I know this will probably make me sound like an ass, but whatever, I'm frustrated. I think it's kind of bull that veterans get automatic preference for government jobs just because they are veterans. I just received notification that I won't be considered for a job because there were too many applicants with veteran preference. In a previous job I applied for, the hiring manager I knew was so frustrated by this policy because the vets would get put in the front of the line, wash out of the training, re-apply, then, because technically because they were still qualified, would get put in front of the line again. Yeah, I know, they served our country, gave up their lives, yadda yadda...but it's still kind of annoying to me. At least I admit I'm an asshole for it.
Post by RitzyHeifer on May 24, 2012 10:46:36 GMT -5
I understand; our system is a testing-based points and vets get an automatic 20 points. So if I test and score 100, I'm still behind any one who is a veteran who earned an 81 or higher and they only interview the top 3 candidates.
Casinos around here give hiring preference to Native Americans. It's almost impossible to even get an interview because of that. You'd think that they would go for the most qualified person....
Casinos around here give hiring preference to Native Americans. It's almost impossible to even get an interview because of that. You'd think that they would go for the most qualified person....
That isn't really how it works. There are some pretty strict guidelines.
Post by sweetnsour on May 24, 2012 10:55:08 GMT -5
I only half agree. I don't think they should get extra points but if you have two candidates that are similar then I think the vet should take precedence. I think the vets earned it.
Disabled people also get special consideration for gov't jobs so that might affect your chances. Basically if you are up against a disabled vet, you don't have much of a chance.
My husband has been trying to get a gov't job for awhile so I understand your frustration.
Yeah, it sucks. It certainly sucked for my grandpa who was rejected from joining the military during WWII (heart condition) & then could not get a job anywhere because he hadn't served & that was REALLY looked down upon by everyone--not just gov't jobs. He ended up driving a taxi & moving furniture (his heart never failed him). They never got above the poverty line. Growing up dirt poor, uneducated (3rd grade) & not at least being able to at least get in the military is a recipe for a lifetime of struggle. That being said my dad & brother (he just got out after 3 tours in Iraqa) are both vets so I do understand the commitment & sacrifice.
Post by onomatopoeia on May 24, 2012 10:55:42 GMT -5
The degree program I'm in has a lot of ex/ current military, and this issue is frequently discussed on both sides. I think there are some jobs where it makes more sense for than others. I can understand how it's frustrating. Then again, I just figure I could get that perk too. All I have to do is spend a few years overseas getting shot at.
Casinos around here give hiring preference to Native Americans. It's almost impossible to even get an interview because of that. You'd think that they would go for the most qualified person....
Well assuming that you live where the casino is built on Native American lands and the revenues go directly back to the operating tribe and knowing the poverty rate on reservations, I'm not sure why NA preference here is a bad thing.
yeah, I have been pretty outspoken with my anti-war stance, but this is something I see as very good.
I've worked in homeless shelters, and there are a disproportionate number of vets who struggle with homelessness, drug abuse, alcoholism, and mental illness. For obvious reasons, this is an at-risk group for numerous social problems. If we can keep them employed, society as a whole benefits.
Veterans can get up to 10 point preference where I work. That doesn't mean they will get the entire 10 points. I'm pretty sure (from talking to cw who are former military) that it's pretty difficult to get the whole 10 points.
A lot of the point system for entry level government jobs are based on that multiple choice test candidates have to take. If you don't click "yes" to them all, then you're SOL b/c so many people are trying to get into the government and with the freeze, there are few places able to hire.
I understand the sacrifice too...I mean, dad and brother are both vets...I'm kind of being a child stomping her feet here. So while I respect that sacrifice, it is frustrating that people who are just as, if not more so qualified are being passed over because they do not get the preference for being a vet. I want to serve my country too, and I don't believe the military is the only way to do it, but it makes it really hard when I can't even get an interview to do so.
yeah, I have been pretty outspoken with my anti-war stance, but this is something I see as very good.
I've worked in homeless shelters, and there are a disproportionate number of vets who struggle with homelessness, drug abuse, alcoholism, and mental illness. For obvious reasons, this is an at-risk group for numerous social problems. If we can keep them employed, society as a whole benefits.
Team vets.
I think even if a vet doesn't struggle with these issues, there is a perception on the part of many potential employers that they *might*, resulting in a hard time getting hired.
