Un-Stimulating

Today, our new President signs a “stimulus” package with the hopes of the entire country riding on its back.  However, I’m not sure exactly how stimulating these programs are to the millions of people out of work or in fear of being there soon.

Apparently, sometime this summer, those of us lucky enough to still have jobs will begin receiving some direct benefit from the tax cut part of the package.  About $13 a week.  Now I don’t live in a McMansion nor do I live in a trailer down by the river but c’mon, $13 a week?  This is supposed to get me out and spending again?  My guess is that most of us will be so mired in other stuff in June that this “increase” will arrive with zero fanfare or even modest notice.  $13 a week buys me what?  Lunch by myself?  Enough gas for the week? 2 beers plus tip at my local pub?  I’m not sure what our Politicians were thinking when they all sat around and said “yes, that’s it – $13 a week”.  Chances are we could have made it $50 a week if they agreed to cut their own spending like they are forcing Banking Execs to do.

My Favorite “Stimulus Package” was put forth late last year.  Here’s a copy of a real “make sense” stimulus package and how it might work:

Something that makes good sense:
I’m against the $85,000,000,000.00 bailout of AIG.
 
Instead, I’m in favor of giving $85,000,000,000 to America in
a We Deserve It Dividend.
 
To make the math simple, let’s assume there are 200,000,000
bonafide U.S. Citizens 18+.

Our population is about 301,000,000 +/- counting every man, woman
and child. So 200,000,000 might be a fair stab at adults 18 and up..

So divide 200 million adults 18+  into $85 billion that equals $425,000.00.

My plan is to give $425,000 to every person 18+ as a
“We Deserve It Dividend”.

Of course, it would NOT be tax free.
So let’s assume a tax rate of 30%.

Every individual 18+ has to pay $127,500.00 in taxes.
That sends $25,500,000,000 right back to Uncle Sam.

But it means that every adult 18+ has $297,500.00 in their pocket.
A husband and wife has $595,000.00.

What would you do with $297,500.00 to $595,000.00 in your family?

Pay off your mortgage – housing crisis solved.
Repay college loans – what a great boost to new grads
Put away money for college – it’ll be there
Save in a bank – create money to loan to entrepreneurs.
Buy a new car – create jobs
Invest in the market – capital drives growth
Pay for your parent’s medical insurance – health care improves
Enable Deadbeat Dads to come clean – or else

Remember this is for every adult U S Citizen 18+  including the folks
who lost their jobs at Lehman Brothers and every other company
that is cutting back. And of course, for those serving in our Armed Forces.
If we’re going to re-distribute wealth let’s really do it…instead of trickling out
a puny $1000.00 ( “vote buy” ) economic incentive that is being proposed by one of our candidates for President.

If we’re going to do an $85 billion bailout, let’s bail out every adult U S Citizen 18+!
As for AIG – liquidate it.
Sell off its parts.
Let American General go back to being American General.
Sell off the real estate.
Let the private sector bargain hunters cut it up and clean it up.
Here’s my rationale. We deserve it and AIG doesn’t.

Sure  it’s a crazy idea that can “never work.”
But can you imagine the Coast-To-Coast Block Party!
How do you spell Economic Boom?
I trust my fellow adult Americans to know how to use the $85 Billion
We Deserve It Dividend  more than  do the geniuses at AIG or in Washington DC.
And remember, The Birk plan only really costs $59.5 Billion because $25.5 Billion is returned
instantly in taxes to Uncle Sam.
Ahhh…I feel so much better getting that off my chest.
Kindest personal regards,
Birk
T. J. Birkenmeier, A Creative Guy & Citizen of the Republic

Friday Humor

This one’s for Joe and Art at the barbershop – two avid readers;

These individual quotes were reportedly taken from actual employee performance evaluations in a large US Corporation.

1. “Since my last report, this employee has reached rock bottom…..and has started to dig.”

2. “His men would follow him anywhere…but only out of morbid curiosity.”

3. “I would not allow this employee to breed.”

4. “This employee is really not so much of a ‘has-been’, but more of a definite ‘won’t be’.”

5. “Works well when under constant supervision and cornered like a rat in a trap.”

6. “When she opens her mouth, it seems that it is only to change feet.”

7. “He would be out of his depth in a parking lot puddle.”

8. “This young lady has delusions of adequacy.”

9. “He sets low personal standards and then consistently fails to achieve them.”

10. “This employee is depriving a village somewhere of an idiot.”

11. “This employee should go far…and the sooner he starts, the better.”

12. “Got a full 6-pack, but lacks the plastic thing to hold it all together.”

13. “A gross ignoramus – 144 times worse than an ordinary ignoramus.”

14. “He certainly takes a long time to make his pointless.”

15. “He doesn’t have ulcers, but he’s a carrier.”

16. “I would like to go hunting with him sometime.”

17. “He’s been working with glue too much.”

18. “He would argue with a signpost.”

19. “He has a knack for making strangers immediately.”

20. “He brings a lot of joy whenever he leaves the room.”

21. “When his IQ reaches 50, he should sell.”

22. “If you see two people talking and one looks bored…he’s the other one.”

23. “A photographic memory but with the lens cover glued on.”

24. “A prime candidate for natural de-selection.”

25. “Donated his brain to science before he was done using it.”

26. “Gates are down, the lights are flashing, but the train isn’t coming.”

27. “Has two brains: one is lost and the other is out looking for it.”

28. “If he were any more stupid, he’d have to be watered twice a week.”

29. “If you give him a penny for his thoughts, you’d get change.”

30. “If you stand close enough to him, you can hear the oceans.”

31. “It’s hard to believe that he beat 1,000,000 other sperm to the egg.”

32. “One neuron short of a synapse.”

33. “Some drink from the fountain of knowledge; he only gargled.”

34. “Takes him 2 hours to watch 60 minutes.”

35. “The wheel is turning, but the hamster is dead.”

Have a great weekend!

It’s a Hard Job

How do you view the profession of Recruiting?  Grab a mirror and get your “Stewart Smalley” on because we’re about to search your soul as a Recruiter.

In my travels to companies as Director of AllianceQ, I often hear this objection when we present our solution;

How is your system going to help me find my double PhD, Biomechanical Nuclear Physicist? (or fill in any other absolute needle in a haystack profile for your industry)

My answer is always the same;

How do you find them today?

Answer: research lists, cold calls, lots of networking and hard core headhunting

Then THAT is how you are going to find them in the future.

It seems that many Corporate Recruiters are searching for easier ways to source difficult profiles and that search will always be in vain.  You see, Recruiting is a HARD JOB, or at least it should be.

Before the internet, the only way we found anyone was through a very tough and arduous process of cold calling, phone book research and faxing job descriptions.  Then the internet and eRecruitment was born and I think many recruiters have come to rely on the “ease” of internet recruiting to their ultimate demise.

If I ran the world (which I won’t because frankly I’d rather be sailing) Recruiters would be as revered in an organization as the top sales people are.  Why not, their job is just as tough and they contribute as significantly to the bottom line right?  Well, in “Phil-land” they would.  Here’s how.

I’d create a pyramid picture of the roles my department fills every year.  The broad base at the bottom are those repetitive, high turnover roles.  For every industry these are different but they are there in EVERY industry.  Then I’d move up to the next level where we are looking to fill the roles regularly but less frequently and then up to difficult and frequent then to impossible and frequent and then to impossible and infrequent and so on.  You get my drift.

Now anyone with a “Recruiter” title would never touch the bottom few job families in my world.  Instead, I’d find a way to automate that process (yes, it can be done) and allow my Recruiting Assistants to process these people.  I’d then take my now freed up Recruiters (who are dying to get on the phone and pull that needle out of that HUGE haystack) and make them heroes in the company by doing what Executives believe only Korn Ferry and Heidrick and Struggles can do.

I may not have slashed my headcount spend because what I’d save in not paying a bunch of low level Recruiters, I’d redistribute to my now Rock Star Recruiters in the way of retention bonuses, organizational impact bonuses etc. and I’d have a team made up of the best in the country because I’d be paying them like headhunters.

Many of you believe this can’t be done.  I’m not sure why.  Perhaps it is because you came into the industry after it was made easy by the internet, perhaps you believe that “recruiting” is a noun and not a verb.  Either way, these are times of change and I hope you’ll find the courage to re-create Recruiting, not just as a verb but as a very hard job occupied by really great salespeople who love the fight and can sell your company to your biggest competitor.

Recruiting will hopefully be a hard job again one day soon.

Wing Space

“None of us is as good as all of us.” – Ray Kroc – Founder of McDonald’s.

