Other MS in Physics: Unemployed for months/years -- This is My Story

[Choppy]

I agree with this post. Employers with the current high volume of graduates and over education, look for very specific skills. Although many graduates are potentially fit to many positions, but no they need someone who is fit from the beginning. They want people ready to produce from the first minute with no investment. I wonder how the current employers got their first jobs. Did they do the things they ask people to do? I just wonder, since I think the job market was completely different a couple of decades ago, where a degree was enough to secure you a job.

I understand the employers' concern that they need someone productive, but how to judge someone who cannot find a job in the first place because he/she has no experience? The GitHub thing isn't enough. People are looking for real experience. When they ask 3+ years of experience, telling them I have a hobby project on GitHub will get you no where. Personally, I think 3-6 months training/test period, without full benefits, and possibly with partial salary can do the trick. The problem is in the mindset of employers. They are not willing to train fresh employee.

I don't think it's a "mindset" issue, so much as a result of supply and demand. If you have 50 people apply for one vacant position - you can only choose one of them. And you don't have an infinite amount of resources to channel into identifying the absolute perfect person for the job. So how do you figure out which one to give the job to?

In most cases you develop a short-list. You stratify the candidates. First it's binary: qualified/not qualified. Of those in the "qualified" bin, you then stratify by a combination of relevant skills and experience. Those at near the top make the "short list." Then you spend your time investigating those on the short list for things like compatibility, soft skills, and flags via interviews etc..

So to build on your example, if you're applying for a position that requires 3+ years of experience and all you have is a GitHub project, the problem isn't with the employer being unreasonable. The fact of the matter is that you're in the "not qualified" bin for that job.

The real problem is that actual entry-level jobs are in short supply.

EDIT: I see that Dr. Courtney replied to this same statement while I was writing and he's made the point that in some cases one's projects can amount to substantial experience. I agree with that.

 

[dkotschessaa]

I've achieved a long-term goal: tenure with an extramurally funded research program. Other than things out of my control, what it took to get here is simple- I didn't quit. There is no path to follow- make your own.

I'm not interested in repeating someone else's path. (much too late for that). My point is that I think others would find encouragement in knowing that others goals have been accomplished via a path that is not as straight as we are often lead to believe.

-Dave K

 

[Wminus]

Feel you man, it sucks. Can't say I know what to do, but I hope you find some decent advice here.

 

[EngWiPy]

Employers think only how to maximize their profits, and you made my point. They need people ready for the position. They accept people who have gained training and experience from other companies, but they are not willing to train their own employees. This is a mindset problem to me (Europe suffers less from this because their employers are willing to train people and invest in them). It's also a government problem, because there is no cooperation and regulations that keep companies work within certain guidelines other than maximizing profits. I think each company should have an an entry program to absorb new graduates/inexperienced employees, instead of humiliating them before finding a job. I'm not sure why there are shortage in entry-level positions? Do entry-level employees remain at that level for years? Don't they need to replace them once they are promoted?

Having the same resume doesn't mean no self-improvement is taking place. In my PhD I gained a good knowledge in statistics and MATLAB. It happened that my degree isn't in demand, and my skills in statistics and MATLAB isn't directly related to the jobs in demand (when I read, for example machine learning algorithms, I quickly understand how to translate different statistical measures and the details, although I've never worked on large datasets statistically. But employers want you to say that I know statistics and applied it directly to large datasets to understand that you have something relevant). Anyway, when I have the time (and I still have a postdoc position and do some research), I read about machine learning, R, Python, and SQL. All this reading is unstructured with no final goal, which makes it very difficult. I cannot say in my resume I'm learning these stuff now. Employers want you to say I have practical experience in them for X number of years, and used them in Y projects. And to get to real projects, you need months before you will be able to tackle them. I don't think 6 months (full-time) is enough to learn what I mentioned very well to the level that allows you to tackle real problems. On the other hand, if you are trained, your training will be structured, and would be very specific to the job, instead of spending months learning things that might not be relevant.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

Employers think only how to maximize their profits, and you made my point. They need people ready for the position. They accept people who have gained training and experience from other companies, but they are not willing to train their own employees. This is a mindset problem to me (Europe suffers less from this because their employers are willing to train people and invest in them). It's also a government problem, because there is no cooperation and regulations that keep companies work within certain guidelines other than maximizing profits. I think each company should have an an entry program to absorb new graduates/inexperienced employees, instead of humiliating them before finding a job. I'm not sure why there are shortage in entry-level positions? Do entry-level employees remain at that level for years? Don't they need to replace them once they are promoted?

