All posts in Employment

If you are seeking employment then at some point in time you will have to have a job interview. How you are perceived at this job interview is what may get you hired so a job interview is very important for future employment. Another important factor included in this employment process is your resume. When you go in offer a job interview you have to be prepared. Just remember that Boy Scout motto of Be Prepared and do your preparation thoroughly so you can’t look back and blame your own actions and preparation for not getting the job.

The Preparation:

When you are looking for a position in just about any organization whether it be public or private or even non-profit you will need to do your homework before you apply. This should include researching the company so you know something about its history or background. Also you should find out how it is doing financially if it is publically traded or has that information available to the public. Of course if it is a private family owned company that information will not be available to you. Although you might be able to do some research if it is a licensed company or has to have a city business license.

The second step is your own preparation which includes preparing a resume that you probably will have to send along with some form of application and cover letter. If you have found the potential job online such as a government position the website will have exactly what you will need to complete and send in before you will be granted an interview. Follow these instructions exactly if you have any expectations as to getting an interview. Some of the requirements may seem strange for example a city position may ask that you hand write an outline or your thoughts on a separate piece of paper and include that with your application. If they as for it, just do it. They have their reasons which may be that they want to see if you can follow directions.

The Job Interview:

If all of your paperwork passes scrutiny you may receive a telephone call asking you to come in for an interview. If you get to this stage you really must be prepared and know something about the company or agency and also about yourself. You will have to present yourself as confident and knowledgeable. And you will have to make sure what you tell them in the interview corresponds with your resume. You may be asked to play act such as what would you do if- If this is the case just think quickly and describe your response to the best of your ability. They expect you to be nervous and would probably be surprised if you were not a bit nervous. You may also have to take some sort of written test so keep that in mind also. This is a long process which requires you to be at your very best.

Job Search aggregates job postings from major Job Boards, newspapers and company websites in the US. Jobseekers can easily find their dream jobs in one simple click.

Drug testing is another precaution to have a peaceful working place. Drug testing can eliminate drug users in your firm. There are many types of drug test procedure that you can do. There are many applicants that use illegal drugs. Drug testing helps you determine a good worker. Check this article to learn some drug testing procedures.

Drug Testing is one pre-employment requirement that many Organizations implement. The primary objective is to maintain a workplace that is free from unnecessary and ugly scenarios arising from drug abuse.

High productivity is one of the goals of any corporations. By ensuring that all its employees are not hooked on illegal drugs, the performance of the company is geared toward success.

Of course, the success of the organization does not rely on having a drug-free working environment; however, drug abuse is a culprit that can affect the enterprise’s overall output.

Medical experts explained that people who use illegal drugs get high fast, making them feel powerful, and causing them to act fearlessly. Depending on the kind of illegal drug and the frequency of its use, these drugs can cause hallucinations and paranoia.

Now, without conducting drug testing, you are putting the safety and welfare of your company and its employees at higher risks. It could also damage your company’s reputation if managers already employed use drugs.

With employment drug screening, the company ensures that new hires are not into drug use. There are also corporations that initiate random drug tests on its existing employees to monitor and eliminate drug-abuse habits.

As drug screening becomes popular, some applicants may lie low in using drugs for the sake of passing drug tests, and resume their habits once they get hired. Hence, it is also necessary to conduct regular drug testing on all potential employees and existing employees.

Employment drug screening also creates a safer and drug-free working environment. It can reduce the conflict incidences involving employees who use illegal drugs. This is not to say that those who are involved in corporate brawls or verbal fights are using drugs.

Rather, statistics and medical evidence authenticate that people who are addicted to illegal drugs are quick to anger, vulnerable to physical violence, and an initiator of chaos. Mostly, drug users have frequent absences, low-productivity, utilization and cost of health benefits, higher insurance premiums and accidents.

Small and medium scale businesses can benefit more from initiating drug testing as drug users are more inclined to apply at their company. Just the thought of drug tests can scare away drug abusers. As a major determinant of employment, drug screening allows business owners to save time and effort by hiring the right individuals.

