If you have been out of work for some time or if you are burned out on your current job, then a perk up is needed.
The economy is not doing well. Employers are slow to hire because the economy is so uncertain. Things don't feel like they are getting better in spite of what all the "experts" (who have jobs, by the way) are saying.
Here are some suggestions to get out of the slump and get moving in the right direction.
1) Turn off the news - whether it is TV, newspapers or the internet, the news has the ability to depress anyone further than they already are. You won't miss anything by not watching or reading the news during work (search) hours.
2) Start listening and reading to inspiration. Now that the news is off, go research inspirational writing and videos on the internet. Or go to the library and pick up something positive. This does not necessarily mean "religious or spiritual" (but if that works for you, go for it), but rather, positive thinking and action. Zig Ziglar, Napoleon Hill, etc. Get positive!
3) Leave the house. Too many out of work job seekers barricade themselves in front of the computer and refuse to leave the house. "I can't afford to go anywhere!" they moan. Nonsense. Call a friend, acquaintence or former job mate and meet for coffee. Even Starbucks has a cheap cup for under a buck. Dig some change out from the sofa and go meet someone for conversation. It helps to have a different set of eyes looking at your life.
4) Go through the Rolodex of former work mates, bosses, customers, etc. Maybe you failed to get everyone's contact information - don't worry, they are probably on Facebook! Look up your old contacts and drop them a line. 90% of them have a job and maybe one knows of an opening not yet announced.
5) Get physical. I can't tell you how many times my slump has been broken with a good sweat. Go for a run or brisk walk. Ride the bike. Mow the lawn. Clean out the garage or closets. Get some physical activity and get something accomplished. Release some endorphins and get the old brain moving again.
Bottom line is this. No matter what you do, stop doing what you are doing which has put you in the slump. Get out and get better!
Monday
Marketing Me: The Worse Paying Jobs and How the Government Wants More Of Us To Struggle Financially
The list of the ten worse paying professions to get a degree in was posted online courtesy of HotJobs. Most are no brainers..
10. Drama
9. Fine Arts
8. Hospitality and Tourism
7. Education
6. Horticulture
5. Spanish
4. Music
3. Theology
2. Elementary Education
1. Social Work
Education is so bad, they list it twice.
What does this have to do with the government? Many of those jobs are considered growth professions in the new economy by the government. Wow. I would be excited to get out of college.
Also, may of these jobs, like education and social work are generally financed by the government. I don't know if you have read the news lately, but government is not doing too well financially. I don't know if I would risk a four year or longer college education on a losing proposition.
My advice, find something you really want to do. If you want to teach, have at it. But if you are looking for the best paying job, look for ways to work for yourself and not someone else.
Just a suggestion.
10. Drama
9. Fine Arts
8. Hospitality and Tourism
7. Education
6. Horticulture
5. Spanish
4. Music
3. Theology
2. Elementary Education
1. Social Work
Education is so bad, they list it twice.
What does this have to do with the government? Many of those jobs are considered growth professions in the new economy by the government. Wow. I would be excited to get out of college.
Also, may of these jobs, like education and social work are generally financed by the government. I don't know if you have read the news lately, but government is not doing too well financially. I don't know if I would risk a four year or longer college education on a losing proposition.
My advice, find something you really want to do. If you want to teach, have at it. But if you are looking for the best paying job, look for ways to work for yourself and not someone else.
Just a suggestion.
Thursday
Marketing Me: Annoying Phrases "Raising Awareness"
There are some things that are said in our society so often that they become accepted as fact or better yet, just acceptable. How many times have you heard someone say "I need to find an ATM machine and get some cash"? The M in ATM stands for machine. Duh.
But there are some terms which have far greater consequences in today's society and yet are repeated as if they are good, wholesome terms and which are shared by all. For instance...
Raising awareness - Charity used to be admirable. An individual or group would see a problem and would work tirelessly to find a solution to the problem. Hunger, sickness, homelessness, endangerment and so on.
Not anymore. Today, the buzzphrase is "raising awareness". Instead of finding a solution, simply tell others about the problem. Repeatedly. Even if they already know about the problem, bang them on the head some more. Raising awareness means creating commercials, campaigns, web sites, emails, signs, posters and what not which tells others about a problem.
Raising awareness is popular because advocates no longer have to get their hands dirty. Why actually feed a hungry person when you can simply show well fed people pictures of hungry people and remind them of the problem? Why directly help and comfort cancer patients when you can go to the government and lobby them to "do something"?
Not long ago, companies used to change their product packaging to pink for a month or so and pledge to donate a portion of the product sale proceeds to fighting breast cancer. Now they donate the money to "raise awareness" about breast cancer. I think everyone knows about breast cancer by now (some first hand unfortunately) and all would feel better if that money was actually going to pay some scientists and labs to find a cure.
Raising awareness is a wonderful way for selfish people to feel good about doing as little as possible.
I hate the term "raising awareness" and wish people would get back to actually doing something about problems rather than blabbing about them.
But there are some terms which have far greater consequences in today's society and yet are repeated as if they are good, wholesome terms and which are shared by all. For instance...
Raising awareness - Charity used to be admirable. An individual or group would see a problem and would work tirelessly to find a solution to the problem. Hunger, sickness, homelessness, endangerment and so on.
Not anymore. Today, the buzzphrase is "raising awareness". Instead of finding a solution, simply tell others about the problem. Repeatedly. Even if they already know about the problem, bang them on the head some more. Raising awareness means creating commercials, campaigns, web sites, emails, signs, posters and what not which tells others about a problem.
Raising awareness is popular because advocates no longer have to get their hands dirty. Why actually feed a hungry person when you can simply show well fed people pictures of hungry people and remind them of the problem? Why directly help and comfort cancer patients when you can go to the government and lobby them to "do something"?
Not long ago, companies used to change their product packaging to pink for a month or so and pledge to donate a portion of the product sale proceeds to fighting breast cancer. Now they donate the money to "raise awareness" about breast cancer. I think everyone knows about breast cancer by now (some first hand unfortunately) and all would feel better if that money was actually going to pay some scientists and labs to find a cure.
Raising awareness is a wonderful way for selfish people to feel good about doing as little as possible.
I hate the term "raising awareness" and wish people would get back to actually doing something about problems rather than blabbing about them.
Monday
Marketing Me: Airlines Charging for carryons?
This came across the wire this morning. Spirit Airlines will institute a per carry on bag charge for all flights.
If you don't fly very often, this means that passengers will be charged for their carry on bags for each flight. Previously, most airlines only charged for checked luggage, you know the type that went in the luggage hold.
I fly about once a month (down from once a week before this recession) for work. Most of the other business travelers carry on some version of the following onto the place: one roller board suitcase and one laptop bag. The roller boards (designed for airline use) are stored in the overhead and the laptop for under the seat in front of the passenger.
The airlines allow each passenger to store on bag in the overhead bin and another in the space in front of the passenger under the facing seat. Spirit wants to charge for the bag in the overhead at a rate of $25.00.
The reasons given by the airline are many (the main reason is money), but let's entertain the excuses given..
- Passengers abuse the carry on rule and bring more than two bags on board or store more than one bag in the overhead bin.
- Flights are delayed by passengers attempting to store their overhead bags.
- Overhead bags and other objects stored in the bin can be dangerous a) when the bag is lifted into the bin and strains someone's back or falls on a person, b) when the bag is taken out and falls from the bin and hurts someone, and c) the object shifts or opens and multiple objects fall when the bin is opened.
- Airline attendants do not want to lift passengers bags and hurt themselves or damage a passenger's property.
Here's the real reason - M.O.N.E.Y.
