1:25 a.m. - 2003-01-30
Work!
Just finished dancing with Miss Kitty and Elvis on the stair climb. We were having so much fun that my youngest son joined us. I'm going to have to find a way to learn to jive from my Dad. Maybe the Elvis CD will be enticement enough. He and my Mom loved to dance and they were GOOD. It's a family tradition that's worth preserving and maybe passing on. A couple of my guys got rhythm, they just need a little persuasion. Right? Dance with me or I'll sing! We'll see.
I didn't write about my job interviews yesterday, because I was waiting for the other shoe to drop. Both interviews were a little odd in certain ways. I was waiting for the rest of the story to play out.
In the one interview, at the recruitment agency, it was apparent that the employer had already decided they wanted me based on the pre-screening interview that the recruiter had done with me over the telephone. BUT they had told the recruiter that there were conditions that I had to agree to first. That was the focus of our meeting. First, less wages to start with - fine, since there would be some new skills to learn that I would consider very valuable. My attitude is, that is worth a "tuition fee" in the form of less income for a short time. The take home pay would just cover my monthly expenses, so I didn't feel that it would be too onerous.
Next, the recruiter started asking me for personal information about the supervisors at one of the companies I had worked for. I got the sense that there was some history between them and her, because she was very anxious to know what their situations were. I worked in personnel for a time in that company, so I try to be very careful what I say about staff, because although most of my knowledge is from personal contact, there is also some information I know because of their records. It is just too easy to forget which is which and disclose something that should be confidential. I wasn't clear on why she was even asking me some of the questions - they weren't germane to an interview for a job.
Then she started asking about the owner of that same company. Big red lights came on. He is a very nice man and a true gentleman in personal contacts, but he has a reputation as a ruthless player in the business end of things. Another of the COO's in the industry and I had volunteered on a committee together and he once asked me how I could handle being in such a rough and tumble company. It was that, but not because of anything the owner allowed. It had just become too big for him to catch some of the garbage going on. He sold the company I was in two years ago and has started up another. I think he just didn't like the size the old one had grown to be and he told me one day that he was getting bored - I think because he was needing to spend too much time doing admin work and protecting what existed. Some of his marketing staff were always trying to "rein him in", because they felt his frankness with the press and investors was too much of a liability. What I liked, was the fact that in that company's annual reports what one saw was what one got - not that common. Anyway, the recruiter continued trying to lead me into a discussion about the owner's "worth" and his personal life. She remarked on his generosity when, after the sale of the company, he donated several million dollars to the main charitable organization in the city. Truth was, it had been company policy to contribute cash to any charity to which a permanent staff member devoted time, and time was also given to staff to work on those charities during work hours, without financial penalty. He was and is an example of a good corporate citizen.
One could contrast him with the new owner of the city's professional football team. Since taking over, the owner has publicly humiliated the coach - who has the best winning record in the league - and sent him packing. Several other staff and players are also on the chopping block. The reason? Well, apparently his son has tried out as quarterback for most of the professional American and Canadian teams and been turned down. It appears that Daddy has decided that he doesn't care if it destroys our local team as long as his son can play at the level he wishes. Anyone who isn't willing to co-operate with that plan is turfed. Anyway, I finally managed to divert the conversation away from those questions, because they weren't appropriate.
Finally, she told me the last condition of the employer. I had to quit Elections Canada immediately. Hmmmmm...well let's see then. First, it is the one job for which I have a passion. I love the technical and research work I do in the industry I'm in, but I chose it because it was the only industry in Calgary that would allow me to earn enough to support six sons on my own. The fact that I've come to enjoy some of it is truly a bonus, but it wouldn't have been anywhere near the top of my list of things to do without the financial imperatives driving my choices. There is much I still detest about it too, where the attitude and behaviour of a lot of the staff is concerned.
Second, elections work is the one job I do that challenges every skill I have and demands that I learn more every day. It is the most stimulating and energizing work I know, because it is one of the few times Canadians truly show their passion and commitment to this country and our society. It gives one hope for the future when one sees that unselfish dedication to making things "better" - whatever better means to each participant. Third, I have the freedom to think for myself and make choices based on local need. I get to teach and mentor some really special people. Finally, it pays me nearly as much, in two or three months, as this new job would pay me in a year. The answer, of course was no.
At that point the interviewer became quite upset. I think she believed she had a done deal, because most people would choose security and a permanent position whatever the cost. To me, the last condition showed a degree of disrespect for the most valuable aspect of my work skills that would likely only become worse over time. What I choose to do outside of work hours is my own business. She ended the interview by saying she didn't think the employer would accept that response, and walked me across the hall to the "temp" section of the company. The second interviewer was much more interested in what skills I could contribute during work hours and had a position in mind. She asked me to let her know how my other interview turned out, so she could place me as soon as I was available.
The other interview I had on Tuesday was for a contract that the data management company I have been with for the past two years was negotiating over the past month. It is with one of the two companies in the industry we serve, that I really do want to work for. They have an international reputation for progressive business practices and a local reputation for treating their staff very well. They are good corporate citizens. The interview lasted about an hour and ended with the question of when I could start. The two women who interviewed me were great personally, and obviously very knowledgable about the scope of the work required. They understood what I was saying about a lot of the technical experience I have and seemed eager to draw from it. The material I would be working with is an area that absolutely fascinates me. Lots to learn - yum. Final positive was that both women seemed to be the type to trust me with the work without the micromanaging that often interferes with and slows down a project. I think probably because they do know their jobs so well. Micromanagers are often very insecure. Both ladies had attended and graduated from high schools in my community about the same time as me, and were just as interested in catching up on that as in learning about my work skills. It was nice to feel valued as a person.
I called my supervisor when I got home, to report what had been discussed in that interview. He was pleased with the results. What was bothering me after our discussion, was that something just didn't feel right. For one thing, my liaison on this project would be one of the other managers - not him. Yet, the only reason I've stuck with this company so long was because, as an employee, my supervisor has always backed me up or protected me when necessary in relations with the client, the data management firm, or on technical issues. He also is a generous teacher with respect to the skills he has. I've learned a great deal as a result. Some of the other managers have been less interested in the quality of work produced and make compromises or commitments that I can't support. My supervisor noted that the manager I would report to had been liaising with the company in question for some time, so he didn't think it would be appropriate for him to step in on most issues. The second thing that just didn't feel right is that, even though the manager in question was supposed to be communicating the details of this contract with me, everything so far has come through the initiative of my supervisor. However, maybe there is something going on I'm not privy to. Fair enough, I guess I need to give her a fair chance.
The final thing that didn't feel right? I had visited the data management company's website a couple of evenings ago, because my intuition was saying something was wrong. Some of the material on there was troubling. This morning the mystery was solved when my supervisor called to let me know that the VP of the company would no longer be there after tomorrow. He said that she had been unhappy for some time. He said he wanted to let me know, because she had been the person who had originally hired me and supervised the first project I had done for the company. Alright, so some of my uneasiness seems to be explained. I agreed that I would like to start with this new project on Monday. I really do want to work for this new client. I just hope there is nothing else that I've missed with respect to the data mangement company. Nothing wrong with change - right?
�
�
