I know.  This ain't local news but it's top of mind.  Plus I just want to crab about it a bit.  My company is looking for an Office Manager.  We're running ads in a couple of different places in an attempt to get a good group of candidates.  I'm writing this mainly for entertainment but maybe it'll help someone else out there not do something dumb in the resume / interview process….so let's cover a couple of different parts of the process, shall we?

Initial email response: Do not bang out the initial email on your phone.  Spend some time and actually write the thing.  Do NOT simply flip your resume in without some sort of intro note.  It's a chance to create a positive first impression.  If you want to be able to respond quickly, craft the email and send it to yourself so you can simply forward it from your phone.  Get rid of FW: in the subject line.  Read the ad.  If there are requirements, meet them.  I always ask for salary requirements, a resume in pdf format and availability.  If you do not provide that, I delete your resume.

Formatting: It matters.  If your resume or email makes my eyes hurt or information is difficult to find, I'm deleting it.  Use full justification with clean blocks of text.  Use 12 point font for body text and 14 for captions.  Write your resume in Word and then PDF it.  Do NOT cut and paste it into an email.  If you can't figure it out then pay someone to do it.

Work history: This is the big tamale!  Be thorough and clear in your job duties and employment dates.  If you aren't, your resume is going in the trash.  I am not going to spend time figuring out what you were doing if you cannot be bothered to make it plain.  If you have a job or two that are sketchy, explain them in your cover letter (I received a resume from a gal who was probably a stripper.  She "aggressively merchandised libations and entertained customers".  She stated plainly in her cover letter that "she needed money".  I didn't interview her but she did make the first cut).  Do not leave jobs out unless you murdered someone.  If you have a year long gap that is otherwise unexplained, I'm going to think you are hiding something or just don't need the money.  Neither is good.  If you have worked many contract jobs, indicate that.  No employer likes a job hopper.

Be Honest: there are so many ways to check stuff out that you're going to get found out.  It takes two minutes to see if your Facebook, LinkedIn and resume jive.  If they don't, you're gone.  Everyone worth working for is going to do a background check and maybe a credit history.  Be forthcoming and honest.  This should go without saying but I'm no longer surprised by anything.

Facebook:  For the love of al that's good please, clean up or hide your Facebook profile before you start applying.  I would guess that 30% of applicants are elimiinated based solely on their social media profile.  Here's what happens when I get a resume that looks interesting: I go look up the persons Facebook page.  If I can't find them on Facebook, I go to LinkedIn.  If I can't find them on either then I put the resume in a pile for later review.  It's a good idea to have a clean Facebook page.  People want to know what other people look like.  It's not bad, it's human.  However, if I go to your Facebook page and there's a picture of you doing bong hits (been there, seen that) or your "bae" licking your boob (also true), I delete your resume.  If you make the first cut and we phone screen you, we also look at your friends on your Facebook page.  Only brain-dead employers don't do this. 

Interviewing: Research the company so you sound educated about the prospective employer.  It gets you noticed.  One of the first questions I ask candidates is "what do you know about what we do?"  If they don't know, it gives me some idea of their level of interest.  Look at the people you're talking to.  Shake hands.  It's an opportunity for you to learn about the person across the table.  Bring a pad, make some notes.  Always have a couple of prepared questions.  Always make sure that one or two of your questions will not have been answered in the normal course of an interview.  If you have a question that gets the interviewer talking about them self or their company it helps create a connection.

Dress appropriately:  If you're going to interview in an office, wear a damn coat and tie.  Shave.  If you're a gal, do something similar and with sensible shoes.  Both sexes should dress modestly without any crazy colors.  You want to look accomplished, not like a stripper or a hit man.  Back when I was interviewing I would always put my suit on in my car so I wouldn't tip off my employer!  Find a bathroom if at all possible so you look squared away.

On time is late:  Arrive at your interview 10 minutes early so you can clear any paperwork necessary.  If you're on time or late it looks bad.  So does being 30 minutes early.  Looks like you have nothing to do.  Also, never cancel and attempt to reschedule an interview unless you've been in a car wreck.  If you email your contact to cancel, send a picture of your wrecked car along with the email.  If you email me and cancel our interview, I ain't rescheduling.  That sounds hard but I've never had one of those work.  Ever.

I could go on forever but I won't.  I know that this sounds like it was written in the 50's.  Some of you that read this will think it old-fashioned.  It isn't.  It is the real world.  Remember that you, the applicant, are the one that needs the job.  Sure, the employer needs staff but odds are they have a hundred resumes.  You need to work hard to stand out.  If you can't be bothered to sell yourself to me during the interview why would I hire you?  You only get one shot at the interview, make it worthwhile.

Several years ago I signed up for an Information Technology industry event in New York city.  I was interested to see the city as I hadn't been there since I was a kid.  I don't remember much of that long-ago trip but the bits and pieces I do recall leave me to believe that my grandparents were very careful about where we went in the city.  I do not, for instance, recall a trip to Times Square – a must see destination for any current day tourist – and with good reason.  In the 70's Times Square was an insanely dangerous place (interestingly, the vestiges of those days aren't too hard to find even today) so we didn't go there.  