Having the same resume doesn't mean no self-improvement is taking place. In my PhD I gained a good knowledge in statistics and MATLAB. It happened that my degree isn't in demand, and my skills in statistics and MATLAB isn't directly related to the jobs in demand (when I read, for example machine learning algorithms, I quickly understand how to translate different statistical measures and the details, although I've never worked on large datasets statistically. But employers want you to say that I know statistics and applied it directly to large datasets to understand that you have something relevant). Anyway, when I have the time (and I still have a postdoc position and do some research), I read about machine learning, R, Python, and SQL. All this reading is unstructured with no final goal, which makes it very difficult. I cannot say in my resume I'm learning these stuff now. Employers want you to say I have practical experience in them for X number of years, and used them in Y projects. And to get to real projects, you need months before you will be able to tackle them. I don't think 6 months (full-time) is enough to learn what I mentioned very well to the level that allows you to tackle real problems. On the other hand, if you are trained, your training will be structured, and would be very specific to the job, instead of spending months learning things that might not be relevant.

The small company my wife and I own has our largest income stream (DoD) in a downturn right now, so we're not hiring. But when we did have more work than we could complete personally, we were willing to train folks. Our main criteria was for technically competent, no-excuses, go-getters. You would not be hired. Most complainers on this thread would not be hired. It is not because you don't have all the right skills. (Almost no one who fits our geographical needs has the right skills.) It's because there is too much in the attitude that says, "mediocre." Too much that says, "I've got a good excuse for not succeeding, and I am content with that."

We are close to some other consulting scientists riding the gravy train in legal areas. Big money right now. They are throwing us some bones while we wait out the DoD downturn. Their companies are eager to hire entry level people. They are not looking for complete skill sets. They are willing to train. But they also do thorough internet backgrounds before interviewing. Sorry, the complainers in this thread likely will never work for them.

My management philosophy is to hire good people, give them everything they need, and stay out of their way.

But by "good people" I mean people who are NEVER content with having a good reason to have not completed an important task. People who let me know when there is a hiccup and work pretty hard chasing down ideas to work around the roadblocks. I'm not interested in training people with complaining, excuse making attitudes. I haven't met many scientists and engineers who are. Excuse makers just get tucked away somewhere where they can't cause too much trouble until their managers can figure out how to lay they off or fire them. We work really hard not to make those hiring mistakes.

 

[EngWiPy]

Good for you. Hope you will find all the "good people" you are talking about. When someone tries to address a challenge then it suddenly becomes complaining and excuse making. You and others here are making swift judgments about others. Someone else said that the OP is self-entitled just because he wrote this thread (specifically, because he said he is looking for a decent job after all these years of education), although I think his (the OP's) experience is relevant to many, and his concern is legitimate. The only people who can judge me rightly are my supervisors with whom I worked for years. I will be hired, and I will do more than fine. Trust me. I didn't spend all of these years to sit unemployed. I'm just waiting my opportunity. But the problem is bigger than me getting hired, and shutting such discussions is one of the reasons I think why no changes are made.

I've worked with my supervisors for the last 6 years (they both have good reputations in our field in the sense that they are recognized when their names are mentioned), and I consider myself extremely lucky because they have been friendly with and understanding to me, even when I fell back in deadlines and reports. They have treated me as a friend not as student/employee only to progress their own interests (of course they have interests). I know supervisors who checked the wash rooms if their students weren't on their desks (they checked on them every day randomly). I know supervisors who cut the Internet on their students, and just allowed IEEE access for them. These supervisors have good reputations, but I wouldn't have continued with them had I ended up with them. These people want robots, not humans. I prefer to be a mediocre with a humane employer than to be excellent with an employer who wants robots just to make big bucks on their backs.

Greed is the only rule that covers the market.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

Good for you. Hope you will find all the "good people" you are talking about. When someone tries to address a challenge then it suddenly becomes complaining and excuse making.

Not at all. Addressing a challenge oneself is not complaining and excuse making.

