4 Oct
2011
4 Oct
'11
1:27 p.m.
I have a horrible feeling I am going to regret adding my 2c to this argum=
ent.
On 4 October 2011 14:40, Dave Caroline <dave.thearchivist at gmail.com> wrot=
e:
And how on earth do you decide which bits of the job desctiption (which
to a scientist or engineer is equivalent to a specification) are trivial
and which are not?
You really think not using outlook makes me fit
the asshole category!
No. But getting up tight/argumentative over a trivial piece of the job
description would certainly make you a candidate. I had a very quick read of the job spec and while
understanding the
complexity of machines quite highly rated, this is a senior role. I
would expect that report writing, project management and managing
people are equally high on the list... To the point where I would
expect the role to actually involve very little fault finding and
repairing, and a more supervision. This did not read like a job spec
I didn;'t get that idea _at all_. As it askes for soldering skills and a
knwoledge of TTL and ECL logic, etc I read it as being a hands-on job.
I am still wondering why this is described as a 'Server Engineer' given
that it appears to have little to do with what I would class as a server.
-tony