Would You Employ This Person and Why/Why Not?
- Thread starter Keith1
- Start date
It's an interesting hypotheses but unfortunately it's wrong. I wouldn't have hand written it but I also would not have allowed the glaring spelling error to be double corrected either. (WHIch is a sure sign it's genuine)
So genuine, and to me, quite intriguing.
Do you want to know what I read into it?
You could applaud the attitude and think "I want this man on my team" I took the opposite and quite extreme view.
That he has murdered someone for his job or at least he had been stalking him before he died....:worried:
As I say, it landed on me and I have no idea what it is, but taken at face value is, er, interesting.
Anyone else see a half empty glass here?
Edit: There is a fairly serious caveat here. I mean, this MIGHT be going down somewhere in the world as I speak...
So genuine, and to me, quite intriguing.
Do you want to know what I read into it?
You could applaud the attitude and think "I want this man on my team" I took the opposite and quite extreme view.
That he has murdered someone for his job or at least he had been stalking him before he died....:worried:
As I say, it landed on me and I have no idea what it is, but taken at face value is, er, interesting.
Anyone else see a half empty glass here?
Edit: There is a fairly serious caveat here. I mean, this MIGHT be going down somewhere in the world as I speak...
Jim Rosenthal
Supporter
Oh, it might. And I might flap my arms and fly to the moon, too, but it's not likely.
My reading of this (if there is a "this" to read) is that this is a guy who's applied for a lot of jobs and gotten a lot of pro forma rejections which he's taken literally. He's assuming he was rejected on the grounds of "no vacancy" because there really wasn't a vacancy. He may be assuming wrongly.
There may indeed be a vacancy, but it may be between the poor chap's ears, not in the job he wants.
My reading of this (if there is a "this" to read) is that this is a guy who's applied for a lot of jobs and gotten a lot of pro forma rejections which he's taken literally. He's assuming he was rejected on the grounds of "no vacancy" because there really wasn't a vacancy. He may be assuming wrongly.
There may indeed be a vacancy, but it may be between the poor chap's ears, not in the job he wants.
No wonder he gets turned down so often. That is NOT how you write a letter to a prospective employer.
They say that education is the foundation of civilisation. Lord help us all
Admittedly, the guy is trying to get employment. That's a big plus for him. Fair play. However, when you constantly use a hammer to fix a screw, someone needs to explain that you should be using a screwdriver instead.
They say that education is the foundation of civilisation. Lord help us all
Admittedly, the guy is trying to get employment. That's a big plus for him. Fair play. However, when you constantly use a hammer to fix a screw, someone needs to explain that you should be using a screwdriver instead.
You have to admire his ambition after being incarcerated in an asylum for so many years. Twas the music that wrote the letter not him 
bob
bob
We know how pig headed people who spell badly are. I'd pass.
This person is looking for work in the wrong places.
Obviously a bureaucrat - selfish, ugly ambition, zero empathy or compassion, willing to walk over anyone, doesn't care what they destroy, willing to lose a war so that they can personally win a battle etc...
Although the horrible sense of humour seems appropriate they are not quite as good a candidate for politics: politician = bureacrat + prostitute. This person isn't cunning enough to understand how to say whatever the hearer is looking for and sell it to them as if they really mean what they say.
This person would fit right into any gov't dep't at a decision making level. Remembering that bureaucratic decision is defined differently - no care, no responsibility.
If this is all a sham and this person is not really looking for work then they are perfect for the Australian public service. They'd fit right in.
Tim.
Obviously a bureaucrat - selfish, ugly ambition, zero empathy or compassion, willing to walk over anyone, doesn't care what they destroy, willing to lose a war so that they can personally win a battle etc...
Although the horrible sense of humour seems appropriate they are not quite as good a candidate for politics: politician = bureacrat + prostitute. This person isn't cunning enough to understand how to say whatever the hearer is looking for and sell it to them as if they really mean what they say.
This person would fit right into any gov't dep't at a decision making level. Remembering that bureaucratic decision is defined differently - no care, no responsibility.
If this is all a sham and this person is not really looking for work then they are perfect for the Australian public service. They'd fit right in.
Tim.
Last edited:
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
:stunned: My goodness Tim you sound nearly as cynical as me! I agree totally Btw.:laugh::laugh:
