Some people's opinions are that they believe that Pilar who works as a Supervisor for Contemporary Services Corporation (CSC) in the San Francisco Bay Area is a cocky, rude,
arrogant bitch who needs to learn some proper manners. Some people's opinions are that they believe that Pilar is a very fussy person when she said: "I'm a very picky." and "I'm a stickler."
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Monday, December 8, 2008
Despite
"Despite the claims of test publishers, it seems likely that the overall rate of dissatisfaction is much higher than 5 percent. One need only look at the number of complainants who signed onto Sibi Soroka's MMPI lawsuit to realize that these tests are not just invasive- they are downright offensive. They contain gross intrusions into sensitive areas, and more importantly, they show little disregard for an individual's dignity and self-esteem. Nowhere is this more evident than in the way they lump the entire job-seeking population into two categories: 'recommended for hire,' and 'not recommended for hire.'
Discovering that you had been denied employment due to a poor test score would be bad enough if it happened only once, but what if there are long-term repercussions? Two possibilities exist. In the first, your score could find its way into some kind of labor pool data base much in the same way your financial history now resides in one (or more) of the three giant credit-reporting firms. Second, if integrity tests are found to be sufficiently reliable (not valid, just reliable) then their use could lead to a burgeoning population of individuals who are systematically denied employment due to their constant failures. Both of these scenarios would result in the establishment of a permanent score-derived underclass: applicants unable to find work because of their inability to jump through the correct integrity test hoops. Is this fair?
I don't think so, and I know that many, many other people feel the same way. A paper-and-pencil integrity test will never be ethically defensible until it can prove its scientific validity and that doesn't appear to be anywhere on the horizon.
Benjamin Klemimuntz may have said it best when he said:"They are dishonest towards employers because they reject many potentially productive workers, hence causing greater costs than savings, and they are dishonest toward prospective employees because they constitute an unfair method of screening."
"While acknowledging that business owners have a right to protect themselves from counterproductive and criminally inclined employees, integrity test critics question whether these paper-and-pencil confessionals are fair to the vast majority of honest job applicants. One persistent criticism focuses attention on he actual test items; they are flawed, it is argued, because they are based on unproven assumptions. A passing score cannot be achieved unless the applicant demonstrates a punitive and authoritarian attitude; leniency is unacceptable, even though there is no hard evidence linking a charitable dispositon to dishonesty. Admissions items- equally unsupported- also give rise to some devilish catch-22s and logical conundrums: If Applicant A honestly reports his past misbehaviors, he is penalized with a lower test score. Applicant B, on the other hand, can withhold equally damaging information about his past and obtain a higher score- thus being rewarded for lying. As far as the integrity test is concerned, the applicant who tries to turn his life around and plot a course on the straight-and narrow is deemed less trustworthy than the applicant who continues to lie. This kind of twisted logic should be reason enough to cast doubts on the predictive capabilities of attitudes/admissions items, but there's more: these items consistently fail to take into account the strong role that situational variables play in determining behavior. The trait-heavy nature of most integrity tests is indefensible against what many see as fundamentally a security or 'environment management problem.'
Whether or not integrity test items are based on an ill-conceived theory of honestly is still hotly debated by opposing camps of psychologists and professional researchers. Other groups (like civil libertarians) are more concerned with privacy issues raised by the tests...There is a strong possibility that many of the applicants did not want to hurt their chances for employment by maligning the test, so they stuck with a socially desirable response. (Interestingly, this kind of 'self-protecting' instinct may have helped them more than they realized: additional studies have shown that those who object more to integrity tests are more likely to receive lower scores)."
This is what Charles said.
Discovering that you had been denied employment due to a poor test score would be bad enough if it happened only once, but what if there are long-term repercussions? Two possibilities exist. In the first, your score could find its way into some kind of labor pool data base much in the same way your financial history now resides in one (or more) of the three giant credit-reporting firms. Second, if integrity tests are found to be sufficiently reliable (not valid, just reliable) then their use could lead to a burgeoning population of individuals who are systematically denied employment due to their constant failures. Both of these scenarios would result in the establishment of a permanent score-derived underclass: applicants unable to find work because of their inability to jump through the correct integrity test hoops. Is this fair?
I don't think so, and I know that many, many other people feel the same way. A paper-and-pencil integrity test will never be ethically defensible until it can prove its scientific validity and that doesn't appear to be anywhere on the horizon.
Benjamin Klemimuntz may have said it best when he said:"They are dishonest towards employers because they reject many potentially productive workers, hence causing greater costs than savings, and they are dishonest toward prospective employees because they constitute an unfair method of screening."
"While acknowledging that business owners have a right to protect themselves from counterproductive and criminally inclined employees, integrity test critics question whether these paper-and-pencil confessionals are fair to the vast majority of honest job applicants. One persistent criticism focuses attention on he actual test items; they are flawed, it is argued, because they are based on unproven assumptions. A passing score cannot be achieved unless the applicant demonstrates a punitive and authoritarian attitude; leniency is unacceptable, even though there is no hard evidence linking a charitable dispositon to dishonesty. Admissions items- equally unsupported- also give rise to some devilish catch-22s and logical conundrums: If Applicant A honestly reports his past misbehaviors, he is penalized with a lower test score. Applicant B, on the other hand, can withhold equally damaging information about his past and obtain a higher score- thus being rewarded for lying. As far as the integrity test is concerned, the applicant who tries to turn his life around and plot a course on the straight-and narrow is deemed less trustworthy than the applicant who continues to lie. This kind of twisted logic should be reason enough to cast doubts on the predictive capabilities of attitudes/admissions items, but there's more: these items consistently fail to take into account the strong role that situational variables play in determining behavior. The trait-heavy nature of most integrity tests is indefensible against what many see as fundamentally a security or 'environment management problem.'
Whether or not integrity test items are based on an ill-conceived theory of honestly is still hotly debated by opposing camps of psychologists and professional researchers. Other groups (like civil libertarians) are more concerned with privacy issues raised by the tests...There is a strong possibility that many of the applicants did not want to hurt their chances for employment by maligning the test, so they stuck with a socially desirable response. (Interestingly, this kind of 'self-protecting' instinct may have helped them more than they realized: additional studies have shown that those who object more to integrity tests are more likely to receive lower scores)."
This is what Charles said.
Saturday, September 6, 2008
Silence
"Sometimes people get confused and think that informal conversation is okay, as long they don't 'make a statement,' or 'give a confession.' That's dangerously wrong. Anything you say (anything at all can be used against you, even questions, casual remarks, and jokes. It doesn't matter whether your words are written down or spoken, or whether you're in custody or free to go. And your statements can easily be twisted, taken out of context or misquoted. It's impossible to predict all the things that could go wrong once you start talking. So the only safe course is to remain silent."
"If you've been arrested and break your silence to give your name and address, immediately follow-up by repeating the Magic Words: 'I'm going to remain a silent. I would like to see a lawyer.' This restore your constitutional protection, making it illegal for the police to question you further.'
"The only exception to remaining silent is giving your name and address. You will have to provide that information if you want to be 'released on promise to appear.' Do not give any other information such as your social security number, the names of family members, employment data, etc. This is important because one of the most effective police interrogation techniques is to relax the subject by posing safe, normal questions- the kind that come up on countless forms and applications."
This is what Attorney Kataya said.
"If you've been arrested and break your silence to give your name and address, immediately follow-up by repeating the Magic Words: 'I'm going to remain a silent. I would like to see a lawyer.' This restore your constitutional protection, making it illegal for the police to question you further.'
"The only exception to remaining silent is giving your name and address. You will have to provide that information if you want to be 'released on promise to appear.' Do not give any other information such as your social security number, the names of family members, employment data, etc. This is important because one of the most effective police interrogation techniques is to relax the subject by posing safe, normal questions- the kind that come up on countless forms and applications."
