Get a Job!

Yeah you!

If I were you I'd be knocking on every door.  You need to make some money!

This is a discussion (more of an argument)  I actually had with a relative.  Mind you, I'm not some Instagram obsessed teenager laying around the house binging on Netflix.  For god's sake!  I'm in my 40's.

I can't afford to binge on anything.  That's what's so irritating.

It's one thing to be 20-something and have trouble finding work.  Nobody judges you.  Your frustration has more to do with unbridled ambition than a perceived character flaw.

If you've followed this blog for any amount of time you know my story.  I've worked....hard.  I've ticked off all the boxes; College, career, sacrifice, frugality.  I followed the rules, kept my options open and always kept an ear to the ground.

All seemingly for nothing.  

I had a fairly stable living for many years that allowed me to not only better myself but my family.  Now that same family is harder to deal with than a bill collector.

I understand their disillusionment.  For a long time I was looked at as the guy who always seemed to be able to keep it together.  I took adversity with aplomb (well mostly, I do tend the bitch a lot) 

These days I can barely afford to feed myself.  To them it must seem like I've given up.

Thing is, I haven't but I'm far more disillusioned and frustrated than they are.  

There was a time when there was always a fallback position.  If you couldn't find work in your own field you could at least find something to keep you going til you did.

It doesn't take much investigation to find confirmation of what I always suspected was true.  That being that regardless of the unemployment numbers and Wall Street rallies there are still way too many barriers to making a living.

Minimum wage hasn't kept up with the cost of living for a generation but worse than that the competition for jobs that offer it is staggering.   Look at the candidates for these jobs and you find everything from the high school kid to PhD's. 

Those who've never suffered the indignity of rejection for a low wage job don't understand.  They believe there are still jobs whose only requirement is a warm body.  

They're wrong.

These days even flipping burgers requires training on your own dime just to obtain a food handler's card.  With that in hand you're well on your way to 25 hours a week crafting Angry Whoppers for the princely sum of $8.05/hr.   Oh yeah, with benefits too, if you can afford the payroll deduction....

It gets worse....

Now we're hearing an uproar over raising the minimum wage to something in line with what it actually costs to live somewhere other than your car.  

"It'll cause higher unemployment!" 
"We can't afford to pay more!"  
" It'll break the back of small business!"

Which ticks me off even more.  While all these "job creators" game the system to overwork and underpay their current employees, they place hurdles in the way of new hires to ensure nothing changes.

There's no way around it and if you don't understand what I'm about to say I'm sorry but you're either bloody stupid or worse a selfish bastard.

Hiring someone full time for a wage they can't live on in a first-world country is institutionalized slavery.

Offering only part time hours and scheduling employees so that it's impossible for them to get another part time job is even worse.  As an employer you're effectively forcing your workforce into poverty for no other reason than greed.

Don't give me that crap about high labor costs either.  If you can't afford the means to sell your product you don't have a damned clue about how to properly run a business. 

Employees are your partners not your slaves.  Paying them shouldn't be looked at as "an inconvenience."

It's no different than the argument from the Southern states that led to the Civil War.  Let's get one thing perfectly clear here.  Lincoln was no great abolitionist, he was a nationalist. He was far more open to compromise: even those that would include continuing slavery if it would have kept the country together.  The Civil war was about human rights only as much as the space program was about inventing freeze dried coffee.

That's historical fact.

Meaning any business, especially BIG business that argues against a livable wage is taking the same position as the Civil War South.  For them it was about cheap labor to improve their bottom line.

Sound familiar?

In America, it's not about some misguided fantasy of climbing the ladder of success.   it's about production at the lowest possible cost.  That means near poverty wages to keep an unskilled workforce forever unskilled and powerless.   Now add in the yoke of the "Credit Economy" that exists only to perpetuate itself.  A faceless beast fed by the poor.  By the way, that includes you if you're only one paycheck from financial disaster. 

It's hard to pull yourself up by the bootstraps if the boots have a 29% interest rate.

We, all of us of unfortunate birth are increasingly subject to the indecencies of an inadequate paycheck that won't even cover the basic necessities.  

It's nothing less than indentured servitude.

Which comes to people like me.  I'm not unskilled but I'm not especially talented either.  So I'm right there with you.

I hear a lot of, "You're a top candidate" when applying for jobs in my field only to not get the job.  A bit too much of hearing that lately meaning I've taken to applying for "seasonal" positions with local retail stores.

Even then the whole premise is twisted..

Questions like, " Why do you want to work here?"  Duh!  I need money and you're supposedly hiring.  Of course you can't say that.  You have to come up with some bullshit about a life change and trying new things and ground floors for new starts, blah, blah, blah.

You're actually better off if you never did anything with your life.  Otherwise that 6 figure resume becomes another hurdle to overcome fighting for a job you don't really want for a wage you can't really afford.

BTW, it's damned hard to dumb down a professional resume for $8.05/hr.  Nobody's going to believe you've been sitting on your ass for 30 years of your life.  The background check ( that they all run ) will show your lie anyway.  So no, acting stupid isn't an answer...

Who the hell actually prepares a resume for a minimum wage retail job anyway?  What are you going to say?  Stocked shelves, greeted customers, kissed ass?  All that crap fits on the application.  Resume's are for the jobs you work after you get the hell out of retail.

Anyway, more to the point: that there's any expectation that working retail is a great career move is lunacy.  I know, it's what I did when I was in high school 1000 years ago and I knew I didn't want to do it when I was my age now. 

Give me a break.  Once everyone's returned their Christmas gifts and yanked down the baubles and twinkly lights you're out the door buddy.  

If'someone like me is on your doorstep looking for work, I'm fucking serious about being there.  I've taken a deep breath, swallowed my pride and committed to the relationship.

By the way, never, ever tell me I need to swallow my pride.

I've been so beaten up that I don't have any left.  I've seriously entertained a job delivering and cleaning port-a- potties.  The only thing that stopped me was the lack of a commercial driver's license and being in my 40's.  Meaning I'm not sure I can lift 100 pounds 30 times a day every day on a job with no health benefits.  ( That's what the ad actually said BTW )

I'm mad as hell that I'm being denied a living ( as corrupt as the word is in this country) and even angrier when someone assumes I'm not doing enough to improve my situation.

I'm also sick of being judged by people who don't deserve the jobs they have.  Worse, when they cast aspersions on someone like me who's been in the field longer than they've been out of high school.  

That sounds arrogant but remember, I know from whence I speak.  Most of the people I've interviewed with (with rare exception) got their positions through the buddy system. I only say that because part of my interview preparation involves looking them up on LinkedIn.  I've found IT directors whose last job was a sales director and others with no IT or management training at all.  

I really don't care how they got their jobs just so long as it doesn't have an effect on me getting hired.  Unfortunately, it does...

It's an old boys network and I DO MEAN old BOYS.  I've yet to meet a female IT director.  I doubt I'd have as much bullshit if I did.  The nice thing about having a female manager is that chances are she's gone through a lot of crap to get where she is.  That tends to minimize the games because she just doesn't have the time for it.  

It's natural for the male of the species to feel threatened when someone better than him has come along even if he gets to boss you around.   In my experience women don't engage in that kind of pissing contest.

If you think this is just a bunch of whining and excuses then put yourself in my shoes for a minute.

You're in you 40's, lost all your income and can't replace it.  Nobody takes you seriously when you apply for low-wage jobs and your relatives don't want to talk to you unless you're sending them a check.

Pull myself up by my bootstraps?  My boots have holes in the soles buddy.

It doesn't stop me but what slows me down is your misinformed judgement.  I'm putting it out there, no agenda but to survive.  

Until you know what I'm going through (and I'm pretty sure most don't) keep your admonitions to yourselves and thank your creator that you don't have to be here.

I won't quit but I know a lot of people that dismiss me would have long ago.

That makes me better than them and if nothing else, that's worth living for.  There needs to be a change and perhaps I need to feel the effects to understand how badly it needs to happen.

Livable wage now!  

Self-centered Prick

Gotcha!

No, this isn't an article bashing Trump but it does have something to do with him.  That "something" is a label that often brands those undeserving of it.

It's a label that's often only a superficial representation of the myriad of perceived character flaws exhibited by those who at least on the surface fit the remark.

I'll admit that I've felt the sting of it myself.  The accusers used kinder terms like: arrogant, overconfident or entitled but that's only because they're uttered in mixed company.  The real meaning is: Self-centered Prick.