In any event, I needed to get to NYC.  The timing of the shuttle flight didn't work for me.  I didn't fancy driving up there.  Having driven to Atlantic City in the recent past I thought the tolls might add up to more than the cost of a flight.  So I decided to take the train.  I really didn't know much about how to travel by train so imagine my surprise when I discovered that I could simply walk to the train station in Old Town and hitch a ride directly to Madison Square Garden!!  Like 4-5 blocks from where I was staying.  That just blew me away.  The trip itself was an eye opener.  Yes, Amtrak needs some private sector thinking but I really didn't expect much.  I was pleasantly surprised at how much space you have on a train.  However what was really shocking was the condition of the rail infrastructure.  The rail platforms in Union Station  look like they just arrived from a war zone and the crumbling walls, fences and general disrepair of the track side infrastructure was surprising.  So it's pretty interesting that train travel, commuter trains and even street cars are making a comeback as we are now discovering that you can't simply pave your way to efficiency.  Think about that.  We as a society have spent the past 70 years actively destroying mass transit infrastructure that worked in favor of that which does not scale – the car.  HOT lanes represent the death throes of car-centric commuting.  We find ourselves trying to solve problems that we had a handle on decades ago and, as we continue to try to prop up car-based transit with variable tolls and private sector partnerships and ever more pavement, we end up stratifying a resource meant to empower every member of our society – not just those that can afford it.

What happened, in essence, is that in trying to empower the individual, we ended up doing just the opposite by shirking our responsibilities as a society.

That's where I'm afraid we are heading with "education reform" in its current manifestation.  I think we must be careful about tearing down institutions that have successfully educated generations of Americans in favor of the latest shiny thing.  "School choice" seems to be the latest fad.  Look, I've got no fight with private schools of any stripe.  I fully support people's choice if they want to homeschool and also think those kids should be able to play sports, etc. at their public school.  Doing otherwise seems punitive and petty.  I've done a lot of thinking and research on how to open a charter school in Manassas in what I call an "additive" manner.  I talked to members of the School Board and DMag about it.  They weren't wild about the idea but they did humor me.  I came to the conclusion that we are probably too small a district to do the charter school thing in an additive way – a way that brings more resources instead of simply moving them around shell-game style.

A perfect example of this shell game parading around as "reform" is the idea of educational savings accounts (HB 389).  This law would allow folks that pull their kids from the public schools to receive 80% of the state money dedicated to educating their child into a "savings account" that they could spend on other educational options.  One argument for such a thing are that "It's my tax money" and there is no arguing that it is.  However, I do not have a child in any public school so why would I need to continue to pay?  It's "my tax money" as well.  I could use ten grand in a savings account.  Opponents point out that this, in their opinion, has more to do with funding private faith-based schools – something that the state constitution seems to prohibit.

This is a far more important thread that is being pulled than may seem obvious.  Two reasons:

First of all, incrementally de-funding the public schools will not fix them.  If we're being intellectually honest, we'll make the difficult point that socioeconomic status has far more to do with educational outcomes than we might care to admit.  We might further point out that Manassas has far more single-parent, low-income families than our City Council wants to talk about.  Let alone attempt to address.  An example of what EDGE (a business group I helped start) discovered when helping get the new pre-K system started: we were donating desktop computers to kids so that they could do the online curriculum and found that not only did the kids lack a computer, they didn't even have a damn desk.  Prefering to not get into the furniture biz, we started giving out laptops.  That was IN MANASSAS. 

The second, and more important, reason is that this is a thing that we as a society are undertaking.  Education is the great equalizer and we as a society have taken the troubling turn towards viewing the public schools as simply vendors of education.  That view won't work.  If the public schools are "broken" then we have to fix them, not de-fund them.  This is a "we" thing.  Not a "they" thing.  Someone else is not going to get this done.  We as a society have to do it.

Another talking point about this kind of "reform" is that this would provide competition, resulting in strong schools.  Are we turning government institiions into survival of the fittest?  Has that worked anywhere else?  Also, If that's true why aren't we using this model for the really marginal things that the state does – like selling liquor?  Certainly the private sector is capable of selling liquore far more efficiently than the state is, right?  If I go accross the Potomac and buy liquor it is both cheaper and I have more options.  That doesn't happen because our state government likes to control that aspect of our life (odd for a "conservative" state) and it is a painless source of tax income.

I can tell you, based on my time in office that it would help immensely if there were more resources to help local elected folk.  Yes, their professional staff should be of significant help but outside resources provided by the state or the feds that provide a third-party expert would be great.  Turn the department of education into a group of experts to help local districts and their leaders understand best practices.  This is a societal problem and, just like transportation, if we stratify our educational facility more than it currently is, it will become, and stay, "broken".  A situation that benefits politicians and corrupt officials….and nobody else – well – unless you live in a wealthy district.  Then it'll be ok.

The General Assembly should focus more on that and forget about de-funding the public schools.  They should also stop campaigning aginst the public schools.  They are doing an insanely difficult job and could use a hand, not political brickbats.