Completing School Job Application: Fill & Download for Free

For a change, read an application below:I shared this image just to change your mind. To make you feel relaxed, and calm. This is a funny application. But you need to take deep breath and try to find alternatives on how you can make things work rather then getting fed up with your life. Life has nothing to do with this.I know, and I understand, the phase of your life. And my answer above will not help you in any way.BTW, It's not funny at all.A2AI've been through the same situation when the recession strikes out in year 2008-2009.I was 21. Pursuing MBA the last semester. My father borrowed money from relatives and loan for my MBA. (Loan issued by bank wasn't sufficient so we asked relatives to help us out).I faced almost 10-15 interviews. Didn't get selected in any of them.Finally, the day comes and I got selected in one of the export company (Jute export to Europe). They have selected 12 candidates via campus. I was the second last.I was happy. Next day, they announced that they will accept only the first 10 candidates and last two will be kept on hold.So, again job less. They never called me back.Almost 90% of my classmates were placed via on-campus or off-campus. I was in rest of 10%. I was good at studies. Topper of university though I wasn't very studious. I use to roam around with friends. I enjoyed my college days a lot. But with NO JOB. That's true.There was a pressure of loan on head.I kept trying off-campus. I use to apply daily on at least 50 jobs. This was a continuity program I followed for 60 days.Almost 90% of job applications was rejected. 10% called me for Sales job which was not a good deal for a fresher girl. (At least for me)I kept trying every day.One day I got an offer from a company who said, they will train me and offer me a stipend of Rs. 3400 for one month and if I will do good. They will hire me as a full time employee.Rs. 3400. I was afraid to tell my friends. I felt embarrassed.My father told me not to worry about the pay and about the loan. He said: "I will pay that. You just do the learning. This is the time when you can learn and then the way long to earn."I joined and started learning something about International market. PPL and CPL (I wasn't into aviation so it was quiet tough for me to understand).My boss asked me to continue for one more month as the performance in first month was bad.During my tenure over this training, I kept applying for other jobs.One day, my boss told me (rudely, in anger) to find another job as I wasn't giving him sales, as he could not afford me any more.As I applied on many jobs during my training tenure, one day, I got a call for an interview.I went to interview after my training. (You will find that interview a bit strange)(This was a final round with CEO)Here it was: (Timing was 7:30 PM)Boss: So "Name" (on a very high pitch with a smile on face). How's the day?Me: It was Ok. (Slowly)Boss: (Again in a high pitch) Why Ok? Why not good?Me: The day was hectic. Since morning I was working and then I had to come here for an Interview. So feeling tired.Boss: (Now with a cute smile). Oh Ok :)Boss: Do you know anything about moneycontrol ?Me: No (peacefully)Boss: OK. Do you know anything about CNBC?Me: NoBoss: moneycontrol is a website of CNBCMe: Oh. I wasn't aware. (With a shrink of smile)Boss: Do you know anything about Stock Market?Me: I'm hearing this term for the first time from you! I know NOTHING!Boss: No worries! I will let you know if you get selected.Me: Ok (Smiling)Boss: (Now he asked about eCommerce, Internet Marketing, Blogging, Off-page SEO)Me: I replied with all the answers very correctly.Boss: Ok then "Name". We will call you next week if you will get selected. Thank you!Me: Thank you.Left.Next day! 25th December. National Holiday! Afternoon 3:00 PM. I got a call saying that I'm selected!And the day comes. I got an offer based on my knowledge during the training. I started with Rs. 6000. Working hard and being innovative, I got promoted in next 6 months with a 100% increment.I kept doing that and again got promoted in next 6 months with 50% increment.Total 4 hikes in 2 years.And within 2.5 years. My package was 4.5 lakhs per annum.You said, you have applied to around 30-40 companies.I applied to more than 500 (small, large, agencies, etc). All rejected. But I kept doing that. No matter how hard my luck was going through.My professional growth was good but social life was almost reduced to 50%So, I switched to freelance and earned almost 6-7 lakhs per annum.Now I stay with my family and lead a tension free life. I can go wherever I want, I can watch movies in week days, hang out with family at any time, need not apply for leaves and wait for the approval.And, I'm not talking about any big city of India. I'm from a small town in Madhya Pradesh, India. Yes. Where the opportunities for professional growth is limited.Getting fed up will not help you. You are in a field which is highly competitive.I stated "I got an offer based on my knowledge during the training."You just join somewhere. They may not pay you. But you will learn and when you know something that can help any company. They will hire you. For sure. Just Keep Trying!There is always a company in need of you.Don't think that you have failed, just remember"I have not failed. I've just found 10000 ways that won't work." - Thomas A. Edison-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------I’m really thankful that my experience is inspiring a lot of students and may help them to overcome from the current situation. I've been blown away by the response I've gotten on this post. It makes me really happy that I, somehow helping someone, inspiring the one who is in need.I have written this for the person who is in trouble, fed up from life, fed up from hard work and needs an inspiration and I’m sure that person is reading it and thanks me for sharing my journey. That is all. I thank the people who think, I’m dumb. You are among those who are behind my success.Once, when I was in school, 11th std, one of my neighbor aunt went through my hand lines and predicted that, I will never get into higher studies as I don’t have an education line in my hand. She said, I won’t be able to complete even my schooling. This made me feel sad at that moment. But that’s okay. I didn’t stop myself there because of some Jyotish's words. And now result is in front of you. So, doesn’t matter if this experience is not good for you. Don’t appreciate it and share whatever you feel. It makes me strong and I thank you for that.

