I thought the overall concept seemed pretty clear to me: You, the employer, posted a job. I, the prospective employee, responded to it. Did we make a "connection" here or not?
Yet, here's how at least two of these conversations went this week when said employer was on the phone:
ME: "... and was that job still open?"
THEM: "Yes. Yes it is."
ME: "OK ... and how soon were you looking to fill that?"
THEM: "Fairly quickly ... you know."
ME: "Cool. And you received my resume, right?"
THEM: "Well, I've got a stack to go through here. But I'm sure I'll be giving you a call back if you're qualified."
Isn't that a remarkable hiring strategy? "I'm just going to let people pile up and then call them back when they're probably off the market." Best of luck to you too ... fuckers.
I've since realized that actually showing up at said office and physically handing paperwork over to the person-in-charge makes lame excuses harder to come by. And on the lighter side, there were the others who did talk to me in greater depth about the position I actually inquired about. But I know what the dangers are of building your hopes up before anything pans out, so let me be skeptical for another week. Until then, I'm convincing myself that this is not just a matter of my words being misunderstood:
Brit's jolly cry of approval / SUN 3-16-25 / Florentine artist known for
frescoes / Frodo's enchanting friend / 14-line poem with only two rhymes
across three stanzas / Subway commuters, informally / Not-so-joltin' joe? /
Dug through for digital analysis / Hawkeye's real first name in the
"Avengers" movies / German soccer legend Manuel who innovated the
"sweeper-keeper" role / Cote quote? / Girl who's "sweet as apple cider,"
per an old song
-
Constructor: Paul Coulter
Relative difficulty: Easy
THEME: "Have It Both Ways" — two Across answers share a common Down
segment—that segment reads one wa...
3 hours ago