LATEST ARTICLES

Being angry at employers won’t get you hired

Troy Media
-
0
Being angry at employers won’t get you hired

Job seekers can achieve success by understanding the employer’s goals

Nick Kossovan

Troy Media

The current job market is a stark reminder of a fundamental truth: The employee-employer relationship is inherently asymmetrical. This asymmetry is the default of the employer taking on the risk of investing capital while employees only invest their time. Employers have the upper hand, and the right to work ultimately depends on their decisions, as evidenced by layoffs.

Employees don’t own their jobs; their employers do.

In the face of rejection after rejection, job seekers become frustrated and angry, blaming employers for being unreasonable, greedy, or only looking out for their interests, as if employers are in the business of hiring people. This mindset is counterproductive and will only hinder your ability to land a job.

I don’t think job seekers are angry with employers. I think they’re angry because they were in demand, and now they’re not. Recently, the tech industry has had more than its share of layoffs. Most likely, until now, those laid off had only experienced being highly sought after. A shift of this kind requires humility, which is lacking amid all the anger directed at employers.

When making a hiring decision, the employer rightfully prioritizes its interests over those of the job seeker. Employers seek candidates who can deliver value and contribute to their organization’s success. In contrast, job seekers look for roles that fit their skills, experience, and career goals. Employers looking after their interests aren’t wrong or nefarious; it’s simply smart business.

Employers’ self-interests are not your enemies. Instead, use them to your advantage by identifying them and positioning yourself as the solution. Demonstrating how you’ll support the employer’s interests will turn you from a generic candidate into an asset.

Three strategies can be used to align your self-interests – presumably landing a job – with those of an employer:

Understand the employer’s priorities, the obvious being to generate profit

Job seekers tend to focus solely on the job description and the required qualifications and overlook the company’s overall goal(s). Knowing (researching) the company’s goals will enable you to explain how your skills and experience can support their goals.

Suppose you’re applying for a marketing co-ordinator role at a rapidly growing tech startup. The job posting lists key responsibilities, including managing the company’s social media accounts, creating content, and planning events. However, after studying the company holistically, you find, like most companies, it prioritizes gaining new customers.

With this knowledge, you can position yourself as a candidate who can help drive that growth by emphasizing, using quantifying numbers (In eight months, I increased Instagram followers from 1,200 to 32,000) in your resume, LinkedIn profile, cover letter and during your interview, your experience developing high-performing social media campaigns attracting new leads for previous employers. You could mention your innovative ideas for using user-generated content to raise brand awareness or partnering with industry influencers. The key is to show that you possess the required functional skills and understand the company’s overall goals and how you can help achieve them.

Explain how you’ll make your ‘to-be’ boss’s life easier

Your ‘to-be’ boss is juggling a million competing priorities, budget constraints, and pressure from their boss to optimize their team’s productivity.

Position yourself as the candidate who’ll simplify your ‘to-be’ boss’s life, and you’ll differentiate yourself from other candidates. During the interview, make it a point to understand the specific pain points and challenges your ‘to-be’ boss is facing – I outright ask, “What keeps you up at night?” – and then present yourself as a solution.

Perhaps the department has a retention problem. You could tell a STAR (Situation, Task, Action, Result) story, demonstrating your ability to build strong cross-functional relationships and create a positive work culture that boosts employee engagement and loyalty.

Educating your prospective boss that by hiring you, they’ll have one less headache is a hard-to-ignore value proposition.

Show how their success is equal to yours

Hiring boils down to finding candidates who can drive measurable business results. Don’t rely solely on your skills and experience. Outline how you can deliver tangible benefits to the employer. Quantify the value you’ve brought to previous employers.

If you’re applying for a sales role, share data on the year-over-year revenue growth, client retention rates, and customer satisfaction scores you achieved in your previous positions. Quantify the value you brought to the organization, then explain how you can replicate or exceed that level of performance in the new role.

Say you’re interviewing for an IT support position. In addition to highlighting your technical expertise, again using a STAR story, highlight your expertise in streamlining processes, reducing downtime, and providing exceptional customer service. Tie those accomplishments back to the employer’s need to maximize productivity and minimize disruptions.

The key is to make a compelling case that the employer also succeeds when you succeed.

It’s understandable to feel frustrated by rejection, but the most successful candidates recognize that employers have legitimate business priorities. Identifying an employer’s interests and showing how you can support them will improve your chances of landing a job. Stop expecting an employer to save you. Save an employer.

Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job.

New grocer code rewrites rules in Canadian market

Troy Media
-
0
New grocer code rewrites rules in Canadian market

Major retailers like Loblaw and Walmart are committing to fairer practices through the Grocer Code of Conduct

Sylvain Charlebois

Troy Media

Costco will be joining the Grocer Code of Conduct, alongside established Canadian players such as Loblaw, Sobeys, and Metro, marks a critical step forward in the evolution of Canada’s grocery sector.

This collective commitment by all major players is vital for the code’s effectiveness and represents a significant effort that has taken years to achieve.

The Grocer Code of Conduct is designed to improve competition in the Canadian market by ensuring accountability across the food industry. It targets previously hidden practices, such as the high fees retailers charge suppliers, subjecting them to scrutiny and regulation.

For instance, consider a Canadian jam producer who wants to distribute products through major retailers like Loblaw. Initially, the grocer might impose listing fees and other charges that could amount to over $100,000 annually. As the product gains popularity, these fees can escalate dramatically, compelling the supplier to increase prices to maintain profitability.

This cycle leads to market instability and higher costs for consumers. The Grocer Code of Conduct aims to regulate these fee escalations, promoting a more stable pricing environment and fairer practices.

Furthermore, the Grocer Code of Conduct promises a more equitable environment for independent grocers, allowing them to negotiate on more equal terms. While major players like Loblaw and Walmart will still hold significant market influence, the code is expected to curb their predatory practices.

The industry’s need for an image overhaul cannot be overstated, especially in the wake of scandals such as the bread price-fixing debacle and the controversy over ‘hero pay’ during the pandemic. These incidents have severely tarnished the public’s perception of the grocery sector.

Key figures such as Michael Medline, CEO of Sobeys, have played pivotal roles in advancing the code. Medline’s call for greater discipline and respect within the industry, alongside the tireless advocacy by Michael Graydon and Sylvie Cloutier on behalf of Canadian food manufacturers, has significantly shaped the discourse and mobilized support among policymakers. The efforts of Minister of Innovation, Science and Industry François-Philippe Champagne and the Parliamentary Agriculture Committee, chaired by MP Kody Blois, have also been instrumental in positioning the code as a strategic blueprint for fostering competition and enhancing supplier relations in Canada.

With the code’s implementation, food manufacturers and independent grocers will gain a stronger voice, leading to greater product diversity for consumers. This is a straightforward equation: more suppliers equate to more choices on the shelves.

While securing the commitment of all five major retailers is a commendable achievement, the real challenge lies ahead in ensuring compliance and tangible results. Canadians’ skepticism will likely persist until they witness the benefits of these reforms firsthand – a sentiment that is both understandable and justified.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is senior director of the agri-food analytics lab and a professor in food distribution and policy at Dalhousie University.

Canadians are tired of Ottawa’s over-taxing, high-spending

Troy Media
-
0
Canadians are tired of Ottawa’s over-taxing, high-spending

New poll shows Canadians prefer spending cuts over capital gains tax hike

Franco Terrazzano

Troy Media

The Trudeau government is like a band that only knows one tune: higher taxes and spending.

The government recently imposed a capital gains tax hike. Part of the rationale for the hike is to reduce the debt burden on future Canadians.

“Canada could finance these critical investments by taking on more debt, but that would place an unfair burden on younger generations,” Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said as she announced her capital gains tax hike. “Fiscal responsibility matters.”

But if the government is worried about deficits and debt, couldn’t it cut wasteful spending instead?

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation commissioned a Leger poll asking Canadians if they would rather the government increase capital gains taxes or reduce spending to rein in the deficit.

The poll shows that 54 percent of Canadians prefer the government to cut spending, while only 23 percent prefer the capital gains tax increase. Twenty-three percent of Canadians are unsure.

Among those who are decided on the issue, 70 percent of Canadians prefer reducing spending to increasing capital gains taxes.

Here’s where the government should cut:

Corporate welfare. Want the rich to pay more? Start by making rich multinational corporations pay for their own factories instead of putting taxpayers on the hook for about $30 billion to multinational corporations like Honda, Volkswagen, Stellantis, and Northvolt. The Trudeau government has also announced more than $600 million for the Ford Motor Company, $551 million for Umicore, $420 million for Algoma Steel, $110 million for Toyota, $372 million for Bombardier and $12 million for Loblaws, among others.

According to the Fraser Institute, federal corporate subsidies totalled $11.2 billion in 2022. That’s more than double what the government spent on corporate subsidies in 2015, even after accounting for inflation. And it’s $4.2 billion more than the federal government will bring in through the capital gains tax hike this year.

The bureaucracy. The government must also take air out of its ballooning bureaucracy, which consumes more than half of its day-to-day spending. The government’s payroll hit a record $67 billion last year, increasing 68 percent since 2016.

The reason for the spike? A bigger bureaucracy collecting bigger paycheques.

The Trudeau government has hired about 100,000 bureaucrats since 2015. It also rubberstamped more than $1.5 billion in bonuses, despite the Parliamentary Budget Officer finding “less than 50 percent of (performance) targets are consistently met.” And it dished out more than one million pay raises over the last four years.

Crown corporations. The government should sell off Crown corporations, such as the CBC, which costs taxpayers more than $1 billion every year and competes with media companies. VIA Rail should be on the chopping block. The feds shovelled $1.8 billion at the failing Crown corporation over the last five years just to cover operating losses.

Canada should also follow the lead of countries like the United Kingdom, Sweden, the Netherlands, Germany, New Zealand, and Portugal, which have fully or partially privatized postal services. According to its annual report, Canada Post lost $748 million last year and $548 million in 2022 and forecasts “larger, unsustainable losses in future years.”

There are countless other examples of government waste – a list too long to fully list here. Here are just a few examples:

The National Capital Commission spent $8 million building a barn at Rideau Hall. Parks Canada is spending $12 million hunting deer on one island. Three “affordability” cabinet retreats in one year cost more than $1 million.

Balancing the budget would only require modest restraint. In fact, the government could balance the budget this year if it stuck to its own spending plan from just two budgets ago. Even if you remove the extra capital gains tax cash, the deficit would be $5.5 billion, not $40 billion.

There are two key takeaways. First, Canadians are fed up with tax hikes and want less government spending. Second, there’s no shortage of places to cut.

The government should listen to Canadians, stop hiking taxes and cut spending.

Franco Terrazzano is the Federal Director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

A guide to which foods to eat to stay cool when the weather is scorching

Troy Media
-
0
A guide to which foods to eat to stay cool when the weather is scorching

Food to eat, and food to avoid, during heatwaves

Sylvain Charlebois, Troy Media

As temperatures rise in Eastern Canada, residents will face the sweltering conditions typically seen during Western Canada’s summer heatwaves. While the West is accustomed to summer heatwaves and heat domes, recent rainfall in many areas has offered some relief.

Heatwaves and droughts significantly impact grocery prices. The recent spike in olive oil and beef prices, caused by ongoing droughts in key regions for grain and olive production in North America and Europe, highlights this trend. Depleted olive inventories and rising cattle feed costs have forced many ranchers to sell their livestock prematurely.

The American Corn Belt, one of the world’s most intensive grain production regions, is a key indicator of the impact of climate on North American agriculture. Iowa State University experts recently highlighted the current ‘neutral’ weather phase as North America shifts from El Niño to La Niña later this summer and fall. They noted an “elevated signal” for warm temperatures in June, July, and August but noted “no clear indication regarding precipitation.” Unfavorable weather patterns in the Corn Belt inevitably lead to increased grocery prices.

While there is no need for alarm, climatic conditions clearly influence food costs. The Canadian dollar has also weakened against the U.S. dollar – declining about six percent over the past year – which could potentially increase the cost of food imports in the coming months.

Produce faces similar challenges. Extreme heat accelerates the wilting of fresh produce, complicates transportation, and strains supply chains. These factors invariably lead to higher prices at the checkout counter.

Heatwaves also significantly alter eating habits. Traditional hearty meals give way to lighter, cooler alternatives that help manage body temperature and hydration levels. Here’s a guide to keeping cool with food when the weather is scorching:

Optimal foods during a heatwave:

            •           Water-rich fruits: Watermelon, strawberries, cantaloupe, and peaches are ideal because they are high in water, aiding in hydration.

            •           Vegetables: Cucumbers, celery, lettuce, and zucchini offer refreshment and ease of digestion.

            •           Cold soups: Gazpacho and cucumber soup provide a cooling alternative to hot meals.

            •           Salads: Mixed greens and fruit salads deliver nutrition without heaviness.

            •           Smoothies: Blended fruits, vegetables, and yogurt create a cooling, nutrient-rich drink.

            •           Yogurt: Plain or with fresh fruits, yogurt is a light, protein-packed option.

            •           Herbal teas: Iced peppermint or chamomile tea can be both hydrating and soothing.

            •           Light proteins: Grilled chicken, fish, and tofu are easier to digest in the heat.

            •           Hydrating beverages: Water, coconut water, and electrolyte drinks help maintain hydration.

Foods to avoid during a heatwave:

            •           Heavy proteins: Red meat and pork can be difficult to digest and may increase body heat.

            •           Spicy foods: Hot peppers and spicy sauces can intensify the sensation of heat.

            •           Fried foods: Items like French fries and fried chicken are heavy and dehydrating.

            •           Sugary drinks: Soda and sweetened iced tea can contribute to dehydration.

            •           Caffeine: Coffee and energy drinks can elevate dehydration risks.

            •           Alcohol: Beer and cocktails, although tempting, can exacerbate dehydration.

            •           High-fat dairy: Cream and cheese can be heavy and less appealing in the heat.

            •           Salty foods: Pretzels and salted nuts can increase thirst and dehydration.

Grocers must adapt to a market where consumers seek food suitable for high temperatures. Canadians must also consider food safety more seriously. Heatwaves heighten the risk of contamination, as products leaving coolers and fridges warm up more quickly. Ensuring the integrity of the cold chain is essential for the well-being of oneself, family, and friends.

As Eastern Canada swelters, it is crucial to recognize the broader implications of such weather events and work towards a unified approach to safeguarding our communities and food systems against the escalating climate challenges. We have navigated heatwaves before, and this time will be no different.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is senior director of the agri-food analytics lab and a professor in food distribution and policy at Dalhousie University.

How job seekers can showcase their value

Troy Media
-
0
How job seekers can showcase their value

Job seekers who focus on the value they bring to a business achieve the most success at landing a job

Nick Kossovan

More than ever, job seekers, with a sense of entitlement, are hyper-focusing on getting paid what they’re worth. Job seekers seldom consider, let alone quantify, the value of their work, which determines their worth. Hence, a candidate’s or position’s worth is calculable and, therefore, isn’t as subjective as is often assumed.

INTERVIEWER: “What salary are you looking for?”

JOB SEEKER: “$75,000 per year.”

INTERVIEWER: “What warrants you getting $75,000?”

(The interviewer wants the candidate to quantify their value to justify a salary of $75,000.)

Job seekers tend to calculate their worth based on their experience, skills, education, work history, and living expenses. Their sense of entitlement – “I deserve a high income because life is expensive” – blurs the distinction between how they perceive their worth and the value of their work.

Employers care little about your experience, skills, education, or financial needs. Their primary interest is in the results you can produce, which determines your value and, subsequently, how much you’re worth paying. Few job seekers quantify the impact they can have, if hired, on an employer’s business. Most job seekers don’t include quantifiable numbers (read: results achieved) on their resumes or LinkedIn profiles, which would encourage employers to want to meet them. Conversely, job seekers are comfortable conjuring up compensation figures based on what they feel entitled to.

Several years ago, I worked for a financial services company. One Friday afternoon, I met a colleague in the cafeteria. All week, he’d been interviewing candidates for a workforce manager position. I asked how the interviews had gone. As he opened his can of Dr Pepper, he sighed. “My last interview, as well as several throughout the week … let’s just say we didn’t create their lifestyle, yet they feel we should be responsible for it. I was constantly bombarded with questions asking about our benefits and compensation package. Of the eight candidates I interviewed, only two focused on what they could offer rather than what we could offer them.”

Employers didn’t create your lifestyle, so why do you expect them to support it?

A company’s success depends on profitability and efficiency, which means keeping expenses in check. For most companies, payroll is the biggest expense; therefore, every employee needs to pull their weight by delivering an ROI that justifies their salary, as well as answering the question: How does [employee] help the company reduce costs or increase revenue?

Companies don’t hire the most qualified candidates. They hire the candidates they believe will deliver the most value; hence, as a job seeker, instead of focusing on your qualifications, focus on the value you can offer an employer.

Once, an interviewer asked me, “What salary are you looking for, and what will the company get in return?” I was impressed that my interviewer asked me what they were thinking without sugarcoating it. I now include this question in my interview questions. Several times, I’ve agreed to pay a candidate’s salary request based on their answer.

Your competition, many of whom are younger, hungrier, and equally qualified as you, also plays a significant role in determining your worth. Additionally, easy access to overseas labour, robotics, self-serve technology, artificial intelligence, freelancers, and third-party vendors influence the fundamental determinant of wages: supply and demand.

The law of demand in labour markets works like this: An increase in wages or salaries reduces the demand for labour. Conversely, a lower salary or wage increases the demand for labour. Ironically, higher wages increase supply because more people want to work for a higher wage, resulting in a more competitive job market. This is why highly sought-after jobs – jobs with a reputable and stable company that pays well and provides good benefits – are more challenging to land than a job with, for example, a small family business.

Despite all the “legalities” quasi-imposed on employers, employers hire candidates at their discretion. Employers owe you and me nothing. A job seeker’s goal is to get hired based on their own merits and, therefore, solely responsible for proving to an employer how they’ll add value (measurable results) to their company.

A job seeker who presents a cost-benefit analysis business case – hiring is a business transaction – explaining the value the employer would gain by hiring them will set them apart from their competition. Being given a job isn’t an absolute right; it’s an earned privilege.

I’d never argue that any one person is worth more than another. I contend that the value of an employee’s work, and therefore its worth, varies, sometimes significantly, between employees. There’s no denying that employees who go the extra mile, produce above the minimum expectations, positively influence their colleagues and are team players add more value to their employer than those who do the minimum. (aka, quiet quitting)

Only after you’ve established what measurable value you can bring to an employer can you begin discussing your compensation. Job hunting isn’t the place for any sense of entitlement; you must demonstrate your value to an employer – prove your worth.

Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job.

Canada’s economic backbone is facing yet another crisis

Troy Media
-
0
Canada’s economic backbone is facing yet another crisis

A looming strike by CN and CP highlights a chronic vulnerability in our national logistics infrastructure

Sylvain Charlebois

Troy Media

In a country as vast and resource-rich as Canada, one would expect logistics – a critical backbone of our economy – to be a priority. Yet, it remains one of the most underappreciated aspects of our economic infrastructure.

Canadians, largely oblivious to the intricacies of supply chains, are accustomed to the seamless appearance of goods on store shelves. This perception belies a stark reality: Canada has one of the poorest reputations worldwide for logistical efficiency, and we are teetering on the brink of yet another disruptive labour dispute.

The looming strike involving Canadian National (CN) and Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) threatens to cripple the nation’s largest railway network. CN, spanning 20,000 miles and transporting 300 million tons of cargo annually, is vital for connecting eastern and western Canada with the southern U.S.

This potential strike, the third rail conflict in five years and the fifth including port disputes in Montreal and Vancouver, highlights a chronic vulnerability in our national logistics system.

Unfortunately, the timing coincides with peak export periods. For instance, Canada exported over 2.6 million metric tonnes of grain last June. A strike during this period could inflict economic losses exceeding $35 million daily, not to mention the cascading effects on global supply chains.

The frequency of these disruptions tarnishes Canada’s reputation for reliable transportation and procurement, particularly impacting the food and beverage sector. This sector depends crucially on both the steady supply of manufacturing inputs and the distribution of finished products across the country. Repeated labour disputes and logistical bottlenecks have become annual threats to the economic stability of our agri-food industries.

The pandemic starkly tested our already fragile infrastructure, with blockades and additional strikes exacerbating the situation. Disruptions often compromise the cold chain, leading to decreased quality and safety of food products – overripe produce and prematurely spoiled dairy products became familiar sights during supply irregularities.

Our logistical framework, encompassing roads, bridges, railways, and ports, is notably underfunded. According to rankings by the World Bank and S&P Global Market Intelligence, the Port of Vancouver is the second-worst globally based on efficiency. All major Canadian ports rank low internationally, and our airports do little better.

In response, the Trudeau government’s recent budget proposes a paltry sum of less than $5 billion for strategic infrastructure to support exports – a mere drop in the bucket given the scale of needed improvements. This underinvestment signifies a grave underestimation of logistics’ critical role in our national economy.

To safeguard the sustainability and competitiveness of Canada’s food economy, it is imperative to recognize food supply chains as an essential service nationwide. This recognition would help stabilize expectations and planning for agri-food companies, from farmers to retailers.

Furthermore, logistical operations should be elevated to a national priority, reflecting the sector’s strategic importance to our economic sovereignty. The federal government must take the lead in reminding us of logistics’ pivotal role rather than relying on the public to recognize this need.

The challenges posed by climate change and the vast Canadian landscape demand a deliberate and strategic approach to logistics. While the East has benefited from the St. Lawrence Seaway, deliberate efforts to stay competitive must be made in the rest of the country.

It is becoming clear that addressing ongoing logistical challenges is not just a matter of economic policy but of national importance. It is time for Ottawa to step up and champion a robust national logistics strategy, ensuring that the veins and arteries that keep our country’s economic heart beating are healthy and resilient.

Dr. Sylvain Charlebois is senior director of the agri-food analytics lab and a professor in food distribution and policy at Dalhousie University.

Moe calls out Trudeau’s budget debt, but his own is even worse

Troy Media
-
0
Moe calls out Trudeau’s budget debt, but his own is even worse

Gage Haubrich

Take two Canadian governments: the first doubled its debt since becoming elected, and the other has increased its own debt by 166 percent over the same period.

Which government would you say has better budgeting skills?

Easy – it’s obviously the first one because it increased debt less. But the other one doesn’t have room to gloat.

So, which two governments are we comparing?

The first is the eight years of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s government in Ottawa and the second is the Saskatchewan government over the same timeframe.

That’s what makes Premier Scott Moe’s comments on the federal budget a little lacking in humility.

“It’s very unfortunate that this is a government that just won’t even try and won’t even attempt to curtail some of the spending and the investments that they’re making and try to at least get close to balancing the books federally,” said Moe, when asked about the feds’ deficit.

Trudeau can’t be let off the hook for his runaway spending, but Moe should look at his own record with the province’s books.

Trudeau’s budget contains a $40-billion deficit and no relief to help cash-strapped taxpayers. Moe’s budget saddled taxpayers with a $273 million deficit and also lacked new tax relief.

Now, the numbers are smaller at the provincial level, but the problem is still serious. The difference is that Moe is steering the finances of a province of 1.2 million people, not an entire country with a population of about 40 million.

Since becoming premier in 2018, Moe has balanced exactly one provincial budget. And that one balanced budget wasn’t the result of some newfound financial genius or a reduction in spending but rather a huge increase in resource prices that drove provincial revenues to record highs.

Trudeau, on the other hand, has balanced zero budgets since being elected in 2015.

It’s all well and good to criticize the Trudeau government for maxing out the taxpayer credit card. But it would also be good if Moe’s government did some serious introspection about its own spending habits.