Perseverance.I could offer countless stories of people who have succeeded in life because they had that skill. But I won’t.For example, I could have told you about J.K. Rowling, a broke, divorced mother who bashed out the first Harry Potter story on an old manual typewriter, and had her manuscript rejected by 12 publishers before being accepted by one who nevertheless warned her there was no money in children’s books.But I won’t.I could have told you about Ethiopian Abebe Bikila, son of a shepherd, who won back-to-back Olympic marathons in the Sixties, became a quadriplegic after a car accident, and returned to international sports as an archer.But I won’t.I could have told you about Mr Bean actor Rowan Atkinson or comedian Wayne Brady, both of whom had serious stuttering problems as children and used the stage as a way to overcome them.But I won’t.I could have told you about Nick Vujicic, born without arms and legs, but whose motivational speeches attract stadium-sized crowds and give hope to those living with disabilities.But I won’t.Instead, I’ll tell you to take a good, close look at your own life and the challenges that came up along the way.Of the time when you were five, and the simple act of tying your shoelaces made you frustrated. When you eventually figured it out, it wasn’t because you were talented. It was because you persisted (or your parents encouraged you to) until you got it right.Or the time you were in school and had to learn a new language, and it seemed unthinkable you would ever be able to speak it with any degree of fluency. But you stuck with it, and you did.Or the time you fell in love and thought the girl or guy of your dreams might be impossible to get. But you wooed them anyway, and you did.Or the time when the love ran out and the relationship appeared to be drifting aimlessly, until you consciously decided to work on making things better. And they did.Or the time you continued to send out job applications, despite the sinking feeling that came with every rejection letter or no letter at all. Until one company called you in.Or the time you started work at a new place and had this horrid feeling you’d be shown up as a fake because you had no clue of what needed to be done. Until you figured it all out.Or the time you tried to get started in a business of your own, and kept failing at it, until you found a way to steady the ship and power ahead.Or the time you decided to take up something new, like woodworking or web coding, and you couldn’t but be disheartened at how hard it was. But you persevered, and now looking back, it surprises you at how far you’ve come.Talent is a nice thing to have. It’ll take you far. But to get to where you really want to, that takes perseverance.

Billy Connolly, the famous Scottish comedian, had a joke about buying shampoo. He went into a shop and discovered hundreds of different brands, types and varieties of hair products, and it wasn’t even clear whether some of the bottles were shampoos or not. And he yearned for the days when “you’d go into the shop and ask for a bottle of shampoo, and they would give you one.”This joke tells us a lot about what is wrong with the job market and why it has become such a minefield for job-hunters. The workers and job-seekers are the shampoo, in case this isn’t clear. 50 years ago, a company needed a typist or an engineer, or a school needed a teacher, they would advertise for one. And if you had the right qualifications, you could apply. And they would pick one. And normally that person would do fine. You had a job, the company had an engineer, the school had a science-teacher, or whatever. Everyone was happy.Today, every company is convinced that they are special: “we don’t just need any shampoo, we need a moisturizing, coffee-scented, dark green 2-in-1 shampoo/conditioner for brittle shoulder-length blonde hair.”However, since they know that maybe they won’t find exactly what they want, and who knows, there might be one exceptional lemon-scented shampoo that would be just as good as a coffee-scented one, they don’t put all this information in the job-advertisement. In fact, they say something like “we need someone with a degree who is interested in having an exciting career” - although they are not always quite that specific.So everyone reads the application, realises that they may be eligible, and because they are desperate, spends maybe a day applying, writing a cover-letter, filling an online application form, and so on.And so the company gets 231 applications for one job, and the hiring manager simplifies her life by discarding 80% of them based on what are, essentially, really stupid criteria - typos, CV formatting, the first line of the CV, and so on. These are “stupid” criteria because they tell you nothing about the candidate, only about which source of advice the candidate has used to complete the CV, and who has proof-read it for them. If you are looking to hire someone to a senior position, then probably their ability to proof-read their 120th job-application-cover-letter for spelling-typos should not be the first criterion you use. If people have a typo in their CV, maybe that’s a sign that they are trying to optimise it for each specific job, surely a good sign of strategic thinking that should outweigh the negative of slightly imperfect orthography.But there are so many applications that the HR manager needs to find some way to eliminate say 221 of the 231 candidates. And giving serious consideration to the potential fit of each person for the specific role just isn’t realistic. (future AI might change this, even today possibly AI’s ability to sort through vast numbers of applications might outweigh its inability to deeply understand