Validity of Recruiter Website Job Postings

[WWSituation]

Has anyone ever actually interviewed for a job they inquired about?? It seems as though the sites never change these. I wonder if they are real at all, or are just supposed to attract your attention.

Not to single any out, but I found this one on ****************.com:

PI-4030 Are you looking for an excellent opportunity to become part of a highly respected and cutting edge risk management department for one of the fastest growing annuity companies in the United States? Do you have an actuarial background that includes variable and/or fixed annuity exposure, variable and/or fixed risk management, ALM or CFT experience, asset modeling experience, strong computer/modeling skills, strong analytical skills, and an ability to work in a dynamic team environment? Computer programming experience (especially APL) and competency with Microsoft Excel and Access are preferred. To apply, you must have at least 100-400 credits towards Fellowship (preferably the investment track) and 1-5 years experience in the insurance industry or investment related fields. Eastern Region. Salary: Open for the right candidate.

100-400 credits?????? What a joke!! This must be at least 3 years old!

[zapped]

i have always wondered if they were real. i mean, there's no company name, no contact name, etc. it's like getting those things in the mail / email where you may have just won something (but probably didn't)....i tend to think that when they don't give the name of the company or more detail about the job or a way to contact a real person, it must be fake. but why do they post it in the first place?

[Enough Exams Already]

This one sounds like ING. The recruiter may have just pulled an old listing from the files without reading it.

[urysohn]

They don't give you contact information because they want you to actually call them (i.e. the recruiter not the company). Even if they just posted the company name, you wouldn't need them anymore. It's not sleazy, it's just smart business.

And I would guess the HR person at the company (or the actuarial manager who's a bit out of touch with the exam process) just submitted a canned job advertising from a couple years ago.

[DW Simpson]

Q: Has anyone ever actually interviewed for a job they inquired about??

Yes, all the time.

Q: It seems as though the sites never change these. I wonder if they are real at all, or are just supposed to attract your attention.

I usually put over a dozen new jobs on our site every week and take off a dozen. These are real jobs that recruiters have entered in our database. The average age of a job on our site is approximately 1 month. But that's a lot of jobs that are only a week old and some that might be 2 months old (and many 2 month old jobs are still viable; a lot of positions in the industry stay open way longer than that). I can't speak for other sites, but I try and cram as many jobs on our site as I can, limiting the descriptions to the bare essentials to maximize the variety (since some people are looking at the site at home on dial-up with limited bandwidth). We do our best.

[McUSA]

Not to pick on DW Simpson, but this ad cracked me up:


Student

Consultant is looking for students to work on workers compensation, general liability and property. Reserving experience required. Non-exam taking position.

So basically they want students who don't take exams. How do you ever "graduate" from that school?

[DW Simpson]

There are more technician jobs opening up all the time. Some companies are asking for people who have stopped taking exams.

[WWSituation]

I brought it up because I have probably made 5 or 6 inquiries about web-site related job postings with about 4 different recruiters (including DWS) and have never heard any mention about the actual job - they all seemed to have the same model, use the fact that I got in touch with them to start placing me anywhere they can.

I'm not saying it is a bad model, I was just wondering if all these postings are bogus. Many of them seem to be as I've been seeing the same ones on several sites for years, now.

[The Mister]

On 2002-03-15 10:06, D.W. Simpson Webmaster wrote:
There are more technician jobs opening up all the time. Some companies are asking for people who have stopped taking exams.<font size=2>Like mine, for example.

[Agtuary]

We prefer to grow ours in house. Basically, we hire people we know aren't going to make it, pay for them to take a couple of exams, then move them into the technician (non-exam taking) jobs when they get tired of the exam process. However, we prefer they receive less than a 4 on the same exam 3 times in a row. Otherwise we might discuss giving them more paid study time to fail some more exams.

Edited to add: I will probably be one of those individuals very soon.

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: saucywench on 2002-03-15 11:56 ]</font>

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: saucywench on 2002-03-15 11:56 ]</font>

[Dr T Non-Fan]

The first RE broker we used had an ad for a home in a certain area. We called, found out it was a townhouse, but he assured us he could find the house we wanted. Four months later we had a house found by this guy.
The model works in many applications. If we as actuaries want something a little more exact, we have to change our collective minds (since recruiters have been around, for like. ever). We all need to get back to the cube and regenerate, during which our programming can be changed. (A little ST:TNG reference, there.)

[McUSA]

I don't have anything against non-exam taking positions in general, although non-exam takers probably shouldn't be called "students."

Obviously, this shows the system is "broke" in many ways if a company or consulting firm doesn't care if you pass exams. It really surprises me for consulting firms, since you really do need letters there.

[Dr T Non-Fan]

"You" do, but "they" don't need you to have letters to do work.
"They" need letters to review your work and explain it to clients.