I am looking for work. At the start of this year, I signed up to Seek.com to be emailed relevant jobs. Seven months in, I have applied for three. One was overseas but I figured as it was all internet based, I could maybe talk them into letting me work from here. I receive a seek email about twice a week. There has been 2 jobs that would suit me.
I am not on the dole, thankfully. I am not 'bludging'. I am genuinely trying to find work. I am not even looking at the income as a deciding factor. In fact, I am looking at jobs that are a fifth of what I used to earn.
If I have only found three jobs to apply for in seven months, how is ANYONE meant to find 40 jobs to apply for that isn't wasting time for all those involved, from job seeker to recruiter or employer?
I understand that there is a perception of people rorting the system, and there are always a few bad apples in every bunch (of anything), but should extra pressure be put on those that are trying to find work and start over?
If I were a recruiter, or a CEO of a corporation that has regular staff turn over, I'd be voicing disapproval very loudly, as you will pay heavily for these 'initiatives' and your voice will carry more weight than those actually expected to find legitimate work for their future.
This budget policy seems so removed from the reality of looking for work. I would love to see Senator Abetz trial the system for 8 months first to see how it works. First he needs to live on ZERO income for six months (good luck with that!), and then apply for 40 jobs a month while working for free to receive any welfare benefit. Then let's hear if this policy is the way to go. No need to limit it to Senator Abetz, the man with the plan, Mr Hockey could join in too.
Who's up for the challenge?
As always, you don't need to agree with me, but I will delete offensive comments aimed at me, other commenters or members of the Liberal Party.
Linking up with Things I Know, because I know these changes will lead to less jobs being advertised and more jobs being given only by word of mouth, to avoid the inundation of irrelevant applications.
I don't know what sort of work you are looking for or what you are qualified to do e.g. if you are a rocket scientist and are looking for work you will have a more difficult time that someone who is happy to pack shelves or work on a check out register - the thing that annoys me is the people I have seen interviewed on TV have, as a rule, said that they aren't interested in working and don't want to look for a job - they are happy to be on the dole. Those are the people I object to using my tax dollars to fund. I do feel very sorry for those people who are genuinely looking for work and can't find it - provided they aren't been really picky about what work they will or won't do. Having packed shelves for over 8 yrs while holding down a full time job and studying part time, I know that the work isn't that great but we needed the income and were prepared to do whatever we had to in order to get that income.
ReplyDeleteGood luck with the job search - I know how hard it is.
Me xox
Always remember the media picks who they choose to show in the final report. We have had the media film at our school on the eve of a teachers strike, and they would stop filming the minute anyone said they supported the strike and didn't care about the inconvenience.
ReplyDeleteAs for the welfare issue, I acknowledge I have never applied for it, and the only people I know that have were in desperate situations or just out of uni and in all cases were genuinely looking for work. I accept my world vision might be naive.
It is rather ridiculous considering that not every one looking for work are suited for the jobs that may be going. For people in small towns where there's not much/no work, it is going to be rather difficult to apply for 40 jobs a month, especially if they have no qualifications. I am not sure what the answer is, but this isn't it.
ReplyDeleteGah! Wrote an intelligent comment and cyberspace ate it! Short version - completely agree...
ReplyDelete