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:
Capote or chesterfield / SAT 5-16-26 / Modern "go-to's" / Up to snuff,
facetiously / Matches with forensics / Roman goddess who drives a two-horse
chariot / Marriott property with the slogan "Whatever Whenever" / Victor
over Washington on 11/12/1955 in "Back to the Future, Pt. II"—and in real
life / Curtain for silhouetting on stage / Once-popular terra-cotta
figurine / Spelling combinations? / Folks who enjoy a well-aged beef?
-
Constructor: Byron Walden
Relative difficulty: Medium-Challenging
THEME: none
Word of the Day: ZARFS (*36A: Cup holders*) —
A *zarf* (plural: zarfs, z...
1 hour ago