This is what Attorney Kataya said.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Unlicensed
"Large-scale unlicensed broadcasting got a big boost in Italy in the wake of the Golden Age. Italian courts ruled that the radio licensing procedures were unconstitutional, and the field was left wide open. Anyone who could get along some gear together could go on the air, and many did. This included stations with various political points of view, commercial stations, and those whose purpose could perhaps be described as for the Hell of it...But since this is a case of state consent (through the courts) for unlicensed broadcasting, it doesn't strictly fall within the category of pirate radio."
"The FCC is seldom interested in tracking down and seizing hobbyist pirates unless there is some kind of complaint. They estimate that they close down fewer than twenty pirates a year, a small fraction of the total."
This is what Erwin said.
"The FCC is seldom interested in tracking down and seizing hobbyist pirates unless there is some kind of complaint. They estimate that they close down fewer than twenty pirates a year, a small fraction of the total."
This is what Erwin said.
Monday, May 12, 2008
Affluent
"In affluent parts of the country, people own summer homes and leave them totally unattended during the off-season. This provides burglars with tremendous 'window of opportunity' to break in and ransack them. Because these are usually located at the end of country roads, and with few neighbors, burglars run little risk of observation. In many cases, the only neighboring houses are other summer homes. Some vacation cottages are very well-furnished, with expensive electronics, making them rewarding targets.
Burglars like to work in solitude. A house with a side entrance unseen from the street makes a better target than one with entries in full. A corner house, one with a lot of shrubbery screening the entries, and one isolated at the end of a long drive offers the burglar more privacy."
This is what Burt said about how to try to prevent burglaries from happening to one's home.
Burglars like to work in solitude. A house with a side entrance unseen from the street makes a better target than one with entries in full. A corner house, one with a lot of shrubbery screening the entries, and one isolated at the end of a long drive offers the burglar more privacy."
This is what Burt said about how to try to prevent burglaries from happening to one's home.
Prevent
"The best way to prevent fires is to teach fire safety and prevention to your whole family, and make sure it is practiced religiously. Many fires could have been prevented, but have ended in tragedy because of a mistake or carelessness.
Fireplaces
A fireplace can be a wonderful addition to a home, but it is important to take extreme care around one. A fireplace screen should be used at all times so that sparks do not fly. No wood, newspaper or other types of flammables should be stored anywhere near a fireplace to prevent sparks from catching something on fire outside of the fireplace. The chimney to a fireplace should be regularly cleaned and maintenance to ensure that all combustible build-up is removed. All children and even adults should be aware of the dangers of playing anywhere near a fireplace, as well.
Smoking
If there is a smoker in the house, it is crucial that he or she follow the proper safety measures to prevent fires from cigarettes. Never smoke in bed or even if you are extremely tired. If you are drinking alcohol, you should not smoke, or at least smoke outside. Deep and large ashtrays should be used, and dumped frequently. An ashtray should never be emptied without wetting it first, to ensure that all sparks have been put out. Matches and lighters need to be put away and kept out of the reach of children.
Appliances.
Many appliances have malfunctioned or overheated, causing a fire to start. Space heaters are one appliance that can be very dangerous to have if not taken care of properly. Space heaters should only be on in a room that is occupied. Flammable materials should be as far away as possible, such as newspapers and clothes. A space heater should NEVER be left on if the house is going to be empty.
A clothes dryer is another such appliance that should always be attended to. A dryer should never be left running when no one is home. The lint screen should be cleaned often, and the dryer must be vented outside.Electrical appliances can be deadly, as well. Electrical cords, such as extensions, should be used with extreme care and not overloaded. They should not be run under anything flammable, such as a rug, or twisted around to fit over a nail. Light bulb wattages should not be too high, and be sure that all lamp light bulbs are not touching the shade. Air should be allowed around appliances such as a TV, toaster, and stereo sets, to allow air into the system to circulate and cut down on accidental overheating.
