| Author | Topic |
|---|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 03 May 2004 06:53
|
 |
so, which would you rather be?
without fail, I fall into one of those categories.
went for a job interview today, where the guy's main concern was I'd leave the company because I was overqualified & too intelligent, and would get bored. The bored bit is true, but I can't get a better job.
My qualifications are absolutely no use in getting a job it seems :\
</bitch>
|
|
|
Location:
Cabramatta, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 03 May 2004 07:09
|
|
This is something I kept telling one of my friends.
A PhD is a disadvantage if you have no industrial experience.
There's gotta be a balance. But failing that, experience counts more IMO. (Says the guy that doesn't have a degree  )
|
|
|
Location:
toowoomba qld
Registered:
March 2004
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 03 May 2004 07:13
|
|
I wish I was overqualified 
|
|
|
Location:
On your mum!
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 03 May 2004 07:28
|
|
I gotta go with Max on this one; people are not interested in which pieces of paper you have, they ARE more often than not interested in what you can do, and what previous employment has been like (you worked there for 10yrs!? That's good!)
What sort of work are you looking for? And how can I help?
|
|
|
Location:
Northwestern Sydney
Registered:
August 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 03 May 2004 07:29
|
|
Where I work, out of the 5 engineers here 4 of them have PhD's.
Excluding the director (years of experience).The rest studied straight through to get their PhD's and started work here.
I have no qualifications and yet these 3 engineers constantly come to me asking things that should be (I believe) assumed knowledge to an Engineer.
These guys tend to spend their time fine anilysing 1 column to find the most effecient size/reinforcement and its impact on the rest of the structure, then move onto the next. now if you were working for N.A.S.A that would be fine but in Structural engineering spending that sort of time on a project may lead to problems later and no profits off that job.
And most don't have a clue how a building is built and don't think of "buildability issues" when designing.
Geez I could go on......
After being in the industry I'd love to get out but that really isn't an option now, finacially. So I may well do my Engineering degree and start my own company doing speciallist jobs on the side.
But to answer the question I'm happy being underqualified (un)
But at the same time I'm young and I've reached the pinicle of where my current career can take me (in this industry) and I'll be stuffed if I'm doing this for the rest of my life.
|
|
|
Location:
Adelaide, SA
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 03 May 2004 07:44
|
|
A phd with no "industrial" experience is really just setting yourself up for a academic career. Some of the really high end scientific companies with big research budgets will take Phd's, but the more specialised you become, the less useful you can be.
I am a mere Bachelor graduate, but with a few years experience now look after a commercial R&D lab and have to sort through job applications from Phd students. I rarely progress the applications to interview for a couple reasons - money, and the boredom factor. There's no way we want someone working for 2 years, getting bored because we're not a "pure" research lab and then pissing off. And bachelor/honours graduates are cheap.
Unfortunately Draven, that's way it goes..... Keep plugging away and you'll find something though - be careful about falling back into study if you can't find the job you want as it may not pay off long term.
|
|
|
Registered:
August 2002
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 03 May 2004 07:52
|
|
I'm stuck with study for the moment - I need my 6 years to even qualify for what I want to do 
So for waht I want to do, I dont have the qualifications.
for what I need to do to earn money, they see I have 5 years of uni behind me, including a thesis, and tell me I should be looking for something more challenging.
and as for his "too intelligent" comment - funny that makes me overqualified, when it almost never qualifies you for anything.
on the plus side (I think) I got the job
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
|
Location:
Northwestern Sydney
Registered:
August 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 03 May 2004 08:34
|
|
| BlackSupra wrote on Mon, 03 May 2004 17:46 |
| Lambolica wrote on Mon, 03 May 2004 17:29 |
And most don't have a clue how a building is built and don't think of "buildability issues" when designing.
|
Sounds like most architects too!
Im inbetween.....no experience sucks sweaty donkey nads......not that i have. 
|
DO NOT get me started on Architects...... 
I've had architectural firms ask me to join them...
But I don't change my mind enough to qualify to be an architect.
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
sydney.au
Registered:
August 2002
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 03 May 2004 08:46
|
|
|
know of any psych positions going that don't require masters?
