Who do you hire for a position in middle-management at the office?

CVs or gtfo

Obviously the one that's half a foot taller than the rest. we can't have any womanlets around here.

>armour
>confident posture
>direct eye contact
>focused and intense
>physically fit (mens sana in corpore sano, after all)
>naturally tall
>the unusual hair and eye colours are most likely natural
>no visible tattoos or piercings
>shows no embarrassment or concern for how the other candidates view her
3 would be my pick for sure.

I'd hire 2 or 3. The former because she's the only one actually wearing pants, the latter because she seems the most confident, and assuming she can reign in her eccentricities would be the best pick for management.

>I'd hire 2 or 3. The former because she's the only one actually wearing pants
Good point.

4 is fucking hilarious now that I'm looking at it that way.
>I wear the shortest skirt I can find to make sure I show enough skin to get this job.
>......and then THIS bitch shows up.

women are proven to be far better at multitasking and social interaction then men, so yes middle management is the perfect position for a woman to use her biological pros while still being subservient to upper management (assumed male) thus enforcing her presumed subservience and ensuring that the people she manages still respect her or at least the people she represents.

also I'd hire #5 dresses professionally, shows that she recognizes improper work etiquette like #1 and #2 but isn't distracted by it, and doesn't have a bitch attitude like #4

>women are proven to be far better

I was going to say something, but then I looked at girl #3 again and remembered that this is a high fantasy setting.

Carry on.

That's some really funny perspective going on if that's true.
She can't be looking more than 30 degrees to the right.

I know that it's the style (both artistic and fashion-wise), but the fact that #1,#2,#4 and #5 are wearing neither stockings nor socks annoys me for some reason. #1, if you look closely enough, wearing shoes that are too small for her feet. #2's feet look like the merge at the heel, with how they're angled and her collar button is undone. #4 is obviously slouching and has shit posture, not to mention the fact that she either doesn't really give a damn or was in a hurry because she's wearing a plain long-sleaved shirt instead of a collared button-up like #1, #2 and #5 and just grabbed the shortest skirt in her dresser. #5 looks way too stiff and is obviously trying to avoid looking at #3, her posture is okay but is a tad too rigid for my taste. She'd probably make a good secretary, and I'd keep her resume on hand if I needed a new one.

But still, the lack of socks or stockings on #1, #2, #4, and #5 bothers me for some reason. So I'm slightly biased toward #3 just on that alone.

>ut the fact that #1,#2,#4 and #5 are wearing neither stockings nor socks annoys me for some reason.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pantyhose

Not 3, because 3 will overthrow you to become higher management.

And yet, due to the art style, there's no way to tell because the skin-tone of the legs are the same as the hands, face, and neck. Which means it'll still bother me every time I see this image.

I haven't seen their respective resumes, I haven't interviewed them, I don't even know what kind of job I'm trying to fill. What exactly do you expect me to do?

No, she's the one most capable of looking the least wierded out amongst the four, making her the most capable of dealing with and entertaining the Mucus Men of the Aeleothine Slugmines during trade and business negotiations. The other three are just much more unable to mask their discomfort.

This is all discounting Tits McGee herself of course.

FYI, #4 is wearing a bit of cloth over her front, in what is called a draped bodice, if I remember correctly. It's rather common.

>not picking strong subordinates to sharpen your skills

I bet you even attend your children's birthday parties too.

The weak are doomed to mediocrity

Number 1 and number 5 are the only ones appropriately dressed and thus deserve to advance to secondary interviews

The thing is. Competent base employees can meet their goals even with useless middle management. Competent middle manager can't do shit when the base employees are useless. It's basically the work position of least potential harm.
Unless they are actually signing deals with customer and write down unrealistic promises. But then if your company doesn't have dedicated sales people, you probably have worse problems than quality of middle managers.

>It's a ShindoL doujin with a happy end
Office Ladies truly are magical.

I love how women always interview like they're asking for the job or qualifying themselves to teacher. Curveballs make them spaghetti everywhere.

Job interviews are already stressful enough without the curveballs.

Whichever killed a dragon or other large monster.

I want blood on the floor in the boardroom meetings and dead bodies piling up as quickly as possible.

Whats wrong with how 2 and 4 are dressed?

I asked this one girl about the last movie she saw just to fuck with her

This other kid was nervous af so I asked him what he imagined he'd be doing now back when he was 10

#2's collar isn't properly tucked in and her collar button isn't done up. #4's skirt is a Sexual Harassment Lawsuit waiting to happen.