Casinos around here give hiring preference to Native Americans. It's almost impossible to even get an interview because of that. You'd think that they would go for the most qualified person....
That isn't really how it works. There are some pretty strict guidelines.
I'm sure all casinos are different. From my experience with the one near me, they rather hire NA people that have horrible work history and are unreliable (don't show up to work, no reliable transportation, no experience, don't know how to act at work) instead of the people that actually have experience and show up to work every day.
Casinos around here give hiring preference to Native Americans. It's almost impossible to even get an interview because of that. You'd think that they would go for the most qualified person....
Well assuming that you live where the casino is built on Native American lands and the revenues go directly back to the operating tribe and knowing the poverty rate on reservations, I'm not sure why NA preference here is a bad thing.
I understand that argument, but it should still go to the most qualified person.
yeah, I have been pretty outspoken with my anti-war stance, but this is something I see as very good.
I've worked in homeless shelters, and there are a disproportionate number of vets who struggle with homelessness, drug abuse, alcoholism, and mental illness. For obvious reasons, this is an at-risk group for numerous social problems. If we can keep them employed, society as a whole benefits.
Team vets.
I worry about vets in these states too. The skyrocketing rate of suicide of vets is terrible. But I am not worried that I am competing with these vets though. A vet who is struggling with drug abuse, PTSD, or mental illness would not qualify for the types of jobs that I am applying for. I think it would be wonderful if our government would do more for those who did need more support, I really do.
I understand the sacrifice too...I mean, dad and brother are both vets...I'm kind of being a child stomping her feet here. So while I respect that sacrifice, it is frustrating that people who are just as, if not more so qualified are being passed over because they do not get the preference for being a vet. I want to serve my country too, and I don't believe the military is the only way to do it, but it makes it really hard when I can't even get an interview to do so.
I'm just curious, but do you support other programs that may give preference to an under-represented, disadvantaged, or historically mistreated group in a given sector (correcting for gender bias in standardized tests or increasing diversity in higher education, for example)?
yeah, I have been pretty outspoken with my anti-war stance, but this is something I see as very good.
I've worked in homeless shelters, and there are a disproportionate number of vets who struggle with homelessness, drug abuse, alcoholism, and mental illness. For obvious reasons, this is an at-risk group for numerous social problems. If we can keep them employed, society as a whole benefits.
Team vets.
I think even if a vet doesn't struggle with these issues, there is a perception on the part of many potential employers that they *might*, resulting in a hard time getting hired.
exactly.
keeping our vets employed and independent is probably one of the most effective preventative methods. It's a lot easier to avoid these issues than to treat them.
I understand the sacrifice too...I mean, dad and brother are both vets...I'm kind of being a child stomping her feet here. So while I respect that sacrifice, it is frustrating that people who are just as, if not more so qualified are being passed over because they do not get the preference for being a vet. I want to serve my country too, and I don't believe the military is the only way to do it, but it makes it really hard when I can't even get an interview to do so.
I'm just curious, but do you support other programs that may give preference to an under-represented, disadvantaged, or historically mistreated group in a given sector (correcting for gender bias in standardized tests or increasing diversity in higher education, for example)?
holy long sentence. lol.
Yeah, I do. But I do see that as a different issue. Affrmative Action is trying to fix a system that has discriminated against minorities for a long time. It is trying to give equal opportunity. Giving vetrans preference is not righting a wrong or trying to level the opportunity field, it is giving a leg up to vetrans as a thanks for their service.
That isn't really how it works. There are some pretty strict guidelines.
I'm sure all casinos are different. From my experience with the one near me, they rather hire NA people that have horrible work history and are unreliable (don't show up to work, no reliable transportation, no experience, don't know how to act at work) instead of the people that actually have experience and show up to work every day.
Well assuming that you live where the casino is built on Native American lands and the revenues go directly back to the operating tribe and knowing the poverty rate on reservations, I'm not sure why NA preference here is a bad thing.
I understand that argument, but it should still go to the most qualified person.[/quote] There is a really long, hideous history in our country re: our treatment of NA citizens. Stripping a group of people of their rights, their homes, and their opportunity obviously has detrimental effects. Providing jobs to a group of historically mistreated group of people is kind of the least we can do, dude.
Post by hannamarin on May 24, 2012 11:25:55 GMT -5
This was my UO a couple weeks ago. I said at least those people had jobs for the last 2 yrs. a lot of people havent My H told me that I was horrible to think it. Andnot everyone can join the service. Health issues, etc.
yeah, I have been pretty outspoken with my anti-war stance, but this is something I see as very good.
I've worked in homeless shelters, and there are a disproportionate number of vets who struggle with homelessness, drug abuse, alcoholism, and mental illness. For obvious reasons, this is an at-risk group for numerous social problems. If we can keep them employed, society as a whole benefits.
Team vets.
I worry about vets in these states too. The skyrocketing rate of suicide of vets is terrible. But I am not worried that I am competing with these vets though. A vet who is struggling with drug abuse, PTSD, or mental illness would not qualify for the types of jobs that I am applying for. I think it would be wonderful if our government would do more for those who did need more support, I really do.
You really don't know that. And the field of psychology today largely uses a diathesis-stress model. The individual may have a certain predisposition (diathesis) for mental illness, drug abuse, etc. -- but this problem only surfaces when the environment places sufficient stressors on the person. Certainly, serving in the military (and especially in violent wars), only to return home and find yourself unemployable, can be enough to make some of these issues surface. I mean, really, what do you think eventually happens to these fresh-faced vets who are turned down for job after job?
I see vet preference for gov't jobs as a social program.
yeah, I have been pretty outspoken with my anti-war stance, but this is something I see as very good.
I've worked in homeless shelters, and there are a disproportionate number of vets who struggle with homelessness, drug abuse, alcoholism, and mental illness. For obvious reasons, this is an at-risk group for numerous social problems. If we can keep them employed, society as a whole benefits.
Team vets.
I worry about vets in these states too. The skyrocketing rate of suicide of vets is terrible. But I am not worried that I am competing with these vets though. A vet who is struggling with drug abuse, PTSD, or mental illness would not qualify for the types of jobs that I am applying for. I think it would be wonderful if our government would do more for those who did need more support, I really do.
I can see your point - but this really pissed me off. Veterans who respond to the horrors of war be developing PTSD or other mental health problems can't possibly have the same skill set as you or be just as educated / talented? There are people - Veterans or not - with mental health problems who are highly successful in every sector in this country. It is these exact attitudes that require these types of special consideration.
I support the extra weight toward veterans. If you do not like it there is an easy solution. Look for a job in the private sector.
Or here's another solution, perhaps not so easy: serve in the military so you can get the coveted veteran status.
I once read a quote about veterans that said "A veteran is someone, who at one point in his/her life wrote a blank check to the U.S. government for any amount up to and including his/her life."
I think that's a big deal. A huge deal, actually. It's not just "they served our country ... yadda yadda."
I'm glad you realize that's a huge insult to trivialize the contributions veterans have made by not supporting the benefits they've earned.
Like I said, I know it's an asshole opinion. But meh. And yeah, I could look for jobs in the private sector, but like I said, I do want to serve my country, but I don't want to do it in the military. There are more ways then one to serve. The particular jobs I would like to do don't exactly have private sector equals. I will keep applying, and I will probably keep getting pushed behind vets, but eventually maybe I won't...that's just the way it is. I'm not advocating for change, I was just bitching.
I worry about vets in these states too. The skyrocketing rate of suicide of vets is terrible. But I am not worried that I am competing with these vets though. A vet who is struggling with drug abuse, PTSD, or mental illness would not qualify for the types of jobs that I am applying for. I think it would be wonderful if our government would do more for those who did need more support, I really do.
I can see your point - but this really pissed me off. Veterans who respond to the horrors of war be developing PTSD or other mental health problems can't possibly have the same skill set as you or be just as educated / talented? There are people - Veterans or not - with mental health problems who are highly successful in every sector in this country. It is these exact attitudes that require these types of special consideration.
I can see how that would piss people off, but if you knew the types of jobs, you would see that I ain't just being an elistest or whatever. The jobs I am applying an dinterviewing for do require a clean mental health history (no depression, etc), clean health history, no drug use in the past 5 years. Hell, one position requires that no one in your immediate family has issues of drug use...I know that people with mental health problems can be successful, I know people who use illegal drugs can be successful, and I think they could be successful in the field for which I am applying, but I don't set the standards. There are some careers out there that ask this of their perspective employees.