>Hello group.
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>We really appreciate if you can actively help us by answering our JAVA
>problems as there is a forum for JAVA.

Signature
Paul Tomblin <ptomblin@xcski.com> http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
Graffiti has merely machine-gunned the surviving handwriting ability
clinging to the upturned lifeboats of the good ship 'Cursive'.
-- Saundo, on Palm Pilots
> and thrown several dozen resumes in the garbage after seeing a
> pattern of frequent job changes.
I don't know exactly how frequent and how many job changes define your
pattern, but it would be maybe fair to consider the possibility that
such a pattern can also be caused by incompetent companies, and not only
by incompetent candidates.
zero - 23 Jan 2006 18:26 GMT
Andrea Desole <news@desole.demon.NOSPAMPLEASE.nl> wrote in news:dcda9
$43d519a6$d468cb3c$14319@news.support.net:
>> and thrown several dozen resumes in the garbage after seeing a
>> pattern of frequent job changes.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> such a pattern can also be caused by incompetent companies, and not only
> by incompetent candidates.
Very true. IMO a resume is only an indication, and the only way to get a
real feel of your applicant's knowledge is a test.
Oliver Wong - 23 Jan 2006 19:31 GMT
> Andrea Desole <news@desole.demon.NOSPAMPLEASE.nl> wrote in news:dcda9
> $43d519a6$d468cb3c$14319@news.support.net:
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> Very true. IMO a resume is only an indication, and the only way to get a
> real feel of your applicant's knowledge is a test.
On the other hand, I believe most IT companies receive more resumes than
they'd care for when they advertise for a position, and it costs time and
money to actually interview and test candidates, so the more candidates they
can eliminate (by expecting near flawless resumes), the cheaper it is for
them to run through their recruitment process.
Yes, there's a risk of inadvertently turning away an excellent
candidate, but business is about balancing risks and costs, and hiring new
people, when done properly, is an expensive task.
- Oliver
Paul Tomblin - 23 Jan 2006 21:22 GMT
In a previous article, Andrea Desole <news@desole.demon.NOSPAMPLEASE.nl> said:
>> and thrown several dozen resumes in the garbage after seeing a
>> pattern of frequent job changes.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>such a pattern can also be caused by incompetent companies, and not only
>by incompetent candidates.
Yes, my resume has a couple of short (less than one year) stints. But it
also has one of 6 years and a couple of 4 years.
I was given a bunch of resumes by HR for my last opening, and a couple of
them had ONLY short stints. The ones who'd had only a couple of 3 month
jobs since college got thrown away. Some of the others got a technical
interview. Some of the technical interviews are the reason why I suspect
that many recent graduates bought themselves degrees without actually
learning anything.

Signature
Paul Tomblin <ptomblin@xcski.com> http://xcski.com/blogs/pt/
You're nicer than I. I was thinking "Mark, would you recognize a clue
if one were gnawing on the end of your dick?"
-- random
Andrea Desole - 24 Jan 2006 09:07 GMT
> Yes, my resume has a couple of short (less than one year) stints. But it
> also has one of 6 years and a couple of 4 years.
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> that many recent graduates bought themselves degrees without actually
> learning anything.
these values look to me quite fair. But there are also people who
consider something like 5 years an "ideal" time, and don't appreciate it
if someone has worked for a company shorter or longer. Not that the CV
is thrown away; it's just considered as something negative.
Concerning the quality of the people interviewed, I'm not sure the
duration of their jobs makes a difference. But I might be wrong
Dimitri Maziuk - 24 Jan 2006 01:14 GMT
Andrea Desole sez:
>> and thrown several dozen resumes in the garbage after seeing a
>> pattern of frequent job changes.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> such a pattern can also be caused by incompetent companies, and not only
> by incompetent candidates.
On the gripping hand, if the candidate keeps accepting jobs at
incompetent companies, time after time after time...
Dima

Signature
Well, lusers are technically human. -- Red Drag Diva
Andrea Desole - 24 Jan 2006 09:10 GMT
> On the gripping hand, if the candidate keeps accepting jobs at
> incompetent companies, time after time after time...
True, people should get smarter with experience.
Still, it's not always possible or easy to find out how a company is
from a couple of interviews. In any case, that might make the candidate
naive, but not necessarily a bad developer
Dimitri Maziuk - 25 Jan 2006 17:01 GMT
Andrea Desole sez:
>> On the gripping hand, if the candidate keeps accepting jobs at
>> incompetent companies, time after time after time...
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> from a couple of interviews. In any case, that might make the candidate
> naive, but not necessarily a bad developer
No, just not someone who'd score top points in the selection process.
Dima

Signature
We're sysadmins. Sanity happens to other people. -- Chris King