As I sit on this US Airways flight from Charlotte, NC to La Guardia today (knowing I have a return tomorrow the other direction) I can’t help but think of US Airways Flight 1549.
This is the famed “Sully” Sullenberger flight that was the only successful ditching of a commercial jetliner on record.  All 155 passengers and crew made it out safely.  For those of you not living in Charlotte or NYC, it may have simply been an interesting distraction from the tanking economy.

To those of us in Charlotte – it is lore.

We asked ourselves for days “how did they do it?”  How did everyone walk out onto the wing in 41 degree water and survive to be interviewed on 60 minutes?  Like many of you, I’ve scoffed at the mention of “your seat cushion can also be used for a floatation device”, figuring that when the time comes that I’m on a plane being ditched into a body of water, I’m kissing this life goodbye.
Not true I guess. 

You see, the power of “WE” is always greater than the power of “ME”.

What the crew and passengers did that afternoon was to work togther in a calm and orderly fashion to ensure everyone was safe and out of that plane before it swamped in the Hudson.
Professional air crew and professional bankers stood shoulder to shoulder and took control and at times, took orders without ego or preconceived notions of self getting in the way.  Amazing!  That people can come together and create miracles (the flight is called “Miracle on the Hudson”) is nothing short of inspiring.

So why don’t we read more amazing stories of collaboration in the pages of the paper or web about people casting off what they know and believe and simply “acting” in harmony?  Because many consider life to be a zero sum game.  This means that if you have it, I can’t have it and visa versa.  So we hoard and protect and compete for perceived “scarce” resources. 

Fortunately or unfortunately it takes a moment of life or death for most people to realize this is not true; that life is full of abundance if we only believe it to be so.  The crew and passengers of Flight 1549 certainly believed there was enough “wing space” for all of them to get out of the plane and out there on those wings

So the question begs to be asked; do you believe there is enough “wing space” for everyone?

Whether you are out of work and looking for a job or are lucky enough to have a job and are being bombarded by “networking” friends and relatives, are you doing all you can to make sure there’s enough “Wing space” for everyone?

If you are a Recruiter and you can’t personally help a candidate, are you taking the time to look for ways help them?

In times of difficulty will you make room on the wing?

Job Seeker “Bill of Rights”

Seems the Universe is sending messages about the idea of a job seeker “Bill of Rights”.  I just finished watching the HBO series “John Adams” (highly recommend it) where the story of the original bill of rights was told.  Then I hear a caller on a radio show speak of how she wished our forefathers had also written a “bill of responsibilities” in exersizing these rights.  Really good idea.

So I wrote previously of a job seeker’s bill of rights and now I’m going to add a bill of responsibilities. 

2009 Job Seeker Bill of Rights

1. WE have the right to know if the position you have posted is an open, viable role and that you are currently recruiting and interviewing candidates to fill the role.
2. WE have the right to apply for a job and not get spammed with junk email offers for garbage jobs and poorly disquised get rich quick schemes.
3. WE have the right to know if we are being considered for the position to which we applied.  If not, simply tell us but don’t leave us hanging.
4. WE have the right to know why we weren’t selected.  If you didn’t consider us for the job, we just need to know why. 
5. WE have the right to disagree with your decision.

2009 Job Seeker Bill of Responsibilities:

1. We have the responsibility to honor your decision to pass on our application even though we may disagree with it and move forward in our job search without attempting to dispute your decision. 
2. We have the responsibility to NOT adjust our resume to fit the job description.  This wastes time and money and the truth always comes out in the interview process.
3. We have the responsibility to educate ourselves on the company and position we are applying to.  Not knowing the basics about a company when invited for an interview shows lack of earnesty.
4. We have the responsibility to only apply for jobs we are qualified to do.  Applying to jobs with a lack of qualfications is never a way into a company.
5. We have the responsibility to use the full array of tools availble to us in a job search.  Applying to jobs online is only ONE of the many tools and if we rely solely on this method our search will stall.

All rights come with corresponding responsibilities that must be adhered to to protect those rights.  If job seekers conduct a job search adhering to the responsibilities, it is our responsibility as Recruiters to ensure their rights are protected.

The Status Quo Has To Go

Like many of you, I was glued to my television set yesterday watching the inauguration of President Obama.  It doesn’t matter if you are Democrat, Republican, Libertarian or just don’t care – yesterday was a moment in history we will all remember.

So I asked myself, why?  What is it about THIS inauguration that brings over 1.5 million people to D.C. (whereas Regan had a small percentage of that for his first one) and causes a nation to come to a halt to watch?  Many will state the obvious, first African American President.  However, I think it is more than that.  I think this administration has given all of America and much of the world hope that the Status Quo in Washington is finally going to be broken and we are excited to see what changes are possible once this happens

So what has this got to do with Recruiting you ask?  Everything.  There are few departments in a corporation more tied to the status quo than the Recruiting Department.

Recruiters cling to the status quo long after the quo has lost its status.

If you doubt this, simply ask anyone responsible for change in a Recruiting department.  They will tell you that the change management is the hardest part of any operational adjustment.  New ATS, implementing a CRM for the first time, changing the candidate experience process etc are all great business decisions, backed up by sound financial and operational supporting measures and most FAIL because Recruiters fight change like an addict fights recovery.  I know of a brilliant Recruiting Operations Manager who just went through this; implemented a CRM, tied it to the ATS, brought the project in under budget and ahead of schedule and the metrics of savings etc proved true.  The CRM is failing due to Recruiter Resistance and he’s now at another company.

What causes Recruiter Resistance?  Why does changing, improving, modifying their business cause chills in Recruiters’ spines?  Here are a few observations of why Recruiters resist change: 

Change Overload.  Many recruiting departments change for change sake.  One way to protect mediocre performance is to give the illusion of continuous improvement to those who control the budgets. 

Fear.  Implementing new technology, new strategy and new process can expose people who have learned to game the system and float along, just above the performance issue line.

Work Overload.  Just-in-time (JIT) recruiting requires a fine balance of time management and Recruiters become the ultimate juggling multitaskers.  Picture the performer with a hundred plates spinning at the end of poles at one time.  Now picture tossing a medicine ball at that performers mid-section.  That’s how “change” can feel to JIT Recruiters.

Poor Communication.  Decisions made at the top and trickled down can become simply orders to change.  When people are involved in decision making (whether they ultimately support the change or not) they are more likely to embrace the change simply because they have a fundamental understanding of it.

Regardless of which of these situations your recruiting department is mired in, now is the time to break your status quo.  Seize the momentum of change permeating the country and make changes long overdue in your department.  You have the time, you have the reasons and now you have momentum on your side.  Turning your Recruiting Department into a strategic weapon for the company is the right thing to do.  Use the down economy like a change in administration and begin to create the energy and hope that breaking the status quo can bring to your organization.

Ipso Facto

It is January so I still have time to get my “2009 Predictions” in along with the hoards of others.  In the Recruiting community, predicting what will happen in our industry has become not only a tradition, but a somewhat stale one at that (like Aunt Ruth’s Thanksgiving Turkey, who everyone has to eat even though it’s dry and overcooked every year) with most “predictions” being nothing more than observations of what’s happening already:  (these are actual predictions from our thought leaders)

There will be less hiring this year

There will be fewer recruiters employed this year

Social Networking will continue to expand

Recruiting vendors will suffer

Less business travel

and so on.

Not exactly Nostradamus-worthy predictions right?  Since much of this was already happening in 2008, these just don’t seem like predictions to me.

So I’m not going to make a bunch of “observa-predictions” – you can read it in the Wall Street Journal and make your own.  I’m simply making one prediction.  One thing I can see on the horizon that, if things don’t change, will come true by Christmas this year.

I call it the “Ipso Facto” prediction.  Here it is;

I predict that 2009 will be the year that Job Seekers take back their job search.  I predict a “revolution” of sorts where job seekers, tired of being treated like a commodity, begin to fire their job boards and begin to demand tranparency from corporations they apply to.  If we are going to see 10%+ unemployment and it hits all industries and socio-economic levels – I believe the 21st century internet job seeker says, “ENOUGH ALREADY”.

So why “Ipso Facto”?

There will be no one to blame for this trend but job boards and corporate career sites!  Allow me to elaborate;

Job Boards today are flush with “false” jobs – jobs put there by anyone with a checkbook  who can pay for a posting.  At worst, they are people/firms who want to lure candidates into the false hope of finding work (to feed their family) so these predators can build a multi-level marketing organization or get someone to work for commission only with false promises of big returns (Madoff style).  Anyone posting a resume on a big board should have the Arnold Schwarzenegger of spambots on their computer – it’s really ugly and people are tired of it.

Corporate Career sites have no fraudulent intents but commit similar “crimes against job seekers”.  Even though there is no law requiring private sector companies to post their jobs externally, many HR departments are convinced this is a best practice for Equal Opportunity reasons.  In times of growth and expansion it may be a good idea as you can gather the best internal and external candidates for consideration.  In times of contraction, when you are already planning on filling that role with an internal candidate or a pre-determined candidate – this “artifical posting” is simply cruel hope to the millions of unemployed Americans.  These same job seekers who gleefully complete your online profile and apply for the “artifical posting” or even the real postings are, more often than not, rarely communicated with once their application has been acknowleged.

I think job seekers will be pushed past the tipping point and begin to demand better from eRecruitment.  They will flock to solutions that put the control of their job search in THEIR hands as they once and for all tire of putting it into the hands of people who don’t handle it with the care it deserves.  They will demand a “job seeker bill of rights”:

There are recruiting solutions today that treat the job seeker with the dignity they’ve always deserved and I’m happy to say there are corporations out there who treat job seekers the same way.  The partnering of these corporations and these solutions vendors will become a force in 2009.

I’ll answer to my peers if none of this happens but I think it may already be taking hold as you’ll see when you read this post from a blog titled; “The Day I Fired Careerbuilder”.

Power to the Job Seeker!

Job Seekers are from Venus; Recruiters are from Mars

As a Headhunter or Corporate Recruiter I always felt my job was to create matches.  Long before eHarmony, Match.com or any other “matchmaking” service, Recruiters have been bringing together candidates and hiring managers in what one of my early mentors described as “having two hands full of jello and trying to get them together before one flops off”.

So today I take up the Matchmaker role again and try to patch a misuderstanding between Job Seekers and Corporate Recruiters.

It seems these two groups don’t understand each other: Venus and Mars.  I’ll explain.

Job Seekers want a job, first and foremost.  Many are quite persistent and most are quite professional.

Recruiters want to fill jobs, first and foremost.  Many are thorough in their search and most are quite professional.

On the surface, this is a match made in heaven – both have virtually the same goal.

Where the relationship breaks down is when the decision not to hire (or interview) someone is made.  This creates several misunderstandings on both the Job Seeker and the Recruiter sides of the equation:

Job Seeker:

You were not selected for hire or interview because there are better qualified people out there who want the job too.  Millions of job seekers, one job – the chances that you are the most qualified are not in your favor.

The decision not to hire/interview is not made in a vacuum; Recruiters and Hiring Managers collaborate to choose the best pool of available candidates.

This decision is subjective and not worth arguing or complaining about.  As a BMW owner, you don’t try to convince the Mercedes owner of the mistake they made in car selection, don’t try to convince Recruiters that they’ve made a mistake in NOT hiring/interviewing you. 

The more you argue and fight with a Recruiter, the less and less chance you have of EVER working for that company.  Recruiters talk to each other and if you find doors closing faster than opening at certain companies, you probably chose to argue a decision at one time a little to persistently.

Remember that timing plays a KEY ROLE in this decision.  If you applied for the role anytime after it has been open 30+ days, chances are you won’t get to interview.  The reason is simple but never explained to you – Cost of Vacancy.  This is a calculation of the cost to the company for each day that position is open and once a viable pool of candidates is moved into the inteview process the clock is ticking on getting it filled.  Understand that, as in life, in recruiting timing can be everything.

Recruiter: 

Job Seekers are frustrated.  Why?  Go to any job board, search for jobs, post for jobs, hear nothing and get spammed to death. 

Job Seekers are frustrated.  Why? Go apply for one of YOUR OWN jobs.  Fill out a complex profile and hit apply.  Then be told you’ve created your “account” (did I really want an account? No, I want a job.  See #1under Job Seeker above) and NOW you need to actually apply for the job.  Be told “Thank you” but never hear from anyone about anything again. 

Job Seekers DO want to be told what happened to their application.  If Job Seekers can live with 3 and 4 in the Job Seeker list above, you OWE it to them to tell them what’s going on.  Let them move on, let them get closure.  Do the right thing.

More is more.  I know Legal and HR tell you to be very tight lipped about the reasons people didn’t get interviewed or hired but c’mon – common sense says that there is information you can provide a job seeker that may actually HELP them get the next job they apply for.  Don’t be callous, it could be YOU.  Treat job seekers the way you want to be treated.  Don’t be too busy, don’t be too cold, don’t be put out by their need for information.

I’m not writing a book or going on Oprah but I am simply saying that the Recruiter can do his/her job without aggravating the frustration of the job seeker and that the job seeker can seek jobs without causing Recuiters to withhold information and be non communicative.

