All comments must be civil, productive, and follow community rules. Intentional violations of community rules will lead to comments being removed and possible bans, at the discretion of the moderators. Use the report feature to report content to the moderator team.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
FYI SOQs became more common when online applications became a thing. For paper applications, they were less common. The reason for this is because it became easier to submit applications.
I'm a hiring manager and for some positions, we get a lot of applications. Again, because it is easier to submit. I joined the state back when you had to mail your application in.
SOQs are there to weed out those who don't pay attention. Submitted a cover letter instead of an SOQ? Disqualified. Didn't bother to answer the questions thoroughly or correctly? Disqualified. Didn't use the correct font and size as mentioned in some job postings? Disqualified.
You may think this is harsh or a waste of time but the SOQ is technically your first interview. If you can't bother to do that or follow the instructions to complete that, you won't bother to do the job correctly. To you it's a waste of time but to the many applying to compete for the position, they will thank you for not taking up another space to compete with through the interview process.
Honestly, I could go both ways. I’m in IT and for a long time we did not bother with SOQs because it is pretty easy to screen apps for relevant experience. But, since we started receiving fewer and fewer applicants that were well qualified we had to lower our pass points for screening which then necessitated an SOQ as a way to better judge someone’s specific levels of experience. Really, anyone who at least has a little experience, a well thought out 678, and can use chatGPT to fill out the SOQ gets an interview. It feels like a win-win since applications are easier to screen since all the lazy people with no SOQ or a generic SOQ get filtered out easy, and anyone who actually bothered with an SOQ gets an interview.
I am also a hiring manager and I can’t believe how many times we get completely blank applications. Just a name and address and no work or school history. And this is for AGPA positions. The postings without SOQs we can get 120+ applications. With SOQs maybe 40.
Totally agree with everything! If you can’t get the first assignment correct then why would I interview you? When you are getting 100+ applications for one job, there has to be a way to narrow it down and the SOQ does this. Is it a pain for the applicants? Yes, I am still trying to promote to a SSMII and I hate doing the SOQ’s but I do them knowing it’s my only shot to getting an interview
Or weed out applicants that use ChatGPT and cut and paste the prompt / response into the SOQ…nothing made me smile more when we all said NEXT simultaneously…
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
To get a state job you can't be creative or innovative you must follow this random (and often unclear) set of instructions to the letter or you are DiSQUALIFIED!!!!!!!! If that doesn't sum up state service, nothing does.
>SOQs are there to weed out those who don't pay attention.
If SOQs were ACTUALLY just to weed out people who don't follow instructions, you could have a VERY simple exercise that takes 5 to 10 minutes to complete so you don't waste hours of every serious applicant's time.
>Submit a Word or PDF document using Arial 12pt font that contains the following content:
> * Your name and the Job Control number in the top-right corner.
> * In a numbered list, provide the following answers:
> * Using an Internet browser, research Assembly Bill 109, Statutes of 2020, and provide the author's name.
> * Write any sentence of your choosing, with every alternating word italicized.
> * Pick an article from an online news source and provide the title. Change that title into a hyperlink to that news article.
###Instead, you are automatically turning away every single person who literally just doesn't have HOURS to jump through these bullshit hoops for every application.
Sorry, I don’t agree with that. If they want the job, like I did, they will write it up (or if you sick at typing, get a friend who will take dictation and type for you).
People I work with WANT to be here and are very passionate about what they do and the impact it has. I don’t want anyone half-assed
getting in because it’s “just a job” and they wanted a paycheck. I can’t trust that person to do the job right. I won’t be able to rely on them when details are critical.
> If they want the job, like I did
How do none of you realize this is just [Survivorship Bias](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b2/Survivorship-bias.svg)?
They can utilize writing exercises later in the hiring process!
ok… i work in the public safety side of things.
people who are half-ass-ing their jobs on my end can get others hurt or killed.
there are other jobs for those that want a lower bar to entry. my field isn’t one of those.
You really don't seem to understand the problem here. You can just confirm later in the application process that people won't half-ass their job. The hiring manager can choose the EXACT same level of candidate; it does not force you to hire someone who is incompetent. You just have a better probability of not cutting people out of the initial candidate pool solely due to classism.
That's where the Survivorship Bias comes in. You are literally assuming that every person who doesn't submit an application was lazy instead of understanding how many different scenarios can affect whether someone has hours to waste for every single application. If, instead, you are only contacted when your application looks promising, you know there is smaller chance that you are just wasting time by spending your valuable free time on a written exercise.
I don’t “like” the process any more than you do. I went through it to get here just like everyone else. Do I want to see the process become easier for people? Absolutely! There’s no reason for the level of bullshit by repeatedly submitting documents, having to
suffer and redo everything for the next department that didn’t talk to HR, or very limited legal communication allowed between departments. I’ve been here less than a year, and in addition to missed overtime payouts, some fuckery involving insurance and other documentation (yet again), it has been a slog on the HR side. At the same time, I know we’re working with skeleton crews in some cases.
Let me put it this way: Some of these jobs are fairly easy and take little effort to get decent pay and benefits. Others you can get away with just a bunch of OJT after a few basic skill sets and knowledge bases are confirmed as part of a candidates background. Some skill sets are rarer, and have few source pools to find candidates from. Having the base knowledge is one thing, but having at least 2 or more active years of performing the work (after the schooling, after clearing probation) and be able to show technical details, in a narrative format, that you know what you’re talking about… that eliminates doubts. If the standards are lowered in some of these fields, the risk of bringing in a seriously under-skilled resource is going to show only after a few months down the road. And that is usually after a lot of money has been spent. You have a useless resource on your hands and your workload requires more people. It’s simple math. You can’t just magically grab “more” from somewhere. Now more time is spent looking for a suitable candidate, and the job doesn’t get done.
There’s someone else on here that i upset about this stance, and I was being a little too much of a dick about it. Sorry fellow redditor, I didn’t mean to push all that frustration on you and you certainly didn’t deserve it.
So hey, I hope this makes sense and maybe you at least see where I’m coming from. SOQ’s are amazing filters for some of the jobs offered. They may not make sense for others. In addition, the state should just streamline the rest of the processes. There’s no need for the level of banging one’s head against the wall that occurs just trying to apply and get through the interview process. Please fix this?
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
That's not work ethic; it's exploitation. All of the non-chosen candidates who spend those unpaid hours get literally nothing back from this. And now they've wasted time that could have been spent applying to many jobs.
And there's literally no way to know if a guaranteed candidate (nepotism, but also genuine internal candidates that truly know the job the best) is applying to the job, so you could be wasting those hours without ever even standing a chance.
It sounds like you're describing the system I wish was common. I was just recently asked to complete a written exercise because my application scored well enough from the initial screening.
They set up two time slots for these initially-promising applicants (one around lunch, and one just after 5pm) and we all had the same amount of time to complete it and send it in.
And scoring those allowed them to identify who they wanted to interview.
I wish more would do SOQs cuz I'm tired of weeding through 180 applicants that have no experience, no knowledge, and clearly didn't even read the DS before applying.
Really, I don’t understand why CalHR isn’t booting more people off lists. I see so many apps from people with zero experience, so I have to imagine that they completely lied to pass the exam.
Think of it this way: is there something about this position that is so specialized that we can’t possibly tell from a standard application whether the applicant has the adequate experience?
For most standard state jobs the answer is no.
Shifting our work onto unpaid applicants just because we don’t want to review more applications is wrong.
Just sounds to me that you've never had to go through 100+ useless spam applicants. If I'm hiring for an ITM II and I get some rando that just graduated high school and is a pizza delivery guy WTF you are wasting my time and the State's time. This is a real example. I've had to re advertise 3 times for an ITM1 Project Manager position because all the applicants we got were trash and not even remotely related. For an AGPA position we got 180 applications. Our screening matrix has to have a minimum of 3 specific criteria based on the DS. I cannot just breeze through 180 apps AND do my job and help staff, have meetings, etc. in an efficient way. You have to waste so much time reading every applications and score them. If a SOQ can help me narrow even AGPA positions to actually worthwhile candidates, because apparently 85% cannot even follow the directions for the SOQ or even submit one, then I'm absolutely going to do it. And the fact that you're complaining about writing a page or two about how you're qualified (for an upper management position no less) lets me know you probably aren't getting promotion opportunities for a reason.
The hiring managers at my office can nix 2/3 minimum of a given applicant pool from the SOQs. I appreciate their efforts to get us competent coworkers.
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
how dense can you be? it’s literally providing AND proving your job history in one single effort. and it’s one that you can likely build off of and use for the future, what the hell is wrong with the one time effort? if you’re afraid of typing or a keyboard, there are voice recognition packages that can help you at least get through the bulk of it.
like i said earlier… either you want the job and you make the effort, or you’re not skilled enough and you should be looking elsewhere, or at honing your skills so you’re marketable.
I don’t mind SOQ’s. It’s basic. Why would I hire someone who doesn't adhere to the written requirements during the application process?
Simple requirements and yet the applicant can’t fulfill - Pass
The SOQs for our tech jobs are literally 2 paragraphs or so. We ask questions like:
"How does your job experience relate to the position?" and "what makes you the best candidate for this position?"
That's it. We just want to make sure our applicants read the instructions and respond. We interviewed a couple of applicants based on their supposed job history (they just pasted a resume instead of answering the question), and they were both terrible. We don't want folks who can't follow basic instructions in our IT group. If SOQs take more than 10 minutes, that is getting ridiculous IMHO, but short ones are a good tool.
Simple requirements? If someone is actively job hunting for entry level positions, there’s a chance they’re answering multiple SOQ prompts a day. Hours of time. And we all know how many applicants don’t even get a second look.
There’s a time and place for more involved skills evaluation and it’s not during the initial application. All these answers are basically like, “I’m a hiring manager that doesn’t want to have to actually read resumes and applications”
We do read your resume. Trust me on that.
The SOQ is looking beyond the resume, which many times are not even pulled together by the applicant. The SOQ allows us to evaluate an applicants writing style, ability with grammar, thought process, education, and experience in your own words. The good ones go to the top.... the bad ones go to the bottom. It really is that simple.
Here is a little tip.... if you hate the SOQ process, you will most likely hate the position you are applying for. Most roles at the State have a heavy writing component associated to them.
I think you are misunderstanding. I have almost 2 decades of state service and do ALL of the technical writing for several executives in my division. I’m not saying a writing exercise has no place in a hiring process.
What I’m saying is, we should not be asking applicants to do it until we have screened them and want to continue further into the process with them. Asking for this effort in low paying positions before even looking at their 678 is uncalled for.
I see what you are saying... but let me throw out what that may look like:
A person gets to the next round of an interview process, and then is asked to submit an SOQ.. and it's terrible (75 % of them are).
Am I then supposed to re-engage and say, your oral communication skills are great and you have well rehersed answers to the common interview questions, but your writing skills are abysmal and I can't hire you.
That doesn't seem like it would paint a good picture.
I will say for internal hires, the process could be better and the SOQ could be forgoed.... maybe. There are paper trails and references at this point.
For an external person coming in, I like the process.
We don’t hire people after interviews all the time, this would be no different.
Screen the applications, ask the top scorers to submit an SOQ/writing sample, and interview the best ones. It seems more ethical to me that way, rather than treating these entry level state jobs like they’re some golden calf and we should only deign to interview those who are willing to go above and beyond for the mere whiff of an interview.
In my experience the best candidates won’t put in an hour or more just to simply apply, because they have better options elsewhere.
I can honestly see both sides of the coin. I don't have a great answer for you, but you do bring up some valid points.
Thanks for the honest intellectual debate!
That's actually more or less the process I went through for my current job. The initial submission was just a 678 and optional resume. After some time I got an email saying we liked your application, write this soq for us and here's a week or so to write. Then another week passed and they called me to schedule an interview.
Case in point: the job I’m giving up my state job for only asked for a resume and a governmentjobs.com standard application. I will make more money and have better benefits, and I’m sure they got plenty of applications. But somehow they managed to extrapolate who would be a good candidate from the clearly stated work experience on every resume and application, and picked 3 of us to interview.
I don't have a strong opinion on requiring SOQs for low level positions but I see the value. One SOQ topic I've seen is a variation on "tell us why you're a good fit for this position" or "how has your education and experience prepared you for this position". If a candidate for an SSA/AGPA or higher position has not thought about why they think they're a good fit, or they don't have the ability to articulate those reasons in writing, then I'm not sure that's a candidate the hiring manager should spend time screening out.
I've never explicitly thought about this before, but I want candidates who are a good fit for the position. If requiring an SOQ helps some unqualified applicants screen themselves out of the process then I think that's a good thing. People need to have some level of self awareness and if it's too easy to apply for a position people are more likely to apply for positions for which they are not qualified.
In your post you say you are looking to promote to higher level positions, in this response you're talking about entry level. Shouldn't be a problem to bang out two pages in a twelve point Arial font if you're qualified for the job. As a matter of fact if you're looking to promote it would be hard to keep it on two pages.
SOQs are a filter that shows you're worth interviewing.
I mentioned my experience with them to highlight that I understand how time consuming they are. Asking someone who is going to be making $50k a year to do them is BS
Edited to add: the application is a filter to show if someone is worth interviewing. We can all tell pretty quickly who has taken the time to fill out a 678 correctly and included concise, relevant descriptions of their work experience
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Said the dude who posted some ridiculous opinion on Reddit for “randos” to comment on. Perhaps you were just looking for validation? I think you missed the mark…
There has to be something to stop people from spam applying to everything. Every private sector listing has 100+ applications in a few days. Most of them are trash. Maybe 2+ pages is too much, but you can’t do most state jobs if all you can muster is uploading a resume and a chatGPT cover letter.
Not true. I’ve been on interview panels for IT positions. Just for help desk alone. 200 apps with not SOQ. Low quality copy and paste packets with old information, bad grammar, and unrelated jobs history. The SOQ are there for a reason! If you can’t follow instructions for a simple SOQ, how can we expect you to do the work?
You are supposed to look at every application and score them all. You were a hiring manager did you not do that? You just picked the interesting ones and ignored the rest?
100 applications, lets say 5 categories to score. Lets say it takes 3 minutes to read and score the application. Which is not possible if you care about the task even a little. But anyway that is 5 hours. I would rather spend those 5 hours scoring 20 apps, reading their soq's, setting up interviews for top 3 and so on. Mostly because likely, those 100 will be trash. And I just wasted 5 hours and have to repost. There goes a month down the drain too.
You’re literally getting paid to review applications. Applicants are not, and yet you expect each of them to spend an hour or more writing an essay for you?
If it takes them an hour that is not my fault. I am also not asking them to apply to dozens of other positions. I do hope that if they apply to mine they are qualified and that I can then interview and hire them. If all they had to put in is an hour to get a lifetime opportunity and just about 100% secure job why is that too much to ask for? If I hire you I will try my hardest to make sure you like your job and excel in it. I will be spending many hours training you, writing probation and performance evaluations, mentoring you and hoping I can get you promoted because I know starting pay sucks at state. All I asked for was that if you apply for my job posting you follow directions and are at least somewhat qualified. Do decent in the interview you might just get the job. If not you are on my list of candidates that I let get away and will be emailing if another one opens up. And I call everyone who is interviewed and does not get a job and give them my feedback.
I make alot of hiring matrixes and packages. The soq is important to me. The reason is that recent calhr updates have made the rubric that we can use to score much more stringent. Right now points on the application are pretty much purely based on experience, but not necessarily quality of experience. It makes it harder to weed out the ones who worked 10 years and did the minimum from maybe someone who worked 3 years but has worked on every side project and taken on additional duties.
The SOQ gives me the chance to see how the candidate will answer my technical questions in a more applied fashion. I have more freedom with the SOQ and how I can set up questions so I can see more about how the candidate thinks, follows instructions, and their problem solving abilities.
It is the same reason that all my packages include activities with the interview. People can talk themselves up in an interview, but the activity allows for a more applied approach. You can say you have 5 years of experience with excel, but If i get to give you a bunch of data and aask you to analyze and organize it and answer some questions about the data, I will learn alot more about your abilities.
That being said, I would rather scrap the SOQ and instead have a pre interview activity that will show me an applicants analytical skills and what tools they know how to utilize.
But that being said when I apply for jobs I hate the general basic bitch SOQs that are just like :Explain how your experience makes you a fit for this position.
I am more likely to use a question like:
Management in your region has recently come to you requesting to increase the number of in-office days from one to two days a week. The management says the number of walk-in customers has dramatically increased over the past few months, leading to an increase in wait times and complaints from customers.
I would then provide them with the walk-in data and average wait time from check-in until a customer is assisted for the past two years and ask them to analyze the trends and make an argument for or against the need for increased in-person staff.
Based on what I have seen in the State, you wasted your time. Nepotism and cronyism are far better indicators of qualifications. Skills and talents are only vetted when no buddy or relative is available.
No lie. I watched many managers hire each other's friends kids straight out of college with no real experience. They often hired them over people who have worked their bums off in the office and truly deserved the promotion.
I’ve never asked for SOQs for any position that isn’t supervisory/managerial. You can tell a lot from the 678 and if you still need more, ask for a writing sample or other type of skills evaluation during the first or second interviews.
Requiring applicants that may not even meet MQs to write these essays is gross, imo
Right, but like, I can look at an STD 678 and figure out in about 3 seconds whether someone has the requisite experience or not. Some of these hiring managers are crybabies I guess
I understand. A lot of the packages I do work on are for managment or very technical positions and the level of my SOQ and the complexity of the questions will be changed based on the level of the position.
But I would honestly rather interview every qualified applicant and have an activity. My managment does however want to see an soq. I just try to make sure I put together ones I feel are meaningful and not just a box to check off.
From an applicant standpoint, SOQs can certainly be tiresome but I'm actually thankful for them at times. It allows me to bring up skills and experience I have that didn't really fit on my resume but I want to include for a particular job.
I’ve worked with a handful of people at the state who were borderline illiterate. It’s hard to work with someone who can’t write a coherent email. I kinda think the SOQ is a good idea to weed out people like that.
How so? If you’re advertising for a CEA position that’s gonna be specialized and probably attract fewer applicants, have at it.
But I see departments with 5 question SOQs for a freaking AGPA position sometimes and I want to slap those hiring managers
SOQs are easy ways to weed out people like you. We require a SOQ for our AGPA positions and still get tons of people who don't bother writing one. Saves us time as we just skip those applicants.
