Job Hunting - Red Flags

I have been searching for a new job the last few weeks, just time for a change I guess. Today I came across (some recruiting sent it to me) the following job description:

Position Title: Security Manager
Reports to: Information Services Director
Receives Reports From: None
Rate: $197,600 annual
Term: 3 Months/Perm
Operating Expenditure: $50,000.00
Capital Expenditure: $100,000.00
Required: Windows/Internet/Oracle security, Bachelors degree, CISA/CISSP, 10+ years Information Systems experience.
Responsibilities: No unidentified noncompliance in market audit process. Establish an ongoing viable security strategy. Ensure appropriate skills are available to implement security requirements.

So... am I alone in this, or do any of the rest of you see some serious red flags here?

It may be getting progressively more dangerous to be in this field.

cheers,

catch

There are many job descript's that don't make much sense.

I always like the ones that ask for 5+ years of windows 2003. :p I also get a kick out of the ones that ask for 3+ years of experience, but then they list every single computing technology that has been in existence in the last 20 years. :eek:

Maybe it's just lazy HR or recruiters doing copy and paste jobs without much thinking. Either way, you probably want to give them a honest resume that list the skills you *do* have. There is a very, VERY good chance that the person interviewing you *will* be a IT person and know what they are talking about.

I personally don't apply for any jobs that don't list who the company is.

Sounds like a headhunter fish.

Yeah, it does look fishy. When I am looking, I'm always following up on these but pretty adamant that I want company info and such before I'll tell them they can submit me as a candidate. PARTICULARLY if the recruiter is overseas. I've seen a LOT of that; I'm pretty sure that many firms have switched to a model where they outsource the harvesting of resumes from Monster, Dice, HotJobs, etc. to companies in (SURPRISE) India or similar places. Once that person has gotten an initial look at your resume and supposed skillset, they pass you into the 'inner circle' where you deal with a more typical recruiter that probably works directly with the client. A sort of screening process. It might work, but it pisses me off to be bombarded by these people. They see the word SAN and you get flooded with SAN ENGINEER DESPERATELY NEEDED, not bothering to catch that you may have USED a SAN, but hadn't actually built, admin'd, or engineered it. ****in' waste of time.

</rant>

Also note the time frame for employment:

Quote:

---

Term: 3 Months/Perm

---

As many of you already may know, employers are more apt to "try" their perspective employees out with a temporary commitment, rather than offering an immediate permanent position. Just so you know before considering any position, be aware of that. This confirms my babbling:

From US News & World Report :

Quote:

---

On your own.

Still, few workers can expect to regain the job security and steady upward march that firms like IBM were once famous for. "Your career is your responsibility; you're no longer going to have a company plan it out for you," says Hemming. "Those days are over."

She tells her clients to consider the freelance-to-full-time scenario. More and more companies want to try out an employee before committing, so workers offered a job on such a trial basis should look at it as an opportunity, not an insult. At this point in the economic cycle, companies are looking for experts, says Hemming, "so don't market yourself as a jack of all trades because you'll come across as a master of nothing." Figure out what expertise the job you want calls for, and make the case that you have it. If you don't, consider getting it. "Master's [degrees] and certificate programs are great," she adds.

---

Link to the whole news article: http://www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech...21/21intro.htm

If you do decide to read the article - you will also note that the market (according to them) is starting to turn for the seller's (us).

Also - as Zencoder mentioned - without the company details - sounds like a submitted resume would go to a pool of potential employers and without the location... sounds like a bad (or at least fishy) deal :deal:.

What seems weird to me, is doesn't that seem like a lot of money, for a pretty small operating budget? I have known guys working for $60K with budgets bigger than that....maybe he was just underpaid?

Well kr5kernel hit one point...

The term for such a position is too short.
The pay too high.
The budget too small.
And the ominious mention of "market audits."

I suspect the company might be seeking a patsy for an impending failed audit.

cheers,

catch

... or someone to get them out of the dark cess pool of government regulation. A setup for failure.

Quote:

---

Required: Windows/Internet/Oracle security, Bachelors degree, CISA/CISSP, 10+ years Information Systems experience.
Responsibilities: No unidentified noncompliance in market audit process. Establish an ongoing viable security strategy. Ensure appropriate skills are available to implement security requirements.

So... am I alone in this, or do any of the rest of you see some serious red flags here?

---

Thats what I'm talking about. Overpaid and under-worked hell yea. To answer your question on a serious note: Yes I do see red flags with this. If this is legit I would surely look into this. I live in Miami were people say (its expensive to live) I don't think so personally, I see your from San Fransico CA (catch) which I know is a lot more expensive to stay out there, than Miami maybe thats why careers/jobs pay more out there? Where do I apply? Thank you, Computernerd22