Since there are many types of substance abuse, it is important to specify which drug tests are necessary to administer to your employees and applicants. There are marijuana testing, cocaine drug tests, and many other drugs test that can be done.

Generally, companies follow a standard five-panel test, which is composed of Marijuana, Cocaine, PCP and Amphetamine. There is also a 10-panel test to include prescription substances that can be obtained legally, but which can also be addictive and abused. Only few companies use this type of drug testing.

Usually, all drug substances linger in our system between 2 and 4 days. In conducting the drug tests among regular drug users, the results become available in 14 days or even more. If the drug testing is done with hair, the substance can be detected for a period of 3 months.

People, in general, like to be open to opportunities which gives them different options, especially in the field of employment. Nowadays, a number of companies in India have become existent, which lets people have these kinds of opportunities. Companies and agencies like RRB, NIC, NMDC, etc can be highly alluring for the candidates, especially those who have passed out recently because of their stature in Indian society.

RRB or Railway Recruitment Board is present in 19 different railway zones of the country, which presents a large number of employment opportunities. It is known to everyone that the Indian Railways is one of the largest recruiters in the world and the majority of the recruitment in the railways, is done through the different railway recruitment boards in the country. Therefore RRB recruitment 2013 is an opportunity for people to get to the jobs and increase the chances of improvement in their lives. Starting from the grade 4 vacancies to the various posts such as railway station master and such, most of these recruitments are done through the RRBs, which are spread in different parts of the country.

There are different reasons for employment in the railways and one of the many reasons why people have been coming for the RRB recruitment 2013 is that of the large number of options that the railways present. National Mining Development Corporation is a Navratna company under the Ministry of Steel in India. It is one of those public sector enterprises of India, which bring strength to the Indian economy and a variety to the employment opportunities. To be a part of NMDC is a matter of pride for the recruits and they are opting for the company because there are a number of jobs found with the company.

NMDC recruitment 2013 is therefore sought by people, usually after they pass out from their education. Starting from pharmacist post to that of the engineers, there are plenty of vacancies published by the public sector company for the people who are interested to work in one of Indias leading PSUs. Also, there are a number of offices and mining units under the NMDC, where recruitment is going on and the massive expansion plan is to be rightly corroborated with the help of NMDC recruitment 2013.

Another major company under the Government of India is that of the National Informatics Centre, which is responsible for various IT related works. These activities are carried out in large numbers in the country, now that the government is trying for computerisation and IT linking of the various organisations. Due to the rapid rate of work going on through the NIC, the NIC recruitment 2013 is a prospective time for the students who are seeking to get into various posts in the National Informatics Centre.

For the present, there are vacancies announced for scientific officers and Junior Research Fellow in different places of NIC offices. These are opportunities which people will not be leaving out because they have the potential to put a big jump in the careers of people. The variety of jobs has been the primary reasons, for which people from various areas of the country have been coming out for vacancies in NIC, NMDC and RRB.

It is your duty as an employer to keep a close eye on your employee’s absences from work. This is for two main reasons; firstly, to ensure that your business does not suffer due to staff absence and secondly, to ensure that your staff are well, healthy and happy.

Every company should keep a record of employee absence. Keeping this record will help you identify any emerging patterns of absence or alert you to a member of staff suffering from a long-term illness. Each department within your business should keep its own records, you are then able to compare company absence from sector to sector. Employee absences records should always be managed in light of the Date Protection Act (1998). Any records of employee absence should then be destroyed after 3 years (of the financial in which it was made) and if you are monitoring any statistics then employees should be made aware.

If a pattern of absence appears which is inter-departmental, i.e. one department has a considerably higher level of absence, then you should take the appropriate steps into looking at that departments working environment. Not only this but you should look to your senior members of staff to report on issues within the department, which could be causing the higher levels of absence.