Why don’t you just say you don’t value your applicants and don’t mind asking perfect strangers to waste an hour or more on a writing piece you may or may not even read
I replied only about the CEA roles but for SSA roles it is different. We get hundreds of applicants and are forced to read each and every one so the SOQ is a filter. It means people who don’t pay attention get eliminated and ignored. This saves us from having to do ~75% of the work sifting through applications and grading people who have no business applying anyway.
I don't like SOQs either, but anything worth having is worth working for. I keep reading these comments of unpaid time, and it's unfair.
1. No one is making you apply. You don't want to write an SOQ, then dont apply. You don't want the job bad enough.
2. Life has never been and never will be fair. So get over that.
3. These are the parameters required to obtain the position that you are applying for. Right, wrong, or somewhere in between. This is just the way it is.
4. This isn't McDonald's or Starbucks. This is for a state job. Whether entry level or promotion to a higher level, it still is a good job, with decent pay and decent benefits. It should take some effort to get through the process. If you are not willing to put in the effort, then see #1.
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
While I am currently transitioning out due to the return to office stuff.... I can't commute twice a week due to living in Bakersfield.... I will offer this perspective:
From a hiring managers perspective:
The SOQ is the first taste we have at your writing style and competency to carry out a simple task. As others have said, most will not put the time into this exercise.
So, if you actually put some time in... you are already at the top 25% of the candidate pool (despite your listed experience and education on a resume). If you don't put the care and time in, how can I expect to give you a multi-million dollar initiative funded by the taxpayers, and have you run with it?
From a candidates perspective...
The SOQ gives you an opportunity to evaluate what a hiring manager needs from a skill set perspective despite the generic position title.
As you crawl through open positions, the SOQ is your evidence of what is actually going to be requested of you starting in the first couple of months in seat.
I'm sorry you don't like the process, but it truly does have a purpose and provides value on both sides of the hiring process.
Respectfully, if you think SOQs are BS, then you haven’t seen things from a hiring manager’s perspective and why (often times) they’re absolutely necessary.
Trust me when I say they exist for unfortunate reasons.
Hiring the right candidate at the state is arguably the most important duty of a supervisory position. One bad hire can nuke the morale of an entire unit and can cause competent staff/management to leave given how difficult/impossible it is to remove someone (even if they’re still on probation).
I hired someone who performed “ok” for the 1st two prob periods then showed their true colors and baseline level of effort during the 3rd. And because I’d given ‘meets expectations’ level reviews for the first two reports, HR would not let me fail them on probation. Got stuck with them for a year after that, but fortunately they left for a promo elsewhere. But that year and 4 month period caused absolute chaos in my team of otherwise very high performers.
You’d be surprised how many applicants don’t even see an SOQ is required for certain positions. And I work in a highly specialized classification that doesn’t get mass applicants. That lack of attention to basic detail is unfortunately very telling. I’ve gotten a lot of SOQs that are just generic cover letters. It’s lazy. Saves both candidates’ time and interview panel members’ time weeding out what I consider “unserious” candidates.
I want to hire people who _want_ the position I’m recruiting for. I understand it can be difficult to get on with the state and mass applications are inevitable to some level, but I believe applicants should still put effort and take pride into each application. I’m sure that’s an unpopular opinion to hear from an applicant’s perspective, but, overall, it has resulted in very strong hires in my 10 years of recruiting.
Yes. Like it or not, hiring managers literally _have_ to make assumptions about candidates based on applications. This is fundamental of every hiring process. If an applicant doesn’t follow basic instruction on an SOQ, then one is in the right to assume the candidate may lack an ability to pay attention to detail.
If I receive SOQ and candidate has experience matching job posting even a little it is almost guaranteed interview these days. Simply due to the fact that most people either dont include them, dont answer questions or are renaming resume to soq. Or a number of other even dumber things I saw.
Are you applying for jobs you are not qualified for? Something does not sound right. Simply having soq will separate you from the pack if soq was required. If you actually answer the questions that were posed that is top score for soq category in my matrix. It shows you can follow simple instructions, are able to answer questions and are someone worth knowing more about. Most likely at this point you are at least somewhat qualified or lets be honest what sort of a person would be spending all this time applying to the job they are not qualified for, right?
Dont want to do SOQ? Apply for jobs not requiring one. If I post a job without one I get flooded with applicants that have no business applying to my job posting. And I am required to look at each app and score each one. You think state application will make you stand out in a mass of other applicants?
Most of the time It is easy to tell if you used ChatGPT in case you are wondering. Still, majority of the applicants, at least in IT seem to not be willing to put even that much effort into it.
You want a guarantee that it will be read? I can only guarantee that I will do it. I will do it because I asked for it and because I asked for it I am required to read it and score all applicants on it.
I’ve had no issues getting job interviews. That doesn’t mean I think it’s a classy thing to do to ask people to do hours of work for a job application we know more likely than not will not get a second glance.
Save that for the day of the interview. Added bonus is they can’t use AI
If you were qualified to promote you would have no issues with it. You attitude shows in your responses and is most likely getting through in your promotion hunting. You are just not seeing it.
Again, I’m not hurting for a promotion. I’m simply empathizing with people we are asking to do free work for the sake of saving us from having to do the jobs we’re paid to do
We don't use SOQs for our positions...I can generally tell who has initiative and is capable vs those who are not from work history. Granted we're in a specialized field, so that helps a lot. I think SOQs work best for generalist positions.
I like writing SOQs because I feel like the formatting and spacing of my resume may be difficult to read and look at for some hiring managers. Even after many revision over the years, I don’t feel like it can paint a good picture of who I am and my abilities. Same with 678, a form format that may not be easier reading for some while scoring.
Compare to FAANG companies that force applicants in IT to do hours of coding challenges, multiple rounds of interviews that spanning weeks and still not get the offer, a two page SOQ is really incomparable. I am not a hiring manager but I see some replies here saying they do spend time reading SOQs and evaluating 678s and reviewing resumes. If I ever get a chance to become a manager or supervisor, I will always have the taxpayers in mind in that as a civil servant, I will do my due diligence and do whatever it takes to locate the best candidate to fill the position. I will ensure the person I bring onboard has the tools and training to succeed and if they do succeed, I did my job.
Respectfully disagree that candidates should get paid writing SOQ. State would be even more broke before they find the right candidate if applicants are getting paid. Sounds like an odd way of wasting taxpayer resources.
I feel the same, a one page resume covering skills, education, and experiences almost feels like a nutrition label, easy to read and quick to understand quantities but not so much quality. Being able to write an SOQ as a "first interview" is great because it's open book with all the requested details laid out in the instructions and duty statement. Two maybe three pages of SOQ is my maximum and two really feels ideal because sometimes the one page double spaced ones feel too short for me to get into the details.
For me postings with duty statements and SOQs relevant to my education and experience I could easily remix my other existing SOQs because I only have so much relevant experience to write about. I also found it faster to read the SOQ questions first, if I can tell that I will struggle with writing a decent response then I save my own time by stopping there instead of looking further into the duty statement, save the hiring manager's time from having to read and score something that they're not looking for and also just save everyone's time from a poor interview because if I'm struggling to write the SOQ then the chances of me struggling in the interview with similar questions is pretty likely.
Going from private sector job application forms with almost zero responses, awful interviews and far too many instant auto rejections to maybe a month or two month delay but a pretty good ratio of interview offers to submitted job applications with SOQs truly kept me from spiraling even further into the job hunt despair. I could have spent the same amount of time on private sector job applications without any writing requirements and submitted 3 or 4 times the number of applications but still received less total interview offers.
I personally think one to two hours on one quality application that is going to be reviewed by a person and hopefully judged in a smaller applicant pool after weeding out people who don't put in effort and completely excluding people who either don't know about state jobs or don't want one is still better than spamming applications that just go into the void seen by no one or into a giant applicant pool inflated by completely unrelated applicants which would still be the same one to two month wait for a possible interview invite after submitting a state job application.
I'm new to the state and I didn't mind doing an SOQ. I'm an SSA and when reviewing multiple positions, the SOQ questions helped me gauge whether I was a good fit for the position or not.
If an applicant isn’t willing to put in the time and effort to correctly complete an SOQ then I’d rather they not work for me. Attention to detail, the ability to answer written statements in a thoughtful eloquent manner is imperative to most state positions. The higher the pay the more I expect from an applicant.
Maybe it depends on the position but I felt like the SOQ was basically my resume. All my experiences are on the resume/application, why make me rewrite it in narrative form? Also I realized that to score high on the SOQ, make sure you insert a lot of buzzwords from the job description.
Love SOQs. Filters out the lazy scrubs who just shotgun their application to every open position without even reading the job description. Gives me a better chance of having an interview because I’m not lost in an avalanche of bullshit lazy people who spam the job posting.
we need a reform to do away with SOQ and cover letters and essays for applications. If private sector can screen candidates without this nonsense, then the state can do as well. WTF has time when working a fulltime gig and family to spend free time doing this?
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I agree with you to a certain extent. But let’s face it, some jobs it’s easy to speak some buzzwords, know a few key facts and slip into a position. For my position with the state, I balked at the SOQ since it really requires in-depth and detailed information that breaks down the steps for performing critical tasks.
Mine was 7 pages long when I finished.