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
I renounced punctuation
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 03 May 2004 08:59
|
|
A masters was a basic requirement 15+ years ago when I did psychology (and did miserably at it!).
How on earth would you get around it?
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 03 May 2004 09:01
|
|
|
I don't know - but since I have 5 years of psych behind me, noone wants to hire me because, obviously, once I have the masters I'm going to ditch their organisation and go become a psychologist
|
|
|
Location:
Lost in the K hole
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 03 May 2004 09:57
|
|
| draven wrote on Mon, 03 May 2004 19:01 |
I don't know - but since I have 5 years of psych behind me, noone wants to hire me because, obviously, once I have the masters I'm going to ditch their organisation and go become a psychologist
|
go into research!!!
says the totally overqualified guy completely without a paid job
i just cant be fucked anymore. im sick of the threatend faces every time i enquire about flipping burgers or making coffee. fuck em... let the govt support me (and my engine habits...)
|
|
|
Location:
1st street on the right
Registered:
November 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 03 May 2004 10:54
|
|
| Lambolica wrote on Mon, 03 May 2004 17:29 |
Excluding the director (years of experience).The rest studied straight through to get their PhD's and started work here. I have no qualifications and yet these 3 engineers constantly come to me asking things that should be (I believe) assumed knowledge to an Engineer.
These guys tend to spend their time fine anilysing 1 column to find the most effecient size/reinforcement and its impact on the rest of the structure, then move onto the next. now if you were working for N.A.S.A that would be fine but in Structural engineering spending that sort of time on a project may lead to problems later and no profits off that job.
And most don't have a clue how a building is built and don't think of "buildability issues" when designing.
Geez I could go on......
|
FINALLY someone speaks the truth on the paper vs experiance and practical application debate.
Like the engineer running my project. Put it there, the grund penetrating radar says its clear. One foot down, obstruction city, 4 mths and $700,000 later problem solved. of course they could have put it 75mm left and it would have been done in a day.
|
|
|
Location:
adelaide
Registered:
April 2003
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 03 May 2004 13:33
|
|
| clubagreenie wrote on Mon, 03 May 2004 20:54 |
Like the engineer running my project.
|
you misspelt that, it's meant to be RUINing.
but as to my opinion, i guess when job hunting it's always better to be overqualified, at least that way they'll give you an interview.
so does having a Bachelor of Economics and working as a woolies night manager count as overqualified.........
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 03 May 2004 13:53
|
|
bout as much as 5 years of psych and being a telstra support lackey
I think the guy took 1 look at my 65wpm and got scared or something, as I'm pretty sure I left out my thesis (that seems to make people nervous)
|
|
|
Location:
Cabramatta, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
 Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Tue, 04 May 2004 00:15
|
|
That's a good idea Greg, just leave stuff out of your resume.
You don't *have* to tell them all your qualifications. Only the relevant ones required to get you the job.
FWIW, my woman (after finishing her degree (with the University Medal mind you)) wanted to become a clinical phsychologist. But that was years of Uni and more years of being paid bugger-all before she would qualify.
I advised her to just go out and make money, the rest can come later when she's financially stable enough to take years off to persue her passion.
She's never looked back.
You'll find a phsychology degree opens heaps of doors for you. She's in market research where her skills in research and in stats gives her a huge edge over others.
|
|
|
Location:
Adelaide, SA
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Tue, 04 May 2004 00:55
|
|
Just tell 'em you're not overqualified...but oversexed 
You'll either scare them away.....or get the job
|
|
|
Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
September 2003
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Tue, 04 May 2004 16:29
|
|
Speaking as someone who has a military background as an airframe fitter (apprenticeship in the RAAF) who then did a Diploma with the RAAF, and then did my BTech in Mech & Manufacturing Engineering, and after that did a Grad Cert in Manufacturing Management, Experience AND Qualifications are best.