Fire prevention and safety is everyone’s concern. No one can predict the start of a fire, so it is important that all family is prepared for such in an emergency. For more information, you can talk to your local fire department for information on classes and fire prevention measures that can mean the difference between life or death for you and your family."
Fireplaces
A fireplace can be a wonderful addition to a home, but it is important to take extreme care around one. A fireplace screen should be used at all times so that sparks do not fly. No wood, newspaper or other types of flammables should be stored anywhere near a fireplace to prevent sparks from catching something on fire outside of the fireplace. The chimney to a fireplace should be regularly cleaned and maintenance to ensure that all combustible build-up is removed. All children and even adults should be aware of the dangers of playing anywhere near a fireplace, as well.
Smoking
If there is a smoker in the house, it is crucial that he or she follow the proper safety measures to prevent fires from cigarettes. Never smoke in bed or even if you are extremely tired. If you are drinking alcohol, you should not smoke, or at least smoke outside. Deep and large ashtrays should be used, and dumped frequently. An ashtray should never be emptied without wetting it first, to ensure that all sparks have been put out. Matches and lighters need to be put away and kept out of the reach of children.
Appliances.
Many appliances have malfunctioned or overheated, causing a fire to start. Space heaters are one appliance that can be very dangerous to have if not taken care of properly. Space heaters should only be on in a room that is occupied. Flammable materials should be as far away as possible, such as newspapers and clothes. A space heater should NEVER be left on if the house is going to be empty.
A clothes dryer is another such appliance that should always be attended to. A dryer should never be left running when no one is home. The lint screen should be cleaned often, and the dryer must be vented outside.Electrical appliances can be deadly, as well. Electrical cords, such as extensions, should be used with extreme care and not overloaded. They should not be run under anything flammable, such as a rug, or twisted around to fit over a nail. Light bulb wattages should not be too high, and be sure that all lamp light bulbs are not touching the shade. Air should be allowed around appliances such as a TV, toaster, and stereo sets, to allow air into the system to circulate and cut down on accidental overheating.
Fire prevention and safety is everyone’s concern. No one can predict the start of a fire, so it is important that all family is prepared for such in an emergency. For more information, you can talk to your local fire department for information on classes and fire prevention measures that can mean the difference between life or death for you and your family."
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Nest
"Some shoplifters 'tag-team' which means shop seperately, using seperate grocery carts. One of them is the 'nest-builder,' the other is the pickup man. If done properly, this tactic is very hard to detect.
The term 'nest' is security slang for a collection of items to be picked up and shoplifted later.
A person and their buddy agree in advance where the nest will be planted. Sometimes they put it in an aisle not easily observed which contains bulky, rarely-shoplifted merchandise (pet food, paper goods, etc.) They move through the store putting items in the cart, including small valuable items.
They steer to the pre-arranged site and build their nest. They hide it from casual shoppers by placing an article from that aisle's stock in front of the nest.
Ten minutes later, the person who didn't put an easily shoplifted item has attracted no attention to himself. He pockets the contents of the nest and leaves.The nest-building technique has been used by one person later. When a person routinely pays more than one visit a day to my store, I get suspicious.
If a person has been spoted, they could dump the loot. Most stores won't prosecute anyone who doesn't actually carry the merchandise out of the store. Merely concealing or moving merchandise inside the store may legally constitute shoplifting, but prosecution is unlikely if the evidence is ditched."
This is what Andrew said.
The term 'nest' is security slang for a collection of items to be picked up and shoplifted later.
A person and their buddy agree in advance where the nest will be planted. Sometimes they put it in an aisle not easily observed which contains bulky, rarely-shoplifted merchandise (pet food, paper goods, etc.) They move through the store putting items in the cart, including small valuable items.
They steer to the pre-arranged site and build their nest. They hide it from casual shoppers by placing an article from that aisle's stock in front of the nest.
Ten minutes later, the person who didn't put an easily shoplifted item has attracted no attention to himself. He pockets the contents of the nest and leaves.The nest-building technique has been used by one person later. When a person routinely pays more than one visit a day to my store, I get suspicious.