Another good procedure to implement is the ‘return to work interview’. This face-to-face meeting should be done in private with the relevant line manager for that employee. The interview has several purposes; it details why the employee was off work, if they are suffering from something which may cause further absence and most importantly if they are well enough to come back to work. It can also provide the employee with a private outlet to complain about their working environment and/or fellow staff members, which incidentally could be causing their absence.

If you do not deal with employee absence at an early stage you run the risk of the following occurring:

– Low staff esteem due to increased workloads in covering the absent colleague

– Agency staff bills being extraordinarily high

– The company failing to reach targets or provide a good service due to a lack of consistent staffing

In order to deal with an emerging absence pattern there are some steps you can take to ensure that you investigate the problem scrupulously. Firstly, you should compare the employee’s absence over your last 3 years of records to establish any recurring pattern. Secondly, compare the employee’s absence record to that of the other employee’s within the same department, this may identify a work related issue. Lastly, check that the employee does not have an illness which fits the criteria of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995. The area of disability discrimination is particular complex — don’t risk being grounds for a potentially highly expensive disability discrimination claim — take advice from expert employment solicitors first.

For the first few absences the employee needs to be dealt with amicably. Discuss with the employee the reasons why they have had continued absences or absences which form a pattern. Solutions such as flexible working arrangements, changing work location or job description can offer lower cost results for you and the employee.

If no solution can be found or the problem is merely unauthorised absence, then you have the option of disciplining the employee under capability and/or conduct. An approved disciplinary handling procedure should be used at this time.

If you are in any doubt as to the reason for the employee’s absence or the grounds upon which you are starting the disciplinary procedures, then you should seek legal advice immediately from specialist employment solicitors. A dismissal based upon an employee’s absence has to be legal and if it is not you could face claims of an unfair dismissal via the Employment Tribunal.

Perhaps the very simplest step is to make sure that you have clear policies on employee absence. If you don’t and you are not sure where to begin, contact specialist Employment Solicitors who should be able to provide you with appropriate policies dealing with employee absence at a relatively modest cost.

As we approach the end of the year, we are also approaching the end of President Obamas first year in office. You might be wondering how he is doing, based on actual numbers (rather than political spin).

Obama clearly inherited a difficult situation economically. Only two others in the modern era came even remotely close. One, of course, was FDR, but unfortunately the data from then is rather sparse, and mostly available on just an annual basis, or at best quarterly (good economic data was one of the by-products of the New Deal).

The other who inherited a difficult economic situation was President Reagan. Granted, the type of difficulty was very different under Reagan, and presidents — like quarterbacks — get too much of both the praise for a good economy and the blame for a bad economy.

Still, I think comparing the numbers for the two during their first “year in office could be instructive. The data I used for the comparison are all available monthly (at least, and if more frequently, I used the monthly data). The source of all data is the St. Louis Fed (except for the S&P 500).

The two presidents offered very different prescriptions for the economy. Reagan was all about cutting taxes and less government involvement in the economy. While most of the really big moves of government into the economy in response to the recent economic crisis actually took place under President George W. Bush, Candidate Obama saw them as needed. The Bush Administration was the one that bought the stakes in American International Group (AIG – Snapshot Report), Fannie Mae (FNM – Snapshot Report), Freddie Mac (FRE – Analyst Report) and the banks, while Obamas support for a prepackaged bankruptcy resulted in large government stakes in the Auto industry.

There were no comparable big investments by the government into the private sector late in the Carter Administration, and certainly Reagan did not initiate any. Reagan did not have to deal with a financial meltdown when he took office, but on the other hand, Obama did not have to deal with runaway inflation. Both are serious diseases, but think of it this way: both cancer and heart disease can kill you, but you would not want to give chemotherapy drugs to a heart attack patient. Thus, perhaps it is appropriate that the prescriptions be different.

If one only looks at the unemployment rate (U-3), both did a poor job in their first year, and Obama was significantly worse. The unemployment rate in January 2009 was 7.6% and by November it had climbed to 10.0%. In January 1981, when Reagan took office, the unemployment rate was almost identical at 7.5%, and by November of 1981 it had climbed to only 8.3%.