each one).Let’ say that they eventually interview some of the candidates, for the sake of argument, 10 of them. So now, each of these candidates will give up a day for the interview itself and often significantly more time in preparation, reading up about the company and so on. Because to not have researched the company could suggest that the candidate was just applying to lots of companies rather than having a specific life-long interest in this particular company, which would be enough reason to exclude them - after all, if you’re not willing to invest a week of your life for a 1 in 231 chance to work with our company, are you really the type of person we want to hire?But do they really have a 1 in 231 chance? Or now a 1 in 10 chance?Of course not. Because a lot of HR departments these days pretty much exclude anyone who actually applies for many roles, on the Groucho Marx logic that they wouldn’t hire anyone who would want to work for them. Or more precisely, because, by virtue of applying, that suggests they must be desperate (well, at 231 to 1 odds, they have a point), which means their career mustn’t be going very well, so they mustn’t be all that good. Etc.And so, they go and look for “passive” candidates. Find someone who’s happy and successful in whatever job they’re doing, and try to tempt them to come and work for you instead. What a great idea! Literature is full of characters who refused to accept any of the single, available suitors and insisted on chasing people who were married instead. Predictably, that usually worked out pretty badly. And so some genius decided that HR should try the same experiment. It may be in the short-term interest of the hiring manager, a few high-visibility candidates may benefit from it, but the long-term impact is just very negative on everyone, especially on the people who were working with the passive candidate in their previous company.But even more especially on those job-seekers who have put so much time and effort into their application and interview only to find out that in fact there was never any real chance of them getting the job at all.Or more likely, never to find out anything - because these days, rather than sending rejection letters like we got when I was in college and we were all applying for our first jobs (PFO’s and occasionally just FO’s :) ), many companies just ghost - you never hear from them again, you have no idea if the role has been filled, if you’re still a candidate, or whatever. You don’t know if you should apply for other vacancies with that company, for example.You can argue, of course, that the good candidates will eventually find a job. But the problem is that many don’t, and there is no guarantee even for the good candidates. And so the whole process is highly stressful.Part of the problem is with statistics. You’d think that if you’re a good candidate and you just keep applying, one day you’ll get lucky. But that’s not how it works. Let’s say you apply for 100 jobs, and for each job you have a 1% chance of being hired. So you’d think “OK, 100 applications is a lot of work, but I’m pretty sure to get a job at the end of it all, right?” Well, no. Because that’s not how statistics works. Even if you don’t have any systemic problem (e.g. your shoes or your tie or your grey hair or some standard answer you tend to give is putting interviewers off, but they don’t tell you why, so you never find out), lots of low-percentage chances do not ever add up to certainty. In this case, 100 applications with a 1% chance for each one, the odds are less than 2 out of 3 that you will get a job.How can it be right for job-seekers to have to go through this minefield just to feed themselves and their families? How can it be right that experienced, hard-working, qualified people who can definitely do a great job, cannot find a job, even in markets where employers claim there is a shortage?Equally, how can this be right for people newly entering the job-market and desperately in need of income to pay off their college loans? Or for parents returning to work after career breaks to raise a family?How can it be right that so much of the creative energy and intellectual effort of so many people, energy and effort that could be used for so many great things to benefit society, goes into this game of competing just for the right to work, to this charade in which everyone knows that everyone else is pretending, but still the rules state that you must stay in character or you are expelled from the game?How can it be “normal” that the process of finding a job requires so much time and effort and offers so few guarantees?I have some ideas, which I’ll share. But first some personal perspective.From the tone of my answer, you may assume I’m a very angry job-seeker, frustrated at the lack of progress, feeling powerless to do anything. Actually, nothing could be further from the truth. I’ve been lucky enough to never be unemployed, and when I have, during certain periods, applied for jobs, I’ve found the system treated me very well. Most of my applications got replies, and I got several interviews, in which I met very interesting and friendly potential future-colleagues and truly got a chance to convince them that I was the right person for the job.Any HR people I interacted with were super-helpful. I know I’m part of a privileged minority thanks to my qualifications and experience, but I also truly believe that the flaws in the current system are not the fault of HR managers anywhere - they are victims just like the rest of us, struggling to do a tough job in a system which needs to be re-thought for the third millennium.My real perspective is that I’ve been involved in hiring, both in my