Before I begin: I hope this post doesn’t come across as whiny or entitled. Experience is a valuable thing, and often genuinely mandatory. The breadth and depth of experience someone has in any field can make a huge difference in their contributions. My main point in this rant is that I think it unfortunate when people without experience not only aren’t given a chance in an entry-level position, but are led to believe their inexperience is a roadblock.
As someone who is just starting to figure out what she wants to do with her life, I’ve admittedly found myself daunted by the requirements listed by some employers. Must have five years’ technical writing experience. Must have a marketing degree. Sometimes, the job posting will say “Degree in XYZ preferred,” rather than “required.” That’s my in. I think it’s the in for a lot of people. I’m grateful for employers like that, and I wish there were more of them.
That being said, I recognize that sometimes a company is just not in a position to do on-the-job training. Even if they don’t need someone with lots of experience, they want someone who is well-primed for the opportunity. Maybe they have so many candidates (I bet this is true especially in the current economy) that it seems like a no-brainer to hire the person with five years’ experience rather than the one who is eager to learn, and so they don’t even bother looking at applications from less-experienced people. Okay. I can understand that. I might not like it, but I get it.
What I don’t get is when a job posting is condescending. I ran across one for a baking job recently that said something like “Casual home bakers need not apply.” The tone there just really riled me up. Who amongst us didn’t start as a home baker? How many home bakers will read that ad and form the (incorrect) impression that there’s no way to break into this field, and then give up? Me, I was lucky enough to find my first kitchen job (working for a chocolatier) when I’d had no professional experience; my second kitchen job, my current baking job, came to me when I’d had only one year of professional kitchen experience and none as a baker. Both of these employers recognize something important: if a person is capable of learning quickly, has a history of being a hard worker, and shows an interest in the work, they are likely to succeed. This, of course, does not mean that every job should be willing to hire someone without experience or certification. Certain things take too long to learn to be taught on the job. Baking, however, not only can be taught on the job, but typically is. Yes, some people go to culinary school – but formal education is less critical than, say, computer science coursework is for a software development job.
Therefore, I ask – how does this employer expect inexperienced bakers to break into the field? Maybe by first holding a different, lower-paying kitchen position? Maybe simply by first working for someone out there who is willing to take on someone with no experience? Probably, it doesn’t matter, since (one way or another) there are experienced bakers out there.
By the way, I do think it’s important for home bakers to realize that baking in a professional kitchen is very different, in some ways, than baking at home. Yet I think some people overstate the differences in an attempt to warn away those who are on the fence. Yes, I lift 50-pound bags of flour and sugar every day. Yes, I am on my feet the entire workday (got used to this much faster than I thought I would). Yes, I have multiple recipes going at once, and have to keep track of things in the oven at the same time as things in the mixer. Yes, there are days (today was one of them) when I have to challenge myself to work even faster than normal, when “normal” is so much faster than I used to bake before I did it professionally.
These are the kinds of things people will tell you to scare you off. They want you to know that baking for a career does not involve sitting down to read a book while waiting for your single tray of cookies to bake. They are correct. But there are other, sometimes richer, rewards. I’ve formed amazing friendships with my coworkers. I’ve gotten to work with ingredients, and learned techniques, that I never would’ve on my own. I get paid to bake. I go home every night knowing that the 12 bags of chocolate chip cookies on the shelf the next morning are there because of me. That the people who enjoy them will do so because I went to work the day before. This is such an amazingly rewarding feeling! It is certainly not the only reason I wanted to bake for a living, but it’s a big one. And in my opinion, finding out whether someone wants that feeling should be considered just as carefully in the hiring process as “Have you ever done this before?”
“Yes, I have multiple recipes going at once, and have to keep track of things in the oven at the same time as things in the mixer.”
Wait, this doesn’t happen at home too? Usually with a kid running around your ankles. Or mine, at least. 😛 I have become a much more efficient cook (not just baking) now that I have a kid, but having three or even four recipes going at once isn’t that unusual in this house. Though if there are that many going one of us will try to get the kid out of the way.
Anyway I’m fairly certain this field isn’t for me, but I wholeheartedly support the sentiment. This economy is so bad that really even in the IT/computer jobs I see all kinds of requirements that really aren’t necessary for the job. 5+ years of experience? Yeah! Totally needed for data entry..what? Ugh.
I hope your post makes a difference 🙂
Good point! I bet bakers with kids do get this experience a lot more than those of us without…heh. And having three or four recipes going at once is impressive at home, even without kids. Kudos!
Yeah, you raise another good point – unnecessary requirements. This must be just an arbitrary way to reduce the huge influx of applications, right? Not the most worker-friendly approach. Sigh.
Man. Total flashbacks to my own semi-recent job search. Everyone wants 5+ years experience already doing absolutely everything they could imagine you doing at the job. Sometimes using things that haven’t existed for 5 years yet, at least for tech jobs.
And, also at least for tech jobs, I’m inclined to be less generous than you are about people’s motivations. Training people on how to do at least part of their job is a totally reasonable thing for employers to do, and I think many of them are just trying to profit from horribly high unemployment and avoid doing this. I’m not sure if such cynicism should be extended to those who employ bakers, though.
5 years’ experience required in something that hasn’t yet existed 5 years?! Ha, yeah, that certainly points towards “we don’t want to train people and we get so many applications that we can set random requirements without any thought put into them.”
Training on the job, I think, is basically unavoidable – it becomes a matter of degree (err, no pun intended?) – are you willing to train someone for months, or merely weeks or days? I agree that training is something employers should be willing to invest in. However, I think there are probably situations (temporary ones) where it might not make sense. For example, if you’re a very small and very young company and know you need someone to do something specific, but don’t have an employee who is qualified to train in that area, I think it would be natural to seek someone who already knows the basics in that area.