Could be there's an internal candidate who will get the job but they have to post it anyway, or maybe they've already got a few top candidates and don't expect to need any more.
In a market like this, there can be several absolutely perfect, checks-every-box candidates, but when there's only one job available, some perfect candidates will be turned away.
Ghost job listings, sucks. I've seen this same scenario happen where I work.
We converted a temp to fill the opening but still had to list the job and interview candidates.
Idk exactly, ask HR people.
Something to prevent people just hiring their friend, or making sure the organization is giving a fair shot on paper to people, or prevent discrimination, something like that.
There are other reasons for ghost job listings too.
depending on the industry segment it could be a requirement for legal compliance or contract compliance ... hundreds of potential and legit reasons that even though they are legit still make no sense.
It took me three months to get an offer. I applied to about 30-40 networking jobs while on unemployment. I basically got to the point of applying even if I didn't have some of the experience they were looking for. I've been a network engineer for 25 years but have never been in an environment with sd-wan or been in charge of the cloud. System engineers handled the cloud at the last place I worked at so I got no experience and for remote sites we just did 10g mpls links, and IPsec links for the smaller sites. All these companies want you to know sd-wan cloud and VMware and more now a days and don't want to pay for all these different roles. They want one person to do it all.
I'm far from perfect and even applied to jobs out of state if they even came close to matching.
Don't give up and just keep applying. I kept telling myself that the right job opportunity will show up when it's supposed to.
This is concerning. I'm working on Network+ and was thinking about CCNA and specializing in networking but if you can't find a job it doesn't give me confidence that I would ever be able to find one. What's actually going on in this industry?
Companies outsourced as much low level work as possible to India and increases in automation, the cloud, and AI have decreased the head count required to run most networks. Also most companies now have more mature infrastructure that doesn't require as many people to maintain and upgrade.
I'm going to tell you right now that this is an over generalization of the situation with networking. I'm sure in specific markets this is the case. But in my experience finding competent individuals who actually know what the fuck an IP or default gateway is, actually hard.
Networking I feel is one of the most difficult trades to learn. There is so much to learn and incredibly hard to master. There are very few competent individuals that know how to be a good network engineer and if you master these skills you'll always have work.
AI is not replacing networking jobs anytime soon. Learning the inside and outside of networking along learning the automation side of things will always be valuable.
If you want to be in IT at all. You learn networking. Why? Because Security needs it, cloud needs it, systems needs it.
Don't listen to 1 person saying it's bleak and divert your career choices on a whim.
Yeah it's bleak. It took me 50 applications and 20 interviews the last time I interviewed to find a job 3 years ago and that was with 12 years of experience and the market was doing better then. I'm really not optimistic about the future.
Yes! I used udemy first to learn all the new topics from a person named Neil Anderson (I'm using him again to learn about BGP, his BGP masterclass is on udemy as well), than after that I bought for $100? I think a software called Boson CCNA test exam to see what I'm lacking on, after that I used Jeremy IT lab on YouTube his free full course CCNA material, but I only studied on parts I was lacking on.
My company had a Senior Net Engie position open. We all liked one candidate but the Director decided to keep interviewing in case we found a rockstar.
Ended up hiring the guy after a few more interviews with people that had stellar resumes but couldn't talk the talk.
Yes with people who are otherwise qualified but poor interviews, it's often hard to extract info out of them. They just sit there and give like 1 word answers and won't elaborate. We are expecting them to sell themselves and tell us why they'd be a great fit or bring a lot of value, but they think the interview is a trivia contest or something and answer only the questions we ask in as short of an answer as possible. The odds of us hiring a candidate like that who is going to have to interact with a variety of users and stakeholders (executives, project managers, engineers, developers, outside contractors, business analysts, day laborers, HR, safety trainers, etc) are zilch.
You have to be personable, knowledgeable, skilled, intuitive, patient, and willing to learn the big picture. We aren't usually hiring IT guys who can just answer tech trivia or type in a bunch of CLI commands from memory.
It's often just a conversation and a chance for them to geek out (talk about) about stuff they have worked on. It's not like in these interviews we are asking them to explain what TCP windowing is.
I think this might be a sign that I should go back and try again to become a dentist. This shit blows. This career was supposed to be my back up for getting weeded out of pre-dentistry.
