slemslempike: (Default)
[personal profile] slemslempike
I hate stupid requirements in job applications.

"Commitment to good quality research". Really? Well, damn, I'm a deliberately slap-dash researcher, with no pride in my work and a commitment to making it as shoddy as possible. I guess I can't apply. I mean, what on earth can they tell from the answer to that?

Date: 2005-07-04 10:35 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] zoje-george.livejournal.com
Whether you can read and follow directions, I'd wager.

Date: 2005-07-04 10:55 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] slemslempike.livejournal.com
But they can tell that from the other marginally less stupid questions on there. Why all these hoops?

Date: 2005-07-04 11:00 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] zoje-george.livejournal.com
Never underestimate the level of busywork created for absolutely no reason by HR and personnel departments.

Date: 2005-07-04 10:40 am (UTC)
jekesta: Houlihan with her hat and mask. (Jungle!Delenn)
From: [personal profile] jekesta
Really that's one of their requirements? God. I bet they expect you to not steal from them or burn down their offices either. Moon on a stick.

Date: 2005-07-04 10:52 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] slemslempike.livejournal.com
No burning? Oh no! When I was looking at the Uclan website at their startling lack of jobs for me, I saw that they had a "Centre for Fire and Explosions". I would quite like to work there. Stupid jobs.

Date: 2005-07-04 12:58 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] glitterboy1.livejournal.com
Ha!

How stupid. Remember to point out that you use a spell-checker, too. Clearly, they need to be reassured.

Date: 2005-07-05 04:05 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] biascut.livejournal.com
I bet it's something that their funding body requires them to put in. But I could just about see that it might describe a choice between someone who is doing research because it gets them paid vs. someone who is doing research with a full awareness of the purposes that their research might serve and why it was so important that it was thorough and careful?

Date: 2005-07-05 04:21 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] gair.livejournal.com
Yeah, I'd guess that it's something they have to put in for the purpose of transparency and paper-trail-leaving. My old Department is currently selecting for a new lecturer post, and my ex-supervisor is working on the shortlisting, and she tells me that she has to provide a REASON in WRITING why every single non-shortlisted person isn't short-listed, so that... I don't know. So that if someone complains that they never get shortlisted for positions at this Department and they think it's just because the Head of School hates them, the School Secretary can check the file and say "No, it is because your list of publications consists of two essays in a non-peer-reviewed webjournal, and you therefore clearly do not demonstrate a commitment to good quality research."

But now all of this is making me think about Heidegger, so I had better go and lie down.

Date: 2005-07-05 04:33 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] slemslempike.livejournal.com
I suppose so. But I don't like it!

Profile

slemslempike: (Default)
slemslempike

July 2023

S M T W T F S
      1
23456 78
9101112131415
16171819202122
23242526272829
3031     

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Jun. 20th, 2025 03:39 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios