No need to apologize, it is a completely strange concept and I'm rushed!
Some places have existing employees interview for the job they want. They do this by making a 'packet'; a collection of documents proving things like business impact.
It's often put in front of a group of people with that job for review and they decide.
Normally, management, your peers, or the company as a whole are aware of your performance. They should be doing a lot of this for you, in my opinion.
It basically demands you do the job you want, before you have it. Some see this as fair, and I could agree, but not after 5+ years. I see it as a way to trick newcomers into overextending themselves.
> Normally, management, your peers, or the company as a whole are aware of your performance. They should be doing a lot of this for you, in my opinion.
In company's with forced attrition rates, it becomes a hell of a popularity contest.
When Kevin Turner (former Wal-Mart exec) headed CSS (Customer Services and Support) at M$FT, it was a shit show and a half - creating something like a mandatory 5% attrition rate per year.
Nothing boosts morale better than people vying to NOT be the person let go that year. /s
Of course, it can affect people’s mental health if they consume too much of it. Lack of education and some people’s self-control were never a reason to make alcohol illegal.
United Kingdom 450 is a count not because the UK actually launches so many satellites of its own, but rather because legacy commercial telecom operators (geostationary like INMARSAT and others) are often UK incorporated. Dig deep enough into commercial satellite telecom and you'll find stuff with offices in the City of London.
Finances and investment... not so much that their corporate HQ is legally in the city of london specifically but the people arranging debt/financing to do big costly telecom projects will be adjacent to the NYC and/or London financial markets. Same reason why a lot of submarine telecom projects are closely linked to things in London. If you need to spend a ridiculous amount of money for something that has a 10, 15+ year ROI you need a massive amount of debt and that money can only come from a few sources in the English-speaking world.
For people here still struggling with their bullying (past), I’d highly recommend Cognitive Behavior Therapy together with EMDR. The same professional applied both techniques in my case. It has worked wonders for me and the painful past is much less painful now. Having being bullied no longer define my sentiments and outlook in life.
Asking because it's something I've looked at for unrelated reasons, and while the couple of providers I've interviewed thus far I disqualified for other reasons, if there's more to look out for here it'd be good to know about.
Wow, this comment comes across as extremely nationalistic, sorry to say but to the point of being fascistic (and I’m not one for using this term lightly).
I agree the tone was aggressive but this is arguably a real issue and it's not as simple as it seems at first
Israel as a "Jewish state" is arguably a place that would not exist if they let in unlimited immigration because it would soon be majority not Jewish. I see that's in conflict with the idea that people should be/do whatever they want. I don't see how to reconcile the two sides.
Radiolab had an episode on this issue WRT to Samoa (https://radiolab.org/podcast/americanish-2306) My memory of the episode is the first half they paint the picture of a particular seemingly "racist" local trying to keep non-Samoans from owning any land. Most people are okay with it, then this person whispers in their ear and suddenly they're against it.
In the second half they go over why. The reason being rich non-Samoans would quickly buy up the entire island and there would be no Samoa / Samoan culture anymore. I don't know how to resolve that.
Part of me thinks they Samoans, Jews, Japan, British, Native Americans, etc... should not disallow immigration. It seems anti-democratic, anti-liberal values. On the other hand, something will be lost, something that seems to have value, which is the cultures of the people there currently.
> The reason being rich non-Samoans would quickly buy up the entire island and there would be no Samoa / Samoan culture anymore.
isn't this more of a class (rich vs non-rich) issue than an immigration issue?
> I don't know how to resolve that.
allow only people who live long-term and actually reside there to buy property might be one strategy?
> On the other hand, something will be lost, something that seems to have value, which is the cultures of the people there currently.
its true but its also true many of those cultures most prized traditions come from the intersection of native and foreign creating something new in the first-place... something might be lost but another gained...
--
btw, slight tangent but i think there is also a contradiction with immigration policy in regards to attracting rich foreigners: many countries want them because its supposed that they bring capital/money with them in the hopes of spurring investment and local economy but the flip-side is what you describe where the rich foreigners start owning/dominating things to the detriment of locals... and countries conversely don't want the non-rich to stay long-term because they aren't perceived as high-class/desirable yet they are the ones that work in the 'productive economy' which might help the locals more in the long and short term....i think there is an issue there as well...
> isn't this more of a class (rich vs non-rich) issue than an immigration issue?
That Doesn't really seem to matter if there are few rich Samoans and lots of rich foreigners. Their culture will still disappear if they have no where to collectively live and access to the things the culture cherishes.
> allow only people who live long-term and actually reside there to buy property might be one strategy?
That's one idea. It has the issue that you can't sell your house if you can't find a local to buy it, even if you desperately need the money.
Nationalism was historically the reaction against imperialism. Some empires transformed into nation states, such as Great Britain. Most countries who are independent today are independent because of nationalistic movements against imperialism and colonisation.
How did the future looked like for a kid living through 1929’s crisis? A world in between wars. Or living through the Cold War and the possibility of a nuclear extinction of humans? Despair and hope have always been cyclical and yet we always think we’re “doomed” when living through hard times.
I'm not sure, but as an 80's kid things haven't gotten remarkably better in my time. Modern technology sure is grand, but I've been worried about economy/climate/politics my whole life because it just keeps getting worse in those areas. Especially a lifetime of impending climate crisis then adults, and now my adult peers don't seem to believe is real.
The doomsday clock is closer to midnight than it’s ever been https://thebulletin.org/doomsday-clock/current-time/ and now we avoid another 1929 by inflating away the gains of the middle class and siphoning value off to the 1%
I don't understand how the doomsday clock is closer to midnight now than it was during the Cuban missile crisis. It makes me think that it's not an objective measure.