Did I deserve it? In their mind I did but it doesn't matter.

Once you're branded as such, there's not much point in defending against it.  To do so just proves the point to the prosecution.

Maybe that's why Trump never apologizes.  You can't admit a mistake without owning the flaw and as we all know, everything about Trump is, "Fabulous, never better."





But more to the point...

I've leveled the barb myself and of course I was right to do so.....Uh Oh....maybe I am a self-centered Pr...

Perception is rarely reality.  We color our views with our own experience.  Whatever we're going through now is viewed through that lens.  

Even if it's a family member, if something they're doing ( or NOT doing ) is affecting YOU in some way and they won't acknowledge it to your satisfaction, I can guarantee the phrase will at least briefly come to mind.

Thing is, who's the bigger devil here?  If you're only concerned with yourself how are you any better than the other guy?  If you won't take the time to see things through their eyes, their experience and their beliefs then who's the real "prick?"

I don't make excuses for people that deserve the charge.   We're all products of our environments and if that's a negative thing and we don't try to change it then the label is deserved.

But an attack is rarely left unanswered.  The conflict only escalates and in our society conflict sells.  We even encourage snap judgement without further reflection.  It's a world with little more patience than the life of a paparazzi's flash bulb.

Everything is black and white.  You're guilty or not.  No time for evidence or reflection.  Why waste time moving past the first impression when it fits so neatly into our safe, uncomplicated view of the world.

If there's anything from the Star Wars prequels I liked it was one quote.  

"Only a Sith deals in Absolutes"  - Obi Wan Kenobi

Sith's are bad people, you don't want to be a Sith.  

Nobody is completely right or wrong and by extension you know nothing about anyone if you don't bother to listen to them first.

You have a right to an opinion, don't waste it with unilateral decisions based on petty evidence.

TWIT & YouTube: The Hypocrisy Engine and Why it Works (against you)

I told you I'd be watching and I'm keeping my promise.  This time it's proof positive of the double standard TWIT employs when it comes to copyrighted material.

TWIT had a "Live Special" that was nothing more than a live reaction video to Apple's September 7th event.  That's bad enough but TWIT was also rebroadcasting the event which is in direct violation of the Apple Copyright and Terms of Use of their website.

So why do I care?

As you know, My Digital Dynamic channel received a copyright strike due to a takedown of an UNEDITED vidcap of the broadcast of TWIT's move to the East Side studios.  Even though I conformed to the strictest interpretation of the Creative Commons license I still received a copyright violation that removed monetization for all videos on that channel most of which had no TWIT content.

OK, so TWIT's on my list but what about YouTube?  What do they have to do with it?

Everything..  There's a double standard at play here.

One that for me began years ago with the #microstopped mass takedown that yanked a Windows 8 HowTo video and continues with the recent TWIT takedowns of the past month.  YouTube provides the heavy hand to enforce what is often unfair and unsubstantiated copyright claims.

The fact of the matter is this.  YouTube is not your friend when it comes to copyright law and free speech.  YouTube is in the business of selling ads not political activism.  To that end they protect their Safe Harbor provisions and their advertising revenue at your expense.

It's a business not a public park.  They get to make the rules and however unfair or unevenly applied you have to operate within them if you want to put your content on their service.

BUT...

When they enforce the rules on one party and not another that sets up a double standard.  This is why I include them in my "hypocrisy engine."

Here's the companion video.   Much more fun than all these...words...

TWIT: Kicking puppies again ( on YouTube )

See that screen capture above?  That's the rule I went by for TWIT videos.  Guess what?  It doesn't matter.  

Newton's 3rd Law

\

For Every Action There Is An Equal And Opposite Reaction

Let me tell you a story....

TWIT: The Gloves are off....

I promised almost 2 years ago that barring people being led away in handcuffs I was going to stop covering TWIT and for the most part I did.

The continuing lewdness, misogyny and a tendency to circle the wagons at the slightest hint of detractors has hardly been  newsworthy.  As such, I was content to just passively watch them die in an implosion of their own making.

To that end I've never done anything to them that they didn't first do to themselves.  In fact, everything I've  written was meant more as a sanity check than attack.  