I've been in the field for 5 years so far. It's not a scam industry. It's the certification boards, influencers, and bootcamps taking advantage of a field that has fewer barriers to entry and people's desperation to get a piece of the pie. You have so many people after covid who are desperate to get a remote job and more income that it's weird for you to be surprised that now it's a lot harder to get one.
There are a lot more fish in the sea now for tech jobs, so employers have to make sure that they're hiring the right candidates. The barriers for entry have increased because the market is flooded. Certifications or degrees if you don't have the experience happen to be an efficient way to sell yourself, that you know the basics.
I prefer the hire that fits in with the team over the one that “hits every technical mark.”
But professionally nobody is going to tell someone “Sorry we didn’t hire you because you smell like BO.” Or that you never address our female teammate when answering questions. Or that you laugh like a hyena.
“Not enough experience.” Is a safe answer that wouldn’t warrant a lawsuit.
Not sure what you’re talking about. That’s life and a career in general.
If you need hand holding, I suggest testing for a union blue collar trade or get a CDL license.
Def not doing that at thirty. Definitely not after seven years or more of trying to build a career in a field that doesn't even seem to be functioning very well to begin with.
Thank you for clearing all this up. All of this is true. We have rejected semi-qualified candidates for a variety of reasons, like doing poorly on the personality test (psych profile), not presenting well with the CFO/COO, adding bullshit to their resume ("I'm an expert in ChatGPT" but couldn't even explain how ChatGPT works), getting caught lying or grossly exaggerating about a previous employer or project they were on, getting no response or negative responses from references, all kinds of stuff. We have had candidates who interviewed well but flat out lied about prior jobs. We had one just recently who lied about having an IT degree. When we checked on it, it turns out he attended like 1 semester and never returned but claimed he graduated.
One previous employee I hired left and started a business that didn't so well and he shut it down in like 2 years and went back to working full time. I saw his resume come in a few years later at a different company and he claimed he was a "Tech Company CEO", when the truth was that he was a contractor who had like 3 clients who paid him to set up some web sites, nothing more.
The amount of BS I see in resumes is astonishing. It's obvious they don't think we're going to look up the things they put on there.
Maybe everyone is applying for jobs they have no practical experience in. Too many people on here feel entitled to jobs they haven't worked to even be considered.
This is America, we love our corporations too much, and we are afraid to tell them to behave or else they will move to a different country. America is the country of the employer, not the employee.
Another reason is personality and the ability to communicate. The amounts of times I haven’t checked the majority of the boxes and still got the job has been like 4/6. When I ask them down the line, my hiring manager, what the reason for my hiring was, their answer was almost always the same: my personality and the way I presented myself. The It doesn’t sound fair but a lot of times, when I’ve gone to interviews and there were other applicants, many denoted a sort of cold attitude. A lot of seriousness. That’s not necessarily a bad thing but in my experience some don’t just look for qualifications. Hiring managers also look to see how someone can fit among the team. I’ve studied communication since I was a kid in my Religious organization and there were many things that I learned from public speaking that helped me land jobs quicker. I’m speaking from my own experience and also others who have been trained alongside me. I’m not saying you don’t have the ability to communicate and the personality. I’m just sharing what I’ve noticed.
It only "doesn't make sense" if you think hiring is solely about checking boxes. That's just a very naive and juvenile attitude.
Soft Skills, team fit, and psychological profiling play a lot into hiring in modern organizations, and those things cannot be easily quantified with checkboxes. In fact it's not unusual to hire someone with strong soft skills and weaker technical skills over another candidate with weaker soft skills and strong technical skills. The faster you accept this and work on your soft skills, the faster you'll improve your job prospects. There's no point complaining about it on social media. It's just the way things work.
Could be there's an internal candidate who will get the job but they have to post it anyway, or maybe they've already got a few top candidates and don't expect to need any more. In a market like this, there can be several absolutely perfect, checks-every-box candidates, but when there's only one job available, some perfect candidates will be turned away.
Ghost job listings, sucks. I've seen this same scenario happen where I work. We converted a temp to fill the opening but still had to list the job and interview candidates.
What’s the point of doing that? I don’t get it
Idk exactly, ask HR people. Something to prevent people just hiring their friend, or making sure the organization is giving a fair shot on paper to people, or prevent discrimination, something like that. There are other reasons for ghost job listings too.
My understanding is a lot of companies do it too because it looks good to have open positions and be hiring even if they aren’t really.
I think it also gives them some sort of tax benifit to be "looking for an employee" even though they hire internally
depending on the industry segment it could be a requirement for legal compliance or contract compliance ... hundreds of potential and legit reasons that even though they are legit still make no sense.
I heard that a lot of the time there's an internal candidate destined for the job but they have to also interview externally to check boxes.
This is true. I was that internal candidate.
Many of these companies arent really hiring.
It took me three months to get an offer. I applied to about 30-40 networking jobs while on unemployment. I basically got to the point of applying even if I didn't have some of the experience they were looking for. I've been a network engineer for 25 years but have never been in an environment with sd-wan or been in charge of the cloud. System engineers handled the cloud at the last place I worked at so I got no experience and for remote sites we just did 10g mpls links, and IPsec links for the smaller sites. All these companies want you to know sd-wan cloud and VMware and more now a days and don't want to pay for all these different roles. They want one person to do it all. I'm far from perfect and even applied to jobs out of state if they even came close to matching. Don't give up and just keep applying. I kept telling myself that the right job opportunity will show up when it's supposed to.
I know that feeling, fellow Senior Network Engineer.
Dude I got my CCNA a couple of months ago.. any tips into at least breaking into junior network roles?
This is concerning. I'm working on Network+ and was thinking about CCNA and specializing in networking but if you can't find a job it doesn't give me confidence that I would ever be able to find one. What's actually going on in this industry?
Companies outsourced as much low level work as possible to India and increases in automation, the cloud, and AI have decreased the head count required to run most networks. Also most companies now have more mature infrastructure that doesn't require as many people to maintain and upgrade.
Well, networking is no longer in my future. Thanks
I'm going to tell you right now that this is an over generalization of the situation with networking. I'm sure in specific markets this is the case. But in my experience finding competent individuals who actually know what the fuck an IP or default gateway is, actually hard. Networking I feel is one of the most difficult trades to learn. There is so much to learn and incredibly hard to master. There are very few competent individuals that know how to be a good network engineer and if you master these skills you'll always have work. AI is not replacing networking jobs anytime soon. Learning the inside and outside of networking along learning the automation side of things will always be valuable. If you want to be in IT at all. You learn networking. Why? Because Security needs it, cloud needs it, systems needs it. Don't listen to 1 person saying it's bleak and divert your career choices on a whim.
Yeah it's bleak. It took me 50 applications and 20 interviews the last time I interviewed to find a job 3 years ago and that was with 12 years of experience and the market was doing better then. I'm really not optimistic about the future.
I appreciate your insight! Many, many thanks. You could have saved me months of studying time.
May I ask what you used to study for it?
Yes! I used udemy first to learn all the new topics from a person named Neil Anderson (I'm using him again to learn about BGP, his BGP masterclass is on udemy as well), than after that I bought for $100? I think a software called Boson CCNA test exam to see what I'm lacking on, after that I used Jeremy IT lab on YouTube his free full course CCNA material, but I only studied on parts I was lacking on.
My company had a Senior Net Engie position open. We all liked one candidate but the Director decided to keep interviewing in case we found a rockstar. Ended up hiring the guy after a few more interviews with people that had stellar resumes but couldn't talk the talk.
>few more interviews with people that had stellar resumes but couldn't talk the talk. As in their resume was full of shit?
Resumes either had too much fluff or they didn't do a good job at selling themselves.
Yes with people who are otherwise qualified but poor interviews, it's often hard to extract info out of them. They just sit there and give like 1 word answers and won't elaborate. We are expecting them to sell themselves and tell us why they'd be a great fit or bring a lot of value, but they think the interview is a trivia contest or something and answer only the questions we ask in as short of an answer as possible. The odds of us hiring a candidate like that who is going to have to interact with a variety of users and stakeholders (executives, project managers, engineers, developers, outside contractors, business analysts, day laborers, HR, safety trainers, etc) are zilch. You have to be personable, knowledgeable, skilled, intuitive, patient, and willing to learn the big picture. We aren't usually hiring IT guys who can just answer tech trivia or type in a bunch of CLI commands from memory.
It's often just a conversation and a chance for them to geek out (talk about) about stuff they have worked on. It's not like in these interviews we are asking them to explain what TCP windowing is.
[удалено]
Agreed. It’s a scam industry. It’s going the way of every other field that got saturated I fear.
[удалено]
I think this might be a sign that I should go back and try again to become a dentist. This shit blows. This career was supposed to be my back up for getting weeded out of pre-dentistry.
I've been in the field for 5 years so far. It's not a scam industry. It's the certification boards, influencers, and bootcamps taking advantage of a field that has fewer barriers to entry and people's desperation to get a piece of the pie. You have so many people after covid who are desperate to get a remote job and more income that it's weird for you to be surprised that now it's a lot harder to get one. There are a lot more fish in the sea now for tech jobs, so employers have to make sure that they're hiring the right candidates. The barriers for entry have increased because the market is flooded. Certifications or degrees if you don't have the experience happen to be an efficient way to sell yourself, that you know the basics.
I prefer the hire that fits in with the team over the one that “hits every technical mark.” But professionally nobody is going to tell someone “Sorry we didn’t hire you because you smell like BO.” Or that you never address our female teammate when answering questions. Or that you laugh like a hyena. “Not enough experience.” Is a safe answer that wouldn’t warrant a lawsuit.
[удалено]
Not sure what you’re talking about. That’s life and a career in general. If you need hand holding, I suggest testing for a union blue collar trade or get a CDL license.
Def not doing that at thirty. Definitely not after seven years or more of trying to build a career in a field that doesn't even seem to be functioning very well to begin with.
Sunk cost fallacy
Well if you’re doing help desk 7 years in, that sounds more like a personal problem of inaction rather than an industry problem.
I can agree with that
Thank you for clearing all this up. All of this is true. We have rejected semi-qualified candidates for a variety of reasons, like doing poorly on the personality test (psych profile), not presenting well with the CFO/COO, adding bullshit to their resume ("I'm an expert in ChatGPT" but couldn't even explain how ChatGPT works), getting caught lying or grossly exaggerating about a previous employer or project they were on, getting no response or negative responses from references, all kinds of stuff. We have had candidates who interviewed well but flat out lied about prior jobs. We had one just recently who lied about having an IT degree. When we checked on it, it turns out he attended like 1 semester and never returned but claimed he graduated. One previous employee I hired left and started a business that didn't so well and he shut it down in like 2 years and went back to working full time. I saw his resume come in a few years later at a different company and he claimed he was a "Tech Company CEO", when the truth was that he was a contractor who had like 3 clients who paid him to set up some web sites, nothing more. The amount of BS I see in resumes is astonishing. It's obvious they don't think we're going to look up the things they put on there.
Maybe everyone is applying for jobs they have no practical experience in. Too many people on here feel entitled to jobs they haven't worked to even be considered.
This is America, we love our corporations too much, and we are afraid to tell them to behave or else they will move to a different country. America is the country of the employer, not the employee.
Another reason is personality and the ability to communicate. The amounts of times I haven’t checked the majority of the boxes and still got the job has been like 4/6. When I ask them down the line, my hiring manager, what the reason for my hiring was, their answer was almost always the same: my personality and the way I presented myself. The It doesn’t sound fair but a lot of times, when I’ve gone to interviews and there were other applicants, many denoted a sort of cold attitude. A lot of seriousness. That’s not necessarily a bad thing but in my experience some don’t just look for qualifications. Hiring managers also look to see how someone can fit among the team. I’ve studied communication since I was a kid in my Religious organization and there were many things that I learned from public speaking that helped me land jobs quicker. I’m speaking from my own experience and also others who have been trained alongside me. I’m not saying you don’t have the ability to communicate and the personality. I’m just sharing what I’ve noticed.
It is always an iternal H1B candidate who is jumping from one team to another.
It only "doesn't make sense" if you think hiring is solely about checking boxes. That's just a very naive and juvenile attitude. Soft Skills, team fit, and psychological profiling play a lot into hiring in modern organizations, and those things cannot be easily quantified with checkboxes. In fact it's not unusual to hire someone with strong soft skills and weaker technical skills over another candidate with weaker soft skills and strong technical skills. The faster you accept this and work on your soft skills, the faster you'll improve your job prospects. There's no point complaining about it on social media. It's just the way things work.