Good luck Draven with the job apps, and as lumpy intimated, don't keep studying if it doesn't work. Easier said than done tho'
Ooroo
Michael B
PS Mind you, I know a few guys on the Production line here at Holdens that have an Engineering Degree, but are happy earning $60k plus with a bit of O/T
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Epping, Sydney
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Wed, 05 May 2004 02:01
|
|
|
michael - after reading your sig - I call dibs on your wreck if you have a serious crash!!
|
|
|
Location:
Northwestern Sydney
Registered:
August 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Wed, 05 May 2004 02:09
|
|
bbaacchhyy is 100% correct in the experience and qualifications are the best to have, but for the most part, experience isn't somthing that you can study and most employers look for 10+ years experience over a PhD (at least in my industry)
Personally I decided to go out into the workforce, learn, gain experience and then get my degree.
I did get accepted into Uni (not the one I wanted) but declined and did an apprenticship instead. Now 5 years down the track there are 2 of my mates who did do the course and degree that I was to do. but are on about 1/2 the money I am and I have 5 more years exp that they will never catch up on.
|
|
|
Location:
Canberra
Registered:
August 2003
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Wed, 05 May 2004 03:54
|
|
Yes engineers are fussy, but hey:
-If someone dies, the engineer is liable.
-If someone is injured, the engineer is liable.
-If something breaks, the engineer is liable.
-If something doesn't work, the engineer is liable.
-If something costs too much, the engineer is liable.
An engineer cant just take a guess that a minor change will not effect anything, cos if something goes wrong - not only can (s)he have their arse sued off, they could ruin their career, and worse have the concious of a death on their mind.
Yes you could design a structure to be more buildable and it may collapse (it has happened recently) someone may die, because a company was too tight arsed to put the proper efforts into construction.
|
|
|
Location:
Sydney
Registered:
June 2003
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Wed, 05 May 2004 04:51
|
|
I would say that the qualification isnt so important. More important these days is the experience that you have. FAR more important actually.
That piece of paper means a lot to begin with but once you are there it's all about experience.
|
|
|
Location:
Cabramatta, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Wed, 05 May 2004 05:06
|
|
Actually, the higher you go, especially in a large corporation, it starts to become quite important to have that peice of paper.
But then we'd be talking management (The Dark Side), and we all know that incompetence goes a long way in management. Degree or no degree... 
|
|
|
Location:
Northwestern Sydney
Registered:
August 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Wed, 05 May 2004 06:15
|
|
| Squid wrote on Wed, 05 May 2004 13:54 |
Yes engineers are fussy, but hey:
-If someone dies, the engineer is liable.
-If someone is injured, the engineer is liable.
-If something breaks, the engineer is liable.
-If something doesn't work, the engineer is liable.
-If something costs too much, the engineer is liable.
An engineer cant just take a guess that a minor change will not effect anything, cos if something goes wrong - not only can (s)he have their arse sued off, they could ruin their career, and worse have the concious of a death on their mind.
Yes you could design a structure to be more buildable and it may collapse (it has happened recently) someone may die, because a company was too tight arsed to put the proper efforts into construction.
|
Then why do engineers ask the draftsmen "should we put a column here"?
Sorry I'm having a s#%t day and the engineers aren't helping.
|
|
|
Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
September 2003
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Wed, 05 May 2004 13:38
|
|
| draven wrote on Wed, 05 May 2004 12:01 |
michael - after reading your sig - I call dibs on your wreck if you have a serious crash!!
|
Ummm, I hope I can avoid that by judiscious (sp ??) use of common sense (don't go for a serios fang in the dry or with other occupants)and that my days of track driving will help.
The aim is to enjoy it and not have to pass on the ahrd wiork to someone else !!!
Cheers
Michael B
|
|
|
Location:
Canberra
Registered:
August 2003
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Thu, 06 May 2004 06:34
|
|
| Quote: |
Then why do engineers ask the draftsmen "should we put a column here"?
Sorry I'm having a s#%t day and the engineers aren't helping.
|
So an engineer thinks highly enough of you to stake his professional reputation on your opinion and you are insulted by this?
|
|
|
Registered:
March 2004
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Thu, 06 May 2004 22:40
|
|
You poor overqualified guys, I don't know how you manage. I can't imagine going through life burdened by degrees, diplomas & the like. If only you'd known what an obstacle the education & skills that you acquired are, in the way of finding employment, I am sure you would have skipped uni & high school & found work stacking shelves at woolies. Surely, such an existence would be more fulfilling than the current hell your living through.