If the airlines really believed all the above excuses (except for money) they would tape the overhead bins shut and limit all passengers to a single bag which can fit under their seat. All other bags would have to be checked.
Now a US Senator wants to get involved (for our own good, of course) and wants to present some national legislation for carry on luggage.
Like I said, I fly frequently. The carry on luggage problem is exacerbated by the dimwits who bring everything they own into the cabin and cause a big fat fuss when they can't get it all in the overhead. I once watched a guy bring a roller board suitcase, laptop bag, huge department store shopping bag, some giant cardboard tube and his overcoat onto a flight and wanted everything in the overhead and nothing at his feet because he wanted to "stretch out and relax". I would have kicked his butt and his entourage of junk off the flight.
Here's the deal. This new rule will only hurt business travelers. Business travelers fly frequently and want to carry on their bags to expedite their arrival and exit from the airport. If some of the airlines want to chase business people away, that's a mistake and just dumb.
A number of airlines won't charge for checked luggage. And they get plenty of business. If others refuse to follow along with this idiocy and won't charge for carry on luggage, they will get business. The airlines "nickel and diming" passengers to death will find themselves with empty seats on flight populated by occasional travelers and tourists.
To the airlines -
- Enforce the one bag in the overhead bin rule.
- Have attendants refuse to help with bags (except for the handicapped, aged or similar). If the passenger can't place or retrieve their own bag, check it.
- Publish dimensions of carry on bags and available space for carry on bags in each flight. Once the limit has been hit, start checking.
- Consider requiring passengers to note their carry on bags at check in - what type of carry on bag do you have? Roller board? Tote? Computer bag? Backpack, etc?
To the passengers -
- Check in the night before your flight to get the earliest boarding and thus, first crack at available bins.
- One bag in the overhead, the other at your feet. Any more, then check it, ship it or leave it at home. You don't get to put your coat, purse, computer bag, artwork, guitar, whatever in my overhead space! (I have yelled at other passengers to hogging the overhead bin with more than one bag or object).
- Only fly airlines which do not charge these exorbitant fees.
Happy travels,
If you don't fly very often, this means that passengers will be charged for their carry on bags for each flight. Previously, most airlines only charged for checked luggage, you know the type that went in the luggage hold.
I fly about once a month (down from once a week before this recession) for work. Most of the other business travelers carry on some version of the following onto the place: one roller board suitcase and one laptop bag. The roller boards (designed for airline use) are stored in the overhead and the laptop for under the seat in front of the passenger.
The airlines allow each passenger to store on bag in the overhead bin and another in the space in front of the passenger under the facing seat. Spirit wants to charge for the bag in the overhead at a rate of $25.00.
The reasons given by the airline are many (the main reason is money), but let's entertain the excuses given..
- Passengers abuse the carry on rule and bring more than two bags on board or store more than one bag in the overhead bin.
- Flights are delayed by passengers attempting to store their overhead bags.
- Overhead bags and other objects stored in the bin can be dangerous a) when the bag is lifted into the bin and strains someone's back or falls on a person, b) when the bag is taken out and falls from the bin and hurts someone, and c) the object shifts or opens and multiple objects fall when the bin is opened.
- Airline attendants do not want to lift passengers bags and hurt themselves or damage a passenger's property.
Here's the real reason - M.O.N.E.Y.
If the airlines really believed all the above excuses (except for money) they would tape the overhead bins shut and limit all passengers to a single bag which can fit under their seat. All other bags would have to be checked.
Now a US Senator wants to get involved (for our own good, of course) and wants to present some national legislation for carry on luggage.
Like I said, I fly frequently. The carry on luggage problem is exacerbated by the dimwits who bring everything they own into the cabin and cause a big fat fuss when they can't get it all in the overhead. I once watched a guy bring a roller board suitcase, laptop bag, huge department store shopping bag, some giant cardboard tube and his overcoat onto a flight and wanted everything in the overhead and nothing at his feet because he wanted to "stretch out and relax". I would have kicked his butt and his entourage of junk off the flight.
Here's the deal. This new rule will only hurt business travelers. Business travelers fly frequently and want to carry on their bags to expedite their arrival and exit from the airport. If some of the airlines want to chase business people away, that's a mistake and just dumb.
A number of airlines won't charge for checked luggage. And they get plenty of business. If others refuse to follow along with this idiocy and won't charge for carry on luggage, they will get business. The airlines "nickel and diming" passengers to death will find themselves with empty seats on flight populated by occasional travelers and tourists.
To the airlines -
- Enforce the one bag in the overhead bin rule.
- Have attendants refuse to help with bags (except for the handicapped, aged or similar). If the passenger can't place or retrieve their own bag, check it.
- Publish dimensions of carry on bags and available space for carry on bags in each flight. Once the limit has been hit, start checking.
- Consider requiring passengers to note their carry on bags at check in - what type of carry on bag do you have? Roller board? Tote? Computer bag? Backpack, etc?
To the passengers -
- Check in the night before your flight to get the earliest boarding and thus, first crack at available bins.
- One bag in the overhead, the other at your feet. Any more, then check it, ship it or leave it at home. You don't get to put your coat, purse, computer bag, artwork, guitar, whatever in my overhead space! (I have yelled at other passengers to hogging the overhead bin with more than one bag or object).
- Only fly airlines which do not charge these exorbitant fees.
Happy travels,
Friday
Marketing Me: Phone Call - UNKNOWN
The other day, my mortgage company called me. The caller ID on my phone said "Unknown". My mortgage is my largest expense each month. It's my home for crying out loud. So why in the world would the company which has earned my largest payment not take advantage of the advertising and marketing of their business name?
Many companies these days do not include their company name in the outbound caller ID. In phone terminology, caller ID is called "call appearance". The reasons companies have "Unknown" for call appearance are multiple.
For instance, some companies do not want call recipients to know who is calling quite simply because they want the recipient to answer the call. This tactic is used by collection agencies because they know the recipient will not take a call from a bill collector if they know it is them.
Other times, calls are done by call centers which are contracted by a company, but are truly not the company in question. Thus, they choose not to put "Company A" on the call appearance, but rather leave it blank.
Sometimes, a company's phone system has not been correctly configured or is a VOIP system which is incapable of producing a correct call appearance.
Regardless, companies are wrong not to include their name and number in the call appearance.
For instance, if it's my mortgage company, I want to know their number! How many times have a I dug around for my statement to find the customer service number? With the number, I can add it to my phone's phonebook and can call the company whenever I want.
With "unknown" as the call appearance and lack of phone number, I cannot make that call quickly and which business does not want their customers to call? Goofy.
If you have a business, call yourself sometimes and see what your phone system is sending your customers. You may be surprised.
Many companies these days do not include their company name in the outbound caller ID. In phone terminology, caller ID is called "call appearance". The reasons companies have "Unknown" for call appearance are multiple.
For instance, some companies do not want call recipients to know who is calling quite simply because they want the recipient to answer the call. This tactic is used by collection agencies because they know the recipient will not take a call from a bill collector if they know it is them.
Other times, calls are done by call centers which are contracted by a company, but are truly not the company in question. Thus, they choose not to put "Company A" on the call appearance, but rather leave it blank.
Sometimes, a company's phone system has not been correctly configured or is a VOIP system which is incapable of producing a correct call appearance.
Regardless, companies are wrong not to include their name and number in the call appearance.
For instance, if it's my mortgage company, I want to know their number! How many times have a I dug around for my statement to find the customer service number? With the number, I can add it to my phone's phonebook and can call the company whenever I want.
With "unknown" as the call appearance and lack of phone number, I cannot make that call quickly and which business does not want their customers to call? Goofy.
If you have a business, call yourself sometimes and see what your phone system is sending your customers. You may be surprised.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
