atw: Re: WARNING: Recruiter advertisements are ONLY trawling for resumes for tender responses!
- From: "Stephen Nason" <snason@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 17:55:10 +1000
"Compulsory enrolment and compulsory voting were first introduced in
Queensland, where a non-Labor government hoped that it would discourage apathy
among Australian electors there. Compulsory enrolment was written into the
Commonwealth Electoral Act in 1911 but compulsory voting was not introduced
until 1924 by a National Country Party government.
The term compulsory voting is in fact a misnomer. The Australian electoral Acts
enforce compulsory attendance, with names checked on the electoral roll. In a
democracy, no electoral law can enforce a compulsory vote because any such
attempt would breach the principle of the secret ballot."
(http://rubens.anu.edu.au/raid1/student_projects/elections/project/process/pvote.html
)
----- Original Message -----
From: Howard Silcock
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, 15 August 2012 4:31 PM
Subject: atw: Re: WARNING: Recruiter advertisements are ONLY trawling for
resumes for tender responses!
Are you sure it's true that the law doesn't say that voting is compulsory?
It's certainly true that in practice you can get away with registering to vote,
then throwing away or defacing or destroying your ballot paper. But the
Electoral Commission clearly states that voting is compulsory. There may be
limits to what will be done to enforce the law, but that doesn't change the law.
Howard
On 15 August 2012 15:49, Stephen Nason <snason@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
There is no law compelling us to vote. The law compels us to attend a
polling station on election day.
----- Original Message -----
From: Howard Silcock
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Wednesday, 15 August 2012 3:42 PM
Subject: atw: Re: WARNING: Recruiter advertisements are ONLY trawling for
resumes for tender responses!
Bob T asked Warren: do you vote for politicians at elections?
Er, sorry, I don't quite see where you're going with this, Bob. According
to the way it's supposed to work, there's not much choice about that. You're
legally required to vote and politicians are what's on offer. I wonder what
would happen if the Electoral Commission pursued you for not voting and you
explained that you wanted to vote for a minister of religion, not a
politician...
Howard
On 15 August 2012 15:10, Bob Trussler <bob.trussler@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Warren,
Wow, that is certainly more than two cents worth!
A personal question - do you vote for politicians at elections?
Bob T
On 15 August 2012 15:02, Warren Lewington <wjlewington@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Yes, nice counter points Bede.
The recruitment agent from late yesterday has called me twice since,
both times to sincerely apologise. And my word yes, this episode has cost the
recruitment agency far more than it cost me. They now have to work damned hard
to restore trust, and faith in them to me, not to mention the costs of paying
the agent and adverts and so on. And, they certainly see my skills have value.
And that is nice to know. But I digress towards egomania…
This morning the lady conveyed apologies from her contact within the
bidding company. The person there too, had been misled.
There are two issues here.
One is doing your research. My major gripe is that with further
digging on the two occasions in the last few days, the true picture would have
been very clear. I don’t need to go there anymore.
The second goes back to honesty and ethical dealings in business.
Sure, there is the Trade Practices Act, where grey areas abound of course.
Bede, you are absolutely right, my resume as a commodity in that situation
MIGHT get me the work. Typically the bid companies never offer the job to you
when they win it – they don’t even call.
More than that though, it was the FACT that I was lied to about the
existent role as advertised. Someone knew they needed resume information.
Someone made the decision to say there was a legitimate role available,
somewhere in the feeding trough. Someone knew that they would get resumes worth
including in the bid by saying there was a job available – but they knew there
was not. That deception got them resumes.
Our society works because for centuries our ancestors built a
cultural system around morality and honesty. The justice system we have built
our society upon requires a commitment from everyone to maintain and live by
the standards of honesty and morality our ancestors fought and died for. The
Australian Constitution was written relying on the fact that our society
enshrined fundamental understandings of the Westminster, Judeo-Christian system
of morality and honesty. “Tell the truth” is one of them – even if it doesn’t
make you look all that good.
If we simply let people behave amorally (making decisions based on
what is right for them at the time) within the constructs we have been
ancestrally provided then we are going to erode all that we have been given,
and others have sacrificially defended. If you want to live in a community that
says “Its right if I think it is right and it benefits me to do it this way
now;” then we are going to have a big fail on our hands… By saying “it’s the
way it is; just swim with it” you are letting people get away with deceit and
lying.
Where does it end? It ends with losing fundamental rights. Someone
doing something because it suits them at the time may not be illegal, but that
does not make it right according to fundamental tenets of honesty and
integrity.
Solzhenitsyn said we must question everything those in authority do –
otherwise they will take our right to question away.