Hopefully, the government will show so some compassion and implement a welfare program specifically for the overqualified, supporting you from the time of your studies through till you land the high paying job of your dreams. God help you.
|
|
|
Location:
Northwestern Sydney
Registered:
August 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Fri, 07 May 2004 02:01
|
|
| Squid wrote on Thu, 06 May 2004 16:34 |
| Quote: |
Then why do engineers ask the draftsmen "should we put a column here"?
Sorry I'm having a s#%t day and the engineers aren't helping.
|
So an engineer thinks highly enough of you to stake his professional reputation on your opinion and you are insulted by this?
|
No... I'm really not insulted at all. But It really feels like these guy were just given their bit of paper.
I find it a concern that they can come up with a design, which comes across my desk and I pick it to pieces, reduce the amount of concrete, make the structure more effecient, easyier to construct and cheaper for the builder, give it back to the engineer to check and the find that it works better than theirs.
I mean these guys are supposed to supply me with information not the otherway around. And they are starting to rely on this type of communication. That is what concerns me, when an Engineer (on $120,000) asks a person with no (completed) study background (on $35,000)to setup a job lay reinforcement so they can check it.
There is somthing wrong with this industry and I want out...
|
|
|
Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
September 2003
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Sun, 09 May 2004 21:59
|
|
| Squid wrote on Thu, 06 May 2004 16:34 |
| Quote: |
Then why do engineers ask the draftsmen "should we put a column here"?
Sorry I'm having a s#%t day and the engineers aren't helping.
|
So an engineer thinks highly enough of you to stake his professional reputation on your opinion and you are insulted by this?
|
I would be if he was getting paid as an engineer and you were as a draftsman and it is his job to do it !!!
Ohwhatafeeling : exactly what are you on about ? Education is a choice, and I am very happy with my qualifications and the job I have, except for a nong of a manager !!!
|
|
|
Registered:
March 2004
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 10 May 2004 06:07
|
|
you've lost me bbaacchhyy (strange name, do you suffer from Parkinson's?), you're happy with your job & qualifications? Why did u create a thread venting your frustrations at being overlooked for jobs because of your qualifications? Have you forgotten the thrust of your original post or are you just on crack?
Hopefully your not one of those people who post rubbish just to get a rise out of others. In any event, your post is suspicious & I've reported it to the Toymods admin, just to be sure.
In my short time on this board I have already encountered several trolls & while fortunately I'm thick skinned, I am afraid other newcomers may be discouraged by the apparent lawlessness of this board.
I encourage toymods moderators to put forward a greater effort in weeding out trolls, Bbaacchhyy & his friends are not welcome around here.
|
|
|
Location:
Northwestern Sydney
Registered:
August 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 10 May 2004 06:27
|
|
|
bbaacchhyy Didn't start the thread.
|
|
|
Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
September 2003
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 10 May 2004 06:59
|
|
| ohwhatafeeling wrote on Mon, 10 May 2004 16:07 |
you've lost me bbaacchhyy (strange name, do you suffer from Parkinson's?), you're happy with your job & qualifications? Why did u create a thread venting your frustrations at being overlooked for jobs because of your qualifications? Have you forgotten the thrust of your original post or are you just on crack?
Hopefully your not one of those people who post rubbish just to get a rise out of others. In any event, your post is suspicious & I've reported it to the Toymods admin, just to be sure.
In my short time on this board I have already encountered several trolls & while fortunately I'm thick skinned, I am afraid other newcomers may be discouraged by the apparent lawlessness of this board.
I encourage toymods moderators to put forward a greater effort in weeding out trolls, Bbaacchhyy & his friends are not welcome around here.
|
Ummmmm, now I'm lost. Really lost. Draven started the thread, not me. Maybe you need to read from the top and follow what I'm saying very carefully. 
I have not criticised anyone, and as far as me not being welcome, who has accused who of being on drugs and having a terminal disease ? Who needs to be reported ?  And who's the newcomer ?
