u/zines_unrea — reddlx

Oh yeah

They just don't say anything and walk away. OR tell you to do it their way anyway and pretend it never happened

High salaries are not what make prices increase. This is a smokescreen from companies. They squeeze every penny they can from you anyway.

Don't you always hear that tired old argument? The one about companies not being able to increase employee salaries without raising prices on you? This is complete nonsense, and intentional misinformation. Anyone who understands market fundamentals sees this for what it truly is.

The important point here is that: the labor market (i.e., the salaries workers receive) and the market for goods and services (i.e., what the consumer pays) are largely separate from each other. Their pricing mechanisms operate independently. They do not affect each other in the direct way we always hear.

Any company's primary goal is always to sell its products at the highest possible price the market can bear, while remaining competitive. At the same time, they try to secure labor at the lowest possible cost that still attracts skilled employees. When they price their products, they are not thinking about what they pay their employees. Instead, their entire focus is on one question: 'What is the highest price we can ask before customers stop buying?' And that's the number they settle on. Large companies even employ entire teams to determine the exact highest possible price.

Think about it: no company lowers its prices just because it pays low salaries to employees. By the same logic, they don't suddenly raise prices because they increased employee salaries. Why? Because their prices were already set at the highest point consumers could tolerate. There is simply no higher place they can reach. So, let's stop believing this false narrative.

reddit.com

u/zines_unrea — 5 days ago

▲ 728 r/interviewhammer

A former manager tried to sabotage an employee's hiring with a terrible recommendation, but my gut feeling was right

Recently, I found myself in a somewhat difficult situation during a hiring process, and it truly tested my decisions. Our academic research team wanted to transition one of our excellent interns into a permanent position. We needed two good recommendations for it to be official, and our intern gave us three contacts: myself (her direct supervisor), her academic supervisor at the university, and her former supervisor from a study support lab where she used to work.

Her academic supervisor at the university gave an excellent review and praised her highly, which perfectly aligned with everything I had observed from her throughout her time working with us.

Then came the call from her old manager at the study support lab. This person completely trashed her character. They said she was among their bottom fifteen percent of employees, constantly distracted by her phone, uncooperative, and generally difficult to work with - every negative stereotype imaginable. This truly confused me; I felt like I had completely misjudged someone.

Fortunately, I work with a fantastic team. My supervisor and a senior colleague told me they trusted my direct assessment far more than this unexpected negative review. After some deliberation, I decided to take a calculated risk: I personally provided the second positive recommendation, based solely on my direct experience with her.

Honestly, this was one of the smartest decisions I've ever made. She has now been a permanent member of our team for almost two years, and her performance has been phenomenal. She saved several critical projects from delays, simplified complex data analysis, and always tackles new challenges with enthusiasm. Her reliability and eagerness to learn have been invaluable.

So, yeah. To that former manager: seriously, what was that about? And to anyone else, this was a great reminder to always trust your gut when you have direct evidence. Sometimes, people have personal issues.

Here's a thing. Any boss who will give such a scathing character reference (maybe any negative character reference) automatically is suspicious. They might have a conflict of interest. Many recruiters don't listen to those refs at all, even when they're positive.

And this makes anyone who knows they are in a job-searching period and already have interviews look for tools to help them complete this step more quickly, such as ChatGPT for preparing questions with ready-made answers for memorization or for immediate responses. An InterviewMan is open during the interview, listening to the questions and giving you answers.

Companies that know how to pick candidates want to find out whether you've been truthful on your resume. That's it.

u/zines_unrea — 12 days ago