Making interviews ain't much easier than doing them. But if I'm throwing a curveball, I either already decided candidate is good enough and just want to double check how far they can be pushed or already decided they are not worth it but need to drag the interview on for a while longer.
No answer save for complete mental breakdown or revolutionary breakthrough idea worth of patenting will change my mind at that point.

Number 3 has no respect for the workplace decorum. Number 4 appears to be a raging lesbian that can't control her sexual urges in a professional setting.
Numbers 1 and 2 are close, but number 5 really looks to be company material.

>This other kid was nervous af so I asked him what he imagined he'd be doing now back when he was 10
Кocмoнaвт!

>or already decided they are not worth it but need to drag the interview on for a while longer.
I'd honestly prefer it if at that point I was just told "sorry, you're not what they're looking for" (and preferably why I'm not what they're looking for). No offense, but asking questions just to stall feels pretty rude to me. I get that the entire job interview thing is bullshit with its own weird code of etiquette and codewords, but I just like a bit of honesty from time to time.

I throw them to test how quick thinking they are, how cool they are under pressure, and how they handle banter.

That and I just like making people spaghetti.

I'd prefer that as well, but there's procedures that need to be followed and if you cut it too short candidate might try to dispute the interview for "not giving them a real chance". Happened before.

Number 4 looks most likely to give me a blowjob out of desperation, so her.

I used to tell people.

But apparently it's a lawsuit waiting to happen. And my colleague said you could be interviewing the person 1 more rejection away from going Columbine on your ass.

>That and I just like making people spaghetti.

>That and I just like making people spaghetti.
On company time?

>no visible tattoos or piercings
Personal pet peeve
why is that part of your hiring criteria? Why has this hiring meme persisted?

Remember folks, if a man sexually harasses a woman, it's because how could he possibly control himself at the sight of slightly more skin than might be anticipated!

But men are the only ones capable of leading effectively. Women are too hormonal or something!

Whereas men have the convinction and strength of will to lead but not to avoid groping someone the instant their willy feels hard.

I understand the logic of the Far Right, I really do, but have you instead considered full communism now?

>that guy who unironically put his IQ on the resume

Not that I hate autists, but they're a huge pain

Because office photos.We want people looking as wonderbread as possible.

eric?

>And my colleague said you could be interviewing the person 1 more rejection away from going Columbine on your ass.
me getting complete radio silence for 2 weeks after interviewing at 4 places makes me consider columbining their business. How fucking hard is it to send a "sorry but we have chosen a more qualified candidate". At least give me the closure of a yes or no

Anyone have the screencap of the guy who throws half of the resumes in the trash because he doesn't want unlucky people working for him?

the youngest one with the biggest tits.

>user, you put a 45 here, but there's only two pages

it exclusively exists on Veeky Forums. 40-year-olds have tattoos now, discriminating against it makes you look like a retard

Holy shit do people do this? Like, real people, not teenagers.

Because if you're working with customers in person, you will be facing people that grew up on those standards and still firmly believing in them.
Unless you're office drone that's never seeing people from the outside or working segmented targeted specifically at millennials tattoo is a hindrance.

>too hormonal or something!
Case-to-case thing. I've met women that keep stable and reliable behavior all month long. And I've run into some that I would rather share office with a werewolf. Chances are the stench would be more tolerable too.

But Wonder bread tastes like shit.

and I'd hire #5. She's the only one who kept her shit together. #3 makes me nervous. She might take my job through a combat trial, and I'm just not ready for that sort of competition.

>The girls are arranged according to their political stance

>#1 wants to smash capitalism and introduce a worker's paradise
>As a middle manager she expects that all do to their abilities, but she also hands out salaries to all according to their needs

>#2 is a moderate leftist who kind of wants to smash the patriarchy but not really
>She gives everyone the same pay so nobody feels discriminated against

>#3 doesn't really care for politics, she's probably more of an anarchist or a primitivist
>She only believes in paying those who manage to survive their first month under her

>#4 is a patriotic nationalist
>She's upset because she can't stand the obvious foreigner trying to steal her jerb while her countrymen struggle with unemployment
>It's not like she hates those pink haired knights, it's just that a country should look after its own citizens first and foremost

>#5 unironically posts on /pol/
>She appears so giddy because she can't wait to underpay all the niggers

Does this influence who you want to hire?

When I can get away with it

>anarchist
>doesn't care for politics

My pick, number 5, remains unchanged.

user

Do you really have to ask how autistic the world is?

If you're not able or willing to defend your post through any means, be it corporate competitors, ambitious youngbloods or trained warrioresses wanting you to prove your worth, then you're not worthy of that post.