Believe me, I could have written so much more.  I could have documented the minutia of every misstep, every cruel word, every thoughtless act.

But I left such things to Totaldrama.   I wasn't interested in baldfaced attacks, name calling or sensationalism.  

TWIT does a fine job of that all on its own.

Well....guess what....

The gloves are off BITCH...

They came off because of the latest round of wagon circling.  It seems my video capture of TWIT's big move to the Eastside studios was a violation of copyright.  

At least according to the takedown notice I received today.

Unless something has changed that I don't know about, all TWIT broadcasts are licensed under a Creative Commons license.  As such, so long as you give full attribution of the source and don't try to make any money off of the content you can freely distribute whatever you capture.  

Even the most restrictive of Creative Commons Licenses allows what I've done all along that being...

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 

CC BY-NC-ND

This license is the most restrictive of our six main licenses, only allowing others to download your works and share them with others as long as they credit you, but they can’t change them in any way or use them commercially. 

from the official Creative Commons site...

Which is what I've always done with all my TWIT video captures even going so far as to never edit or cut out material that may change the context of the programming in the slightest way.  In fact, the most editing I've ever done with a TWIT video capture was to edit out the paid advertising reads.

There's no reason that I should give free advertising to a TWIT sponsor nor do I want any hassles with YouTube over it. So it just never happened.  

There are less restrictive licenses under Creative Commons.  In fact most of them allow remixing, parodies, just about anything you want so long as you attribute the original work.  Some even allow for commercial use.

I've always chosen the most restrictive interpretation making no substantive changes to the content or monetizing them in any way.

Even the rather damning videos creatively edited by those less than kind to TWIT were covered under versions of Creative Commons.

Which is the root of my newfound crusade.

You see, my innocuous little YouTube channel consisting primarily of videos of monsoon storms with it's 16 whole subscribers is somehow a threat to TWIT.

So much so that I've earned a copyright strike that puts my channel and my reputation in jeopardy.   The infraction is for a video capture of the TWIT move to the Eastside studio.  A video offered without editing, commentary and free of charge. 

For the unfamiliar, A YouTube copyright strike is a virtually indefensible charge of copyright infringement which in an Internet context is akin to grand theft.

The only recourse, a YouTube form to "Request" the retraction of the charge that demands full contact information. 

Just the thing for a copyright troll to pursue a frivolous lawsuit.  Or to bully a detractor into silence.

I won't be bulled but I'm also not stupid. 

Rack up too many copyright claims and you can find your channel shut down.  As such I've removed similar videos from the channel to prevent from being bullied into oblivion.  Unless you plan on asserting a claim on raindrops and lightning strikes you got nothin'....

So what's the game TWIT?  Are you attempting to rewrite your own questionable history?  Then stop making so much of it!  

Surprising that such a staunch liberal as Leo Laporte would chose a tactic favored by the Texas school board.  You know, that Conservative body that wants our children to at least "consider" that humans were running around underfoot of dinosaurs.  In which case the Flintstones could be considered a documentary series...

..Intelligent design indeed.

What's the threat of presenting content that's already been freely shared for those who care to watch?  

Are we trying to put the genie back into the bottle? Do we want to ensure that the free and uninhibited nature of TWIT is a premise without foundation?  Is anything not directly controlled by TWIT a threat regardless of the intent?

Then you better be damned sure that your edits happen well before the broadcast.  Perhaps the appointment of a propaganda minster would be in order.  Someone with the power over even the Fuhrer...

Josef Goebbels isn't available but I hear Roger Ailes is looking for a gig...

TWIT proudly professes to be more than just another podcast network.  They claim to be community driven but lately it seems like they're more of a cult.  

Communities are made up of like minded people with a common purpose.  OK, so far the same goes for a cult.  The difference is a community is made up of individuals some with controversial ideas.  Ideas that allow the community to learn, grow and persist.  

Cults usually end up with a lot of dead people and a weird website.

We've already got the weird website...

So what's next?  Well, I'm not putting my thunderstorm videos at risk over TWIT.  But I will keep writing.  I will keep watching and I will expose that which is offered freely be it good or bad.

You made a mistake Leo and Lisa.  I was content to be passive even sharing your content on occasion.  Always without spin.  

