Ed's Jobs and Careers

Your Billionaire Spokesperson: Warren Buffett, World's Second Richest Man, Lobbies Congress for the Average American

2007-11-22T13:15:00.000-08:00

Ed's Jobs and Careers:

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

If you think all of the world's richest people neglect the less fortunate, you are dead wrong.

Bill and Melinda Gates have donated billions to the help the poorest of the poor both in the United States and in underdeveloped, third world countries. Warren Buffett has pledged and given Gates billions more to help the less fortunate.

Fortune Magazine has identified Buffett as the world's second wealthiest person with a personal fortune of $52 billion as of 2007. Bill Gates is the wealthiest at $56 billion (a millionaire 56,000 times).

Buffett, the first person in the world to make a billion dollars by investing in stocks, is the creator and chairman of Berkshire Hathaway, the hands down most successful stock ever.

Buffett recently lobbied the U. S. Senate Finance Committee to keep the estate tax rather than repeal the measure because of a law enacted in 2001 that gradually phases the tax out after 2010.

The tax is scheduled to return with a top rate of 55% on estates worth more than $1 million. This year, estates of more than $2 million are taxed at the top rate of 45%. By 2009, estates less than $3.5 million will be exempt.

Buffett said advocates of repeal movement were "dead wrong" to call the levy a "death tax." It would be more accurate to call it a "death present."

In the last 20 years the nation's "super-rich" have gained ground by becoming even richer. "Tax-law changes have benefited this group, including me, in a huge way," said the 77-year-old stock-picking wizard, while "the average American went exactly nowhere on the economic scale."

Good for Warren Buffett. I know from first-hand experience that Ronald Reagan's "trickle down theory" of economics during his 8-year Presidency from 1981 to 1989 did not trickle down to me as the Nation enjoyed its longest recorded period of peacetime prosperity without recession or depression.

A rising tide in the harbor may lift up all ships but the trickle down theory pretty much stops with those who are already rich. The idea of making rich people 4 times richer so they can create jobs for the great unwashed does not hold water when making $10 an hour for your labor.

Buffett urged the Senate Finance Committee to keep the estate tax in some form and to use the $24 billion it raises to give a $1,000 tax rebate to low-income households.

Warren Buffett's suggestion may clearly amount to a simple redistribution of wealth, but it seems appropriate when a fat-cat CEO of a major corporation can be paid $400 million in income a year while the average per capita personal income in the United States is $35,000 according to the U. S. Department of Commerce in 2005.

So why would Buffett come down on the side of the average Joe?

"A meaningful estate tax is needed to prevent our democracy from becoming a dynastic plutocracy," said Buffett. Heirs to vast fortunes, he said, have already won the "ovarian lottery" and should not be rewarded again.

A plutocracy, of course, is government by the wealthy, a country with an elite or ruling class of people whose power derives from their wealth.

Being born into a wealthy family and inheriting your wealth is almost un-American. I cannot stand people born with a silver spoon in their mouth. I root for the underdog, the man who, by the honest sweat of his brow, lifts himself up by his bootstraps to become successful.

Just as something morally wrong can never be politically right, so pandering to the rich can only result in an eventual revolution by those whose backs make the investments of the rich work.

If the rich could acquire, keep and build their fortune alone, no one would be a millionaire, much less a billionaire. We are all interconnected, whether we choose to recognize it or not. The wealth of the rich is just as much a gift as an earned right.

Editor's Note: Read my articles on "Why Benjamin Franklin Was So Awesome" and "The Role of Money in America's Economy".

Editor's Note: Explore my main blog at:
http://www.edbagleyblog.com
Discover 136 Movie Reviews, 68 Sports Articles, 88 Articles on Lessons in Life, 18 Articles on Jobs and Careers, 30 Articles on Internet Marketing and 591 Famous Quotes.

Reader Finds My Article on Income and Education Interesting, But Wonders "Why Our World Is So Much Less Perfect Today?"

2007-08-22T15:14:00.000-07:00

Ed's Jobs and Careers:

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

(Editor's Note: Steve emailed me about my article titled "There Is No Huge Correlation Between Education and Income and Here Is Why". Enter the article title into the search feature in the upper left box and click search; this will bring up the article from the archives for you. Here is his email and my response.)

"Good Morning Ed,

These were very interesting perspectives. There is much truth to the premise that financial success can be achieved without extensive educational debt.

It is unfortunate that in this day and age, many have to choose between personal fulfillment and generating a reasonable salary.

I have been dating a high school teacher who has been in her profession for many years. She genuinely enjoys her students, believes that she is able to make a difference in some lives, and she has skills that allow her to share things that will be of benefit to her students.

Unfortunately, on a teacher's salary, her lifestyle is almost Spartan.

Could she find another profession that would allow her to generate a better income? Likely. Would it be as emotionally rewarding to her? Doubtful.

We do not live in a perfect world but why is it so much less perfect than 30 years ago?"

Hi Steve,

Thanks for reading my article. Every now and then someone takes the time and effort to email me with a comment or question. I try to respond when this happens but not reveal their full identity.

As a former daily newspaper managing editor, I try to be sensitive to a reader's interest.
You pose a great question, Steve, "We do not live in a perfect world but why is it so much less perfect than 30 years ago?"

I suspect one reason, Steve, is that each generation seems to invent its own idea of what is a perfect world. As a 63-year-old father of two children and grandfather of three, I have come to accept this as a rite of passage through time.

I confess that I love 60's rock 'n roll, Motown, Nat King Cole and Broadway musicals. If this does not date me, nothing will.

It has been my observation that each generation is loyal to its music because a song can instantly remind us of an emotional moment in our life. Maybe the start of a lifelong relationship, or the ending of another.

You only have to have your heart broken once in a lifetime and a certain song playing will remind you of the experience. It matters not that you go on to marry another girl and live happily ever after. The song and the moment remain.

My son has a totally different idea of what his perfect world is compared to mine. My perfect world would bore him to death, and put him to sleep at the same time.

The lesson to be learned is that "our" world, its culture, its values, and its mores are all constantly changing, and we are too—we are getting older with the passage of time.

I suspect a second reason, Steve, is that each generation believes its own special world should be the same for everyone.

Your friend may be happy in her career choice, an outstanding high school teacher, and making a real difference in her students' lives.

Ask any successful person if there was a teacher or coach who made them feel special and turned their life around for the better, and you will likely get a very positive response.

I am one of those successful people. I consider my high school cross-country and track coach—Varnard Gay—and my journalism teacher—Vernita Knight—to be tremendous, positive influences in my life to this very day.

Varnard produced many team and individual champions during his coaching career, and I was one of them. Vernita produced many outstanding journalists who would go on to productive careers, and I was one of them. I was blessed at a time when I needed a blessing. This is the gift a teacher or coach gives.

I have never been burdened with working at a job I hated. I have done what I wanted to do and sacrificed income in doing so. I did not care. I became self-employed in the early 1970's and never looked back.

It would be years before I would realize that there is no monetary reward for doing "good" in a job or profession. People who make a lot of money, like my son, make it their business to make money. In the business of making money there can be only two outcomes: results or excuses.

I never chased money and big money never really caught me. We live in a time where making a lot of money, wearing the fad clothes of the day, and driving the hot car or truck of the time, is believed to make you look more successful.

Why do something that you do not like for more money rather than doing something you do like for less? That would be chasing someone else's dream for the perfect world.

In assessing why I am not any other person than who I am, I try to remember two things:

1) What you think about me is none of my business. What is most important is what I think about myself.

2) Always remember that no matter what anyone is saying to you from the outside, the most important conversation is the one you are having with yourself on the inside.

My son spends little time reading, and I constantly read. As I have grown older, I have come to appreciate not only the writing of Ralph Waldo Emerson, but his mind as well.

Here are two things Emerson has written that impress me:

1) You cannot do a kindness too soon, for you never know how soon it will be too late.

2) This time, like all times, is a very good one, when we know what to do with it.

I believe that integrity is 1,000 times more important than making a lot of money. I will grant you that having a ton of money allows you to have better health and to do more fun things.

I have found that entertaining yourself is a blessing, and the best things in life are still free, such as a sunset over the lake, a walk on the beach and the warm glow of a fireplace.

I have never believed that having a lot of money causes me to make decisions with right thinking and right motives. I make decisions with right thinking and right motives because I am at peace with myself and value my integrity.

The world may pass me by on its way to a different way of life, but when I go to sleep for the final time, I am secure in my final resting place.

Always remember that when your regrets exceed your dreams, you are truly growing older.
When all reason and logic fail to convince, remember what William Shakespeare said:

"There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so," or my more modern adaptation: "Nothing is either good or bad except that thinking makes it so."

Thanks again, Steve, for posing the question.

Make yourself a good day, and make your world a good world.

Ed

Note: Read my articles "Want a Six-Figure Income Without Getting a College Degree of Any Kind? Here Is How", "Who Earns the Most Based on Their Educational Level", and "Six Power Secrets of Getting Hired and Promoted". Find these reviews in my Jobs and Careers Archive.

Editor's Note: Get a Free Analysis of PIP, Empowerism and SFI for Affiliate Marketers. Email me at: edbagley@comcast.net and put "Subscribe List 2" in the Subject Line.

Editor's Note: Explore my main blog at::
http://www.edbagleyblog.com
Discover 136 Movie Reviews, 68 Sports Articles, 88 Articles on Lessons in Life, 18 Articles on Jobs and Careers, 30 Articles on Internet Marketing and 591 Famous Quotes.

At What Point Does a Student's Rights End, and the University's Rights Begin When Awarding Degrees?

2007-05-04T21:41:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

The headline looked common enough: School Sued Over MySpace Photo Response.

It appeared affixed to an Associated Press story posted online by comcast.net recently.

Apparently a woman was denied a teaching degree on the eve of graduation because she published her picture captioned "Drunken Priate" on her MySpace.

The photo, apparently taken at a 2005 Halloween party, showed Stacy Snyder wearing a pirate hat while drinking from a plastic "Mr. Goodbar" cup.

Jane Bray, dean of the School of Education at Millersville University in Millersville, Pennsylvania, took exception to Snyder's photo, accusing Snyder of promoting underage drinking.

Although Snyder apologized, she learned the day before graduation that she would not be awarded an education degree or teaching certificate. Snyder was instead granted a degree in English last year.

Snyder, who is now 27 and reportedly works as a nanny, has sued Millersville University, seeking $75,000 in damages.

All of this raises some interesting questions about how this legal action will play out in court if it gets that far.

This story caught my attention because I had been chair of a board of directors for 9 years at a private school, a 20-year veteran in the news business, an editor of a daily newspaper, and a publisher of a newspaper property.

Here are some of my thoughts on the significance of this news event.

1) Was Stacy Snyder intentionally trying to promote underage drinking? I doubt it.

She did apologize for her apparent indiscretion, but it was not enough to ensure her the education degree and teaching certificate she thought she had earned.

I do not know how Pennsylvania handles its education students, but I suspect that the education degree would come from the university and the initial teaching certificate would come from the state.

To say she was looking for some attention in publishing her MySapce photo might be an understatement. As a potential teacher in a public or private school, I doubt any school board or school superintendent would be impressed by her sense of judgment, regardless of her motive.

It takes more than good intentions to be a good role model as a teacher, it takes good actions and good decisions as well. Clearly, Stacy Snyder's apparent actions were neither consequence free or well timed. The exuberance of youth is sometimes only exceeded by its stupidity.

You could say that Jane Bray, the dean of the School of Education at Millersville, might be very conservative in her views. You could also say that she has some standards of expected behavior that will be enforced.

2) I am not sure there is anything stopping Stacy Snyder from applying for an initial teaching certificate from the State of Pennsylvania, assuming that it is the state that grants teaching certificates and not the university. Perhaps Pennsylvania might be a little more forgiving of Snyder's stupidity.

3) Snyder could enroll in another qualified college or university and seek to get an education degree. Schools of higher learning love income and all schools do not have the same standards, for education or issuing degrees.

4) If Synder's suit has any legs to stand on, she should be suing for a lot more money if this incident has destroyed her teaching career. Perhaps for $750,000 or $1.75 million. As a teacher in today's public education system, it is not unreasonable to assume her income may reach one of those levels should she teach for the next 30 or 35 years. After all, inflation doubles about every 20 to 22 years.

5) Synder has perhaps learned a valuable lesson about instant communication in today's world. When someone says an insignificant story can go around the world in 8 seconds, they are not exaggerating. A significant story may even travel faster and be seen by millions more viewers.

6) It would be easy to postulate but difficult to accurately predict about how much Synder's photo might negatively influence the generations of children in the present and future.

Such speculation does remind me of Ronald Reagan's answer as to why he was not working harder as President. As I recall Reagan said I have been told that working hard will not kill you, but I figure why take chances?

7) Freedom of speech is a guaranteed right in the 1st Amendment to our United States Constitution. While this is so, freedom of speech does not allow one to yell "fire" in a crowded theater, so our freedom of speech does tend to stop when that freedom needlessly endangers our fellow citizens.

So much for Stacy Snyder.

What about Jane Bray and Millersville University?

1) Does a university have the power and the right to determine to whom it will award degrees? I think so.

Perhaps the question is, does the standards at this university include a written, published standard of behavior as well as a standard of performance in learning and testing? I not have a clue if that is the case at Millersville University, but I seriously suspect that it is so.

Otherwise, there might not be any basis for Jane Bray's decision not to award an education degree to Stacy Snyder. Perhaps Bray found Snyder's behavior to be unseemly for a professional teacher who is educated at Millersville University.

Snyder certainly has the right to post whatever pictures she wants on her MySpace website.

MySpace certainly has the right to take away her website if it does not meet the posting standards for MySpace website users. MySpace has the right to control its online business space.

Millersville University is, according to its Internet website, a public liberal arts university. The University certainly has a right to set and enforce educational standards in awarding degrees.

Does Millersville University have the right to set and enforce behavioral standards in awarding degrees? I think this a very good and pertinent question. The answer might well depend upon whether the University has written and published standards of behavior, and the evidence to show that students have agreed to and accept those standards in exchange for the right to earn a degree.

Exactly where does Synder's personal rights end and the University's rights begin?

Synder is paying for a service, the available educational training and knowledge to earn a degree by meeting the University's standards of performance. Does that standard include behavioral as well as educational performance?

Does Snyder's personal actions off campus constitute any more or less of an egregious breach of behavior than on campus? Would the University's authority in this matter carry more weight if Snyder were a student on campus rather than off campus?

A statement issued by Millersville University on its website today denied the claims alleged by Ms. Stacy Snyder and also said this:

"Due to federal student privacy restrictions, the University is unable to directly respond to media accounts related to the case. The University notes, however, that all of its educational decisions are based on a full range of academic performance issues, not solely on a student's personal website or social networking site."

Yikes! I am glad I do not have to defend Millersville University in this case. I would instantly be looking for a new attorney team.

I think I understand the University's position and why it merits some serious consideration in a court of law.

Should Snyder prevail in her suit against Millersville University, what sort of Web-published photos might we expect to see among future students?

This might play itself out in a court of law because we are a republic and not a democracy.

In a democracy, Stacy Snyder might have virtually no chance of success. Her complaint might easily be voted against by a majority interested in maintaining certain standards of credibility.

In a republic, Snyder's chances improve immensely because the law is no respecter of majority rule.

In the law are rights that exceed the limits of our imagination, and sometimes even our stupidity.

Editor's Note: Explore my main blog at::
http://www.edbagleyblog.com
Discover 136 Movie Reviews, 68 Sports Articles, 88 Articles on Lessons in Life, 18 Articles on Jobs and Careers, 30 Articles on Internet Marketing and 591 Famous Quotes.

Want a Six-Figure Income Without Getting a College Degree of Any Kind? Here Is How

2007-04-19T18:27:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

As someone who has 5,000+ high end clients who are interested in jobs and careers, I paid attention Tuesday when I came across a story about six-figure incomes by Laura Morsch of CareerBuilder.com.

According to Laura Morsch and the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, "physician jobs dominate the list of the nation's highest-paying positions, holding 9 of the top 10 most lucrative jobs."

Morsch reminds us that there are other high-paying jobs in our economy.

"Although statistically more education means better pay," says Morsch, "you can land a very high-paying job with just a bachelor's degree and considerable work experience."

She then goes on to list these 9 examples: Chief Executive at $140,000, Airline Pilot at $135,000, Dentist at $134,000, Lawyer at $111,000, Air Traffic Controller at $106,000, Engineering Manager at $105,000, Computer and Information Systems Manager at $102,000, Marketing Manager at $102,000 and Astronomer at $101,000.

I have clients making six-figure incomes in all of Morsch's examples, however, you need more than a bachelor's degree to realistically become a Dentist, Lawyer or an Astronomer; therefore, they are not good examples.

I have a client making $350,000 a year with a high school diploma. I have another client making $144,000 who is a high school graduate with two additional years of technical training. A third client is making $250,000 with a high school diploma only. All three of these examples are men.

Men can make excellent money with a high school diploma in a number of occupations.

Women can also make $100,000+ with a high school diploma, but they tend to do it generally in three ways:

1) They own their own business, usually a small business that is very profitable. Some research organizations report that there are more small business owners making six-figures-plus than in any other job or occupation.

2) They work in commissioned sales rather than salaried sales. A sharp woman can many times outsell a man because of the dynamics between the sexes. A sharp woman calling on a male client many times gets more time and attention than a male calling on the same client.

3) They work in a financially-related position, such as a stockbroker, mortgage banker, mortgage broker, loan officer or chief financial officer.

Here is some information you can use if you are a high school graduate and have zero interest in getting a bachelor's degree at this point in your work career: go into sales if you have any people skills or personality.

Sales is the second highest paid profession in the world, and it does not usually require a college degree. There are some corporate sales jobs that do require a degree, but there are many more opportunities available if you can generate sales production.

There is not a single business in America that cannot benefit from more sales, and almost every one will pay for sales production.

Here is some even better news: If you are selling and producing big time and the owner or company is too cheap to compensate you at the level you should be compensated at ($100,000+++), dump the owner or company and sell for someone else.

A far better idea would be to start your own business, go into competition directly against the cheap owner or company that would not pay you, and wipe them off the map.

There really is no reason you should be working for someone else anyway. Working in your own business can be an outstanding deal. You call your own shots. You will not fire yourself, lay yourself off, or deny yourself promotions, fat bonuses for production, outstanding benefit packages, and a lot of time off to enjoy your money and family.

The nine examples listed above have 7 positions that amount to no more than hired help, that includes the Chief Executive position. Only the Dentist and Lawyer positions might be either self-employed or hired help.

All nine examples cited by Morsch and the Bureau of Labor Statistics have more stress than anyone needs and are labor intensive. Even the Dentist and Lawyer positions, which might be self-employed, require them to report to work or not get paid. If a Mac truck runs over either them, their income stops in a heartbeat.

Has anyone ever heard of income-producing investments when these job opportunities come up? Income producing assets allow you to take possession of your own time while your investment throws off the income to fund your lifestyle without working a job.

It might be fancy to have any of those nine jobs with status and making $100,000 a year. Some people would rather make $250,000 a year and not have a job, have a boss, and deal with the stress.

Here is a rare career path: Own the business, company or organization and hire the six-figure people in the examples above to work for you. There are people who would gladly pay the above examples their listed wages when they could make $250,000 free and clear and not work.

Who needs status and aggravation when you have money?

Editor's Note: Explore my main blog at::
http://www.edbagleyblog.com
Discover 136 Movie Reviews, 68 Sports Articles, 88 Articles on Lessons in Life, 18 Articles on Jobs and Careers, 30 Articles on Internet Marketing and 591 Famous Quotes.

There Is No Huge Correlation Between Education and Income and Here Is Why - Part 2

2007-04-18T09:52:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

5) This has little to do with life being fair or not. It has everything to do with you figuring out how to make money, whether you have a degree or not.

Do I think you have been snookered on the education trip? Yes I do. Why? I have too much experience and evidence to think otherwise.

Both of us come from educated families that would naturally stress education. I was appalled when my son and daughter had zero interest in continuing their education after high school.

My daughter is now a loan officer with Washington Mutual making good money, probably far better than you are, and she has zero student loan debt.

My son did get a 2-year certificate as an automotive technician; he refused to take the 4 or 5 academic classes with the occupational training so he could get an Associate of Technical Arts Degree rather than a certificate as an auto tech.

He told me, "Dad I do not need any more education." Remember what Mark Twain said: "I never allowed schooling to interfere with my education."

My son is 28 years old and already has a $540,000 house, 4 upscale vehicles, a rental property and two auto repair shops with an income well in excess of $12,000 a month plus the net profits from his businesses.

Did he need a college education to succeed? You decide. This is why I say that there is more correlation between people skills, having technical skills and being in an activity that is in demand than there is between pure education and income.

6) Do I believe everyone should have a college degree, say at least a bachelor's? Absolutely, because you will be exposed to multiple areas of knowledge and get some well-needed breeding and culture. My son could care less about classical music, plays, culture, reading, etc. He is focused on making money and when he looks at anything he is only interested in discovering the answers to two questions: Where is the money? and How can I get it?

This is the clear difference between an entrepreneur or businessperson and a college graduate who is thinking his or her education is going to bring them big bucks.

Nothing will bring you a lot of bucks unless and until what you bring provides a service or product that is in demand, has little competition and you can charge big bucks for your service.

This is why brain surgeons and auto repair technicians who own auto repair shops make money. Cars break down. People have brain cancer. Who cares whether you have 3 degrees, or 20 degrees, or whether you know hip-hop from opera?

7) Given your circumstances, this is what I recommend you do: Use your expensive education, street smarts and intuition to figure out what people want to know and then provide the knowledge or information they want and need, and charge for your service.

The more they want the information the more you can charge because no one else will be providing the information they want at a lower cost.

This is America, the land of opportunity. This is a needs-based, on-demand economy. The market you want to earn your living in is capitalist based, not education based. If you cannot figure out the economy, become a teacher and settle for whatever salary and benefits education pays a teacher.

8) Also, stop acting like there is some big secret about how to make it in your chosen field. Get into the field and act like you are the secret. Do not chase people and opportunities, act like you are THE person and THE opportunity is with you.

You are bright, educated and capable. You are the answer to your own quest to find someone else to hire you. Start acting like you are a person of total substance.

Make people appreciate and understand instantly that when they are talking to you, or doing business with you, that they are dealing with a person of substance. Repeat, a person of substance. Let there be no mistake.

If your thing is hip-hop music, become the authority, brand yourself and build a reputation so that no one thinking hip-hop is doing squat without consulting you first because you have the answers, and are worth whatever you are charging and 20 times more!

Think about who you need to be, not who you are at the moment, then be that person, becoming a magnet that will attract people to you.

Now get out there and make me proud of you. You are Carolyn, an expert. You do not know everything and quickly acknowledge so, but in your area, there is no one who knows more than you. Period. That is it.

And if you do not agree with me that I am an expert in my field, no matter, others do.

You are not some silly girl with three degrees who cannot find the right job at the right income. Start 2007 as an expert, not as someone looking for a job.

You know I believe in you. Now you need to believe in yourself and get out there and let the world know who Carolyn is. People will start listening when you decide you are a person of substance, know what you are talking about, and then continue to get more knowledgeable and helpful in your area of expertise.

This is not a mind game. Do not believe with your head, believe with your heart as if your life depended upon it and people will accept you as an expert.

When they offer you less money than you want, look them straight in the eye and tell them you would like to help them but other people are offering you more money, and then shut up.

Do not try to justify or explain yourself or your value. If the person you are talking to cannot figure it out, find someone else who can.

There are two possible outcomes in any situation: results or excuses. I think you know which outcome you want to be in.

There Is No Huge Correlation Between Education and Income and Here Is Why - Part 1

2007-04-17T12:35:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

(Editor's Note: A client e-mailed me yesterday about her student loan debts that netted her 3 college degrees and a job without a commensurate income and future. She has a Bachelor of Arts Degree from New York University, a second Bachelor of Arts Degree from the London Institute and a Master of Arts Degree from the University of London. My unvarnished answers to her questions follow. I changed her name since I could not contact her in time to use her name.)

Happy Holidays Ed Bagley,

I had a follow-up question to your three-part series on "Six Power Secrets of Getting Hired and Promoted."

If education is not a great factor in making the "big bucks" why do people stress that, especially a lot of companies that only want to hire college educated employees?

OK, I don't have a source for those stats, just stuff I have heard. I am guessing just media hype. Nonetheless, if there is any validity to that, why is that the case?

Because I so regret the major amounts of money I am in debt for because of higher education, and the three degrees I have have not gotten me any further than anyone else.

I am not surprised. I guess life isn't fair.

Happy New Year, Carolyn

Fasten your seat belts for my reply to Carolyn the same day:

Carolyn,

You are reading my blog! This can only help you, and you have the added benefit that I am not going to try and collect on your student loans! (it is OK to smile)

You ask an excellent question and you shall receive an excellent answer.

Here are some considerations in no particular order:

1) Colleges and universities are not part of the same world that exists around them. They are isolated special interest groups with no other primary purpose than to ensure their continued existence.

Job one for them is to stress education as the answer to all of life's issues and ills, thus, get a degree and earn a lot more money, get a degree and start doing something you really want to do, get a degree and get hired quicker, get a degree or many corporations will not hire you, etc.

Their real purpose is to generate enough income to support the salaries and lifestyle of those involved in perpetuating the enterprise. A tenured professor must be paid even if the subject he or she is teaching has almost zero demand in our economy.

If colleges and universities really told the truth about what you could reasonably earn after you acquire your degree, enrollment would plummet in certain subject areas. Students would stop being skydivers without parachutes.

Colleges and universities will put 120 students into a program that there is absolutely no need or demand for in the marketplace. What will a student do with an art history degree when there is zero need for people to run the few museums that exist.

You cannot turn out 120 students a year at each university when the annual demand for what they have to offer is 22 openings at all levels nationwide. This is why education majors who do not want to teach in South Central Los Angeles end up as shift managers at a McDonald's restaurant, or as a life insurance agent for Prudential.

2) Not all degrees are equal. A Bachelor of Arts in history is pretty useless unless you switch to teaching history. Get a Master of Business Administration degree from a top 20 school and your chances improve. Get a Doctor of Medicine Degree, become a physician and surgeon and your chances are even better.

Degrees that lead to a high paying profession pay off, everything else has little real impact on your salary.

3) Corporations want to hire college graduates not only because they believe educated workers will make them more money, but also because it is their best guarantee that the person they are hiring is literate.

They want to be assured that the new hires can speak and be understood by fellow staff members, and are not so illiterate that they will drive away customers and clients by showing, through their lack of communication skills, that they are stupid, lack grammar and diction, and have the personality of an ashtray.

4) Facts: Results from the 2004 Census Bureau report shows a $23,000 difference between the average annual salary of adults with a bachelor's degree ($51,554) compared to adults with a high school diploma ($28,645).

In what may or may not be an anomaly, the income gap narrowed slightly from five years earlier when bachelor's degree graduates made nearly twice as much as high school graduates.

Notice the fact says "the average annual salary" which means that in this total is a brain surgeon making $1.2 million a year and a ditch-digger making a minimum wage of approximately $7 an hour or about $14,000 a year. This produces an average difference of only $23,000.

Throw out the brain surgeons and ditch-diggers of which there are very few and the difference is even less.

(Ediotr's Note: This is Part 1 of a 2-Part Series. Look for Part 2 tomorrow.)

Six Power Secrets of Getting Hired and Promoted - Part 3

2007-04-16T22:37:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

Power Secret Five: How to Make Money Without a College Degree

It is worth pointing out that many times there is no meaningful correlation between education and income.

One can statistically show that an average college graduate, over the course of his or her adult working life, will make more money than an average high school graduate who does not go on to higher education. Any knowledgeable person can show this as a fact.

The problem is that many times the difference between the two is not as great as some would think. It is not like all college graduates make an average of $100,000 a year, and all high school graduates make an average of $20,000 a year.

It is a fact that if you are a physician or an attorney with a professional degree, well placed and competent, you can make a potentially huge income compared to people who do not have a medical degree, or a juris doctor degree.

But what about all of the college graduates without professional degrees who end up as a cook or behind the counter at McDonald's while they are trying to find a challenging, good paying position that interests them?

Clearly, without a college degree that leads to a high paying profession, you cannot expect to knock down the big money.

Some graduates have a bachelor's degree, have been out of school for 10 years and are making less than $30,000 a year. You are going to have a hard time convincing them that a college education has put them on easy street.

The reason they are making only $30,000 a year is not because they are underpaid for the service they are performing, it is more likely because they are underemployed.

College graduates in this position generally do not have an education problem, a training problem, an intelligence problem, or a refusal to work problem. They usually have a marketing problem. They simply do not know how to market themselves.

Just as there is many times no meaningful correlation between education and income, so is there no meaningful correlation between intelligence and income. There are educated idiots everywhere. A high IQ (intelligence quotient, your ability to learn quickly) does not automatically equate to a high income.

Many times there is also no meaningful correlation between talent and income. Have you ever heard of the proverbial starving artist? How many painters are waiters at restaurants while they are waiting to be discovered? How many talented actors have gone to Hollywood and, like thousands of others, not been discovered?

How can we then explain why some people (generally sales representatives) earn more than $100,000 in annual income and do so with a high school degree, and sometimes even as a high school dropout?

The answer is that you can many times show a meaningful correlation between people skills and income.

In almost every case, when you can identify a person who is not in an education-driven, high paying profession, does not have a college degree, and makes $100,000 plus a year, you will likely discover a person with obvious people skills. When you listen to them talk, they may not have perfect subject-verb agreement, however, they know how to relate to prospects at an emotional level, and use their winning personality to create a likeability factor that results in sales.

You do not need a college education to generate a lot of income, you do need to have people skills, and know how to relate to people at an emotional level before you begin benefit selling a prospect on your product or service.

Power Secret Six: When the Protestant Ethic Does Not Work for You

This is the Protestant ethic: work hard, be thrifty, keep your nose clean, and good things will happen (like such success being a sign that one is saved). Too often today, people who follow the Protestant ethic find that good things do not automatically happen (like getting hired or promoted when qualified), which might help explain why a lot of folks have little use for the Protestant ethic these days.

How many times have you seen a fellow employee hired or promoted who was not really the most qualified person?

Yes, you are seething too. Someone might say: "I can not believe they hired that person," or "I can not believe they promoted that jerk. If they only knew."

The reality is that 50% of the time the person hired or promoted is not the most qualified. It is important to note that another 50% of the time, the person hired or promoted is the best choice based on his or her qualifications.

Why does this happen? The answer is fairly obvious. People who hire get a lot of pressure to go through all their relatives, friends, neighbors and lovers to find prospects to hire or promote. This is why you need to know that 60% of hiring and promoting involves influence, the person getting hired or promoted simply knows someone who wants to help him or her.

Granted that much of this occurs at entry level to mid-management positions, but it occurs none the less.

Here is some good news: the people who get hired or promoted are oftentimes not the most qualified, but usually they have done the best job of presenting what it is they have to offer.

This means that many potential hires who are not the most qualified can also get hired or promoted when they do the best job of presenting what it is they have to offer. This is exactly what you need to do in the process of getting hired or promoted: the best possible job of presenting what it is you have to offer, despite your qualifications or lack thereof. It almost goes without saying that knowing someone who wants to help you is an even bigger factor in getting hired or promoted.

Six Power Secrets of Getting Hired and Promoted – Part 2

2007-04-15T19:31:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

Power Secret Three: Why You Will Not Be Able to Relate to Everyone

You need to know that for every 10 people who could potentially make a decision to interview you or hire you, the odds say that 3 out of the 10 will like you, and it will have nothing to do with who you are or what you do.

They may simply like your smile, your handshake, the sound of your voice, or the way you do your hair.

Rest assured that 3 out of those same 10 people will not like you, and again it will have nothing to do with who you are or what you do.

They may simply not like your smile, your handshake, the sound of your voice, or the way you do your hair.

And when you are hired, 4 out of those same 10 people will learn to like you, or dislike you, as they develop a working relationship with you.

The odds say that those 4 in 10 will like you if you actually do your job and then some, you work at earning their respect, you honor their confidence, and you treat them as you would want to be treated.

Considering these numbers, you will potentially be able to develop a very good working relationship with about 70% of your fellow employees when you are hired and go to work.

The other 30% you can forget, and if you bend over backwards to cultivate their good will, you will usually find that they always have a reason to whine or complain about what is happening to them, and why the world and the people in it are not treating them right. They are, in a word, negative. Your best positive attitude will not likely overcome their negative attitude. So forget about them, or they may do mental harm to your psyche.

Why do people like or not like you based upon things that really have little to do with your skills and abilities?

The simple answer is that people are not always rational. People are filled up with prejudices, beliefs, foibles and idiosyncrasies. They will continually tell you that cat is spelled "kat" even when you lead them to a dictionary and show them that cat is spelled "cat". They may see but choose not to recognize reality, or truth. A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still. A woman convinced against her will is of the same opinion still.

Under the category of "people are not always rational" is also the phenomenon of "life is not always fair.”

For those of us who have been paying attention, life is not fair, and unfairness (or discrimination) is no respecter of race; no one is immune. People of any race are just as apt to be unfair to a person of their own race as they would to a person of another race, they are just less obvious about doing so.

A good example of this would be Karen, a woman who went to a job interview, had a fantastic experience at the interview, and came away feeling good about herself, and her prospects of being hired.

She knew that the company representatives liked her, and would offer her a job. She did not get the offer. Later she learned that everyone liked her, but the key decision-maker axed her hiring, even though he clearly liked her as a possible hire at the interview.

What Karen did not know was that the key decision-maker was going through a nasty divorce and child custody battle, and his ex-wife's name was Karen. He simply did not want to come to work every day and have to smile at this Karen and say, "Good morning, Karen, how are you doing?" Such is life.

Power Secret Four: Be Careful About From Whom You Take Your Advice

Always remember that the cheapest commodity in the world is opinions. Everyone has one, and if you do not think so, just ask them, and he or she will tell you.

Ask a lot of questions and even solicit opinions, but be careful about from whom you take your advice.

Some displaced workers making $100,000 a year get pushed out the door during a merger, acquisition, restructuring or downsizing (all words for the same negative impact on the individual involved), head down to the local watering hole, ask some unemployed, broke person for advice on what to do next, and then actually listen as if the unemployed, broke person could tell them how to become financially successful in life.

The sources of advice are all around us: fellow employees, those who did not get axed, your friends, your relative who has never had a job, your pastor, and, if you are desperate enough, your dog Spot.

When you want advice, never go back down the success ladder, always climb higher until you reach someone more successful or accomplished than yourself in a certain area. Let someone with experience, expertise and success suggest meaningful actions that can actually produce potential results.

Always remember that when you take your advice from anyone, they are not going to hire you. Nor would you hire yourself.

Seek advice from those who are competent through their own experience and success to give it.

Six Power Secrets of Getting Hired and Promoted - Part 1

2007-04-14T22:27:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

Power Secret One: Do Not Fill Out Job Applications

Job candidates should not fill out job applications because applications contain so much potentially incriminating and damaging information.

While it is illegal to ask you your age, a business can legally ask you your salary history, how much you want to make, reasons why you left jobs, your medical history, and specific references. This information alone is worth much to a business but can only hurt you, the potential hire, 99% of the time.

Job applications can be the "kiss of death" because the company (or organization) controls your information flow. They ask the questions and you are obliged to answer, or your possibility of being hired can be trashed.

When you use a resume and cover letter, you control the information flow, you tell them what you want them to know, and nothing else. While it is never a good idea to claim an untruth about yourself, you can liberally practice the sins of omission. When you have a back problem, you want the company to know about it when you place an insurance claim as part of your benefit plan.

When you reveal too much information too soon, you can create a seed of doubt with your potential employer. Once the interviewer or employer senses a seed of doubt, they begin checking for a chink in your armor, and who among us, if put under intense scrutiny, does not have a chink in his or her armor?

Like a pit bulldog on the prowl, they search for something, anything, negative about you to validate their suspicion, whether their doubt is justified or not. You are then thrown upon the scrap heap of rejects, and they move on to another candidate.

Any information about you that is a lightning rod should not be revealed, even when they demonstrate an indicated interest in you as a prospect, and you, in turn, are genuinely interested in the opportunity.

Many potential hires read an ad in the classifieds and then approach the business with this introduction: "I read your ad in the Sunday paper (or online) for an Administrative Assistant (or whatever the position is) and would like to fill out an application." This approach misses the mark in that it invites filling out an application, which is a mistake.

When you feel you must go to the business with your approach, use this language exactly: "I'm interested in your Administrative Assistant (or whatever the job is) position. Here is my resume." Then hand them your resume; it is hard not to take your resume when you are handing it to them. Give your resume and cover letter to the most important person you can reach.

A decision maker is much more likely to take your resume, peruse it, decide to interview you, and set an appointment to do so. On occasion, he or she may even interview you on the spot. In any event, you want your resume--and not a job application-- in their hand.

When applying for a public service position (such as a state job, or a classroom teacher position), filling out a job application will be mandatory. When put under stress and placed under a time constraint, candidates unwittingly and inadvertently rush through the process, putting down any answer that comes to mind.

When confronted with this situation, never fill out the job application on scene. Take the application home, read the questions carefully, and think before you answer. When answering any question on the application, ask yourself this question: how could this answer appear negative, or damage my chances of getting an offer?

Most businesses in the private sector appreciate a resume and cover letter far more than an application, as the resume generally gives more and better information about you (ever try to describe your duties and responsibilities on a job application in one line where only seven words will fit if you print in small letters?).

You would not normally be filling out a job application in the private sector unless you are applying for the lowest of entry level positions. You should not be asked to fill out a job application at the management level, and if you are, there is something terribly wrong.

Power Secret Two: The Most Important Factor in Writing Resumes

Judgment is the most important factor in writing a resume. We can teach people a lot of things but there is at least one thing we cannot teach people: judgment. We develop judgment from the life experience of making judgments, and what experience shows us is that some people simply have better judgment than others.

People without good judgment keep running into brick walls because they have not figured out how to climb over them, walk around them, dig under them, or blow them up and walk through. This reflects a lack of judgment.

We raise our children to have a sense of right and wrong and to make good decisions when it counts. But try as we might, there comes that day and time when we are not there, and someone offers them cigarettes, or drugs, or something worse.

At that point in time, we hope and pray that our child makes the right decision because the wrong decision might lead them down a road from which they may never return. Their decision involves judgment. They cannot acquire good judgment by you simply telling them what to do, or not to do; they also need modeling, the power of whatever influence you may have with them, and osmosis: the process of making judgments, recognizing the results of the judgments, and making better choices.

Judgment is the most critical factor you are going to come to terms with in writing a resume, or judgment may be your most telling weakness when you go to the job market to test its effectiveness. Always remember that it is not just what you say, but how you say it that counts.

Job Interview Answers to 15 Tough Questions – Part 4

2007-04-14T01:31:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

15) What would you do if . . . ?

This question about imagined situations is usually posed to evaluate your reaction and judgment about decision-making matters involving the position.

The answer here is to remember that the quality of your solution is not nearly as important as your attitude and approach toward the solution.

Your first answer should be that the situation is probably not new, and your first move would be consult your superior who has more knowledge and experience in dealing with the problem, or you would ask others who have likely encountered the situation how they resolved the problem.

Then, be sure to qualify your answer, whatever it may be. Say "I might consider . . .,” rather than "I would . . .” Always strive to be calm and rational in your approach, and certainly be open to receiving more information upon which to base a decision, or take an action.

Remember, too, that some problems will resolve themselves if you do not rush to judgment too quickly. Sometimes responding quickly actually adds to the problem or challenge. Even consultants oftentimes suggest the right answer to the wrong problem. Consultants can be quick to tell you the answer to your problem when they have not even identified the actual problem, but thought they did.

The bottom line here is to know that the more information you have, and the better it is, the more likely you are to make an intelligent decision.

This ends the answers to the 15 most frequently asked questions during a job interview, and almost begs the question: What do employers really want when hiring? The answer may surprise you.

Most potential employees are told that employers are looking for someone with a degree and hands-on skills.

While this is true in many cases, you should know that employers are also looking for someone who can do the job.

This is why they are not necessarily looking for someone with only education, experience and knowledge, as important as these three attributes may be.

Some employers will not hold it against you if you do not have education, experience, knowledge or obvious ability going for you.

For some prospects, the ego is so well developed that an employer cannot teach them anything because they already know everything.

The ego, in this case, becomes a barrier to learning.

It is really helpful to be an open, willing spirit without all the answers; and this applies whether you have education, experience, knowledge and ability, or you do not.

While employers may not hold it against you if you do not have education, experience and knowledge, they will hold it very much against you if you have a poor personality and cannot get along (work) with people. Remember that attitude drives personality. A person with a good attitude generally has a good personality. A person with a bad attitude generally has a bad personality.

In other words, the single biggest thing you have going for yourself is people skills. People skills are more important in the long run than education, experience, knowledge, talent and intelligence.

Some clients feel people skills are an option. They are not an option; they are mandatory if you expect to get ahead in this world.

When you greet customers or fellow employees, the last thing a business or organization can afford is for you to cost them customers, or the support of other employees because you are a negative person who cannot get along or work with other people.

Believe it or not, the two most important qualities you have going for you are 1) Your personality, which is driven by your attitude, and 2) Your ability to deal with people effectively.

Therefore, it makes all kinds of sense to sell yourself first in an interview before you sell your education, experience, knowledge or special abilities. It is vital in an interview to establish a high likeability factor, without it, you may not get an offer, no matter what qualifications you are bringing to the position.

If you do no more than learn how to smile, be enthusiastic, and act interested in people, it may well take you farther than the knowledge gained by an expensive college education combined with a bad attitude.

Job Interview Answers to 15 Tough Questions – Part 3

2007-04-12T21:44:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

13) Do you have references?

It is not a good idea to give references at the resume stage. References are far more appropriate at the interview stage, and even then, do not give references unless they ask for them. When and if they ask, always have them available at the interview.

The reason you do not want to be giving references at the resume stage is that, if they can read your resume and check your references and—on that basis—make a decision not to interview or hire you, you have done yourself a real disservice. You want to get in front of people (secure interviews). Give them the resume, but not the references unless they ask for them.

Most prospects give names, addresses and phone numbers for references when asked. It is better not to do this. It inconveniences the interviewer in that they have to call to get the reference. And while you think you know what someone may say about you, the fact is, you do not.

The references being called may not be available, or may be on vacation. They may have left the firm, been fired or laid off since you last checked their availability.

Therefore, it is best to use written references only. Have the person put the written reference about you on the company’s or organization's letterhead so it looks official, and have them sign it.

If the person giving the reference will not put it on company letterhead because it is against company policy, then have them use a plain sheet of paper. They can still use their name, company position, and company name at the bottom of the letter.

Usually, written references are taken at face value. Oftentimes, with a written reference, a call is made only to verify employment.

Many candidates think that written references have to come from the big boss, or their immediate supervisor. You have other options if your boss or supervisor will not do it for you, or if you would not want them to do it for you.

When you have little work experience and have volunteered at your church, have your priest or pastor write a reference attesting to your character, ambition, dependability and productivity.
When you have worked with key employees, supervisors or managers of other companies, ask them to write you a reference attesting to your professionalism and ability to work with people.

When you have worked closely with vendors, suppliers, or their sales representatives, ask them to write you a letter of reference.

You could even have another person holding the same position at another company, who you have worked with, write you a reference.

Ask a lot of people to write references because many of them will agree to do it and be happy to do it, but, unfortunately, you are not on the top of their priority list. You can be forgotten despite their good intentions to help you. Ask a lot of people and realize that for every 10 people you ask who are willing to do it and happy to do it, you will be doing very well to get 1 or 2 to actually do it.

And, when all else fails, remember that any written job evaluations you have can also be used as references until you can secure written references. You do not need a lot of references. Two or three are adequate, and they can be personal (about you) as well as professional (about the job you do).

14) Do you have any questions?

It is very important that you have questions at the interview. Any question you ask shows an indicated interest, or genuine concern on your part.

When any of the basic questions about the job have not been covered in the interview, this is a good time to ask about salary, benefits, what is expected, how you will be evaluated, and the opportunities for advancement. Other good questions include:

"Is your company or organization growing?" (Growing organizations create jobs and promotions.)

"What happened to the last person who held the position?" (Maybe they were not fired or incompetent. Maybe the company offered no advancement or salary increases, encouraged lousy working conditions, or refused to get rid of an incompetent boss.)

"How committed are you to research and development?" (Companies that invest in their future plan to be successful, profitable, and on the cutting edge of what is happening in their industry.)

"How fast can people who perform be promoted?" (You want to know that, when you produce, you will be compensated for your effort rather than draw the same salary as another employee who produces far less by comparison.)

"Is this company family owned and operated?" (When it is, you can forget getting anywhere very fast; all of the relatives will get the positions, and this will happen in many cases whether the relatives are competent or not.)

"Is there any possibility of an equity interest in the future?" (Buying in, even on a little scale, can be lucrative. More than one employee has become a millionaire by taking advantage of stock options. Look at the fortunes people made when they hooked up with Microsoft, when the software giant grew so rapidly.)

Job Interview Answers to 15 Tough Questions – Part 2

2007-04-11T22:57:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

7) Why are you interested in this position?

When you are an accountant and you are applying at an accounting firm, it is pretty obvious why you are interested; you are interested in using your acquired education, skills, and knowledge in your career field.

However, maybe the position is a cashier for a store and you just want a job; you do not have a brilliant answer to offer. Not to worry. Do not discount very basic answers such as "I need to earn money to support myself and/or my family," or "I want more out of life, and I need to work if I am going to have a better lifestyle for my family.” Employers like employees who need to work; such employees are more apt to be dependable, responsible and productive.

8) Why do you want to work for us?

Here you should be specific in your answer. There may be thousands of accounting firms with positions to offer, but it is now a question of “why us”?

Research the firm as best you can. Phone book ads often contain great information, such as how long a firm has been in business, what it specializes in, who are the key members of the firm, and whom they hope to serve.

Depending upon what you learn at the library, and from other local sources, possible answers might be:

"You have an expanding firm, and I believe there will be opportunities for me to prove myself and grow with you,” or

"Your firm is one of the oldest and most respected in our community, and I want to learn from, and be associated with one of the best,” or

"I believe you will reward people according to their value to the firm, and I am willing to prove my value to you,” or finally

"Your specialty happens to be my area of career interest.”

9) Why should we hire you?

Here you must be straightforward and confident about your ability and what you have to offer. Say, "I believe I am qualified and can do the job.”

Amplify this answer by stressing your strong points, such as your appropriate education, specialized training, proven experience, skills and abilities.

Do not say you can do any job. You do not know that for a fact, and, more important, the person interviewing you—no matter how good you look on paper or act in person—does not really know if you can do it either until you start having to perform on the job.

This is why you should qualify your answers with "I believe . . . ," or "Based on my performance in similar positions in the past, I have no reason to think I will not be able to do the job for you.”

10) What are your strengths and weaknesses?

Good strengths include some very basic character traits, such as determination, honesty, responsibility, dependability, inquisitiveness, willingness to learn, openness to new ideas, stability, and humor. Pick traits that you are confident and comfortable with.

In approaching the question of your weaknesses, rule one is to have some. The worst answer you could give is "I do not have any weaknesses.” We all have weaknesses, and if we are unwilling to talk about them, it is a big red flag that there are some definite personality problems.

Never let your lack of confidence, or overdeveloped ego, prevent you from showing your weaknesses. Handle the challenge by taking your weaknesses (whatever they may be) and turning them into strengths. If you are a workaholic, say "Sometimes I do not know when to stop working on a project. I can get so involved I may work 16 hours straight. This may upset other employees who quit at the normal time.”

11) What are your career goals?

Your objectives or goals are very important. You do not want to be a wandering generality; you want to be a meaningful specific.

People want to know if you have thought about your future, and have a plan to get where you want to go. You should have both short and long range goals. A good short range goal might be to secure a position in your career field, develop more experience in an area of interest, or position yourself with a firm or organization that is growing.

Long range goals require you to picture yourself, and where you would like to be, 10 or 20 years from now.

12) Why did you leave your last position?

This question can be asked because they are testing your reaction, or if your resume gives the impression you have been "job-hopping”.

If there was a problem with leaving your last position (you were fired, encountered a personality conflict, or got mad and quit), be careful not to speak ill of the position you held, the organization you held it with, or members of the organization. Put downs score no points and reflect poorly on you, regardless of the challenges you may have had.

Good reasons to leave jobs are: 1) an opportunity for advancement, 2) an opportunity to make more money, 3) an opportunity to secure more or better benefits, 4) to gain more job satisfaction, 5) a better career opportunity, 6) a more challenging position, or 7) an opportunity to work with better people.

While all of these are legitimate reasons, none of them is the best answer to the question. It is best to simply say, "I am looking for a better opportunity.” The better opportunity could be any of the above seven answers without actually saying so.

Job Interview Answers to 15 Tough Questions – Part 1

2007-04-11T00:09:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

Some surveys have shown that there are more than 90 questions that could be asked during a job interview. Of these, 15 in particular are asked most frequently during an extended interview (more than 20 minutes) for a regular work-a-day job.

Always remember that in a job interview, it is not just what you say, but how you say it that really counts. Your choice of words is powerful, and can move job interviewers to a more positive impression by how you say what you say. Here, in no particular order, are the answers to the 15 most frequently asked questions during a job interview:

1) Which position are you most interested in?

When you are responding to an advertisement, the company will likely know the position for which you have applied. Many times companies key their advertisements so, when they are advertising for more than one position, they can identify the position for which you have applied. Most public service organizations will have a specific job number with the job announcement.

However, no matter what position for which you may have applied, many companies have more than one position to offer, and the interviewer is probably going to consider you for any position available based on your submitted resume and interview performance.

Key to answering this question is to realize that different companies and organizations may call essentially the same positions by different job titles; therefore, it is best if you answer the kind of function you are interested in performing rather than a specific job title.

Hence, say "I am interested in accounting," or “I am good at accounting,” rather than "I am interested in the Junior Accountant position.”

2) Are you looking for full-time or part-time work?

When you are dealing with a large business or public service corporation, chances are the position is full-time, and you should be prepared to accept full-time employment.

However, when you are trying to get your foot in the door, it is well to remember that many companies hire full-time employees from their part-time and temporary help. This makes sense from a business standpoint in that they are then hiring a person they have had an opportunity to observe on the job.

When you are considering a public service position (working for the federal, state or local governmental entities, for example), it generally makes sense to accept any position as long as two factors are present:

1) That it is a full-time permanent position, and

2) You are entitled to all the normal benefits.

Most public service positions offer opportunities for advancement within the organization, and some even allow you to apply, take tests and interview for positions during your normal working hours. You can, in some cases, look for a better job and get paid for looking during your normal working hours.

This is indeed a good deal for the employee; most private businesses would not tolerate this action and, quite frankly, some would find a "legitimate reason" to fire you if they thought you were looking.

3) Are you willing to travel or relocate (go where the company sends you)?

Decide which is more important to you: where you live, or whether you want the position, and answer accordingly. You may be willing to travel (this could be anything from commuting to another city to work to being out of town two weeks every month), but not willing to relocate. When you are married and earn a secondary income for your family, relocating is not always practical.

4) How much money do you want to earn?

Rather than trying to figure out what they are willing to pay, or revealing what you are willing to settle for (both very risky at best), say this: "What is your salary range for this position?" This tells them nothing, puts the ball back in their court, and you remain a class act.

Another possible answer: "While the salary I would receive is certainly a consideration, I am far more interested in a position that uses performance to determine promotion and compensation. I am interested in being rewarded for my production for the company, thereby proving my value to the company.”

Do ask about benefits if the interviewer does not detail the company benefit package, as the benefit package can add substantially to your salary base. In some cases the benefit package can add 30% to your salary.

5) When can you start work?

The answer is immediately when you are not working, or two weeks—or whatever the notice of termination time is—when you are working. When you are employed and can begin work immediately, your potential employer might wonder if you would quit on them without notice.

6) How long do you expect to work?

Use "As long as it is mutually beneficial for both of us.” When you are the spouse of a career military person, the interviewer may want to know how long you will be around (that is, your spouse's rotation date). That is why it is best to use the suggested answer. After all, you can not predict everything that might happen. Many military families have found this out when a war or military action started.

Online Hiring Threatens to Do Away With Traditional Hard Copy Resumes - Part 4

2007-04-10T00:59:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

Many clients of mine have filled out customized online forms tailor-made to help them only to find out later that they were receiving calls on their cell phones from telemarketers, and needing to get a bigger mailbox as suddenly they were inundated with unwanted advertisements.

How did those advertisers get such pertinent information? Answer: the good fairy brought it to them while they were sleeping, in other words, they bought it from the source of the customized online information form.

Stafford continues her groundbreaking story with this piece of riveting information:

"John Sullivan, a management professor at San Francisco State University, says most interviews are as valuable as Ouija boards in measuring whether a person will be good on the job.

"Interviewers ask the wrong questions, and job candidates can lie, or simply not shine when on the job they'd do quite well, he (Sullivan) says—all the better for online assessments. Companies—especially those that hire thousands of workers and have high turnover—are turning to a range of computer-based filters to pare down candidates to a manageable number."

I could not disagree more with what Sullivan has to say as a management professor who is likely quoted as an expert.

It may well be that Sullivan himself does not have the necessary skills and competence to get anything out of a face-to-face interview with a potential hire in his university department. That would be his problem.

Stafford does end her story with this observation: "May job hunters are frustrated at the digitized 'depersonalization' of the hiring process." Amen.

Just when personnel types and those hiring should be asking more questions of candidates in an increasing complex world they are turning to forms for the answers. Good luck and God speed.
If they hope to represent my companies or me they had better be ready to sit down, look me in the eye, and sell themselves.

In most cases I am old enough to be their father. In many cases I am old enough to be their grandfather. My children call me a fossil, but I still read people so well one-on-one that I would not trust an online form to separate the wheat from the chaff.

(Editor's note: This is Part 4 of a 4-part article.)

Online Hiring Threatens to Do Away With Traditional Hard Copy Resumes - Part 3

2007-04-08T22:51:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

The only two reliable studies I am aware of show that less than 6% of prospects on average are hired through the online process only. That means 94% are of candidates are hired the traditional way: with a hard copy resume and eyeball-to-eyeball contact during an interview. I wonder how Diane Stafford was hired.

A company or organization may, in fact, require the initial resume or an application via email because HR does not want to fuss with paper copies of resumes. I would advise any candidate who has to apply online with an email attachment or in the body of the email, to take 6 or 7 hard copies of their resume and cover letter—presigned—to the interview.

When the interviewers (and today it is one to a committee of several interviewers more often than not) are passing the single email copy back and forth trying to read it and ask questions (which is tacky but they do it anyway), the prospective candidate should get up and say, "I brought hard copies for everyone today" and hand them out.

You cannot imagine how positive an impression this will make until you try it.

Should you try it and the brightest thing an interviewer can say is, "Oh, we don't accept hard copies anymore, just email versions," then I would recommend continuing with the interview, but understanding that when you go out the door this is not the place you are going to work, or the people you are going to work with.

They are too stupid and bureaucratic for anyone with an ounce of initiative, talent, ambition and intelligence to be fussing with. People like these bureaucrats are most often occupying space and contributing little to the progress and success of any company. They are where they are because of their level of incompetence.

They are only screening candidates so someone more important can interview them later and make a hiring decision. In other words, people in personnel may hire entry level workers but no chief executive officer or anyone else important would allow a personnel type to make an offer of employment for key company executives.

What is it with this business of "customized online forms, tailor-made to cull the applicant field"? Are we in some kind of race here? Good grief, does anyone who is a consumer or a potential hire realize what is happening here?

Why exactly do you think the big-time online services that allow you to post you resume for free also might want you to fill out a customized online form before they let you post your resume?

If you believe that the only purpose for this activity is to help you find a job you are very naïve, especially if they ask you to fill out the equivalent of a hard copy job application online. In doing so, you will be asked to fill your first name in one block and your last name in another block, etc.

Why would they do this? Answer: To build a more manageable, faster database of your personal information so they can sell it for profit. I know they say they would never sell your information, but they lie through their teeth, just like banks and financial institutions did for decades.

Why do you think banks and financial institutions must mail you a notice ever year telling you how they use your information. That is correct, they finally got caught.

Even this legislative correction does not prohibit them from continuing to do so in many cases because they have so many wholly-owned subsidiaries with whom they can still legally share information.

Banks routinely sold your personal information to credit card companies for years, for example, and pretended that they did not. It was not in the bank's best interest to reveal what they were doing because it became such a good profit center for them.

What makes you think your banker does not continually lie to you every time you see him or her for a loan? Bankers love to lie at your expense, and they make more money every time they do it.

Do you honestly think that all of the fine print that goes on and on in your loan agreement is there because bankers what to explain to you exactly what it means in plain language? I think not. It is there to confuse you and leave you in the dark about what is really going on.

(Editor's note: This is Part 3 of a 4-part article.)

Online Hiring Threatens to Do Away With Traditional Hard Copy Resumes - Part 2

2007-04-07T23:50:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

As one who has spent 20+ years in the high end of the resume writing business crafting 5,400+ hard copy resumes for executives and professionals making $40,000 to $350,000 a year, this is not my experience of how things get done in the hiring process.

For one thing, the more responsibility and more income the position generates the greater the likelihood that a hard copy resume and cover letter will be requested in the hiring process. Company officers higher up in the food chain than human resource types want more rather than less information on which to make a more intelligent hiring decision.

High level corporate officers would also like to view the writing skills of the applicant. They are well aware of the fact that the potential corporate-level hire probably had a pro write his or her resume.

They also understand that the client had to provide information for the process and this is one indicator of how well they present themselves professionally, and how well they can transmit pertinent information about themselves.

They are interested in the cover letter which, I might add, most online application forms and even resume posting opportunities many times do not address.

This is important because there is one thing that can be done by a pro in a cover letter than cannot be done by a writer in a resume, no matter how good of a resume the writer creates.

Pay attention because this important: You can demonstrate people skills in the cover letter and you cannot do so professionally in the resume product.

So what is the big deal about demonstrating people skills? Only this: people skills are the most important trait you have to present in selling yourself.

People skills are more important than education, training, experience, intelligence, talent and knowledge.

Do not misunderstand what I am saying here.

I am not saying that education, training, experience, intelligence, talent and knowledge are not important in the hiring process. I am saying that people skills are even more important.

The human process of "people contact" (my quotes) forms your attitudes about everything, and your attitude drives your personality. Show me someone with a good attitude, and I will show you someone with a good personality. Show me someone with a bad attitude, and I will show you someone with a bad personality.

If you do not think so and are content to remain ignorant, then explain to me how a high school dropout who lacks subject-verb agreement in his or her conversation can earn more than $1 million a year in sales.

Companies hire high school dropouts in sales even though the description for the job requires a high school or college degree, and proven experience selling in the field.

Why? Simple, do you know how many people can sell effectively? Less than 5% on anyone's best day. When business employers realistically require education as a component in hiring they severely limit their ability to find people to generate sales to keep them in business.

Do people who believe this tripe being peddled about online hiring even realize that less than 5% of the employees in our economy are in professional sales, and that it is this same 5% of people who create the jobs for the other 95% in our economy?

Even Diane Stafford would be unnecessary as a journalist at The Kansas City Star if someone in their advertising department did not sell enough advertising to cover the newspaper's overhead that includes her salary. She produces nothing and sells nothing and is irrelevant without ad sales to support her very existence.

Now some smarty is going to say that Diane Stafford is such a great writer than her writing will help The Kansas City Star draw readers for its ads. Fair enough, but if that point has any legs to stand up then take the ads out of the paper and try to sell it.

I have owned a newspaper and know better. I have worked as a managing editor of a daily newspaper property for another owner. He thought the same thing I did; this is why he did not pay me a $1 million a year to be his managing editor. Some of the ad salesmen made more than I did.

And? What's the point? Well, think about it. How are an online application and an online testing process going to reveal anything about a person's people skills in the hiring process?

At least with a hard copy resume and cover letter you can use the cover letter to demonstrate your people skills. Ergo, high level corporate executives are not going to let human resources (HR) limit them to online processes only.

(Editor's note: This is Part 2 of a 4-part article.)

Online Hiring Threatens to Do Away With Traditional Hard Copy Resumes - Part 1

2007-04-06T21:57:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

The presentation of this story in my Wednesday daily newspaper is dramatic.

A smaller headline in color above the main headline says "Digital Job Searches Gain Ground".

The main headline says "Straight to the Waste Basket" and shows a picture up top of a resume folded like a paper airplane headed presumably for a wastebasket (if you are wondering, wastebasket is one word, not two).

Is it really true? Well, I guess that depends on who you are talking to and what advice you choose to believe.

The story—and I use the word story rather than article because I believe most of the story is make believe—makes some observations and assumptions that are without substance in fact.

"Instead of reading your resume," says Daine Stafford of The Kansas City Star, "an employer might ask you to fill out an online form or take an online test that measures how well you fit the job, based on responses from successful workers."

That is an observation and the first part of it is correct, that more and more employers are asking for an email version of a resume rather than the traditional hard copy (printed) version we have used in recent decades.

Stafford says "Google, for example, uses a screening program to measure applicants' attitudes, behaviors, personality and biographical details. Answers are scrunched in a formula that creates a score, indicating how well the candidate is likely to fare on the job."

Fair enough, Google probably does so if Stafford says so.

I have often wondered what a screening question like "Which would you rather be: 1) a monkey, 2) a bear, 3) a tiger, or 4) a kangaroo?" actually tells human resources about a person's personality that they could not find out better by interviewing them.

If you get the impression that interviewers are personnel types who are lazy in the hiring process, you might be right. Anything to get them to the point where they have nothing to do but push paper around and look important and arrogant in the process (like I have mine, screw you).

Stafford continues: "It's all electronic," said Michael Doyle, a 60-year-old job seeker from Prairie Village, Kan. (sic), who recently landed a job through personal contacts. In nine months, Doyle said, he's spoken to exactly two interviewers as a result of online postings."

My guess is that Doyle may have submitted an email version of his resume to dozens, if not hundreds, of online destinations.

I could have told Doyle that probably 60% of all hiring is contacts, knowing people in the workplace or knowing people who know people in the workplace. Yes, it helps to have qualifications, but it helps more to have qualifications and know someone who wants to help you.

Reading about Doyle's experience might lead me to conclude that online posting is not the best method to proceed here given the results. No wonder hiring is so screwed up.

From this and another example, Stafford then draws the conclusion that the applicants "discovered that resumes have gone digital."

She goes on to say "In some cases, resumes have disappeared from the hiring process completely. Some employers don't even want them in digitized format. They prefer customized online forms, tailor-made to cull the applicant field."

Again, anything to make it easier on personnel types, we certainly would not want to put them out for even a minute of their precious time.

From the input of experiences of two applicants this conclusion comes bursting forth as implied truth that a new paradigm has taken place in the America business of hiring.

(Editor's note: This is Part 1 of a 4-part article.)

How Hiring Corporate Executives Could Improve in a Heartbeat

2007-04-06T01:10:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

It has always been a mystery to me why certain chief executive officers do such a poor job hiring key executives for their management teams.

A lot of folks would agree with the idea that a company's performance (or lack thereof) starts at the top with its key officers and trickles down through managers at different levels to the professional (or less professional) staff members.

Harry Truman became more famous as America's 33rd President when he popularized such phrases as "The buck stops here" and "If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen." Truman understood a thing or two about taking responsibility for the performance of an organization (or a business).

Truman, a Midwest boy born and bred in Missouri, was a folksy, unassuming president who was forced out of his re-election campaign in 1952, and left office as one of the most unpopular chief executives in history.

Historical scholars, however, have treated Truman more kindly in polls ranking the Presidents. He has never been listed lower than ninth, and was most recently ranked seventh in a 2005 Wall Street Journal poll. The primary reasons? His honesty, integrity, political courage, and firm stance for Western democracy after World War II.

Harry Truman was a leader who took responsibility for his actions and decisions. Far too many "leaders" of major corporations today are much more interested in "cooking" the books, increasing the company's stock value, and then sucking out non-existent profits from a losing business.

The losers in the latter case are the stockholders, employees, the company itself, and its image and standing among consumers and watchdog organizations. You do not see major businesses weigh in on these dastardly practices (perhaps because they are too afraid they will be the next ones caught with their hand in the cookie jar).

The high profile cases like Enron have gotten the lion's share of negative publicity. Few consumers are aware that when their government gave major corporations a grace period to rewrite their books before they came after them, an inordinate amount (one report says half) of corporate "leaders" went running to their chief financial officers faster than you could say "lickety split."

The number of corporate executives seeking to cover their tracks due to their self-absorbed, self-centered and greedy nature was sickening, and a poor testament to the face of corporate America today. Many are nothing but thieves and crooks, and should be treated as such (a few have).

There is no reasonable justification for this kind of behavior by supposed "business leaders" in our economy. Their egotistical shortsightedness tears at the very fabric of our society. Many of these "business leaders" (they are not leaders at all) have surrounded themselves with people of their own ilk.

How has this happened? I submit that one reason is because chief executive officers (and sometimes even with the support of their board of director members) spend company money and the stockholders' equity in the hiring process.

So? Isn't that business? Isn't that how business is conducted?

That may be business as usual, but it does not excuse the behavior and subsequent results in the hiring process.

And the cure? How about a new approach for corporate America? (I will do anything to start a dialogue.) What if the chief executive officers had to hire their key people with money out of their own pocket? Some of these chief executive officers are certainly paid enough to afford the investment.

You better believe their judgment and discretion would improve in a hurry. That is the complaint (and rightly so) of majority stockholders who get ripped off by these common thieves who plunder the company coffers to line their own pockets at everyone's expense but theirs.

Career Fairs Best Serve Everyone But the Jobless

2007-04-05T00:50:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

Reading my Sunday newspaper yesterday reminded me of how Career Fairs do little to substantially increase local employment. It seems that no one is willing to say this, and a lot fewer are even willing to believe it, but I know it to be all but a fact.

After spending 20+ years in the news business, and another 20+ years as a personal marketing specialist helping potential hires by writing upscale resumes, I can relate my experience with authority.

You might think that after helping 5,300+ clients get on with moving on and moving up in their careers that I could produce at least one client who has benefited from attending a Career Fair. I can not. This is why I caution any client who gets all excited and goosey about attending Career Fairs. I do not want their disappointment to affect my marketing plan to help them achieve their goals.

In revealing this apparent incongruity for the first time publicly, it is important to note that I am in the high end of the resume writing business. Virtually 97% of my 5,300+ clients during my 20-plus-year career are executives, professionals and managers earning between $40,000 and $350,00 annually who are already in management, want to be in management, or in sales and/or marketing.

Career fairs are all about first jobs and entry level career jobs that do not pay all that well, so they do little for folks who have already been in the marketplace, enjoyed some success, and want to keep moving up the corporate ladder, or any other ladder of their choice.

This makes a lot of sense when you examine who is involved in putting on Career Fairs, and what they expect to get for their investment. I am not talking about the potential hires, or anyone looking for a job or a better opportunity.

I am talking about businesses and organizations, large facility managers, and big advertising media, usually the dominant daily newspaper in the community. Nothing meets their profit needs, their publicity needs, and their public service needs like Career Fairs. It has become almost a rite of passage for these special interest groups in our society.

Let us start with businesses and organizations. Should you stroll down to a Career Fair in your community, and talk to a business representative at a snappy booth display, you will quickly pick up on the fact that the well dressed person is not the person you expected.

You knew going there that if Microsoft was a participant Bill Gates would probably not be there, but you secretly hoped he would. Later you came to realize that the person a major corporation sends to represent them at these Career Fairs is usually the most expendable person available.

This is why they smile a lot, take your resume (sometimes they do not), and tell you very little about what the company is really doing. Major companies that are cooking the books (using unacceptable accounting practices to inflate revenue and profits in order to increase stock prices so executives suck money out faster), and in worse shape than they want their stockholders and the public to know, would be at a Career Fair putting on their best face.

Just being at a Career Fair is good business for businesses and organizations because it gives the impression that those involved are key players in building the community, increasing employment, and acting like a good corporate citizen.

If you think large facility managers do not like Career Fairs you would be sadly mistaken. The same managers who hosted last week's rock concert du jour are more than happy to move the rockers out and the new vendors in.

Facility managers do not give the space away as a public service, and they do take care of the "job" exhibitors. Whether any potential candidate attending the Career Fair ultimately gets hired is none of their business.

Newspapers and related media (usually radio which needs public service announcements to stay licensed) love Career Fairs. The Internet has been gaining the advertising and profits that newspapers have been losing. Newspapers have been forced to create web sites and compete on the Internet whether they want to or not.

Career Fairs give newspapers extra ads and profit regardless of the economy. Newspapers generally run a special section advertising the Career Fair as it gives paying advertisers and the event itself more exposure and prominence. Newspapers also feel a need to serve the community that supports them, whether people get hired at these Career Fairs or not.

You are seeing more and more and more Career Fairs (or Job Fairs) because it is good business for three very big special interest groups who may be more like a three-legged stood than a helping hand. You could hold Career Fairs for the unemployed every other week in Flint, Michigan and it still would not affect their depressed economy; I suspect that the same is true in many other communities across the country.

When your government tells you employment is on the rise, public officials are counting on the fact that when an unemployed person's compensation benefits run out, they drop off of the rolls and remain unaccounted for even though they are still unemployed.

The salient point here is this: It is likely that when people benefit from these Career Fairs it is more by accident than design; the unemployed in our economy are the true story worth telling.

Who Earns the Most Based on Their Educational Level

2007-04-01T21:52:00.000-07:00

Copyright © 2006 Ed Bagley

Colleges and universities are fond of reminding anyone who will listen that there is great value in earning a bachelor's degree. In the most recent statistics available the U. S. Census Bureau tends to agree.

Results from the 2004 Census Bureau report shows a $23,000 difference between the average annual salary of adults with a bachelor's degree ($51,554) compared to adults with a high school diploma ($28,645).

In what may or may not be an anomaly, the income gap narrowed slightly from five years earlier when bachelor's degree graduates made nearly twice as much as high school graduates.

The percentage of Americans 25 and older with a bachelor's degree rose to 28%, and the percentage with a high school diploma rose to 85%. In 1970, 36 years ago, only 11% of Americans had a bachelor's degree and a little more than half had a high school diploma.

It is probable that the increase over time has had much to do with the advent of technology in our society, and the impact of Internet accessibility to the general public in 1993 and 1994 through the creation of browsers.

If you are wondering, Minnesota, Utah, Montana, New Hampshire, Alaska and Washington had the highest proportions of adults with at least a high school diploma, all at about 92%. Texas had the lowest with about 78%.

Connecticut had the highest proportion of adults with a bachelor's degree (37%) and West Virginia had the lowest (15%).

I have long been a believer that there is no real correlation between education and income unless the degree leads to a high paying profession, such as a physician, attorney or dentist. I have known too many people with bachelor's degrees working at McDonald's restaurants.

My standard comment is that it is not like all people with bachelor's degrees make $100,000 a year and those with high school diplomas make $30,000. I also have known many people with only high school degrees and some high school dropouts who make well in excess of $100,000 annually, especially in sales.

Bill Gates is a college dropout who ranks as the richest man in the world. Forbes magazine rates William H. Gates III as the richest person in 2006 with $53 billion, proving perhaps that even Harvard dropouts can make a lot of money.

You, dear reader, will have to decide for yourself how big a difference in income is possible with a college degree instead of settling for a high school diploma. There is no question in my mind that the income gap will increase as the upper and lower edges of our middle class are falling away and the gap between the rich and poor in America widens.

I have also found little correlation between talent and income, intelligence and income and experience and income. Is there anyone in America who has not heard of the starving artist, or educated idiots in menial jobs, or janitors becoming millionaires?

The only real correlation I have noticed is between people skills and income. How else can you reasonably explain how a high school dropout becomes a self-made, multi-millionaire entrepreneur?

These successful entrepreneurs may not have perfect subject-verb agreement when they speak, but they certainly know how to relate to people in a meaningful way. You may have noticed that the whole world steps aside for the man who knows where he is going (ditto for women).

Also of note is the Bureau of Labor Statistics National Compensation Survey which shows that white-collar earnings average $21.85 an hour while blue-collar earnings average $15.03 and service occupations average $10.40.

Source information for the following statistics come from the Employment Policy Foundation.

The jobs that pay the most generally require at least a bachelor's degree (4 years of highereducation) and several also require graduate (master's or doctorate) degrees. Here are the average annual incomes during 2003 for the nation's Top 12 Paying Jobs:

Top 12 Paying Jobs Overall

$147,000 – Physicians and Surgeons
$133,500 – Aircraft Pilots
$116,000 – Chief Executives
$112,000 – Electrical and Electronic Engineers
$99,800 – Lawyers and Judges
$90,000 – Dentists
$85,500 – Pharmacists
$84,700 – Management Analysts
$84,000 – Financial Analysts, Managers and Advisors
$83,000 – Computer and Information System Managers
$80,000 – Marketing and Sales Managers
$80,000 – Educational Administrators

Top Paying Jobs That Generally Require an Associate Degree or Certificates of Training

The jobs that pay the next best annual average salaries tend to be technical in nature and generallyrequire an associate degree (2 years of higher education) and/or job-specific training certificates. Here are the average annual incomes during 2003 for the Top 6 Paying Jobs:

$66,000 – Healthcare Practitioners
$58,000 – Business Analysts
$57,000 – Electrical and Electronic Engineers
$56,800 – Mechanical Engineers
$54,000 – General and Operations Managers
$50,400 – Computer and Information System Managers

Top Paying Jobs That Generally Require a High School DiplomaThese jobs generally require a high school diploma and emphasize work experience and on-the-job training rather than college degrees. Here are the average annual incomes during 2003 for the Top 6 Paying Jobs:

$58,900 – Computer Software Engineers
$56,400 – Computer and Information System Managers
$55,000 – Computer Programmers
$49,000 – Network Systems and Data Communications Analysts
$48,000 – General and Operations Managers
$48,000 – Database, Network and Computer Systems Administrators

Top Paying Jobs That Do Not Require a High School DiplomaThese jobs tend to require substantial on-the-job training and work experience rather than formal education and specialized training. Here are the average annual incomes during 2003 for the Top 6 Paying Jobs:

$36,400 – Bailiffs, Correctional Officers and Jailers
$36,400 – Legal Assistants
$36,000 – Industrial Production Managers
$36,000 – Drafters
$33,600 – Construction Managers
$31,900 – Electricians

Sometimes the sources for these statistics are not really clear in the significance of their findings. You will notice that whatever the educational level, the positions for Computer and Information System Managers are mentioned.

It is the 9th highest paying job at $83,000 in highest educational level, shows up at $50,400 with a two-year degree and becomes the 2nd highest paying job at $56,400 for high school graduates.

The difference in salaries at different educational levels could have to do with the size of the company the worker serves. There is a difference in responsibility and technical requirements for a company generating $10 million in annual revenue as opposed to a company generating $100 million or $1 billion in annual revenue.

I believe it is also important to understand that many people with Top 12 paying jobs are self-employed professionals who are able to take many legitimate deductions in their business tax returns that workers do not enjoy.

Deductions lower their net taxable income. The earnings you see here can be much lower than their actual earnings because deductions can be "paper write-offs," deductions that result from depreciation, for example, that can amount to thousands of dollars credit with no out-of-pocket expenses.

It almost goes without saying that many savvy college and high school graduates also have part-time businesses that allow them legitimate deductions that lower the net taxable income from their jobs.

Welcome to My Jobs and Careers Blog

2007-03-31T19:39:00.000-08:00

Welcome to Ed Bagley's Jobs and Careers Blog.

You are going to get some of the best advice and counsel ever by hanging out here because you will be getting your information from a Personal Marketing Specialist with 21 years of experience and 5,400+ clients. Ninety percent of my clients are executives and professionals making $40,000 to $350,000 annually in management or supervision.

Come back here in the next couple of days and you will find some really great information in my first post.