If a person has been spoted, they could dump the loot. Most stores won't prosecute anyone who doesn't actually carry the merchandise out of the store. Merely concealing or moving merchandise inside the store may legally constitute shoplifting, but prosecution is unlikely if the evidence is ditched."
This is what Andrew said.
Inclination
"The normal inclination is to draw a thick horrzontal line from one of the bar code to the other. It won't work. The lines that make up the bar code are taller than they need to be. If a person draws a horizontal line across them, perpendicular to the individual lines, one has simply changed one tall bar code into short ones, which can still be read.
Instead, some people make a broad, black vertical mark, parallel to other lines, but much heavier. The line needs to be near the center of the code, and broad enough to cover several bars. This is because most bar codes contain redundant information, to permit the bar code reader to double-check its reading. Several lines need to be completely obscured to do the trick. And don't forget that white spaces between lines are also read by the scanner; obscure at least one.
Now, the food container cannot be read by the scanner, and the cashier will be forced out of her normal zombie mode and actually read the label. A person knows how it's done. A person could the same sort of writing utensil, a similar handwriting style, and a discount for out-of-date or damaged merchandise. Each department will have its own style. Some people will not use the butcher's style to mark down the geren eyes.
For it to be effective, it's esential that the person not be seen doing this. Most stores won't arrest a person for it, since it's not a clear-cut case of lareceny. However, the person is likely to be challenged and at least, embarrassed. A person may be photographed and barred form returning to the store."
This is what Andrew said.
Instead, some people make a broad, black vertical mark, parallel to other lines, but much heavier. The line needs to be near the center of the code, and broad enough to cover several bars. This is because most bar codes contain redundant information, to permit the bar code reader to double-check its reading. Several lines need to be completely obscured to do the trick. And don't forget that white spaces between lines are also read by the scanner; obscure at least one.
Now, the food container cannot be read by the scanner, and the cashier will be forced out of her normal zombie mode and actually read the label. A person knows how it's done. A person could the same sort of writing utensil, a similar handwriting style, and a discount for out-of-date or damaged merchandise. Each department will have its own style. Some people will not use the butcher's style to mark down the geren eyes.
For it to be effective, it's esential that the person not be seen doing this. Most stores won't arrest a person for it, since it's not a clear-cut case of lareceny. However, the person is likely to be challenged and at least, embarrassed. A person may be photographed and barred form returning to the store."
This is what Andrew said.
Creativity
" Is it legal to have sexy daydreams about Star Trek's Captain Kirk and share them in writing with others? Can a company appropriate a folk tradition and then claim it as private property?...This chapter explains the strange anomalies that occur when copyright and trademark law become so dominant that ordinary 'people's culture' the everyday creativity and sharing that occur in human communities, becomes stigmatized or illegal.>>
For most of human history, the human imagination has been unfettered. Creativity has arisen and flowed among people, and within communities, without anyone claiming stories, song, or images as private property. The idea of anyone owning whaling songs, folk stores, or quilting patterns would strike the people of the eighteen and nineteenth centuries as absurd, or at least antisocial. Indeed, such communal ownership and sharing was and is part of the beauty of folk music, fairy tales, ethnic dances, handicrafts and native traditions. They flourish on their own, without money, contracts, lawyers, stories or advertising."
This is what David said.
For most of human history, the human imagination has been unfettered. Creativity has arisen and flowed among people, and within communities, without anyone claiming stories, song, or images as private property. The idea of anyone owning whaling songs, folk stores, or quilting patterns would strike the people of the eighteen and nineteenth centuries as absurd, or at least antisocial. Indeed, such communal ownership and sharing was and is part of the beauty of folk music, fairy tales, ethnic dances, handicrafts and native traditions. They flourish on their own, without money, contracts, lawyers, stories or advertising."
This is what David said.
Monday, February 4, 2008
Many
"In many instances, Secret Service agents will ride on running boards built into the presidential limousine...This is partly to screen him and partly to give agents a rest from jogging alongside...