Private employment actually rose during the first 11 months of 1981 by 0.55%, from 74.671 million to 75.084 million. Under Obamas tenure so far, private payrolls have dropped by 2.95% to 108.495 million from 111.793 million.

So on the employment front, Reagan is the clear winner so far. However, over the course of 1982 and 1983 the employment situation deteriorated significantly. We do not know what unemployment will do in 2010 and 2011, and thus can only judge based on what we have seen so far and in the comparable period under Reagan.

Advantage: Reagan

Reagan also wins when it comes to real disposable personal income, which expanded by 2.3% in the first 11 months Reagan was in office, while it has only increased by 1.0% so far under Obama.

Advantage: Reagan

The dollar was also much stronger during the first 11 months of Reagan, although I am not sure if that is a positive or a negative. During the first 11 months of Reagan, the dollar relative to an index of major currencies gained 9.88%, while under Obama, the dollar has lost 9.70% relative to the same index.

Given that we are running chronic trade deficits now, but really were not back then, I would argue that today a weak dollar is good for the economy today since it will help out on the net export side of things. Inflation is not a big problem today, but was the number one problem with the economy when Reagan took office. The downside of a weak dollar is that it contributes to inflation, so back then having the dollar strengthening was a good thing.

No Advantage to Either

On the inflation front, however, things are far better under Obama. On a headline basis, prices have gone up by 2.39% so far under Obama, while they rose 7.57% during the first 11 months that Reagan was in office. On a core basis (ex-food and energy) the difference is even more stark, rising 8.31% under Reagan and up just 1.51% under Obama so far. Later in the Reagan Administration, inflation fell much more, but even when he left office in 1989 inflation was far higher than it is today.

Advantage: Obama

Industrial production fell slightly more during the first 11 months of Reagan (1.07%) than it has under the first 11 months of Obama (0.68%). Capacity Utilization started out at a much lower level when Obama took the oath than the Reagan did, at 71.1% (an all-time record low at the time) vs. 80.7% when Reagan took office. However, by November of 1981, the total capacity utilization rate had fallen to 77.9%. Under Obama, capacity utilization has actually risen to 71.3%, although it remains at a historically low level.

Advantage: Obama

Interest rates can tell a lot about the state of the economy. For example, the spread between the rate that gilt-edged companies have to pay on their bonds and what normal companies have to pay on their bonds tells a lot about how much bond investors fear companies going belly up. The former is measured by the Moodys (MCO – Analyst Report) Aaa rate and the later by the Baa rate (not to be confused with “junk bond” rates; Baa is still investment grade).

In January of 1981, the best credits in America had to pay 12.81% on their bonds, while normal companies had to pay 15.03%, for a spread of 2.22% (or as a ratio, normal companies had to pay 17.3% more than the gilt-edged ones). By November of 1981, both the best and the ordinary had to pay more — the Aaa rate had surged to 14.22% while the Baa rate had risen to 16.39%, so the spread had fallen ever-so-slightly to 2.17. The ratio had come down a bit more, and the ordinary firms were paying 15.3% more than the best firms.

When Obama took office, the Baa rate was 8.14% while the Aaa rate was 5.05%, for a spread of 3.09. In other words, ordinary firms had to pay 61.2% more for money than the best firms did. Investors were very afraid that companies would go bankrupt, and so demanded a higher rate from normal companies than from firms that seemed to have very little risk of writing a new chapter (the eleventh) in their corporate histories.

Since then, the rate the highest-rated firms have to pay has actually increased slightly to 5.19% while the rate that normal firms have to pay has plunged to 6.32%, bringing the spread down to 1.13% and the ratio down to the point where normal companies are paying 21.8% more for their money than the Aaa firms.

(Given the huge difference in the overall level of interest rates between the two eras, it is important to look at both the spreads and the ratios. Clearly a spread of 2% has a very different meaning and significance if it is between 1% and 3% than if it is between 13% and 15%).