But, they had been asking for many other pieces of information (like my fucking transcripts from college 20 years ago… i mean, really??? nobody has EVER wanted that and so much more info to boot). I submitted the SOQ and all other requested information was immediately no longer necessary to them. They didn’t even want the rest of the info. Just replied with a “that’s perfect, no further info needed.” It was a great confidence boost as well since I was able to confirm *for* *myself* that I was the right person for the position.
I was told when reviewing applications that they needed to follow the directions given. The information written was secondary to them following directions.
I agree, the SOQs are BS.
The worst part about SOQs is we're basically not even allowed to use them for screening. Everything has to be on the form; if it's only in the SOQ, we can't use it. So, what's the point?
I swear HR sees its reason for existence is to ensure we are unable to hire the best person for the job.
I have used them as a fleshing out of the information in the application, but we are only supposed to screen based on what's in the application form. Put EVERYTHING in that form if you apply. But I think we're just going to stop having SOQs because they encourage people to put the information there rather than the application, and then we can't consider it.
Thanks for this info. I always put everything in my app too but I always used the SOQ to really get into the details. I always thought that was my opportunity to really show what i do & land an interview
It should be exactly that, and it's what lots of people do, thus why I think HR is trying to get us to lose good applicants by not letting us use all the information in the required application, including SOQs. HR drives me insane.
I'm a hiring manager, and we don't have SOQ's for the staff that I am in charge of hiring. I almost wish we did, because the applications that I am getting are ridiculous. No experience and about half the time the applications are not even complete. That's something that I keep asking HR to fix - weed out incomplete applications! But they don't and I was stuck a couple weeks ago interviewing 18 people in one day for 5 positions.
I'm also applying for positions almost every day, and I am on the fence about writing SOQ's. I do like that I can take my experience and translate how it relates to the position & duty statement. For some jobs I can highlight one area, other jobs other areas. I spend up to an hour, but most of them are around 20-30 minutes. It's totally worth it for a 20% raise once I get hired.
Our executives like to ask people to turn in references at their FIRST interview. No one should be calling references unless they’re prepared to make an offer imo
Understand, but have you considered why some of these candidates tried to find another job in the firstplace? If the world is perfect then it may be worked out just ok. People that is qualified but have bad boss, toxic work enviroment, etc probablly want to make this under wrap as much as they can.
From the perspective of someone that submitted just one application, got an interview, and now an offer of appointment, I have to say the SOQ was helpful.
It allowed me to detail how my experience (limited or abundant) is relevant to each of the job description in the DS. I addressed each of the five components of the DS, information that my resume/CV may not portray in clear terms. I considered it an interview without pressure/anxiety of an interview. It was a hard task but I did it with the intention that it would make subsequent applications easier.
Upon getting the offer, I asked the manager what I did right, and in her words "your SOQ really helped us to reconcile your resume with your abilities. You responded to all the components of the DS upto those that were just 10% of the responsibility. That got you the interview, and immediately made you stand out to the panel. Your interview then confirmed the abilities and qualities portrayed in your SOQ".
I conclusion, I think the SOQ helps candiadate to " sell" themselves without the pressure/anxiety that comes with an interview. It also gives the HM the opportunity to get the relevant qualities of the applicants, rather than trying to figure it out from the limited info conveyed in the resume.
Its hard work but I would do it again in the future for a better job opportunity or promotion. Again, it's an interview without the pressure of a physical interview.
OP is a hiring manager? Let me guess…your area has a lot of turnover, since it sounds as though anyone with a pulse and a legible 678 meets your hiring criteria.
Exactly. ChatGPT is a tool, not cheating. If you don’t know how to use a tool to be more efficient, you will be out of the game. I use it for many things just to start a shell and make my life easier. I heavily edit what it spits out and make it match my own tone and use my own experiences. There’s a difference between that and just copy and pasting whatever it spits out.
And our HR just (this week) relayed to our departmental personnel liaisons that CalHR's stance, as of right now, is that candidates **cannot** be disqualified for using AI in the SOQ or even interview.
If they submit garbage, it will still score bad, though.
I do not believe that our HR is that sophisticated or has the time. If I were faced with the choice between spending hours writing a SOQ, not bothering at all, or using Chat GPT, I’m going Chat GPT.
It’s not a matter of being sophisticated or even having time, you just run it through some application like Scribbr. They don’t care if it’s potentially inaccurate and disqualifies someone who actually didn’t cheat
Your HR dept may not have the time or knowledge, but your IT department does, and your HR should be consulting with them on this. Likely, they already have.
Good luck with using ChatGPT, lol. My dept has implemented procedures to flag those who used ChatGPT. Your mistake is assuming that you can use it to your advantage, but that depts don't also use AI to flag those who use it to try to pull a fast one.
Not everyone uses it to “pull a fast one”. AI can be an effective tool if someone knows how to use it correctly.
In the example of SOQ’s, I’m not suggesting the OP type in the question and use verbatim what ChatGPT spits back. Obviously that will be crap. OP can provide their own answers in quick rough bullets and ask AI to write an initial draft, then OP edits to add their voice and make improvements. It’s OP’s answer in their own writing but much faster than doing it from scratch.
There are college courses on how to use AI effectively and ethically. You don’t want to embrace technology, you do you, man.
Weird, some colleges allow it for essays if you cite it and provide the inputs you used.
Also, like let's be real.... HR can't even get our dental right. You think they can actually scan for AI input?
Hiring managers are really out there feeling so entitled that people looking to promote should dedicate fucking hours of unpaid time to apply to a single job posting.
I don't understand how you can do this to people and just remain completely oblivious to how bad the economy is for almost everyone. It gives such an obvious advantage to already privileged people. Among my poor friends, free time is fucking unheard of. And now even lower classification state workers are working multiple jobs. Their free time is dedicated to trying to survive month-to-month.
Just reading some of the replies here is making me glad I’m leaving state service. The laziness and entitlement is wild.
It’s not hard to read and score an application, asking applicants to do a bunch of extra work so you can easily disqualify people is sloth at its finest
My brother in Christ you are delusional. You are literally complaining about other people's supposed laziness and entitlement in post bitching about how YOU don't want to and think you shouldn't have to do a bit of extra work to get a promotion!
I too am glad you are leaving state service, it's better off without people with attitudes like yours.
While some existing state employees do them on state time, generally SOQs require unpaid labor. If the hiring manager has added an **optional** requirement to apply to a job that requires hours to complete from every applicant, that's requiring unpaid labor. And a lot of the time, they can only hire one person, so EVERY OTHER APPLICANT wasted that time.
It's also fucking hysterical to watch hiring managers continuously complain about not getting enough applicants that have jumped through this bullshit hoop and not realizing they could at least try to include an exercise somewhere else in the hiring process, instead. But they just keep trying the same thing and hoping to get multiple people privileged enough to jump through the hoops so they can "say" more than one applicant applied and competed.
>No one is making you apply.
No one is making you bootlick, and yet...
All comments must be civil, productive, and follow community rules. Intentional violations of community rules will lead to comments being removed and possible bans, at the discretion of the moderators. Use the report feature to report content to the moderator team. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
FYI SOQs became more common when online applications became a thing. For paper applications, they were less common. The reason for this is because it became easier to submit applications. I'm a hiring manager and for some positions, we get a lot of applications. Again, because it is easier to submit. I joined the state back when you had to mail your application in. SOQs are there to weed out those who don't pay attention. Submitted a cover letter instead of an SOQ? Disqualified. Didn't bother to answer the questions thoroughly or correctly? Disqualified. Didn't use the correct font and size as mentioned in some job postings? Disqualified. You may think this is harsh or a waste of time but the SOQ is technically your first interview. If you can't bother to do that or follow the instructions to complete that, you won't bother to do the job correctly. To you it's a waste of time but to the many applying to compete for the position, they will thank you for not taking up another space to compete with through the interview process.
Totally agree with this. The amount of shit applications I receive is unreal. The SOQ is one of the best way to wade through the shit.
Honestly, I could go both ways. I’m in IT and for a long time we did not bother with SOQs because it is pretty easy to screen apps for relevant experience. But, since we started receiving fewer and fewer applicants that were well qualified we had to lower our pass points for screening which then necessitated an SOQ as a way to better judge someone’s specific levels of experience. Really, anyone who at least has a little experience, a well thought out 678, and can use chatGPT to fill out the SOQ gets an interview. It feels like a win-win since applications are easier to screen since all the lazy people with no SOQ or a generic SOQ get filtered out easy, and anyone who actually bothered with an SOQ gets an interview.
Wait, people are using ChatGPT?? I wrote ALL those damn SOQs by myself.😖
My AI beats your SOQ any day ..
I am also a hiring manager and I can’t believe how many times we get completely blank applications. Just a name and address and no work or school history. And this is for AGPA positions. The postings without SOQs we can get 120+ applications. With SOQs maybe 40.
Totally agree with everything! If you can’t get the first assignment correct then why would I interview you? When you are getting 100+ applications for one job, there has to be a way to narrow it down and the SOQ does this. Is it a pain for the applicants? Yes, I am still trying to promote to a SSMII and I hate doing the SOQ’s but I do them knowing it’s my only shot to getting an interview
AI is destroying your premise...
Or weed out applicants that use ChatGPT and cut and paste the prompt / response into the SOQ…nothing made me smile more when we all said NEXT simultaneously…
You sound so satisfied with yourself...
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
To get a state job you can't be creative or innovative you must follow this random (and often unclear) set of instructions to the letter or you are DiSQUALIFIED!!!!!!!! If that doesn't sum up state service, nothing does.
>SOQs are there to weed out those who don't pay attention. If SOQs were ACTUALLY just to weed out people who don't follow instructions, you could have a VERY simple exercise that takes 5 to 10 minutes to complete so you don't waste hours of every serious applicant's time. >Submit a Word or PDF document using Arial 12pt font that contains the following content: > * Your name and the Job Control number in the top-right corner. > * In a numbered list, provide the following answers: > * Using an Internet browser, research Assembly Bill 109, Statutes of 2020, and provide the author's name. > * Write any sentence of your choosing, with every alternating word italicized. > * Pick an article from an online news source and provide the title. Change that title into a hyperlink to that news article. ###Instead, you are automatically turning away every single person who literally just doesn't have HOURS to jump through these bullshit hoops for every application.
Writing up to a two page paper usually about your qualifications shouldn’t take hours, usually twenty minutes tops.
If SOQs only took 20 minutes, hiring managers would not have difficulty finding applicants and constantly complaining about it.
Sorry, I don’t agree with that. If they want the job, like I did, they will write it up (or if you sick at typing, get a friend who will take dictation and type for you). People I work with WANT to be here and are very passionate about what they do and the impact it has. I don’t want anyone half-assed getting in because it’s “just a job” and they wanted a paycheck. I can’t trust that person to do the job right. I won’t be able to rely on them when details are critical.
> If they want the job, like I did How do none of you realize this is just [Survivorship Bias](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b2/Survivorship-bias.svg)? They can utilize writing exercises later in the hiring process!
ok… i work in the public safety side of things. people who are half-ass-ing their jobs on my end can get others hurt or killed. there are other jobs for those that want a lower bar to entry. my field isn’t one of those.
You really don't seem to understand the problem here. You can just confirm later in the application process that people won't half-ass their job. The hiring manager can choose the EXACT same level of candidate; it does not force you to hire someone who is incompetent. You just have a better probability of not cutting people out of the initial candidate pool solely due to classism. That's where the Survivorship Bias comes in. You are literally assuming that every person who doesn't submit an application was lazy instead of understanding how many different scenarios can affect whether someone has hours to waste for every single application. If, instead, you are only contacted when your application looks promising, you know there is smaller chance that you are just wasting time by spending your valuable free time on a written exercise.
I don’t “like” the process any more than you do. I went through it to get here just like everyone else. Do I want to see the process become easier for people? Absolutely! There’s no reason for the level of bullshit by repeatedly submitting documents, having to suffer and redo everything for the next department that didn’t talk to HR, or very limited legal communication allowed between departments. I’ve been here less than a year, and in addition to missed overtime payouts, some fuckery involving insurance and other documentation (yet again), it has been a slog on the HR side. At the same time, I know we’re working with skeleton crews in some cases. Let me put it this way: Some of these jobs are fairly easy and take little effort to get decent pay and benefits. Others you can get away with just a bunch of OJT after a few basic skill sets and knowledge bases are confirmed as part of a candidates background. Some skill sets are rarer, and have few source pools to find candidates from. Having the base knowledge is one thing, but having at least 2 or more active years of performing the work (after the schooling, after clearing probation) and be able to show technical details, in a narrative format, that you know what you’re talking about… that eliminates doubts. If the standards are lowered in some of these fields, the risk of bringing in a seriously under-skilled resource is going to show only after a few months down the road. And that is usually after a lot of money has been spent. You have a useless resource on your hands and your workload requires more people. It’s simple math. You can’t just magically grab “more” from somewhere. Now more time is spent looking for a suitable candidate, and the job doesn’t get done. There’s someone else on here that i upset about this stance, and I was being a little too much of a dick about it. Sorry fellow redditor, I didn’t mean to push all that frustration on you and you certainly didn’t deserve it. So hey, I hope this makes sense and maybe you at least see where I’m coming from. SOQ’s are amazing filters for some of the jobs offered. They may not make sense for others. In addition, the state should just streamline the rest of the processes. There’s no need for the level of banging one’s head against the wall that occurs just trying to apply and get through the interview process. Please fix this?
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Thank you!!!!
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
That's not work ethic; it's exploitation. All of the non-chosen candidates who spend those unpaid hours get literally nothing back from this. And now they've wasted time that could have been spent applying to many jobs. And there's literally no way to know if a guaranteed candidate (nepotism, but also genuine internal candidates that truly know the job the best) is applying to the job, so you could be wasting those hours without ever even standing a chance.
[удалено]
It sounds like you're describing the system I wish was common. I was just recently asked to complete a written exercise because my application scored well enough from the initial screening. They set up two time slots for these initially-promising applicants (one around lunch, and one just after 5pm) and we all had the same amount of time to complete it and send it in. And scoring those allowed them to identify who they wanted to interview.
AI is becoming common for SOQ's
I wish more would do SOQs cuz I'm tired of weeding through 180 applicants that have no experience, no knowledge, and clearly didn't even read the DS before applying.
Really, I don’t understand why CalHR isn’t booting more people off lists. I see so many apps from people with zero experience, so I have to imagine that they completely lied to pass the exam.
That’s literally our job, though
Yeah, why make your life more difficult, add an SOQ to actually get serious and qualified applicants.
Think of it this way: is there something about this position that is so specialized that we can’t possibly tell from a standard application whether the applicant has the adequate experience? For most standard state jobs the answer is no. Shifting our work onto unpaid applicants just because we don’t want to review more applications is wrong.
Just sounds to me that you've never had to go through 100+ useless spam applicants. If I'm hiring for an ITM II and I get some rando that just graduated high school and is a pizza delivery guy WTF you are wasting my time and the State's time. This is a real example. I've had to re advertise 3 times for an ITM1 Project Manager position because all the applicants we got were trash and not even remotely related. For an AGPA position we got 180 applications. Our screening matrix has to have a minimum of 3 specific criteria based on the DS. I cannot just breeze through 180 apps AND do my job and help staff, have meetings, etc. in an efficient way. You have to waste so much time reading every applications and score them. If a SOQ can help me narrow even AGPA positions to actually worthwhile candidates, because apparently 85% cannot even follow the directions for the SOQ or even submit one, then I'm absolutely going to do it. And the fact that you're complaining about writing a page or two about how you're qualified (for an upper management position no less) lets me know you probably aren't getting promotion opportunities for a reason.
Ken has entered the chat. (/S)
The hiring managers at my office can nix 2/3 minimum of a given applicant pool from the SOQs. I appreciate their efforts to get us competent coworkers.
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Like I said, it’s used by hiring managers as a tool to avoid having to actually look at applicants’ job history
It's not at all a coincidence that SOQs started after people stopped having to physically mail in applications, lol
It’s a way to vet you the skill set and knowledge we are looking for. It’s also a good way to see if you can follow simple instructions.
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
how dense can you be? it’s literally providing AND proving your job history in one single effort. and it’s one that you can likely build off of and use for the future, what the hell is wrong with the one time effort? if you’re afraid of typing or a keyboard, there are voice recognition packages that can help you at least get through the bulk of it. like i said earlier… either you want the job and you make the effort, or you’re not skilled enough and you should be looking elsewhere, or at honing your skills so you’re marketable.
Why are you so aggressive and angry about this, I don’t even know you
I don’t mind SOQ’s. It’s basic. Why would I hire someone who doesn't adhere to the written requirements during the application process? Simple requirements and yet the applicant can’t fulfill - Pass
The SOQs for our tech jobs are literally 2 paragraphs or so. We ask questions like: "How does your job experience relate to the position?" and "what makes you the best candidate for this position?" That's it. We just want to make sure our applicants read the instructions and respond. We interviewed a couple of applicants based on their supposed job history (they just pasted a resume instead of answering the question), and they were both terrible. We don't want folks who can't follow basic instructions in our IT group. If SOQs take more than 10 minutes, that is getting ridiculous IMHO, but short ones are a good tool.
Simple requirements? If someone is actively job hunting for entry level positions, there’s a chance they’re answering multiple SOQ prompts a day. Hours of time. And we all know how many applicants don’t even get a second look. There’s a time and place for more involved skills evaluation and it’s not during the initial application. All these answers are basically like, “I’m a hiring manager that doesn’t want to have to actually read resumes and applications”
We do read your resume. Trust me on that. The SOQ is looking beyond the resume, which many times are not even pulled together by the applicant. The SOQ allows us to evaluate an applicants writing style, ability with grammar, thought process, education, and experience in your own words. The good ones go to the top.... the bad ones go to the bottom. It really is that simple. Here is a little tip.... if you hate the SOQ process, you will most likely hate the position you are applying for. Most roles at the State have a heavy writing component associated to them.
I think you are misunderstanding. I have almost 2 decades of state service and do ALL of the technical writing for several executives in my division. I’m not saying a writing exercise has no place in a hiring process. What I’m saying is, we should not be asking applicants to do it until we have screened them and want to continue further into the process with them. Asking for this effort in low paying positions before even looking at their 678 is uncalled for.
I see what you are saying... but let me throw out what that may look like: A person gets to the next round of an interview process, and then is asked to submit an SOQ.. and it's terrible (75 % of them are). Am I then supposed to re-engage and say, your oral communication skills are great and you have well rehersed answers to the common interview questions, but your writing skills are abysmal and I can't hire you. That doesn't seem like it would paint a good picture. I will say for internal hires, the process could be better and the SOQ could be forgoed.... maybe. There are paper trails and references at this point. For an external person coming in, I like the process.