previous job (in a multinational) and in my current role (in a start-up). In both cases I’ve been shocked at the extraordinary number and quality of applicants we got for each position, the amount of work they put into each application, and the number of truly great candidates that get rejected for every one who is accepted. I really wanted to write back to the candidates we didn’t hire and tell them that they were really great (well, most of them) - but I couldn’t figure out how to do that in a way that didn’t sound like a very well written but insincere rejection letter (“it’s not you, it’s us!”) …It is so utterly wrong that such qualified, competent people should have to enter such a lottery to get a job.We need a system in which companies stop looking for some needle in a haystack candidate, and instead, to paraphrase Billy Connolly, when you need an engineer or an accountant or a salesperson, you just ask for one, and they give you one. For example, you put your name on a list to which qualified candidates (say chemical engineers) can sign up and be validated, and the next company who needs one takes the next qualified candidate and pairs you up - so that a person putting their name on the list knows that their turn will come and they will get a job.I know systems like this work for jobs like nursing and teaching in some countries, but apparently it’s not appropriate for hiring middle-managers – because obviously securing a 3% increase in sales in North Dakota is far more important than taking care of the sick or educating our children …And sure, if they prove incapable of the job, you can replace them - but mostly they won’t - after a couple of months working in the company, they will fit in fine. In those first months they will have the time to learn 90% of the things that today are on the list of exclusion criteria for HR, for example “no GMP experience” or “familiar with our budget software” – instead of trying to find the needle in the haystack, just train the person up on things like that, it’s not rocket science. The cost of this will be far less than the cost of the HR and recruiting effort to find a candidate who ticks all the boxes. And working with someone for a month will tell you a lot more about them than any interview, no matter how sophisticated.Why will this never happen? Because the idea would scare the hell out of recruiters … and the irony is that they too face the same dilemma that everyone else faces - if the company decides to downsize the recruiting department, then they are forced to re-enter the lottery of applying for one job with 500 applicants if they want to pay their rent or feed their families.Without pretending to know the perfect solution, I think we can say that the current system is just plain wrong.(note: this was mostly posted first as a comment in response to another answer, but I realised it was actually an answer in itself, so I’ve chosen to repost it somewhere where people can actually see it!)PS It is crazy to think this, but I truly did hesitate before posting this, because with the checks that are run on social-media these days, just writing this answer might end up causing me to be excluded if I were to apply for some role in the future. But then again, maybe it will help … who knows?ADDITION/EDIT:One topic that comes to mind reading all the replies: A lot of job-applicants would really benefit from getting honest feedback about why they didn’t get the job. I mean, real specific details, like “you didn’t seem well-prepared, you couldn’t even name two of our products”, or “you arrived late for the interview, that is a no-no for us”, or “there’s a photo on facebook that appears to show you smoking a joint” - in addition to more standard things like “you were a good candidate, but we found someone better, more qualified, with more experience.”Unfortunately, it is very difficult for HR/Recruiters to give a candidate this kind of feedback, even if they truly want to help the candidate. Because in this world of “no good deed goes unpunished”, there is the risk that the candidate will respond aggressively (“that wasn’t me in the photo - so I want you to re-open my application!”) or even make a legal challenge (“you cannot legally exclude me for not having 5 years of experience, that is ageism!”) or whatever. Not real examples, but you get the idea. The result: applicants rarely get useful feedback, and potentially continue to be excluded again and again for the same reason.I have often wondered if there is a solution to this. Especially for cases where the reason is something blatant and fixable (social-media content, inappropriate attire, typos, …), wouldn’t it be good if the person rejecting the application could provide helpful feedback to the applicant with no risk of reprisal.The applicant would have to promise not to use any of the feedback against the employer in any context. Even if they believed that it was discriminatory or unfair or even false. Yes, this seems wrong, but the alternative is even worse - we shouldn’t let the perfect get in the way of the good.Perhaps an intermediate agent (e.g. a state-body) could be involved, could collect the feedback and share it, so that it is not the company who has to deal with the legal and logistical questions.As humans, we learn best through feedback. I believe this scheme would be extremely powerful, and would perhaps even start to help address the problem many applicants feel of being constantly rejected and never knowing what they need to change to get accepted.I don’t in any way think it would be trivial to make it happen - but the problem is big enough that maybe it’d be worth trying.Interested to hear any ideas about this in the comments below!