Shifting the responsibility to others (government, employers) demonstrates an entitlement mentality.

It's not about greed. It's about survival. Every "bad hire" costs the companies I'm talking about $250,000 - $500,000 to remedy. The background check to find the social media posts that demonstrate an entitlement mentality (or a gambling problem, or a porn problem, whatever the employer cares about) costs about $1000. And yes, for a grand, they will find all your social media accounts (even the ones you think are private, anonymous, or hidden). For a bit more, they can get into your email too.

 

[EngWiPy]

Wow, then it's true there is no privacy to people's lives in the digital age. And all of this is done legally? I saw some employers ask explicitly for a background check, especially for positions that involve private data like banking which is understandable, but for employers to spy on others' private data behind their backs to know if they fit a position ... . This is just a messed up reality.

 

[Dr Transport]

Wow, then it's true there is no privacy to people's lives in the digital age. And all of this is done legally? I saw some employers ask explicitly for a background check, especially for positions that involve private data like banking which is understandable, but for employers to spy on others' private data behind their backs to know if they fit a position ... . This is just a messed up reality.

If your dumb enough to put it out there, an employer will look it up...and it's all legal.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Wow, then it's true there is no privacy to people's lives in the digital age. <snip>

I'm hoping this is sarcasm- are you really this ignorant?

 

[EngWiPy]

If your dumb enough to put it out there, an employer will look it up...and it's all legal.

It's legal if you are dump, or it's absolutely legal to lookup personal information even if it's private?

It was mentioned in post #37 that even your emails and private social media accounts will be exposed! How clever one could be more than making things private and hidden to the public and to the people whom he/she doesn't know?

I'm not necessarily saying it's OK to hire applicants with questionable background checks, but this gives employers one more layer of power to use against applicants if they choose so and no on would know if they discriminate between applicants.

 

[EngWiPy]

I'm hoping this is sarcasm- are you really this ignorant?

Yes, I'm that ignorant. Could you inform me? I know that the government maybe spying on people for security reasons (or so they say), but I'm shocked to know even employers can spy on people's lives to decide if they are a fit or not for a job that is not critical for other people's privacy and lives.

 

[Dr Transport]

It's legal if you are dump, or it's absolutely legal to lookup personal information even if it's private?

It was mentioned in post #37 that even your emails and private social media accounts will be exposed! How clever one could be more than making things private and hidden to the public and to the people whom he/she doesn't know?

I'm not necessarily saying it's OK to hire applicants with questionable background checks, but this gives employers one more layer of power to use against applicants if they choose so and no on would know if they discriminate between applicants.

Companies routinely ask about social media usage during interviews, they are checking on your past history to see if it fits into their culture and they want to make sure that you are not going to do anything that will embarrass them in the future. If it is online, private or not, someone will look for it. Nothing says that anyone has to use legal ways to investigate potential employees and they won't tell you if they find anything, you'll just not get the job and that is their right.

 

[Trioxide]

...On the other hand, you say you have been trying (unsuccessfully) to find an 'appropriate' job- leaving aside what 'appropriate' means- for years, apparently without realizing that what you have been doing so far hasn't worked.

Appropriate = a job that is relevant to my studies = physics/mathematics/astronomy...some programming

By the time I finished graduate school, I easily had the equivalent of 3+ years full time programming experience. ... My dad always taught me that when one is unemployed, one's full time job is improving oneself and looking for a job so that the unemployment is temporary. Sending out the same resume and hoping it will change without adding accomplishments to improve that resume is insanity.

As mentioned earlier...not the same resume...many variations...many fine-tuning. Used the help of staffing firms, family, and friends.

... Our main criteria was for technically competent, no-excuses, go-getters. You would not be hired. Most complainers on this thread would not be hired. It is not because you don't have all the right skills... It's because there is too much in the attitude that says, "mediocre." Too much that says, "I've got a good excuse for not succeeding, and I am content with that."... Sorry, the complainers in this thread likely will never work for them.