That’s because years of failing to balance the budget means that more and more money must be wasted every year on interest charges on the provincial debt.

This year, the provincial government will be spending $728 million on interest payments on the debt. That works out to about $2 million a day. Just imagine waking up every morning and flushing a couple million because you continually failed to get your budget under control.

And this isn’t a new problem.

Eight years ago, Saskatchewan’s debt was about $7.9 billion. At the end of this year, it will be $21.1 billion. Over that same time, the government wasted about $4.5 billion on interest charges. That means that the amount of interest paid in Saskatchewan during that period exceeds this year’s entire education budget.

And it’s because the government keeps spending money it doesn’t have. The Saskatchewan government is spending about $2.6 billion more inflation-adjusted this year than it did in 2016-17. And spending like that means deficits.

Those years of deficits aren’t because the government has been cutting taxes. The province’s revenues are higher than almost ever before. Part of that is because the government hiked the PST from five to six percent in 2017 and stuck it on more things. And the government did it again in 2022 when it started charging PST on event tickets like Rider games.

Despite the rhetoric, there’s more that unites Moe and Trudeau than divides them when it comes to increasing the debt.

If Moe wants to critique Ottawa, he first needs to get his own fiscal house in order.

Gage Haubrich is the Prairie Director for the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

Complaining isn’t a job search strategy

Daily Herald Contributor
-
0
Complaining isn’t a job search strategy

A successful job search and complaining don’t go hand in hand

Nick Kossovan

Troy Media

Complaining is not a strategy. You have to work with the world as you find it, not as you would have it be.
– Jeff Bezos

In a different reality, employers would:

            •           Offer salaries dependent on the candidate’s needs, not the job’s market value.

            •           Not use applicant tracking software. (ATS)

            •           Reply to every application.

            •           Have a short and transparent hiring process.

            •           Not scrutinize your resume and digital footprint.

Today’s reality:

            •           More than ever, getting hired comes down to who you know and who knows you.

            •           Employers are skittish (read: cautious) when it comes to hiring, hence why they have long, drawn-out hiring processes with many hurdles to navigate.

            •           Ghosting (in fairness, candidates also ghost).

            •           Employers are looking for the perfect fit and are willing to wait until such a candidate comes along. (What employers want to see and the stereotypes they expect are constantly shifting paradigms.)

I understand why job seekers are frustrated with their job search and how employers design their hiring process. However, punching down on employers as if that’ll get them closer to your goal, presumably to get a job, accomplishes nothing other than wasting time and energy. Job seekers need to know and accept their controllables and uncontrollables.

Can’t control:

            •           The economy or the number of job openings.

            •           How an employer has designed their hiring process.

            •           A hiring manager’s biases.

            •           Who you’re competing against?

Can control:

            •           The amount of time and effort you put into your job search.

            •           Whom you connect with and how you maintain your connections.

            •           Your digital footprint.

            •           Your preparation and performance. (Practice! Practice! Practice!)

            •           How you cope with rejection. (Embrace the power of “Next!”)

Focus on what you can control, not on what you can’t control. Where you focus is where your energy goes. You can spend your energy and time complaining about employers being unfair and not giving you a chance. Such complaints stem from a sense of entitlement and do nothing to improve your job search success. Complaining discourages you from overcoming the many challenges you’re facing throughout your job search and breeds negativity, which manifests into excuses or believing you’re a victim of some “ism.”

Complaining isn’t a strategy or a way of taking responsibility; it’s not even a way of getting what we want. It’s a way of avoiding responsibility, blaming others, and trying to get sympathy without having to take action.

An essay I recommend everyone read is The Common Denominator of Success, by Albert E.M. Gray, who spent much of his life searching for the one denominator all successful people share. Putting first things first was the common denominator. “The successful person has the habit of doing the things failures don’t like to do,” he wrote. Put simply, to succeed, you must form the habit of doing what others don’t like to do. This is especially true when job searching (e.g., networking).

Job seekers tend to complain because it’s easier than doing what they should be doing. Additionally, job seekers have expectations of employers, which, when not met, cause them to complain. Managing your expectations will limit your complaints about employers.

Two truisms job seekers would be wise to accept:

            •           Total strangers (employers) owe you nothing.

            •           Employment isn’t an absolute right.

I can’t overstress the importance of accepting these truisms. If you’re feeling bitter or resentful about your job search, wishing things were different, or thinking how life isn’t fair – does any of this sound familiar? – you’re fighting reality, which, as Bezos pointed out, “you have to work with the world as you find it, not as you would have it be.”

Complaining is counterproductive and does nothing to help you land a job. In today’s brutal job market, or any job market, you need to be proactive as opposed to reactive, which is what most job seekers are. The difference between reactive and proactive job seekers has nothing to do with degrees, skills or experience. The difference is their mindset. Proactive job seekers base their expectations on reality. Reactive job seekers base their expectations on how they wish the world would be.

Guess which spends their energy complaining.