Job Seeker, meet Recruiter; Recruiter, meet Job Seeker.

The “New” Monster?

Monster.com unveiled its new and improved site claiming;

Monster’s new job search is easier than ever! To apply for the job is 65% faster than before!

I know Monster has a crush of cubicles staffed with Product Managers who no doubt spent hundreds of man (or woman) hours talking to job seekers to develop their “new and improved” hyper-speed application process but Monster, did you also spend that time on the Recruiter side?  You know, that side that pays your fees and determines your future?  It seems that the New Monster is simply speeding up a problem created by the Old Monster.

After spending 15 years at a recruiting desk and having been a Monster, Careerbuilder et al user since their inception I can unequivocally tell you that allowing candidates to apply for the wrong jobs 65% faster is NOT what your paying customers want!  Monster added questionnaires, pre-screening tools etc to try to mitigate this issue but the facts are that a majority of candidates apply for a job they are not qualified to do.  This creates the millions of excess applications for jobs every year to Corporate America.

Proof that Monster didn’t do the due diligence on the Recruiter side is evident in this sales pitch to employers from their new site;

For employers, a faster, easier search process for seekers means more candidates than ever will make time to apply to your Job Posting.

I don’t know of 1 Recruiter who is looking for MORE candidates to apply to their postings.  As a matter of fact I would estimate that over 90% of Monster’s employers are looking for ways to streamline that number, not increase it.  By increasing the number of people who can now, faster than ever, apply for your jobs Monster is exacerbating the job posting issue for employers, not solving it.  The steps in the process are:

Job seekers search for postings that match what they want to do.  Maybe what they have actually done but certainly what they want to do even if they aren’t qualified. (no one applies for jobs they don’t want to do right?  Just see all the postings on Monster stating. “stay home, make millions” – the process appeals to the WANTS of a job seeker, not the qualifications of one)

Job seeker hits “apply now” button on Monster job posting which traditionally takes them to the employers career site where they actually apply for the job in the employers ATS.

Recruiter sifts through the first 20-25 applications until a viable pool of candidates is found (5-7) and then begins the interview process.

Recruiter rarely if ever reviews any applications that come in after interview process has started (#26 +) THUS creating the black hole of recruitment.

I know of Recruiters who get between 100-250 applications for every job they post (multiply times 30 open positions and you can see why “More” is not “better”)

If Monster was listening to the people who pay their bills (hefty bills with the Super Bowl ads to come this year) they would be focused on making it slower and more thoughtful to apply for a job not 65% faster and easier. 

New year, same Monster.

A Case for Annonymity – A Job Seeker’s Ally

Here we are in 2009 – still feeling the effects from 2008 in many ways.  With so many of our citizens unemployed or in fear of joining their unemployed brethren I can only imagine the rush to post resumes on the plethora of job boards out there.  Here’s a case NOT TO for all you would be job seekers or bet hedgers.

Now I know, you are told by everyone from your barber to your Father-in-law that if you are unemployed or about to be unemployed, you need to market yourself like Billy Mays (Oxyclean – classic pitch guy) markets miracle scratch removers.  I agree that you need to network like crazy and make sure people you trust know you are in the market.  HOWEVER, to post a resume on the Internet opens you to everything from spam to identity theft.

An article I read over the holiday points out that posting your resume on a typical job board can be at least annoying, at worst dangerous.

Be a lazy Google millionaire. Earn $64 an hour from home. Get 250 business cards free.

These are just some of the 80-plus junk e-mail messages, known as spam, that are pouring into John Gembecki’s inbox on a daily basis since he started looking for a job in July.

Gembecki is sure that every piece of spam is a result of the resumes he put on Monster.com and other employment sites because he created a Gmail account for his job search that he doesn’t use for anything else.

Leave it to spammers to take advantage of the underemployed but this is a true risk of posting resumes on any job board.

There are, however, alternatives which allow you to build a profile (not upload a resume – remember the “lazy google millionaire” – take the time and build a profile from scratch) and remain anonymous.  You only get contacted for opportunities that you define and you never divuldge your identity until you are contacted by a company (yes, an actual company) who has something of interest to you.  AllianceQ is built on one of these new technologies – QuietAgent.

Take the old addage in Recruiting that a job search is like dating.  If you wanted a date would you post your phone number and address on the supermarket billboard?  Nope, you’d probably go to eHarmony or Match.com and see what’s out there before you reveal yourself.  Smart strategy in dating, smart strategy in job seeking.