Well...that is disconcerting and sad. In my case, as a kid when I first saw the rovers land on Mars and decided to become a physicist/astronomer/builder for NASA, I did a heck of a lot to prepare a good foundation for my career:

• I got involved into cars and tractors so that I can know about moving parts, axles, etc...
• I rebuilt cars, engines, used a number of specialized tools and equipment (sandblasters, welders)
• I built computers, networks, and learned all I could about chips, processors, etc...
• I went to physics/astronomy bachelor's degree
• I went into more physics/astronomy graduate degree
• I learned programming
• All while getting a GPA of 3.59 and 3.53...which I don't think is too bad

. ... and you are telling me that all this is just mediocre excuse for not succeeding ? I don't understand.

Most people in my shoes are not lucky enough to work with cars and tractors and restore them. Most don't even get to learn anything beyond Office (Excel, Words PowerPoint)...There are impoverished areas in this country where some family barely have a phone...let alone a computer. I couldn't afford my education...obviously...I used student loans, without anyone's help. But I was lucky to have access to computers, cars, tools...

I am not a savant kid or a rocket surgeon... But I do well believe that I have done enough than I should have been able to get an ENTRY-LEVEL "appropriate" job ... aka a physics/astronomymath job.

And don't forget that we are at the mercy of the curriculum of the university(ies) you attend. It's not my fault that they didn't teach us 4 years of non-stop programming. It's not my fault that they didn't push us into summer programs and hammered it hard. It's not my fault that even though both of my universities ranked in the top 100 only to find out that Employers consider these universities mediocre/lackluster, despite the $125,000 price tag

Or it is my fault. I should have done more. I should have gone to a better university, like Caltech. I should have learn to develop Artificial Intelligence at age of 17...would somebody hire me then ?

Sorry for my rant...

 

[EngWiPy]

They are welcome to check my credentials and references and ask about my experiences, but checking my personal life to see if I'm a fit ... It's their right to have trustworthy employees for their reputation, but it's also the applicants' right to have privacy and not discriminated against for hidden reasons possibly irrelevant to the job, like having a political view, for example. No wonder why there is a free and open source software movement that fights for privacy. I didn't believe Richard Stallman when I watched a talk for him about cyber privacy. This is another topic, though.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

As mentioned earlier...not the same resume...many variations...many fine-tuning. Used the help of staffing firms, family, and friends.

Right, you made it LOOK better. You've had several years since you graduated. What new skills and accomplishments do you have in that time to actually IMPROVE the substance in addition to the polish?

. ... and you are telling me that all this is just mediocre excuse for not succeeding ? I don't understand.

I am not a savant kid or a rocket surgeon... But I do well believe that I have done enough than I should have been able to get an ENTRY-LEVEL "appropriate" job ... aka a physics/astronomymath job.

And don't forget that we are at the mercy of the curriculum of the university(ies) you attend. It's not my fault that they didn't teach us 4 years of non-stop programming. It's not my fault that they didn't push us into summer programs and hammered it hard. It's not my fault that even though both of my universities ranked in the top 100 only to find out that Employers consider these universities mediocre/lackluster, despite the $125,000 price tag

Or it is my fault. I should have done more. I should have gone to a better university, like Caltech. I should have learn to develop Artificial Intelligence at age of 17...would somebody hire me then ?

Sorry for my rant...

Boo hoo. The project I dreamed of working on when I chose to major in Physics didn't even exist any more when I graduated. I figured it out. Jobs like NASA will always have 1000+ well qualified applicants for every open position. You got to have a plan B and develop a realistic skillset.

And programming isn't your only other option. As I mentioned before, you could teach high school math and/or physics and maybe even land a job at a community college. They are more likely to hire you than tech companies since they won't worry so much about you jumping ship when the NASA/DoD spigot gets turned back on.

Sorry you overpaid for your education.

 

[Trioxide]

...And programming isn't your only other option. As I mentioned before, you could teach high school math and/or physics and maybe even land a job at a community college. They are more likely to hire you than tech companies since they won't worry so much about you jumping ship when the NASA/DoD spigot gets turned back on. Sorry you overpaid for your education.

I did teach at a community college (see original post), but they stuck me in part-time, with a 3-digit monthly paycheck...it was unrealistic, especially with the 4-digit monthly student loan dues.

I am sorry too It was a costly mistake that will be with me for a very long time (about 30 years, based on current interest rates and payment plan availability)I hope I am not coming across too cynical/aggressive...I appreciate all the insight that everybody has thrown into this Thread.

 

[symbolipoint]

It's legal if you are dump, or it's absolutely legal to lookup personal information even if it's private?