I'm not content anymore and it's because of you.  I don't have a hell of a lot to look forward to these days but you...you just gave me a new purpose.

I won't be bullied and you can expect greater scrutiny. 

None of which you can do anything about because what I produce will be backed up with irrefutable evidence.  

Meaning, unless you want it splashed all over the Internet, you'd better clean up your act.  I don't need to make shit up, you provide plenty of content and nobody has to guess at the context.

Tit for Tat.

I'm watching...

I don't care what Barbara Streisand says! People don't need Peeple

As I observe the goings on in the world thousands of ideas, opinions and prejudices swirl around in my head at any given moment.  Golden rule aside, in a flash my opinion of you can literally swing from love to hatred even if we've never spoken a word to each other. 

For instance, you may truly feel a deep, soul burning, hatred for the moron who cut across 3 lanes of rush hour traffic for seemingly no other reason than to further complicate your commute.  But as much as we may revel in those dark thoughts while caught up in the moment, a mile down the road most of us barely summon up the will to be apathetic.

Now imagine if you could form a complete profile of that person based on just that moment in time.

Which brings me to what I can only surmise is a product of the failure of the American public school system to teach anything worthwhile. 

Peeple...

I'm no great fan of social media.  It's just too subjective and frivolous a medium to be taken seriously.  That doesn't seem to stop misguided idealism from taking it to new heights of the ridiculous, however. 

Peeple is best described as an app that elevates the digital equivalent of a popularity contest to a pseudo-science self-worth metric.  Users can evaluate anyone they want so long as they have a relationship with the other person no matter how fleeting.

But that's not the real issue. 

Unlike match.com or Facebook, you don't get the choice to sign up for the abuse.  Instead anyone with a Smartphone and a Facebook account can snap an image and start evaluating you based on nothing more than personal opinion. 

The creators, Nicole McCullogh and Julia Cordray attempt to console us with the app's "integrity features" which among others includes being 21 years old, having an established Facebook account and affirming you actually know the person.  

Verification apparently comes from knowing the person's cell phone number.  A piece of data frequently found on social media and career sites without restriction. 

If you don't sign up for the service you can still end up being evaluated by it but only positive reviews will be allowed.  

Which seems fair if we're playing Devil's advocate but that would seem to invalidate the whole ratings system.  Why not limit ANY ratings to those that choose to BE rated by signing up?

I'm sure that part was for the lawyers.  The real intent is revealed in the discovery that Cordray originally wanted to just scrape names from Facebook but the Facebook API doesn't allow for that.  In other words, in her mind anyone with a Facebook account was fair game for the app.

We live in a very public world, that's a given.  What's disturbing is how many unreliable metrics can affect you in that world, especially online.  That an errant post on social media can cost someone a career or relationship would seem ridiculous were it not so frequently the case.

Even choosing not to participate in social media carries a stigma of its own.  As though being unwilling to participate in such juvenile antics is the mark of deviance and dangerous intent.  People have actually been dismissed from consideration for a job because of a lack of a social media presence. 

It's madness!

Who are we to judge anyway?  What happened to all that lofty idealism of valuing others based on the content of their character instead of the superficial. 

Should I be content to be evaluated like some unwitting head of cattle in an auction?  Is it OK to destroy someone in public simply because they weren't as nice as you'd have liked them to be or elevate them to a pedestal based on nothing more than a passing interest?

Peeple is described as Yelp for People.

To that I say this...

Rate your hotel room....fine

Rate your favorite restaurant ....fine

Rate your Uber driver....fine

Rate people...You've crossed the line!

Taking the Human out of Human Resources

There's a lot of fear in the job market these days and most of it stems from a disturbing tendency of employers to treat candidates like some kind of trade-in at Honest Bob's car lot.  I'll give you some analogies (of course) to make my point a little more clear...

• I sell Trucks, they're trying to trade a motorcycle! - Does this person even fit the job?
• How many miles, Condition? - Are they too old or are they going to drive up my health insurance costs?
• What kind of options does it have? - Do they have all the skills and experience I need or do I have to train them?
• Show me the CarFax! - Anything in their past I can use to lowball the offer or exclude them entirely?
• Market value? - I want to get this guy/gal for as close to free as possible.