Kek

I might get banned for trying to post it, but I remember an entire MLP themed resumé for something like electrical engineering or something.

If I ever reach the point where I simply stop running out of fucks to give, I'll apply for some really prestigious position with a resumé that includes my favorite anime as well as my biggest fetishes, and exactly how the two overlap.

I don't think you understand what I was doing there.

Yup, vaguely recall that one as well. The kid was pretty impressive otherwise - prestigious education facilities and multiple internships at reputable companies. But yeah, if you're calling yourself "a colt" on your resume, it sets couple warning signs.

youtube.com/watch?v=ct2AWh-nKSk

Yes. 5 was a given, nothing has changed, but 4 has been made more appealing. 3 is bumped down to a maybe.

Because people with tattoos TEND to be impulsive, stupid, and reckless

There was also a gamer girl one - something with a Zelda theme, I think?

Please do post it.

1, 3 is actually a plant I set up to see how they would react.
1 is only mildly annoyed/confused. 2's reaction is too naive and shows the interpersonal skills of a teenager. 4 has a "fucking really?" face, no longer secure in her slutty approach for the job thanks to cosplayer showing a lot of skin. 5 is so obviously trying to ignore 3 and smiling regardless than I don't think she'd confront problems that might arise in her position.

you must not work a real job, or a job at all. tattoos and piercings are a sign of someone who doesn't take their life seriously, and is often rash and impulsive. not someone you want to work with.

If someone told me this as their criteria for new hires I would assume they had autism

living off other people's work doesn't qualify you to publish an opinion on whether or not someone else has autism, good sir.

That user was clearly misusing the word "anarchist" to mean apolitical. In which case my inclination to hire 3 is very much supported, and I hire 3 immediately.

rightmost
She looks desperate enough to give under the desk blowjobs

Number 4 because she has DFC and is cutely envious.

warrior girl, hands down

the only think I hope is that she knows reading and writing

That's funny, last time we ran interviews we discussed how someone without a tattoo or a piercing seemed insufficiently creative and seemed too flat for our work environment.

What people decide to put on their skin has very little to do with their personality.

So you have never actually met anyone with a tattoo, have you?

I bet #3 is a plant.

>in order to be seen as creative and interesting you must have X feature
>What people decide to put on their skin has very little to do with their personality.
Please read before you post

This. Everyone knows tattoos are signs of pretentiousness. 90% of all tattoos are of a skull, a wolf or an angel, unless it's one of those "deep, meaningful" tattoos they show on tattoo shows on TV.

Here's how I see it shake out in my workplace, serving general population (I work at a spa).
>torso is fine
>decolletage should be covered up by uniform shirts anyway but we shouldn't be seeing your tittoos
>arms are fine if it's not a sleeve
Neck was a weird area. I've worked there for nearly a year, have had 2 people with neck tats. One's was rather ornate in that trashy way that makes you think of a tramp stamp trying to be artsy, the other was Kokopelli. Neither work here anymore, but the first did complain that she was told to cover up.

Shit I need to interview some people down the line, might be a good idea

>I love how women always interview like they're asking for the job or qualifying themselves to teacher.
What do you mean?

>proven to be far better
In the same sense that bumblebees have been proven not to be able to fly. That is to say, it was in one paper and was sensationalized to the point that it's aped by retards across the globe, despite being obviously false.

I bet you think women have higher pain tolerance than men, too.

Your name doesn't match your writing, namefag.

As someone who has been in countless fruitless job interviews in the past few years, how do you pressure someone in one?

Boss makes a dollar, I make a dime
I make them spaghetti on company time

Tattooed freak detected

This, although at this point I put about as much effort into my applications as the companies do in their ads. Who cares anymore.

Okay, on a hunch, I'm willing to bet at some point someone tried to explain to you how male privilege worked, and how you were acting in a way that showed you were completely oblivious to it and how it worked, and you balked at them because of how ridiculous it sounded to you.

Am I close?

>doesn't know what the most common types of tattoos are
>forcefully insists that they are things they are not
>"tattoos are signs of pretentiousness"

if I see someone with a face tattoo I know they don't think in terms of consequences and that scares me.

I don't believe in the faked moon landing either

Couple things.
1. That's a grammatical mess. It's ambiguous whether you mean "I don't believe that the moon landing was faked" or "I don't believe in the moon landing, which was faked". Consider working on that in the future!
2. So you're saying I was spot on.

I'm betting that someone tried to explain original sin to you but you pretended not to see it

I mean I don't believe in conspiracy theories

>Reddit is THIS bad at reading