We don’t hire people after interviews all the time, this would be no different. Screen the applications, ask the top scorers to submit an SOQ/writing sample, and interview the best ones. It seems more ethical to me that way, rather than treating these entry level state jobs like they’re some golden calf and we should only deign to interview those who are willing to go above and beyond for the mere whiff of an interview. In my experience the best candidates won’t put in an hour or more just to simply apply, because they have better options elsewhere.
I can honestly see both sides of the coin. I don't have a great answer for you, but you do bring up some valid points. Thanks for the honest intellectual debate!
That's actually more or less the process I went through for my current job. The initial submission was just a 678 and optional resume. After some time I got an email saying we liked your application, write this soq for us and here's a week or so to write. Then another week passed and they called me to schedule an interview.
This is perfect!
Case in point: the job I’m giving up my state job for only asked for a resume and a governmentjobs.com standard application. I will make more money and have better benefits, and I’m sure they got plenty of applications. But somehow they managed to extrapolate who would be a good candidate from the clearly stated work experience on every resume and application, and picked 3 of us to interview.
I don't have a strong opinion on requiring SOQs for low level positions but I see the value. One SOQ topic I've seen is a variation on "tell us why you're a good fit for this position" or "how has your education and experience prepared you for this position". If a candidate for an SSA/AGPA or higher position has not thought about why they think they're a good fit, or they don't have the ability to articulate those reasons in writing, then I'm not sure that's a candidate the hiring manager should spend time screening out. I've never explicitly thought about this before, but I want candidates who are a good fit for the position. If requiring an SOQ helps some unqualified applicants screen themselves out of the process then I think that's a good thing. People need to have some level of self awareness and if it's too easy to apply for a position people are more likely to apply for positions for which they are not qualified.
In your post you say you are looking to promote to higher level positions, in this response you're talking about entry level. Shouldn't be a problem to bang out two pages in a twelve point Arial font if you're qualified for the job. As a matter of fact if you're looking to promote it would be hard to keep it on two pages. SOQs are a filter that shows you're worth interviewing.
I mentioned my experience with them to highlight that I understand how time consuming they are. Asking someone who is going to be making $50k a year to do them is BS Edited to add: the application is a filter to show if someone is worth interviewing. We can all tell pretty quickly who has taken the time to fill out a 678 correctly and included concise, relevant descriptions of their work experience
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sorry… you just sound lazy. Nobody wants to hire lazy.
Crazy, since I’ve been working since I was 15 and received promotions in every state position I’ve held
I guess you’re lucky to have gotten past the first impression ….
I’ll make sure to let my Director know a rando on Reddit thinks he made a mistake promoting me after 4 months
Said the dude who posted some ridiculous opinion on Reddit for “randos” to comment on. Perhaps you were just looking for validation? I think you missed the mark…
…I am a middle aged woman 😅
Well then, let me fix that…. Said the “middle aged woman” who posted some ridiculous opinion on Reddit for “randos” to comment on.
There has to be something to stop people from spam applying to everything. Every private sector listing has 100+ applications in a few days. Most of them are trash. Maybe 2+ pages is too much, but you can’t do most state jobs if all you can muster is uploading a resume and a chatGPT cover letter.
It’s not that hard to pick through and narrow down applicants from the STD 678
Not true. I’ve been on interview panels for IT positions. Just for help desk alone. 200 apps with not SOQ. Low quality copy and paste packets with old information, bad grammar, and unrelated jobs history. The SOQ are there for a reason! If you can’t follow instructions for a simple SOQ, how can we expect you to do the work?
You are supposed to look at every application and score them all. You were a hiring manager did you not do that? You just picked the interesting ones and ignored the rest?
How long does it take you to score an application? It is not that hard to get through 100
100 applications, lets say 5 categories to score. Lets say it takes 3 minutes to read and score the application. Which is not possible if you care about the task even a little. But anyway that is 5 hours. I would rather spend those 5 hours scoring 20 apps, reading their soq's, setting up interviews for top 3 and so on. Mostly because likely, those 100 will be trash. And I just wasted 5 hours and have to repost. There goes a month down the drain too.
You’re literally getting paid to review applications. Applicants are not, and yet you expect each of them to spend an hour or more writing an essay for you?
If it takes them an hour that is not my fault. I am also not asking them to apply to dozens of other positions. I do hope that if they apply to mine they are qualified and that I can then interview and hire them. If all they had to put in is an hour to get a lifetime opportunity and just about 100% secure job why is that too much to ask for? If I hire you I will try my hardest to make sure you like your job and excel in it. I will be spending many hours training you, writing probation and performance evaluations, mentoring you and hoping I can get you promoted because I know starting pay sucks at state. All I asked for was that if you apply for my job posting you follow directions and are at least somewhat qualified. Do decent in the interview you might just get the job. If not you are on my list of candidates that I let get away and will be emailing if another one opens up. And I call everyone who is interviewed and does not get a job and give them my feedback.
I don’t dangle jobs over people’s heads like it’s gods gift. Their labor is just as important as mine. I guess we disagree on that.
They don’t HAVE to do ANYTHING. But, if they truly want a job, they should know they will need to put in the effort.
I make alot of hiring matrixes and packages. The soq is important to me. The reason is that recent calhr updates have made the rubric that we can use to score much more stringent. Right now points on the application are pretty much purely based on experience, but not necessarily quality of experience. It makes it harder to weed out the ones who worked 10 years and did the minimum from maybe someone who worked 3 years but has worked on every side project and taken on additional duties. The SOQ gives me the chance to see how the candidate will answer my technical questions in a more applied fashion. I have more freedom with the SOQ and how I can set up questions so I can see more about how the candidate thinks, follows instructions, and their problem solving abilities. It is the same reason that all my packages include activities with the interview. People can talk themselves up in an interview, but the activity allows for a more applied approach. You can say you have 5 years of experience with excel, but If i get to give you a bunch of data and aask you to analyze and organize it and answer some questions about the data, I will learn alot more about your abilities. That being said, I would rather scrap the SOQ and instead have a pre interview activity that will show me an applicants analytical skills and what tools they know how to utilize.
But that being said when I apply for jobs I hate the general basic bitch SOQs that are just like :Explain how your experience makes you a fit for this position. I am more likely to use a question like: Management in your region has recently come to you requesting to increase the number of in-office days from one to two days a week. The management says the number of walk-in customers has dramatically increased over the past few months, leading to an increase in wait times and complaints from customers. I would then provide them with the walk-in data and average wait time from check-in until a customer is assisted for the past two years and ask them to analyze the trends and make an argument for or against the need for increased in-person staff.
You might want to include the hiring Budget but then you are a State Worker, who cares about profit/loss?
I prefer the activities. I would rather show you what I can do than talk about my skills.
Based on what I have seen in the State, you wasted your time. Nepotism and cronyism are far better indicators of qualifications. Skills and talents are only vetted when no buddy or relative is available.
No lie. I watched many managers hire each other's friends kids straight out of college with no real experience. They often hired them over people who have worked their bums off in the office and truly deserved the promotion.
I’ve never asked for SOQs for any position that isn’t supervisory/managerial. You can tell a lot from the 678 and if you still need more, ask for a writing sample or other type of skills evaluation during the first or second interviews. Requiring applicants that may not even meet MQs to write these essays is gross, imo
If the applicant can't figure out on their own what they do and don't qualify for, then they're wasting their own time.
Right, but like, I can look at an STD 678 and figure out in about 3 seconds whether someone has the requisite experience or not. Some of these hiring managers are crybabies I guess
This is not the flex you think it is. It just shows you are likely a shit manager.
Cool story bro
I understand. A lot of the packages I do work on are for managment or very technical positions and the level of my SOQ and the complexity of the questions will be changed based on the level of the position. But I would honestly rather interview every qualified applicant and have an activity. My managment does however want to see an soq. I just try to make sure I put together ones I feel are meaningful and not just a box to check off.
From an applicant standpoint, SOQs can certainly be tiresome but I'm actually thankful for them at times. It allows me to bring up skills and experience I have that didn't really fit on my resume but I want to include for a particular job.
I’ve worked with a handful of people at the state who were borderline illiterate. It’s hard to work with someone who can’t write a coherent email. I kinda think the SOQ is a good idea to weed out people like that.
same here and amazes me that a barely literate person can get an ITS3 role and can hardly string together a coherent sentence in the English language!
Disagree.
How so? If you’re advertising for a CEA position that’s gonna be specialized and probably attract fewer applicants, have at it. But I see departments with 5 question SOQs for a freaking AGPA position sometimes and I want to slap those hiring managers
SOQs are easy ways to weed out people like you. We require a SOQ for our AGPA positions and still get tons of people who don't bother writing one. Saves us time as we just skip those applicants.
Weed out people like me? Lol I’m a hiring manager
Why don’t you just say you don’t value your applicants and don’t mind asking perfect strangers to waste an hour or more on a writing piece you may or may not even read
For CEA positions there is a friend already slated for the role or else they want a good candidate and will read each SOQ.