In the private sector it's no surprise.  In theory, removing intangibles and non-sequitur from the process should create a more level playing field.  It's also more efficient which plays well with the bean counters.

But it can go too far...

It's one thing to use objective criteria  to thin the herd but that's where its usefulness really ends.  We all understand that no employer wants to interview 100 burger flippers for a structural engineering job.  However, a potential candidate shouldn't be excluded by a process that's left to HR departments that have no idea of how to vet a potential hire.

We're coming back to the real point here. 

Today's work environment is frequently populated by underpaid and mostly disinterested workers.  There's no denying it in spite of the all the stock photos of happy faces populating the company HR page. 

We live in an age of stagnant wages, dwindling benefits and a slow erosion of worker rights.  Let's not forget the almost total lack of job security.  Even CEO's can't guarantee their tenure but then they've got a lot softer landing than the rest of us.

So don't expect a lot of that "personal touch."  You're just another resource to be evaluated, a commodity.

Which is a problem.

When you reduce talent to their lowest common denominator you end up missing a lot of important information to help you make a decision.

For example: A top notch engineer could be cut from consideration because of a bad credit record, a visible tattoo or if they happen to smoke.  HR pundits ( yes they exist) will offer up excuses like:

• A bad credit history reflects on a lack of responsibility. 
• Tattoo's cause issues with workplace culture
• Smokers drive up insurance costs and take too many breaks. 

None of them have anything to do with the quality of the candidate but more often than not they're used as screening factors.  The justifications are hollow but there's no point in challenging them.

It's the result of a process cut to the bone and borne out of a systematic devaluing of the Human in Human resources.  
The only advice given to the job seeker? 

Bend over...

Yeah, no big long flowery mental masturbation there.  That's the bottom line. 

Because you as the candidate have no value outside of the factors of a commodity you must focus on the irrelevant.

Look sharp, clean up your social profile, quit smoking, pay all your bills on time even if you're broke and without exception, never have been sick.

That's an awful lot of time spent on things that have nothing to do with your ability to actually DO the job.

Here's a posting for a VERY entry level job.  It's a good representation of what I've been talking about.

Flier Delivery (NOT door-to-door) Team Needed (East Valley, AZ)

FLIER DELIVERY TEAM NEEDED TO DELIVER TO EAST VALLEY SCHOOL DISTRICT SCHOOLS

What: Team (of 2) needed to drive to elementary & middle schools to deliver fliers for after school programs. (One driver & one delivery person per team)

What we are looking for in a delivery person: *GREAT personality a MUST! *Be able to effectively communicate with school secretaries *Must be able to present a clean cut look with business casual attire.

*No visible tattoos or body piercings
*Non-Smoker *Clean Background Check

What we are looking for in a driver: *RELIABLE transportation (with room for boxes) a MUST! *Proof of Insurance *Know the East Valley well! (especially school districts) *Clean Background Check *Clean Driving Record.

*Able to lift about 60 lbs.

Deliveries start right away! Hours will be Monday-Friday, approx 8am-4pm (when schools are open) We give preference to drivers with GPS or navigation systems.

This is NOT a sales position, but sales experience & driver). Driver & Delivery Person need to have a positive personality &
"personality" a ++. We offer $11/hour (per person) + mileage (for the professional attitude. 

Our Teams represent ***************of America to the schools, clubs, churches & districts that support our programs.

Some familiarity with *************** is WELCOMED

Ok , this is about as low on the totem pole as you can get but the takeaway is this: The same selection criteria is becoming commonplace regardless of industry or position.

Entry level jobs usually suck, that's a given but at some point along your career path you would expect to be given more consideration than some kid handing out colorful pieces of paper.

Sadly, you'd be wrong.

The reality of today's interview process is cold and impersonal.  You'll frequently hear catch phrases like, "Culture fit" and "Self Motivated" which translates to "anything we can legally discriminate against" and "doesn't ask a lot of questions."

It's only going to get worse before it gets better.  For now set the bar low and you might just survive it.

Just be sure that you can accept how employers see your value.  These days the demands of work will monopolize more of your time than family or friends and the higher up the food chain you go the worse it gets.

Remember, the price of potatoes is based on their current market value which can fluctuate with demand.

So, are you worth more than a potato?  You might be surprised.