There are four critical steps in the proactive job search:

            •           Identify which companies interest you.

            •           Research the companies.

            •           Leverage your network.

            •           Reach out to hiring managers.

There’s too much of this:

            •           One thousand applicants answer a job posting.

            •           Nine hundred candidates sprayed and prayed and, therefore, don’t have the required qualifications, skills, or experience or know what the business does.

            •           Seventy-five are “okay” candidates.

            •           Twenty-five are candidates worth pursuing.

The Internet has made it much too easy to apply – spray and pray – which has resulted in qualified candidates getting lost in the tsunami of “quick apply applications” employers receive for their job openings. Job seekers have to deal with this reality, the world they have to work with, and no amount of complaining will change this reality.

Save your energy for your job search. Job hunting isn’t a totally unpredictable process if you’re a proactive job seeker and understand that successful job searching and complaining don’t go hand in hand.

Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job.

Searching for a job? Being likable trumps skills and qualifications every time

Troy Media
-
0
Searching for a job? Being likable trumps skills and qualifications every time

Nick Kossovan

Troy Media

I always remind myself that there is someone younger, hungrier, and more skilled than I am; in other words, there’s always someone better than me. This keeps me humble and on my toes.

Employers can’t be blamed for seeking and holding out for the “best” candidate, especially in a job market flooded with candidates. Every recruiter, HR professional, and hiring manager knows no perfect candidate exists. Yet, they still hunt for purple squirrels.

Today’s job market:

            •           The number of jobs has decreased.

            •           The number of candidates has increased.

            •           Fewer people are leaving their jobs.

With so many people seeking work, employers have, along with access to technology that can do the work – job seekers and employees are entering an era where they’re starting to compete against AI, along with robotics – and cost-effective alternatives, such as hiring freelancers, contractors and sending jobs overseas, an array of options to get their jobs done. Hence, there’s always the feeling that there’s someone or something better out there.

An interviewer’s thoughts after an interview: “Yeah, [name] ticks off most of the boxes, but with all the resumes we’re getting, there’s a good chance I’ll find someone who ticks off all the boxes.” It’s common for employers to keep job postings open for several months while they try to find a candidate with specific skills, education, certification, and experience rather than hire for “potential,” which is impossible to determine.

Right now, candidates with shinier resumes and LinkedIn profiles than yours are going after the same jobs you’re gunning for. The ocean of job seekers is filled with more experienced fish. However, there’s a bright side; being “the best” is highly subjective. Perfect on paper or LinkedIn doesn’t always equate to perfect in person.

While employers seek the best, it should be noted that “the best” isn’t always quantifiable, and skills and experience aren’t the only things hiring managers consider. In actuality, “the best” is more about compatibility with the company’s culture and your interviewer(s) – especially if your interviewer will be your boss – and timing, which you have no control over, than “there’s always someone better.” There’s no mythical unfairness or unseen forces at play other than life happening.

Here’s a question to ponder: Which reasons did you feel contributed to you not being hired for the jobs you interviewed for? Was it because the employer felt it was in their best interest to continue looking for a better candidate, or was it something else? Putting aside your self-interests, do you think the employers who didn’t hire you made a mistake? If “yes,” why?

I’ve mentioned before that being likable supersedes your skills and experience. Your charisma, character, smile, clothes, and physical presence will either work for you or against you. It’s not rocket science to self-reflect and determine which of your qualities, behaviours, and physical characteristics entices or repels employers.

Prioritizing being likable over your skills and experience is a job search strategy that more job seekers should adopt.

Several years ago, I was competing against another candidate for a position I was excited about. After three interviews and an online personality assessment, I was blown out of the water. Compared to past rejections, this one really hurt. Curious about who got hired, I kept an eye on the company’s LinkedIn page to see when new employees appeared. Several weeks later, the person I lost out to updated their LinkedIn profile and appeared as a new employee. When I read their profile, I thought, “Damn! I’d hire her over me.” She ticked off all the boxes and many more outside of skills and experience.

When you get an interview, it’s because what the employer read on your resume, LinkedIn profile, and social media appealed to them on some level, and they feel you could do the job. Now comes the tricky part: selling yourself as the best candidate. Your goal is to stop your interviewer from thinking there are better candidates out there than you and not hiring you would be a mistake.

Work in statements that illustrate why you’re the best candidate.

            •           “I’m excited about this opportunity because …”

            •           “I really enjoy

.”

            •           “I admire the way you [or the company] …”

            •           “I solved a similar problem.”

            •           “I’m a match for this job because …”

            •           “I consider this job a good match for my long-term goals, and I would like to continue building my career with this company.”

            •           “Collaborating with others is one of my greatest strengths.”

            •           “One of the things I would keep an eye on if I were hired is …”

Despite many hiring managers’ attempts, it’s impossible to determine “the best” candidate during the recruitment process based on a measurable scale alone. Therefore, stop fretting about being “the best” and focus on being your best and likable version.