It was mentioned in post #37 that even your emails and private social media accounts will be exposed! How clever one could be more than making things private and hidden to the public and to the people whom he/she doesn't know?

I'm not necessarily saying it's OK to hire applicants with questionable background checks, but this gives employers one more layer of power to use against applicants if they choose so and no on would know if they discriminate between applicants.

Yes, I'm that ignorant. Could you inform me? I know that the government maybe spying on people for security reasons (or so they say), but I'm shocked to know even employers can spy on people's lives to decide if they are a fit or not for a job that is not critical for other people's privacy and lives.

This is maybe why some of us choose a screen-name or user-name which is not our real, legal name. We still must be careful of the quality of what we say (like on the forums), because even through our screenname's we develop a reputation. If we want some employer to be able to check on us for that online activity, then we better be willing to tell them our screen name, and be able to give some way to help them verify it is who we are.

 

[symbolipoint]

Companies routinely ask about social media usage during interviews, they are checking on your past history to see if it fits into their culture and they want to make sure that you are not going to do anything that will embarrass them in the future. If it is online, private or not, someone will look for it. Nothing says that anyone has to use legal ways to investigate potential employees and they won't tell you if they find anything, you'll just not get the job and that is their right.

There again, someone using a forum username or screen name needs to take care of the quality of what they say online. One uses a pseudonym (like screen name) to be able to STOP the connection between person's real identity and person's online activity. Still, if you want to break the secret to some specific employer, you better have been careful about what things you have said through your screen name and how you've said them. Once you break the secret, the employer can tell whoever they want of the screen name you have been using.

If you want some kind of technical or professional credit for your forum or online activity, do you really want to be using a pseudonym?

 

[EngWiPy]

I think the Internet gives us a space to say what we cannot say in real life besides giving us a platform to connect and exchange useful information on a specific topic. There are so many forums: health, politics, science, religion, ... etc. That's the idea of having nicknames or screen names. I can give an employer relevant links and names like my LinkedIn, GitHub, ... etc, but why to give them my screen name, say on these forums? If they find it by themselves, is it legal, and if not why they are allowed to do it? I guess it's legal to check the identity, credentials, and work history of an applicant, but why to breach into my private emails and FB posts for a position?

 

[Crass_Oscillator]

Not at all. Addressing a challenge oneself is not complaining and excuse making.

Shifting the responsibility to others (government, employers) demonstrates an entitlement mentality.

It's not about greed. It's about survival. Every "bad hire" costs the companies I'm talking about $250,000 - $500,000 to remedy. The background check to find the social media posts that demonstrate an entitlement mentality (or a gambling problem, or a porn problem, whatever the employer cares about) costs about $1000. And yes, for a grand, they will find all your social media accounts (even the ones you think are private, anonymous, or hidden). For a bit more, they can get into your email too.

How would they find out about a porn or gambling problem (or is a political radical, or has weird reddit tastes)? I'd be curious to know a bit more about the extent of their powers. I'm sure I had accounts on websites when I was a teenager where I posted potentially politically damaging things...

 

[Choppy]

And don't forget that we are at the mercy of the curriculum of the university(ies) you attend. It's not my fault that they didn't teach us 4 years of non-stop programming. It's not my fault that they didn't push us into summer programs and hammered it hard. It's not my fault that even though both of my universities ranked in the top 100 only to find out that Employers consider these universities mediocre/lackluster, despite the $125,000 price tag

I realize you're ranting here, however I can't help but wonder if taking some ownership might help you.

There's a lot in here about what these universities did not do. What about everything they did do? They gave you an education in physics didn't they? That was what you signed up for, wasn't it? So now you're educated, but the problem is you don't appear to have much by way of professional qualifications and you don't want to go on in academia. How do you use this education to help you in the workforce.

One suggestion is to dig yourself out of the sunken cost hole. Okay, you spent $125k on your education. Of course you want to do work related to it. But it can't be news to you that there isn't that much demand for MSc-level computational astrophysics. The immediate extensions from this have already been brought up: programming and teaching. But what about thinking outside the box for a moment? You don't have to do something related to your education. You could think of your background as more of an accelerant. You're going to be better at a lot of things now because of the education you have.

