Gather, understand and document client requirements. Prepare for and actively participate in client meetings when required Other Build a Microsoft Business Intelligence Practice working under the auspices of the BI Program Manager"
(The format is also an artifact of the CalJobs system - it's pretty flat and, thus, a little tricky to read, but that's not what wrong with this entry.)
To begin with, a software engineer is a person who engineers, or in plain English, develops, software. This position is for someone in pre-sales and technical support. In fact, there is nothing in this job description that even relates to the profession of software engineering.
Okay, so maybe the listing employer has something a little different in mind from me when they call this a "computer software engineer" position. However, that makes it no less a complete waste of my time because I am a computer software engineer and this is nothing like what I do. I could do it, but it's not what I want or in my areas of expertise, and the misleading title makes it look like something it is not. Foo.
SOFTWARE SOLUTION ARCHITECT
(Let me say up front that I knew from this title it wasn't what I'm looking for, but it is such a broad-scope title it could mean anything. Let's take a look....)
"Providing pre-sales technical and business support Work closely with Sales Delivery Teams Manage project timelines, scope, budget, risk and resource allocation and scheduling Demonstrates architecture and design expertise in the area of Microsoft BI and SharePoint Help Project teams and assist resources in the technical development Manage POCs Conduct Presentations and demos Participate in information gathering, define work problems, and design programs and procedures to resolve problems. Gather, understand and document client requirements. Prepare for and actively participate in client meetings when required Build a Microsoft Business Intelligence Practice working under the auspices of the BI Program Manager"
Hold on a minute - isn't that almost verbatim what the Computer Software Engineer position said? It's pretty close, but the names make them seem worlds apart. I think this is the same company, and that worries me, too. Here's the one distinction between these two positions:
"Demonstrates architecture and design expertise in the area of Microsoft BI and SharePoint"
So what was the point of all that other stuff that was word-for-word the same between these two positions? Why was it buried in the middle?
Another really big point here is that both of these descriptions clearly involve Microsoft expertise, but neither one of them includes that tiny little tidbit ("MS") up front in the job title. In fact, a whole lot of the CalJobs and other job search listings leave out this rather salient fact that could be called out in the title with just two letters. In general, I haven't done a lot of Windows-specific development, and my expertise is in UNIX and Linux, not Microsoft, so these little distinctions are extremely important in my field.
Let's try number three:
SENIOR ENGINEER
"Participate in the architecture and development of software utilities and tools that are used to develop, validate and support Western Digital disk drives. Provide technical guidance for developing applications in the Windows and Linux environments. Develop driver, kernel and application level solutions with SAS, SATA, legacy ATA, and serial IO drivers. Under moderate supervision, write drive testing tools for CPU architecture, including PPC, ARM x86-64, and perform system-level programming in Linux with Slax, Fedora, Ubuntu and RedHat. Interface with other groups to define and develop new tools and enhance existing software utilities. Perform PCI device driver development utilizing T10/1760-D SAS and T10/1826-D SAT-2 protocol. Implement the Linux driver stack for storage devices. Write software applications that interface directly with hardware in C/C++ and Java with the aim of optimizing operational efficiency. Support Western Digitals integration of advanced features into new drive products. Required skills include: System-level programming experience in Linux: Slax, Fedora, Ubuntu and RedHat; Linux driver stack for storage devices; PCI device driver development; C/C++ and Java; writing software applications that interface directly to hardware; SAS ,SATA, legacy ATA, and serial IO driver; writing drive testing tools for CPU architecture, including PPC, ARM x86-64; and T10/1760-D SAS, T10/1826-D SAT-2 protocol. Education and experience requirement: Bachelors degree in Electrical Engineering or Electronics Engineering or Computer Science + 5 years progressively responsible and post-baccalaureate experience. Will also accept a Masters degree in one of the same fields + 3 years experience."
When you get through all of that, what it boils down to is a senior-level Linux device driver writer (okay, engineer). This is more of a hard engineer position than the average software engineer and it is a low-level, close-to-the-hardware kind of job. The question is, how do I get that from the title "Senior Engineer?" I don't, and neither do you. Why? Because "Senior Engineer" is an HR title for a particular level of technical developer in this company's internal parlance. I was a "Senior Engineer" early in my career, for two years after I had been an "Engineer" for a year and a half and before I became "Principal Engineer" for at least two years after that. In all that time, I never once wrote a single device driver (nor since, but I digress) - I was a key software engineer in the development of a brand new operating system, and I loved that job.