I’ve yet to meet a hiring manager who hired a candidate they didn’t like, no matter how much they thought the candidate’s skills and experience were “the best.”

Nick Kossovan, a well-seasoned veteran of the corporate landscape, offers advice on searching for a job.

How the win-at-all-costs mentality in baseball is leading to a rise in pitching injuries

Troy Media
-
0
How the win-at-all-costs mentality in baseball is leading to a rise in pitching injuries

The quest for immediate victory in baseball is jeopardizing long-term athlete health

Ken Reed, Troy Media

As with virtually every contemporary sports issue, win-at-all-costs (WAAC) and profit-at-all-costs (PAAC) mentalities are at the foundation of the numerous pitching injuries we’re seeing in baseball.

The American Sports Medicine Institute (ASMI) has called the rise in the number of professional pitchers requiring ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (“Tommy John surgery”) an epidemic.

The problem starts at the youth level. Travel leagues, showcase tournaments, personal pitching trainers, indoor pitching facilities, etc., have led to a growing number of young athletes becoming year-round, one-sport athletes, including those who specialize in pitching. Pitching without extended breaks is a recipe for disaster.

Youth and high school coaches too often put winning games, tournaments and leagues ahead of the long-term health of their young athletes. At the college and professional level, and increasingly at the high school and youth levels, the quest is for more velocity, higher spin rate and greater break on breaking balls, seemingly without concern for what those goals do to young arms. Winning now is the overarching goal, not long-term athlete health.

Meanwhile, we have a growing number of youth sports entrepreneurs (aka youth sports vultures) driven by the almighty dollar. These folks create travel teams, showcase tournaments and pitching clinics in order to make a buck off the backs of young athletes and their parents.

That said, parents need to take some blame too, as too many focus on getting their youngsters athletic scholarships. To that end, they are making their kids year-round, one-sport specialists as early as seven years old.

In the book Grit, Angela Duckworth writes, “Sports psychologist Jean Côté finds that shortcutting this stage of relaxed, playful interest, discovery, and development has dire consequences. In his research, professional athletes like Rowdy Gaines who, as children, sampled a variety of different sports before committing to one, generally fare much better in the long run. This early breadth of experience helps the young athlete figure out which sport fits better than others. Sampling also provides an opportunity to “cross-train” muscles and skills that will eventually complement more focused training. While athletes who skip this stage often enjoy an early advantage in competition against less specialized peers, Côté finds that they’re more likely to become injured physically and to burn out.”

Many medical doctors, researchers, sports physiologists and trainers agree with Cote.

ASMI biomechanist Tony Laughlin believes you can’t examine the rise in UCL injuries requiring Tommy John surgery at the MLB level without also examining what’s taking place in youth baseball.

“There’s a lot going on in youth baseball, where they’re pitching a lot and pitching year-round, where they’re just riding these ligaments into the ground,” says Laughlin. “We want the focus to be for parents and younger kids to give their arms a rest.”

MLB pitchers in the ’70s and ’80s grew up in the ’50s and ’60s. The vast majority of them played three sports. One-sport athletes were a rarity. Kids in that era took part in many other activities in the summer besides baseball, including riding bikes, fishing, roller skating, swimming, exploring nature, etc. Today’s kids spend very little time on these kinds of activities. Travel baseball schedules are daunting. Down time for today’s youngsters typically includes hours spent on cell phones and video games. Moreover, kids’ parents tend to drive their children everywhere, making bikes a lot less needed than in decades past.

At the big league level, MLB organizations are paying athletes for increased velocity. The chance for a bigger salary is driving young pitchers to try and throw as hard as possible. But there’s definitely a downside to maxing out on velocity.

“Velocity is a factor,” says Dr. Glenn Fleisig, research director at the American Sports Medicine Institute. “All things being equal, throwing 95 mph is more stressful than throwing 90.”

College and pro teams also push pitchers to boost spin rates and movement on pitches. Big-breaking sweepers are the latest evidence of that. These types of pitches are very hard on elbow ligaments.

Some MLB pitchers are suggesting that the introduction of the pitch time clock is a big part of the increase in pitching injuries. I don’t think so. Arm and shoulder injuries have been trending up for a couple of decades now. Serious arm injuries, like those requiring Tommy John surgery, were rare in the ’80s. When they happened, they usually hit older veteran pitchers, not youngsters in their teens and 20s. Also, the length of games in the ’70s and ’80s was shorter than the games played since the advent of the pitch clock. Pitchers threw quickly in that era without the amount of injuries we see today.

There isn’t one simple answer to the pitching injury epidemic but the beginning of a solution starts by looking at the WAAC and PAAC mentalities that are at the root of this issue.

Ken Reed is sports policy director for League of Fans (LeagueofFans.org), a sports reform project. He is the author of How We Can Save Sports: A Game Plan.

123...21Page 1 of 21