1. Have you thought about working for the armed forces? I know that's not for everyone, and it comes with its own challenges and consequences, but it is an environment where a high level of education is respected and you may find ways to apply your knowledge to some real world problems. Similarly you might also consider work in law enforcement or in the security industry. Or what about just general government jobs?
2. What about technical sales? I think a lot of people naturally shy away from this because they immediately think: I didn't go to school for X years to become that guy on the used car lot. But if you think about medical companies like Philips or General Electric that make imaging machines, they need people to coordinate these multi-million dollar sales, arrange the installations etc. and they need people who have more than just a business background to do it because the sales person has to understand how the equipment works to interact with the customers.
3. Have you thought about starting your own company? Again, it's not for everyone, but for some people it's the only way to fly.
4. If you like rebuilding cars, why not focus on that for a while?

Anyway, you get the picture.
[/QUOTE]

 

[Dr. Courtney]

How would they find out about a porn or gambling problem (or is a political radical, or has weird reddit tastes)? I'd be curious to know a bit more about the extent of their powers. I'm sure I had accounts on websites when I was a teenager where I posted potentially politically damaging things...

By the time you have graduated from college, most employers are not worried about stuff from high school unless it is a criminal history. They know most teens do lots of stupid stuff in high school and are not worried about it. Most of the techniques are proprietary combinations of standard background investigating to determine some starting points for a variety of hacking approaches. The hacking side tends to be IP based combined with the usual user name identification schemes and password hacking.

Stuff that is done through a tor browser and proxy servers with accounts that are never connected with your normal, easily identified accounts, email, phone number, credit card, or PayPal is harder to find. A common strategy to maintain privacy is to create an online identity that is never connected to your real one in any way. But most folks slip up at some point and connect it to their real identity: IP slips, identified account slips, photo slips, "friend" slips, payment info slips.

Most of these background agents do not have anything near NSA capabilities. I tell people if you want something to be private at this level on the internet, go to MacDonalds, create an account only for that purpose, and do what you got to do without linking that account in any way to other online accounts. Most hackers will never get past the IP address at MacDonalds to identify what was done online.

But employers have realized that most professionals are now being careful with their identified social media accounts not to post material that looks bad to potential employers. People are attempting to keep certain behaviors private through the use of anonymous accounts but using techniques that are not really as private as the users think.

Some employers will find somethings more problematic than others. Most of my colleagues have a big problem with drug abuse. The same kinds of things that are problematic for security clearances are problematic for them.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

I think the Internet gives us a space to say what we cannot say in real life besides giving us a platform to connect and exchange useful information on a specific topic. There are so many forums: health, politics, science, religion, ... etc. That's the idea of having nicknames or screen names. I can give an employer relevant links and names like my LinkedIn, GitHub, ... etc, but why to give them my screen name, say on these forums? If they find it by themselves, is it legal, and if not why they are allowed to do it? I guess it's legal to check the identity, credentials, and work history of an applicant, but why to breach into my private emails and FB posts for a position?

Usually at some point in the application process, applicants give potential employers permission to do a background check. If you read the fine print of those, there are very few limitations. Getting into your email is of questionable legality, but the employers who go this far maintain plausible deniability by having a background agency do the background check. Since the employer only specifies what to look for and not how to go about it, they don't really tell the agency to go into your email, they just select a level of thoroughness. I don't think FB posts and other social media posts meet the legal definition of "private."

Sure, applicants want employers to only see the things they approve the employers of seeing. But if you've put it out there in cyberspace, you should not think you have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

I realize you're ranting here, however I can't help but wonder if taking some ownership might help you...

Have you thought about starting your own company? Again, it's not for everyone, but for some people it's the only way to fly.

Ownership is the key attribute that is lacking in many recent graduates.

I've thought for a while that most people in STEM should have a consulting business of some type. It's not hard, and it gives folks who need your services a way to pay you without all the baggage (legal requirements, health care, etc.) and overhead costs of hiring you as an employee. Almost no one is going to hire a recent grad to work from a distance as an employee. Lots of paid consulting work gets done from a distance. A consulting business expands one's reach for potential checks from driving distance to the whole country.

A consulting business also provides a way to account for gaps of time between traditional employers. A decent web site, list of projects, and documented history of one's accomplishments during that time make a strong case for productive self-employment.