Here's one more chance:
SOFTWARE ENGINEER
"This engineer will design, code and test medium to large software modules as they apply to a specific product. Will also create the requirements analysis, functional design, and detailed design specifications as they relate to the implementation of the software. Essential Functions: Designs, codes, and tests medium to large software modules Participate in short term planning of IT projects and programs Participate in group design meetings Analyze, interpret and make decisions affecting work methods and procedures within an overall program Participates in the development of larger modules which may also include requirements analysis, architectural design, or detailed design tasks under the direction of a more experienced engineer Will write technical documentation Develop software using at least one programming language and platform Will utilize source control tools and related build mechanisms Will install and configure software development tools and/or operating systems Will debug and correct problems in existing software Estimates the complexity of a certain task and an appropriate schedule Will create the requirements analysis, functional design, and detailed design specifications as they relate to the implementation of a software module Will provide direction to less experienced engineers Can resolve complex software problems/bugs via advanced debugging techniques Will follow all company standards, including the software coding standards document Additional Functions: Must be able to work independently with little supervision. Must practice regular continued self-education. Exercise troubleshooting and problem solving skills. Must have a willingness to teach others. Requirements: Candidate must be experienced with OO concepts and have a working knowledge of Java. B.S. Computer Science or equivalent experience. Strong understanding of object oriented analysis, design and programming. At least 4 years of Java programming experience, object oriented analysis, design and programming. Ability to work both individually and in team environments is essential. The individual must be articulate and communicate effectively, both in written and oral formats. Experience in a J2EE application server environment. Experience in Ajax, JSP, hibernate Experience in an enterprise transactional environment, a plus. Experience in XML, UML and SQL a plus. Real time programming or other thread management, a plus. Box Office Management or other ticketing experience, a plus. Experience as a group Leader a plus. All other duties as assigned."
Wow, now that's a mouthful - 363 words. Here's the sad part - the first mention of what this job is really about doesn't occur until word number 243, 2/3 of the way through the description. What is that? "OO" which is computer parlance for Object Oriented, followed a few words later by a really important key word, Java. Do you remember what I said earlier about what I do? I develop software in C or C++. No mention of Java.
So, what, Mark? For crying out loud, what do you want, anyway?
See, there are lots of languages used in programming computers, a.k.a., developing software. Some are similar, some are so different you wouldn't know they even fall into the same class of anything unless you happen to know the field anyway.
My point is this: what this company is looking for is a Java Developer, not just any software developer. This routinely excludes people who specialize in C, LISP, COBOL, PHP or any other 4GL, SQL - in fact, it pretty much excludes anyone who doesn't know Java specifically, or, at the closest, C++ or C#. As a job seeker, I not only want to know this up front, I need to know it, for their benefit as well as mine.
There are just a couple more things I'd like to go through here, and they're pretty simple.
PRINCIPAL SOFTWARE ENGINEER - [COMPANY] CLIENT DEVELOPMENT - [unique identifier]
"Location(s) US - California - IrvineTitle Principal Software Engineer - [Company] Client Development - [omitted]Job Description [Company]’s software utilizes patented data de-duplication technology to backup data once – and only once – on a global basis. [Company] identifies redundant data segments at the source, thereby reducing the amount of network bandwidth used and data stored. Using this and other patented [Company] technology, customers can achieve an industry leading 300:1 daily data reduction in real-world applications. [Company] already leverages [---]’s broad portfolio of offerings, such as [unique identifier] as a target for disk-based backup. For customers that require both disk- and tape-based data protection solutions, [Company] wants to talk to candidates interested in the position of Principal Software Engineer located in our Irvine, CA facility.Principal Software Engineer - [Company] Responsibilities* Software engineer to work on development and support of an advanced, multi-platform, disk-based backup system. Work on a small development team in Irvine, CA on a dynamic and fast growing product within a large, stable, publicly traded company.* Development tasks: designing, developing and maintaining multi-threaded, client/server C++ code, correcting bugs, handling field escalations, etc.* Possibly acting as a project leader or liaison in coordinating communications between development teams, QA & Customer Support.Skills* Experience with development of Unix/Linux and Windows software products highly desired* Experience with backup, data compression and filesystem internals highly desired* Experience with databases (Oracle, SQL Server, Exchange, DB/2, etc.) or multiple operating systems (Windows, Linux, Solaris, MacOSX, HP-UX, AIX, Netware, etc.) highly desired* Understanding of requirements for Enterprise-class software products highly desired* Very good problem-solving analytical skillsExperience /Education* B.S. (or better) in Computer Science* 8+ years industry level software experience* Skilled in C++ programming* Excellent English communication and writing skills* Enjoys working on a team and helping others [EOE disclaimer, etc.]"
I know this company, I interviewed there a few years ago, when they were looking for this exact same position. I didn't get the job then, which always left me a little mystified, but I know it's one I could not only do and well, but excel at - it's in my area, I'm familiar with the technologies, and so on. My suspicion is that it's one of those openings where they want an exact fit, and the sad part is that they won't find one. After this many years and still having the same opening, anyone they hired between then and now didn't work out, for whatever reason, and they're either too picky or they don't really need this position filled. Either way, it's a lose-lose for them. (BTW, I did apply, haven't heard back, may apply again with a better cover letter - we'll see....)
To make the rest short, I saw a whole slew of listings on another job search site for "Software Developer III," "Software Developer IV," "Software Engineer II" and the like. Do you have any idea what those are? Don't they sound a lot alike?
In fact, they are not (of course), and for the same reasons I noted above about those positions, too.
So, what's the point?
Employers: if you have a job opening for a Java Applications Developer, please call it that, not just "Software Engineer." If you're looking for a hardware engineer, please do not call it "Applications Engineer" - yes, I saw a few like that. If you can just step a word or two outside your HR title boxes, you make it easier for those of us looking for work to find a good fit and benefit you.
Job Seekers: remember that the majority of employers don't do what I just asked, and be patient. Above all, don't expect the perfect description you find to be a perfect fit. If you should happen to find a really good fit, make sure you write a really good cover letter that says so. Otherwise, your resume will wind up with every other not-quite-perfect match - in the HR file for "future prospects" or just the circular file....
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)