Advantage: Obama

Another important signal that comes from interest rates is the yield curve, or the difference between long-term and short-term interest rates. The curve is measured using Treasury notes or bills, since you only want to be looking at the differences due to maturity, not due to quality (the opposite of the Aaa-Baa spread, which is only looking at quality differences, not maturity differences).

While there are many different measures of the curve, the one that is used the most is the difference between the 2-year note and the 10-year note. Generally speaking, the steeper the yield curve, the better. An inverted yield curve is very bad news, and is probably the best single indicator that the economy is about to go into a recession.

When Reagan entered office, the 10-2 curve was inverted, with the yield on a 2-year note at 13.26% and the yield on the 10-year at 12.57%, for a spread of -0.69. On a ratio basis, the 10-year was providing only 0.95 of the 2-year. By the time November of 1981 rolled around, the curve had returned to normal but was still pretty flat. The yield on the 2-year had fallen to 12.88%, while the yield on the 10-year had increased to 13.39, resulting in a positive curve of 0.51. On a ratio basis, the 10-year was 1.08 of the 2-year.

When Obama entered office, the 2-year was at a very low 0.81% while the 10-year was 2.52%, for a positive spread of 1.71%. On a ratio basis, the 10-year was yielding over three times as much as the 2-year (3.11x to be exact). By the end of November, the curve had expanded even further, with the 2-year virtually unchanged at 0.80%, while the yield on the 10-year had risen to 3.40%, for a spread of 2.60% and a ratio of 4.25x. Again, given the vastly different overall levels of rates, it is important to consider both the spreads and the ratios when making the comparisons.

Advantage: Obama

Mortgage rates were both far higher and moving in the wrong direction early in the Reagan presidency. When he took office they were at 14.90%, and by November they had risen to 17.83%. When Obama took office, the rate on a 30-year fixed mortgage was 5.06% and has since fallen to 4.88%.

Not surprisingly, then, the housing market was far worse under Reagan than it has been under Obama (at least if measured by direction, not levels). In January of 1981, housing starts were running at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 1.547 million, and by November of that year they had plunged to 837,000, a decline of 45.9%. Since January of 2009, housing starts have risen from an annualized rate of 488,000 to a rate of 574,000 in November, an increase of 17.6%.

Advantage: Obama

Similarly, single family new home sales plunged by 25.2% early in the Reagan years to a rate of 382,000. Since Obama came into office, new single family home sales have risen by 22.2% to an annualized rate of 402,000. Existing home sales are not particularly important to the economy (just like used car sales are not very important).

Auto sales also fared worse under the early part of the Reagan Administration than they have so far under Obama (at least as measured point-to-point). When Reagan took office, auto and light truck sales were running at an annualized rate of 11.03 million and had fallen to 9.21 million, a decline of 16.5%. Under Obama, auto and light truck sales have risen from an annualized rate of 9.59 million in January to a rate of 10.89 million in November, an increase of 13.6%.

Advantage: Obama

Finally, while people sometimes make too much of the day-to-day fluctuations in the stock market, it is a good reflection of the overall health of the economy when you look at longer time periods — and almost a year is long enough to qualify there. On that metric, there is simply no contest. Between inauguration day and Christmas Eve in 1981, the S&P 500 lost 7.65%. Since Obama took office, the S&P 500 has gained 39.9%.

Advantage: Obama

Weighing these different economic indicators is inherently subjective, and thus I am not sure that one can come to a clear-cut case that one has done a better job than the other — at least so far. This is also far from a complete list of economic indicators and I focused on only those that were available at least monthly, and many of the most important economic numbers come out quarterly.

Arguably, the economic mess that Obama inherited was worse than the one that Reagan inherited, although both were pretty nasty — yet very different. The U.S. economy is more of an oil tanker than a speedboat, and does not turn around on a dime, so it really is too early to tell how Obama is doing.

However, the indicators that are most forward-looking and leading for the economy (stock market, yield curve and quality spreads, housing starts) are the ones that favor Obama over Reagan. Overall, 11 months in, one must conclude that Obama is doing at least as good a job on the economy as Reagan did in his first 11 months.