 

[Dr. Courtney]

I did teach at a community college (see original post), but they stuck me in part-time, with a 3-digit monthly paycheck...it was unrealistic, especially with the 4-digit monthly student loan dues.

Part time community college teaching is pretty much charity work. It can help gain teaching experience and references for later applying for full time teaching experience, but it isn't going to pay many bills. It is better than nothing while treading water waiting for a full time job offer. It also leaves plenty of time for strengthening one's cv through consulting, programming, or research projects.

Potential employers may also be concerned if one leaves a community college teaching job for nothing or for something close to flipping burgers. Gaps in employment catch there attention. It tends to be easier to find a job if you already have a job. I've known a number of physics types move from community college jobs into much better positions. It is a much better launch pad than appearing to be unemployed or underemployed. From the paycheck, it often feels like being underemployed, but it does not tend to be perceived that way by other employers.

 

[StatGuy2000]

Usually at some point in the application process, applicants give potential employers permission to do a background check. If you read the fine print of those, there are very few limitations. Getting into your email is of questionable legality, but the employers who go this far maintain plausible deniability by having a background agency do the background check. Since the employer only specifies what to look for and not how to go about it, they don't really tell the agency to go into your email, they just select a level of thoroughness. I don't think FB posts and other social media posts meet the legal definition of "private."

Sure, applicants want employers to only see the things they approve the employers of seeing. But if you've put it out there in cyberspace, you should not think you have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Dr. Courtney, you should realize that S_David is based in Canada, and what is permissible in terms of background checks differ considerably from country to country. I'm not sure what is permissible in Canada, but I know that in most EU countries, privacy laws are much tougher, so even with explicit permission from the prospective employee, background agencies and employers have much higher limitations in terms of what they can search. Getting into e-mail is almost certainly illegal there, and even FB posts and other social media posts are protected.

The US is especially lax in terms of privacy, I believe.

 

[Andy Resnick]

Yes, I'm that ignorant. Could you inform me? I know that the government maybe spying on people for security reasons (or so they say), but I'm shocked to know even employers can spy on people's lives to decide if they are a fit or not for a job that is not critical for other people's privacy and lives.

Wow. It's not the government, btw- it's private companies doing the spying. Ever wonder why your targeted ads seem so relevant? The data your computer (or phone, or car, or anything else that is internet-enabled such as a cable DVR) generates as it navigates online does not belong to you, it is a commodity that is bought and sold.

 

[dkotschessaa]

Ownership is the key attribute that is lacking in many recent graduates.

OH yeah. The youth of today right? If they could only be more like the previous generation of hard working, nose to the grindstone realists...

They [Young People] have exalted notions, because they have not been humbled by life or learned its necessary limitations; moreover, their hopeful disposition makes them think themselves equal to great things -- and that means having exalted notions. They would always rather do noble deeds than useful ones: Their lives are regulated more by moral feeling than by reasoning -- all their mistakes are in the direction of doing things excessively and vehemently. They overdo everything -- they love too much, hate too much, and the same with everything else.
(Aristotle)

 

[Trioxide]

...You don't have to do something related to your education.

1. Have you thought about working for the armed forces? Or what about just general government jobs?
2. What about technical sales?
3. Have you thought about starting your own company? Again, it's not for everyone, but for some people it's the only way to fly.
4. If you like rebuilding cars, why not focus on that for a while?

1. Yes! I have been using USAJOBS.gov every week, month, and year(s) to find Civilian employment, in the fields of technicians, engineers, scientists all across the US. I applied several 20 times just in the last two months for general engineers and technicians for the armed forces research divisions, Air Force Bases down South, etc... All were rejected.
2. Yes! Applied to Toyota and General Motors manufacturers to sell, clean, or repair cars! Was denied every single time due to being over-qualified. Also applied to airports, car rentals for doing maintenance or costumer service...was denied for the same reason. I applied multiple time to various such places...not just once.
3. I can barely afford to eat. Starting a company seems a little impossible for me right now.
4. I applied to local repair stores, even went on Craigslist to offer repair services... Nothing ever materialized.

If you go back to my first few original posts, you'll see that I am applying way beyond any physics-related jobs: raking leaves, snow shoveling, etc... I have cast a wide enough net that no longer focus *just* on astronomy/physics anymore.