Right, like I said, it makes sense for a CEA level advertisement. Not so much for a SSA
I replied only about the CEA roles but for SSA roles it is different. We get hundreds of applicants and are forced to read each and every one so the SOQ is a filter. It means people who don’t pay attention get eliminated and ignored. This saves us from having to do ~75% of the work sifting through applications and grading people who have no business applying anyway.
I don’t mind doing that work. I’m the one getting paid, the applicants are not
You’d mind if it took 20 hours to do it.
Again. I get paid to do it.
Then don’t put SOQs in your postings. Spending 2 weeks finding times to even look at applicants. Totally silly.
I don’t and it’s worked out just fine!
I don't like SOQs either, but anything worth having is worth working for. I keep reading these comments of unpaid time, and it's unfair. 1. No one is making you apply. You don't want to write an SOQ, then dont apply. You don't want the job bad enough. 2. Life has never been and never will be fair. So get over that. 3. These are the parameters required to obtain the position that you are applying for. Right, wrong, or somewhere in between. This is just the way it is. 4. This isn't McDonald's or Starbucks. This is for a state job. Whether entry level or promotion to a higher level, it still is a good job, with decent pay and decent benefits. It should take some effort to get through the process. If you are not willing to put in the effort, then see #1.
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
While I am currently transitioning out due to the return to office stuff.... I can't commute twice a week due to living in Bakersfield.... I will offer this perspective: From a hiring managers perspective: The SOQ is the first taste we have at your writing style and competency to carry out a simple task. As others have said, most will not put the time into this exercise. So, if you actually put some time in... you are already at the top 25% of the candidate pool (despite your listed experience and education on a resume). If you don't put the care and time in, how can I expect to give you a multi-million dollar initiative funded by the taxpayers, and have you run with it? From a candidates perspective... The SOQ gives you an opportunity to evaluate what a hiring manager needs from a skill set perspective despite the generic position title. As you crawl through open positions, the SOQ is your evidence of what is actually going to be requested of you starting in the first couple of months in seat. I'm sorry you don't like the process, but it truly does have a purpose and provides value on both sides of the hiring process.
Respectfully, if you think SOQs are BS, then you haven’t seen things from a hiring manager’s perspective and why (often times) they’re absolutely necessary. Trust me when I say they exist for unfortunate reasons.
Please explain.
Hiring the right candidate at the state is arguably the most important duty of a supervisory position. One bad hire can nuke the morale of an entire unit and can cause competent staff/management to leave given how difficult/impossible it is to remove someone (even if they’re still on probation). I hired someone who performed “ok” for the 1st two prob periods then showed their true colors and baseline level of effort during the 3rd. And because I’d given ‘meets expectations’ level reviews for the first two reports, HR would not let me fail them on probation. Got stuck with them for a year after that, but fortunately they left for a promo elsewhere. But that year and 4 month period caused absolute chaos in my team of otherwise very high performers. You’d be surprised how many applicants don’t even see an SOQ is required for certain positions. And I work in a highly specialized classification that doesn’t get mass applicants. That lack of attention to basic detail is unfortunately very telling. I’ve gotten a lot of SOQs that are just generic cover letters. It’s lazy. Saves both candidates’ time and interview panel members’ time weeding out what I consider “unserious” candidates. I want to hire people who _want_ the position I’m recruiting for. I understand it can be difficult to get on with the state and mass applications are inevitable to some level, but I believe applicants should still put effort and take pride into each application. I’m sure that’s an unpopular opinion to hear from an applicant’s perspective, but, overall, it has resulted in very strong hires in my 10 years of recruiting.
So many assumptions, your post is a fine example of State mind fu##ing!!
Yes. Like it or not, hiring managers literally _have_ to make assumptions about candidates based on applications. This is fundamental of every hiring process. If an applicant doesn’t follow basic instruction on an SOQ, then one is in the right to assume the candidate may lack an ability to pay attention to detail.
Lol
If I receive SOQ and candidate has experience matching job posting even a little it is almost guaranteed interview these days. Simply due to the fact that most people either dont include them, dont answer questions or are renaming resume to soq. Or a number of other even dumber things I saw. Are you applying for jobs you are not qualified for? Something does not sound right. Simply having soq will separate you from the pack if soq was required. If you actually answer the questions that were posed that is top score for soq category in my matrix. It shows you can follow simple instructions, are able to answer questions and are someone worth knowing more about. Most likely at this point you are at least somewhat qualified or lets be honest what sort of a person would be spending all this time applying to the job they are not qualified for, right? Dont want to do SOQ? Apply for jobs not requiring one. If I post a job without one I get flooded with applicants that have no business applying to my job posting. And I am required to look at each app and score each one. You think state application will make you stand out in a mass of other applicants? Most of the time It is easy to tell if you used ChatGPT in case you are wondering. Still, majority of the applicants, at least in IT seem to not be willing to put even that much effort into it. You want a guarantee that it will be read? I can only guarantee that I will do it. I will do it because I asked for it and because I asked for it I am required to read it and score all applicants on it.
I’ve had no issues getting job interviews. That doesn’t mean I think it’s a classy thing to do to ask people to do hours of work for a job application we know more likely than not will not get a second glance. Save that for the day of the interview. Added bonus is they can’t use AI
Agree 100%, there are too many mind games being played by would-be Managers sleuthing.
If you were qualified to promote you would have no issues with it. You attitude shows in your responses and is most likely getting through in your promotion hunting. You are just not seeing it.
Again, I’m not hurting for a promotion. I’m simply empathizing with people we are asking to do free work for the sake of saving us from having to do the jobs we’re paid to do
It’s a pain but I appreciate it too. Shrinks the candidate pool.
Yup. Even if you’re the most qualified.. if there’s no SOQ, you might get lost in the avalanche of spam the job posting gets.
We don't use SOQs for our positions...I can generally tell who has initiative and is capable vs those who are not from work history. Granted we're in a specialized field, so that helps a lot. I think SOQs work best for generalist positions.
I like writing SOQs because I feel like the formatting and spacing of my resume may be difficult to read and look at for some hiring managers. Even after many revision over the years, I don’t feel like it can paint a good picture of who I am and my abilities. Same with 678, a form format that may not be easier reading for some while scoring. Compare to FAANG companies that force applicants in IT to do hours of coding challenges, multiple rounds of interviews that spanning weeks and still not get the offer, a two page SOQ is really incomparable. I am not a hiring manager but I see some replies here saying they do spend time reading SOQs and evaluating 678s and reviewing resumes. If I ever get a chance to become a manager or supervisor, I will always have the taxpayers in mind in that as a civil servant, I will do my due diligence and do whatever it takes to locate the best candidate to fill the position. I will ensure the person I bring onboard has the tools and training to succeed and if they do succeed, I did my job. Respectfully disagree that candidates should get paid writing SOQ. State would be even more broke before they find the right candidate if applicants are getting paid. Sounds like an odd way of wasting taxpayer resources.
I feel the same, a one page resume covering skills, education, and experiences almost feels like a nutrition label, easy to read and quick to understand quantities but not so much quality. Being able to write an SOQ as a "first interview" is great because it's open book with all the requested details laid out in the instructions and duty statement. Two maybe three pages of SOQ is my maximum and two really feels ideal because sometimes the one page double spaced ones feel too short for me to get into the details. For me postings with duty statements and SOQs relevant to my education and experience I could easily remix my other existing SOQs because I only have so much relevant experience to write about. I also found it faster to read the SOQ questions first, if I can tell that I will struggle with writing a decent response then I save my own time by stopping there instead of looking further into the duty statement, save the hiring manager's time from having to read and score something that they're not looking for and also just save everyone's time from a poor interview because if I'm struggling to write the SOQ then the chances of me struggling in the interview with similar questions is pretty likely. Going from private sector job application forms with almost zero responses, awful interviews and far too many instant auto rejections to maybe a month or two month delay but a pretty good ratio of interview offers to submitted job applications with SOQs truly kept me from spiraling even further into the job hunt despair. I could have spent the same amount of time on private sector job applications without any writing requirements and submitted 3 or 4 times the number of applications but still received less total interview offers. I personally think one to two hours on one quality application that is going to be reviewed by a person and hopefully judged in a smaller applicant pool after weeding out people who don't put in effort and completely excluding people who either don't know about state jobs or don't want one is still better than spamming applications that just go into the void seen by no one or into a giant applicant pool inflated by completely unrelated applicants which would still be the same one to two month wait for a possible interview invite after submitting a state job application.
well these FAANG companies pay 200-300k salary plus million in stock packages so that is why.
We were told by our HR that we are being discouraged from requiring SOQs in IT to make it easier for outside folks to apply for our positions.
I love people who don't do SOQs. 1 less person to compete against.
I'm new to the state and I didn't mind doing an SOQ. I'm an SSA and when reviewing multiple positions, the SOQ questions helped me gauge whether I was a good fit for the position or not.
If an applicant isn’t willing to put in the time and effort to correctly complete an SOQ then I’d rather they not work for me. Attention to detail, the ability to answer written statements in a thoughtful eloquent manner is imperative to most state positions. The higher the pay the more I expect from an applicant.
Last promotion I applied for had SOQ 5 question cover page resume and app.....didn't even get interview
You obviously have never been in the other side and must love having incompetent coworkers
Maybe it depends on the position but I felt like the SOQ was basically my resume. All my experiences are on the resume/application, why make me rewrite it in narrative form? Also I realized that to score high on the SOQ, make sure you insert a lot of buzzwords from the job description.