By highlighting the problems we can actually make an effort to
prevent the slide down a very slippery slope. It is up to us all to demand
expected, acceptable standards of honesty and integrity from everyone else in
society. United we stand, divided we fall. Do unto others as you would have
them do unto you. I don’t like being used by deception. Do any of you?
My further two cents worth.
Warren.
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of SUNTER Bede
Sent: Wednesday, 15 August 2012 00:37
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: WARNING: Recruiter advertisements are ONLY trawling
for resumes for tender responses!
No, let's make sure it keeps going.
Like Christine says, get with the script. So, agencies are resume
hunting ... who cares? Just send it to them. Who knows when that bingo moment
will occur and you land the job?
The problem of agencies' mis-specifying roles and suddenly
terminating recruitment are a bit different -- this stuffs people around. But
hey, these are the seas we swim in. Do you think agents have better nothing to
do with their time than stuff tech writers around? Are recruitment agents
sometimes out of their depth? Yes! just get over it. They are being stuffed
around themselves by government departments and corporations who know they need
something but don't know what it is; are prone to sudden funding cuts,
restructures by stealth and general uncertainty.
Be part of the solution.
Bede
--------------------------------------------------------------------
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michelle Hallett
Sent: Tuesday, 14 August 2012 8:20 PM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: WARNING: Recruiter advertisements are ONLY
trawling for resumes for tender responses!
So it’s everywhere. Let’s just accept it. That’ll make sure it stops
Michelle
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Bill Parker
Sent: Tuesday, 14 August 2012 6:35 PM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: Re: WARNING: Recruiter advertisements are ONLY
trawling for resumes for tender responses!
Its everywhere. I was advised of a FIFO TW job at Cape Lambert (WA
north west). I applied and got no reply. Much later I was talking to another
TW who was bemoaning the way TWs are treated. She said she had taken a job at
Cape Lambert… turned out to be doing office cleaning mostly, with an
occasional document re-write.
Bill
On 14/08/2012, at 2:55 PM, Michelle Hallett wrote:
I support Warren. The sort of behaviour he describes sucks.
Michelle
From: austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:austechwriter-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Warren Lewington
Sent: Tuesday, 14 August 2012 4:27 PM
To: austechwriter@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: atw: WARNING: Recruiter advertisements are ONLY trawling
for resumes for tender responses!
Hi all.
A large number of the contract roles being posted at the moment are
not genuine. I have found this out after stupidly sending resumes off - and on
one occasion after specifically asking if the role has been funded and
authorised. To which question, the answer was “yes.” Twice in the last 24 hours
I have later been called and told that the “role” I applied for is a tender
response and they (those placing the bid) want to use my resume as part of the
bid.
Well. I think if all you want is a resume for the off chance you
might win a tender bid then you should damn well say it in the advertisements
and more, you should be paying for it. I spend a lot of time updating my
resume, which reflects the skills I have taken years of effort, energy, and
graft to develop.
So for me, in this respect, the resume is a product or commodity of
considerable value, and should be treated as such.
SO YOU SHOULD BLOODY WELL PAY FOR IT. Especially if you win the
bid, and don’t choose to use the people whose resumes you took and put into the
bid – and I know that happens – I have worked in a bidding department for John
Holland...
To follow that up, I have today (15:50 actually) called the ACCC to
ask about the false advertising regulatory framework and have been told that
(basically) if there is no monetary exchange (commercial or otherwise) then the
advertisements and unethical behaviour such as we are seeing from the
recruiters is out of the ACCCs capability to act against. Well, I bet the
recruiters must know that already.
I think this sort of behaviour is beyond dishonest. It demonstrates
to me the lack of trust that recruiters and their cronies higher up the food
chains have rightfully earned. I also think that the recruiters on the list
should be ashamed of your own industry. You need to shape yourselves up. You
cannot deny or defend yourselves in the face of such miserable hyena like
ethical behaviour.
If you are having trouble understanding honesty, ethics, and
integrity; then perhaps you should talk to a local minister, imam, priest or
rabbi; they can assist you with a moral compass. I can give you several names
if you want them.
Unimpressed.
Warren Lewington…
Before printing, please consider the environment
IMPORTANT NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachment to it are intended
only to be read or used by the named addressee. It is confidential and may
contain legally privileged information. No confidentiality or privilege is
waived or lost by any mistaken transmission to you. Roads and Maritime Services
(RMS) is not responsible for any unauthorised alterations to this e-mail or
attachment to it. Views expressed in this message are those of the individual
sender, and are not necessarily the views of RMS. If you receive this e-mail in
error, please immediately delete it from your system and notify the sender. You
must not disclose, copy or use any part of this e-mail if you are not the
intended recipient.
--
Bob Trussler
Other related posts:
