May 2009


[Here’s a re-post from my other blog, just to make sure I hit all the readers out there]

I just received word from Lulu.com that my sermon collection, So, This Is Church, has been selected for listing in their new Amazon Marketplace program. What this means is that I’ll get a little more exposure for that particular title, and perhaps more sales.

For the uninformed, So, This Is Church is a collection of sermons dealing with foundational issues of the local church and her practices. Chapters deal with the Foundation of the Church itself (Christ and His gospel), worship, evangelism, fellowship, and the like. Interested? Hop on over to Amazon.com and take a gander.

Issues with the program include a price hike to accommodate Amazon’s cut and still ensure Lulu gets theirs and they can still produce the book with a tad leftover for me (the author/publisher). If you want the best price on the book, purchase it at my Lulu.com store. And have a great day.

Advertisements

Pre-apology: Today’s post is pure rant–so, I apologize before I begin. Even so, I hope to achieve several objectives with this post:

  1. Get it off my chest (once in awhile you just need to vent)
  2. Introduce a series that will be actually more pertinent to this venue (so stay tuned)
  3. Spark a conversation about the ethical behavior that is prevalent in our culture today.

And now, without further ado, LET THE RANTING BEGIN

 

In recent days, I have become more and more disgruntled with the common practice in the workplace–namely the advertising of a job, interviewing of hopefuls, then disposing of those hopefuls as if they are little more than yesterday’s refuse. The problem is that there never really was a position to begin with; yes, the position was there, but the person to fill the position had been chosen.

Part of the problem is the legal issue involved. In order for an employer to maintain “equal opportunity employment” status, they must advertise the job opening as if it is open. If said employer advertises an opening, they must then interview possible employees in order to give the appearance of actually considering people for the job.

Here’s the part I take issue with: the employer has already decided to offer the job to a particular party, but they go through the motions of interview, just for appearance’s sake. Then following the interview process all but the already chosen person receive a letter or phone call, “Thanks for your interest, but we’ve decided to go a different way.”

Granted, this description does not apply to ALL interviewers, but I see it happening more and more. My question then is this: If you have already decided on a candidate, is it really “fair practice” to interview others at all?

If I were on the prowl for a job (especially in this day when people are honestly looking for honest work), then found out that a position that I applied for and was interviewed for, had been awarded (in actuality) a week before my scheduled interview, I would be truly and utterly miffed. 

One person suggested to me, as I was waxing eloquent about this very subject, that interviewing well was good practice anyway. Perhaps when another position was available, you will be the first on the list of those considered. I, however, would like to know ahead of time if I really have a chance with the position or not. I would like to think that when the prospective employer called me for an interview, I really was being considered. My hypothetical self thinks that when I am called to set up an interview I would ask, “Is this a real interview? or are you just putting up the appearance of interviewing even though I won’t even remotely be considered because you’ve already awarded the job?” In other words, are you just wasting my time sending me on the emotional roller coaster of I think I did really well on this interview, I think I got the job, sorry but we went another direction (before we interviewed you) but thanks for playing our game. Of course, if I asked such a question I would destroy all possibility of a real position that might be out there.

I’m not referring to the common practice of cattle-call type interviewing where prospects are narrowed down through the process of interview and one finally is awarded the position. What I’m talking about is the growing practice of deciding on a person to fill the position, then going through the interview process knowing full well that you have already awarded the position and all other candidates are really not candidates at all. There is just something dishonest at the base of this practice.

Is it just me, or have we become increasingly dishonest in the way we approach one another?