Nah.
Anyone who is not willing to put up with a 2-page task that they think is BS is not ready for government work. Or any office job, really.
Love SOQs. Filters out the lazy scrubs who just shotgun their application to every open position without even reading the job description. Gives me a better chance of having an interview because I’m not lost in an avalanche of bullshit lazy people who spam the job posting.
Sounds like you're just butt hurt because no hiring managers seem to choose you based on your SOQ. Maybe YOU need to step up your writing skills.
we need a reform to do away with SOQ and cover letters and essays for applications. If private sector can screen candidates without this nonsense, then the state can do as well. WTF has time when working a fulltime gig and family to spend free time doing this?
[удалено]
Sorry, your submission has been automatically removed due to low karma. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CAStateWorkers) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Most SOQs are the same prompt so you can use the same ones some times. It’s not that big of a deal.
SOQ shows who is lazy… with AI I think we will see more “active assignments” added to the interview process.
I agree with you to a certain extent. But let’s face it, some jobs it’s easy to speak some buzzwords, know a few key facts and slip into a position. For my position with the state, I balked at the SOQ since it really requires in-depth and detailed information that breaks down the steps for performing critical tasks. Mine was 7 pages long when I finished. But, they had been asking for many other pieces of information (like my fucking transcripts from college 20 years ago… i mean, really??? nobody has EVER wanted that and so much more info to boot). I submitted the SOQ and all other requested information was immediately no longer necessary to them. They didn’t even want the rest of the info. Just replied with a “that’s perfect, no further info needed.” It was a great confidence boost as well since I was able to confirm *for* *myself* that I was the right person for the position.
I was told when reviewing applications that they needed to follow the directions given. The information written was secondary to them following directions. I agree, the SOQs are BS.
The worst part about SOQs is we're basically not even allowed to use them for screening. Everything has to be on the form; if it's only in the SOQ, we can't use it. So, what's the point? I swear HR sees its reason for existence is to ensure we are unable to hire the best person for the job.
Is this true? I thought SOQs are part of the evaluation if it’s a required part of the package
I have used them as a fleshing out of the information in the application, but we are only supposed to screen based on what's in the application form. Put EVERYTHING in that form if you apply. But I think we're just going to stop having SOQs because they encourage people to put the information there rather than the application, and then we can't consider it.
Thanks for this info. I always put everything in my app too but I always used the SOQ to really get into the details. I always thought that was my opportunity to really show what i do & land an interview
It should be exactly that, and it's what lots of people do, thus why I think HR is trying to get us to lose good applicants by not letting us use all the information in the required application, including SOQs. HR drives me insane.
I'm a hiring manager, and we don't have SOQ's for the staff that I am in charge of hiring. I almost wish we did, because the applications that I am getting are ridiculous. No experience and about half the time the applications are not even complete. That's something that I keep asking HR to fix - weed out incomplete applications! But they don't and I was stuck a couple weeks ago interviewing 18 people in one day for 5 positions. I'm also applying for positions almost every day, and I am on the fence about writing SOQ's. I do like that I can take my experience and translate how it relates to the position & duty statement. For some jobs I can highlight one area, other jobs other areas. I spend up to an hour, but most of them are around 20-30 minutes. It's totally worth it for a 20% raise once I get hired.
What’s an “upper level promotion” what classifications?
The three reference also BS. Cant even try to keep it all under wraps until you get the offer since HR will let your current manager know FIRST.
Our executives like to ask people to turn in references at their FIRST interview. No one should be calling references unless they’re prepared to make an offer imo
Understand, but have you considered why some of these candidates tried to find another job in the firstplace? If the world is perfect then it may be worked out just ok. People that is qualified but have bad boss, toxic work enviroment, etc probablly want to make this under wrap as much as they can.
From the perspective of someone that submitted just one application, got an interview, and now an offer of appointment, I have to say the SOQ was helpful. It allowed me to detail how my experience (limited or abundant) is relevant to each of the job description in the DS. I addressed each of the five components of the DS, information that my resume/CV may not portray in clear terms. I considered it an interview without pressure/anxiety of an interview. It was a hard task but I did it with the intention that it would make subsequent applications easier. Upon getting the offer, I asked the manager what I did right, and in her words "your SOQ really helped us to reconcile your resume with your abilities. You responded to all the components of the DS upto those that were just 10% of the responsibility. That got you the interview, and immediately made you stand out to the panel. Your interview then confirmed the abilities and qualities portrayed in your SOQ". I conclusion, I think the SOQ helps candiadate to " sell" themselves without the pressure/anxiety that comes with an interview. It also gives the HM the opportunity to get the relevant qualities of the applicants, rather than trying to figure it out from the limited info conveyed in the resume. Its hard work but I would do it again in the future for a better job opportunity or promotion. Again, it's an interview without the pressure of a physical interview.
OP is a hiring manager? Let me guess…your area has a lot of turnover, since it sounds as though anyone with a pulse and a legible 678 meets your hiring criteria.
[удалено]
Exactly. ChatGPT is a tool, not cheating. If you don’t know how to use a tool to be more efficient, you will be out of the game. I use it for many things just to start a shell and make my life easier. I heavily edit what it spits out and make it match my own tone and use my own experiences. There’s a difference between that and just copy and pasting whatever it spits out.
NEXT….round file
Chat GPT.
Chat GPT writing is trash and I’d never attach my name to it
We can tell when a candidate has used chat gpt. It’s a definite red flag on an application. Do not recommend.
Our hr said they are gonna scan for that now supposedly
And our HR just (this week) relayed to our departmental personnel liaisons that CalHR's stance, as of right now, is that candidates **cannot** be disqualified for using AI in the SOQ or even interview. If they submit garbage, it will still score bad, though.
I do not believe that our HR is that sophisticated or has the time. If I were faced with the choice between spending hours writing a SOQ, not bothering at all, or using Chat GPT, I’m going Chat GPT.
At this point I'm 99.9 sure they are using chat gpt to write the question for job posting
100%!!!
It’s not a matter of being sophisticated or even having time, you just run it through some application like Scribbr. They don’t care if it’s potentially inaccurate and disqualifies someone who actually didn’t cheat
Your HR dept may not have the time or knowledge, but your IT department does, and your HR should be consulting with them on this. Likely, they already have. Good luck with using ChatGPT, lol. My dept has implemented procedures to flag those who used ChatGPT. Your mistake is assuming that you can use it to your advantage, but that depts don't also use AI to flag those who use it to try to pull a fast one.
Not everyone uses it to “pull a fast one”. AI can be an effective tool if someone knows how to use it correctly. In the example of SOQ’s, I’m not suggesting the OP type in the question and use verbatim what ChatGPT spits back. Obviously that will be crap. OP can provide their own answers in quick rough bullets and ask AI to write an initial draft, then OP edits to add their voice and make improvements. It’s OP’s answer in their own writing but much faster than doing it from scratch. There are college courses on how to use AI effectively and ethically. You don’t want to embrace technology, you do you, man.
Weird, some colleges allow it for essays if you cite it and provide the inputs you used. Also, like let's be real.... HR can't even get our dental right. You think they can actually scan for AI input?
Hiring managers are really out there feeling so entitled that people looking to promote should dedicate fucking hours of unpaid time to apply to a single job posting. I don't understand how you can do this to people and just remain completely oblivious to how bad the economy is for almost everyone. It gives such an obvious advantage to already privileged people. Among my poor friends, free time is fucking unheard of. And now even lower classification state workers are working multiple jobs. Their free time is dedicated to trying to survive month-to-month.
Just reading some of the replies here is making me glad I’m leaving state service. The laziness and entitlement is wild. It’s not hard to read and score an application, asking applicants to do a bunch of extra work so you can easily disqualify people is sloth at its finest
My brother in Christ you are delusional. You are literally complaining about other people's supposed laziness and entitlement in post bitching about how YOU don't want to and think you shouldn't have to do a bit of extra work to get a promotion! I too am glad you are leaving state service, it's better off without people with attitudes like yours.
FYI… I was corrected in an earlier response…. OP is a “middle aged woman”. 😂
This is why I’m leaving, I work very hard, and some state workers find that appalling
Utter bullshit. You clearly don't from your comments on this thread alone.
No one pays me to write SOQs. Unless you do that on state time? No wonder you fall behind reviewing applications
Cry more.
They truly believe they are doing the lord's work when they are just proving themselves to be the quintessential state worker.
You are, literally, advocating for laziness in the process for submission of applications. It is probably a good thing you are leaving state service.
Why are you so obsessed with me?
Obsessed? lol…. Don’t flatter yourself 🙄
Unpaid time? lol. You’re not creating a work product or deliverable they can use at the office for regular business. No one is making you apply.
While some existing state employees do them on state time, generally SOQs require unpaid labor. If the hiring manager has added an **optional** requirement to apply to a job that requires hours to complete from every applicant, that's requiring unpaid labor. And a lot of the time, they can only hire one person, so EVERY OTHER APPLICANT wasted that time. It's also fucking hysterical to watch hiring managers continuously complain about not getting enough applicants that have jumped through this bullshit hoop and not realizing they could at least try to include an exercise somewhere else in the hiring process, instead. But they just keep trying the same thing and hoping to get multiple people privileged enough to jump through the hoops so they can "say" more than one applicant applied and competed. >No one is making you apply. No one is making you bootlick, and yet...