The follow-up car serves two other functions: It's a back up in case the presidentialvehicle breaks down, and it carries heavy weapons in case they're needed. While the U.S. President's Secret Service agents are certainly high-profile bodyguards as a deterrent, they have to maintain a certain decorum and avoid giving the impression of being thugs. They all carry handguns, usually in belt holsters,and as we saw in the tape of the Reagan incident, at least carries a submachine gun in a briefcase....We can assume that the Secret Service follows the principle of being ready for any contingency, and also stocks the follow-up car with tear gas and masks, in order to cope with a riot."
The follow-up car serves two other functions: It's a back up in case the presidentialvehicle breaks down, and it carries heavy weapons in case they're needed. While the U.S. President's Secret Service agents are certainly high-profile bodyguards as a deterrent, they have to maintain a certain decorum and avoid giving the impression of being thugs. They all carry handguns, usually in belt holsters,and as we saw in the tape of the Reagan incident, at least carries a submachine gun in a briefcase....We can assume that the Secret Service follows the principle of being ready for any contingency, and also stocks the follow-up car with tear gas and masks, in order to cope with a riot."
Sunday, January 13, 2008
Word
One applicant sunk himself at the outset because he made a smart remark to the receptionist, not stopping to think she might reportit o her boss. You'll need more armament for various preemployment interviewsand for psychological tests you may required to take.
"A word of caution, which is worth repeating several times because it'sso important:
Do not reveal derogatory information during an interview or a test. Even if you're applying for a job that is exempt from the Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988 and you're obliged to take the test, don't let the machine intimidateyou. Deny, deny, deny! Don't ever hang your dirty laundry in plain view. Let the employer discover it for himself. Many people don't ever hang your dirty laundry in plain sight. Let the employer discover it for himself. Many peopledon't understand this. They feel that absolute honesty is always the best policy,and they pay for this naive attitude dearly.
It's surprising what people will reveal about themselves, both in interviewsand in pencil-and-paper honesty' tests...Felons, for example, have admitted that they have conviction records. One applicant, responding to the test question, 'When did you last smoke marijuana?' replied "An hour ago.'
Before you say to yourself, 'Who'd be so stupid as to admit something the employer can't find out anyway?' Remember how naive many people are. Damaging admissions aren't uncommon. When one Fiesta store opened recently, half theapplicants tested admitted on paper that they had smoked marijuana.
At the same time, use common sense. Don't try to appear perfect, because the employer won't buy it. Admit minor faults, such as parking tickets and moving violations, because the employers admits this. Do not, however, admit anything serious, such as illegal drug use, having committed a felony, strange sexual habits,or a hostile and cynical attitude toward employers."
This is what Tony said.
"A word of caution, which is worth repeating several times because it'sso important:
Do not reveal derogatory information during an interview or a test. Even if you're applying for a job that is exempt from the Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988 and you're obliged to take the test, don't let the machine intimidateyou. Deny, deny, deny! Don't ever hang your dirty laundry in plain view. Let the employer discover it for himself. Many people don't ever hang your dirty laundry in plain sight. Let the employer discover it for himself. Many peopledon't understand this. They feel that absolute honesty is always the best policy,and they pay for this naive attitude dearly.
It's surprising what people will reveal about themselves, both in interviewsand in pencil-and-paper honesty' tests...Felons, for example, have admitted that they have conviction records. One applicant, responding to the test question, 'When did you last smoke marijuana?' replied "An hour ago.'
Before you say to yourself, 'Who'd be so stupid as to admit something the employer can't find out anyway?' Remember how naive many people are. Damaging admissions aren't uncommon. When one Fiesta store opened recently, half theapplicants tested admitted on paper that they had smoked marijuana.
At the same time, use common sense. Don't try to appear perfect, because the employer won't buy it. Admit minor faults, such as parking tickets and moving violations, because the employers admits this. Do not, however, admit anything serious, such as illegal drug use, having committed a felony, strange sexual habits,or a hostile and cynical attitude toward employers."
This is what Tony said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)