Think before typing next time, schmuck.
|
|
|
Location:
Brisbane, QLD
Registered:
February 2003
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 10 May 2004 09:41
|
|
i think it depends where you want to go
on a whole though i'd say a balance would need to be acheived.
I'm seriously considering continueing studying part time when i'm fully trade qualified because i dont think i'd like to turn into one of the tradesmen i work with(65, about to retire, and earns less than a 17 year old roofer but has 50 years more experience)
going back to that roofer(a mate of mine) example again, he's 17, been out of school for 2 years and is on $25 an hour. Its not glorious work but it pays more than other people i know(uni graduates) who've been out of uni for 5 years. Thats not always the case though, a friends sister is working in the UK for about 60k pounds a year and she's only just finished uni(damn accountants ) with her masters in something(business i'd say)
as i change my mind often i think this might change, but my current plan is to get trade qualified and keep learning on the side.
oh and draven, i've been knocked back from a job because of my typing speed,70wpm and 95% accuracy, not the best accuracy but still i was told i didnt get the job because "my skills where not suitable for a call centre" and this is with 12 months(2 different jobs) telemarketing experience. well i believe it was this as the person interviewing looked rather surprised when she told me my results from that test. the job actually went to someone i was going to tafe with at the time and i found out from him that he was stoned when he turned up and barely finished the typing test...go figure
|
|
|
Registered:
March 2004
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 10 May 2004 23:17
|
|
Bbaacchhyy, I will not enter into a flaming war with u, I have no intention to 'feed' your habit.
I come here in a spirit of brotherhood seeking fellow Toyota enthusiasts to chat with about our favorite hobby. I DID NOT come here to be attacked and trolled by a troublemaking, obviously sad & socially inept 37 year old.
I will however require an apology. The condescending & insulting nature of your post was uncalled for and very low class indeed. Doesn't have to be long just state you apologize and that you will never frequent this board again.
As for any non-trolls who wish to contribute to this thread, please continue.
|
|
|
Location:
Adelaide
Registered:
September 2003
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Mon, 10 May 2004 23:35
|
|
| ohwhatafeeling wrote on Mon, 10 May 2004 16:07 |
you've lost me bbaacchhyy (strange name, do you suffer from Parkinson's?)
|
the titel I use is my choice, and was not in use by others. You started this personal attack.
| ohwhatafeeling wrote on Mon, 10 May 2004 16:07 |
Have you forgotten the thrust of your original post or are you just on crack?
|
I didn't start the thread. Reread my original post CAREFULLY, and you'll see that I gave nothing but advice. I am very happy with my job thankyou, and my qualifications and pay, and I am proud of the hard yards that I put in getting here.
| ohwhatafeeling wrote on Mon, 10 May 2004 16:07 |
I encourage toymods moderators to put forward a greater effort in weeding out trolls, Bbaacchhyy & his friends are not welcome around here.
|
I don't have any friends  ...
And yet another personal insult.
| ohwhatafeeling wrote on Tue, 11 May 2004 09:17 |
I come here in a spirit of brotherhood seeking fellow Toyota enthusiasts to chat with about our favorite hobby. I DID NOT come here to be attacked and trolled by a troublemaking, obviously sad & socially inept 37 year old.
|
At least you can add up. Yet even more personal attacks
| ohwhatafeeling wrote on Tue, 11 May 2004 09:17 |
I will however require an apology. The condescending & insulting nature of your post was uncalled for and very low class indeed. Doesn't have to be long just state you apologize and that you will never frequent this board again.
As for any non-trolls who wish to contribute to this thread, please continue.
|
Talk about dreaming... . The newcomer (only 6 posts) wants an apology and me to leave
[Updated on: Mon, 10 May 2004 23:38]
|
|
|
Location:
c'town, NSW
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
Sutho/Hills NSW
Registered:
September 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Tue, 11 May 2004 00:39
|
|
|
|
|
I supported Toymods
Location:
south of the big smoke
Registered:
May 2002
|
|
Re: overqualified vs underqualified
|
Tue, 11 May 2004 00:42
|
|
| EvilJack wrote on Tue, 11 May 2004 10:39 |
|
that is some serious wake!!!
|
|
|
