[Position-available] Please comment on the new posting rules for those seeking or offering jobs

[bill-CIZd1d4GmLheoWH0uzbU5w at public.gmane.org (Bill Horne)]

Here's "Round Two" of revisions to the BLU's draft posting guidelines.

I've pasted things in here from different sources, so I'll apologize in 
advance if I get something mixed up.

Bill

Bill Bogstad wrote:
>>>> The length limit is almost meaningless as it depends on screen size/font size/etc.  Why not just specify max # of lines/columns?
>>>>         

Good point: I've changed it to ask for 30 lines maximum. This will need 
more debate, but I agree that there should be a limit.

>
> Guidelines for Positions Available (a.k.a. "Help Wanted") notices:
>
>    1. All positions offered must be for jobs that require proficiency
> in Linux or UNIX.
>   *** 2. You must include a contact telephone number with your
> announcement. Any applicant who has questions about the job is
> entitled to talk to a live human being. Web forms or email addresses
> alone are not sufficient.
>
>   
>>>> Why?  Personally, I would never accept a job without eventually talking to someone, but email is more efficient for an initial
>>>>         
> 'does this make any sense at all for either party' and eliminates
> wasteful phone tag.  Why not leave it up to the applicants to decide
> for themselves if this is necessary to them?  I'm not sure what
> problem this requirement is solving.  Something generic on 'clear
> contact information must be provided for responding for this job'
> would seem sufficient to me.
>   

dsr-mzpnVDyJpH4k7aNtvndDlA at public.gmane.org wrote:

> From the viewpoint of an occasional job poster: the problem is
> rarely in getting resumes; the problem is getting resumes of
> qualified people. Putting a personal email address in a wanted
> ad is asking for a flood; putting a personal phone number in is
> asking to be interrupted every ten minutes for the next two
> weeks. 


I want phone numbers because they're hard to fake and trivial to
confirm. It's the only way I could think of to limit spam and
fishing/phishing posts. As for emails, it's OK to obfuscate them, but
I think those reading such posts are entitled to have an address, and
I doubt there'll be a flood if the address is anti-spammed. Applicants
who are concerned about it can use a throwaway address.

> ***   3. Your announcement must be complete and self-contained. Such
> phrases as "Call for details" will cause your announcement to be
> rejected.
>   

> There's no reason to cover common sense issues, I think.

Yep, you're right. 

> Bill Bogstad wrote:
>>>> What about details on salary, benefits, etc?  A list of required details would make more sense to me.  Personally things like:
>>>>         
> location, types of systems to be used, hourly vs. salary (with
> ranges), would be on my list of required details.  I'm sure there
> would be others.
>   

Several people suggested this, and I've made the change.

> ***   4. You may not include HTML code ar any attachments as they will
> be removed by the listserv. Links to other sites, such as your
> ***business and the complete job spec, are allowed.
>
>   
>>>> I would say plain text with no formatting rather then HTML code.  What is LaTex or Troff okay but HTML isn't?  This works well with max lines/columns instruction as well.
>>>>         

OK, I think that's splitting hairs, but I changed it.

>
> ***   5. No fishing allowed. All positions must be immediately
> available and any applicants are entitled to expect a decision within
> 30 ***days of their response.
>
>   
>>>> Should this be 'phishing'?
>>>>         

Depends on your definition. Recruiters routinely advertise "generic" 
jobs in order to get more r?sum?s, and that's considered ethical 
behavior in their world.

>
>    6. If you are not the same firm that is offering the position, you
> must disclose this in the announcement. If you are being paid a fee
> for your work, you must disclose this as well. A line saying "Employer
> pays all fees" or "Applicants are charged a fee" is adequate notice,
> but you must include one or the other.
>
>  ***  7. Pyramid plans are unacceptable. Don't try to push Amway or
> any of it's cohorts.
>
>   
>>>> Is this redundant with requirements #1 and #5 (skills/phishing).  Personally, I would enjoy reading a real job posting which managed to pass #1 and #5 and failed #7. :-)
>>>>         

I took those out, since the "common sense" rule applies.
>
> Guidelines for Positions Wanted (a.k.a. "At Liberty" or "Seeking
> Employment") notices:
>
> ***   1. You must be seeking a job in the Boston area.
>
>   
>>>> Should something similar be required for 'wanted' postings as well?  I certainly don't want to read a hundred job postings
>>>>         
> for Silicon Valley positions on this list and nothing prevents it in
> the rules above.
>   

Ted Roche wrote:

> Re: Boston-area. What qualifies as Boston-area these days? As an
> independent contractor, I've worked with clients who live in lands
> I'm hard-pressed to find on a map. With the internet, the world has
> become much flatter. I also know several people who've moved
> cross-country for the right position. I know we don't want to become
> a competitor to Monster nor a graffitti board, but we don't want to
> restrict the opportunities, too.

I added the "Boston Area" language to the 'wanted' section. I don't
know if we're reaching an audience outside Metro Boston, or if the
intersection of {Our Members} and {Job Seekers skilled in UNIX and/or
Linux} is a large enough group to take announcements for a wider area.
Ted's point about a flatter Earth is well taken: this needs more
debate as well.

   
Bill Bogstad wrote:

>>>>   2. A post may only be for a single individual, and must include
>>>>   a telephone number where the applicant may be reached. Email
>>>>   address and snail mail addresses are also customary: you may
>>>>   obfuscate your email address if you choose, but it must be
>>>>   human-readable and it must be your own address. (Posts on
>>>>   behalf of others will be considered on a case-by-case basis).

> *** Same comments about phone vs. email here.  Plus, I would never
> post my personal phone number to a publicly accessible mailing list
> and would discourage others from doing so as well.

Well, I concede that some members may be reluctant to post a telephone
number. This also needs more debate.

>  >>>  3. If you list CV that include college credentials, you should
> expect that they will be verified and give permission for anyone to do
> so.
>
> ***I guessing that posting to a mailing list would not be considered
> by a college to be permission to do anything so this is probably
> unenforceable.  Something generic about applicants should expect
> employers to desire to check credentials/references might educate the
> few people who haven't yet learned this is common practice.

I removed it; the "common sense" rule again.

>  5. If you are fluent in a language other than American English,
> please include that as well.   

This is also gone, since I'd bet multi-lingual applicants will want to 
include it anyway.

Again, if I fat-fingered anyone's credits, my apologies. The revised guidelines are at http://billhorne.homelinux.org/blu-jobs.html .

Bill Horne

-- 
E. William Horne
William Warren Consulting
Computer & Network Installations, Security, and Service
http://william-warren.com
781-784-7287