Interesting article on forbes....
- Thread starter wantitneedit
- Start date
TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others
Interesting article. However, it's pretty stupid in my opinion. Obviously, if you are going on an interview you WANT the job. People don't always work because they have to, some simply want to so the size of the ring on their finger would have nothing to do with their work ethic.
As for not being promoted because of a ring ~ well that's just absurd! Again, the size of the ring has ZERO to do with someones work ethic or desire to work. I've known MANY women who are lazy at work and don't have a ring and I've know many who have rocks and work harder than anyone.
If people stopped caring about what other people did, have and own the world would be a MUCH happier place!
As for not being promoted because of a ring ~ well that's just absurd! Again, the size of the ring has ZERO to do with someones work ethic or desire to work. I've known MANY women who are lazy at work and don't have a ring and I've know many who have rocks and work harder than anyone.
If people stopped caring about what other people did, have and own the world would be a MUCH happier place!
Interesting article. However, it's pretty stupid in my opinion. Obviously, if you are going on an interview you WANT the job. People don't always work because they have to, some simply want to so the size of the ring on their finger would have nothing to do with their work ethic.
As for not being promoted because of a ring ~ well that's just absurd! Again, the size of the ring has ZERO to do with someones work ethic or desire to work. I've known MANY women who are lazy at work and don't have a ring and I've know many who have rocks and work harder than anyone.
If people stopped caring about what other people did, have and own the world would be a MUCH happier place!
Hi Whoops! I think you should wear your beautiful ring! Honestly, if someone doesn't hire you based on these absurd criteria, I can't believe you would want to work for them anyway.
I would err on the side of conservative - no gaudy/flashy jewelry (including e-ring if it qualifies) and no extremely expensive/overtly brand-name purses. Is it fair to be judged on those things? Maybe not. But why give anyone a reason to discount you in the interview knowing that some people may take those things into consideration. Once you're hired you can wear whatever you want!
Here's a whole thread on the topic: http://forum.purseblog.com/career-a...ar-engagement-rings-to-interviews-700328.html
Here's a whole thread on the topic: http://forum.purseblog.com/career-a...ar-engagement-rings-to-interviews-700328.html
I think this article goes beyond interviews. I do agree to err on the conservative side when it comes to job interviews.
But on the job, it really depends on the person and her position in the company. If she's not an executive and she is sporting a new huge bling and a headcount reduction is in the works - yes, she may be laid-off because the execs may think she could manage without the job ...because the husband seems wealthy. Wrong I know, but it is a predominantly male dominant world in some companies.
If however she is an executive, she can darn wear whatever pleases her. I've seen a VP with a 4ct bright-white and in-your-face round diamond, and the people who work under her knows that her husband is rich. But she's also considered a hard worker because of her job level. Our HR director sports a 3ct radiant cut and wears it proudly. I don't think they will be laid-off ever.
Wow, the pics in the article with the celebrity rings made me realize how beautiful Khloe's original ring was! Simple and elegant. Too bad she changed her ring setting and now it looks like one big mushroom.
But on the job, it really depends on the person and her position in the company. If she's not an executive and she is sporting a new huge bling and a headcount reduction is in the works - yes, she may be laid-off because the execs may think she could manage without the job ...because the husband seems wealthy. Wrong I know, but it is a predominantly male dominant world in some companies.
If however she is an executive, she can darn wear whatever pleases her. I've seen a VP with a 4ct bright-white and in-your-face round diamond, and the people who work under her knows that her husband is rich. But she's also considered a hard worker because of her job level. Our HR director sports a 3ct radiant cut and wears it proudly. I don't think they will be laid-off ever.
Wow, the pics in the article with the celebrity rings made me realize how beautiful Khloe's original ring was! Simple and elegant. Too bad she changed her ring setting and now it looks like one big mushroom.
Attachments
This article made me chuckle. Seriously? Like the author has nothing better to write about? Sorry just my opinion.
It wouldn't surprise me. People make all kinds of assumptions on your looks and the way you dress. No employer would probably care about your rock if you were older and clearly already had kids, but if you're young they would assume you're about to take a career break especially if you're freshly engaged. I can't really blame them for making those sorts of assumptions. Who wants to train them up only to have them leave and you have to do it all over again?
I don't think the size of the rock means anything. It might exacerbate the problem if you're young, that's about it.
If I was young I wouldn't wear any rings at all to an interview. It's not the employer's business whether I'm single or not. If I was a lot older, I would probably wear rings to give me the edge, to avoid any stigmatism from their thoughts on whether I could maintain a relationship.
But seriously, I'd have to agree with lilmountaingirl. They must have really run out of things to write about!
I don't think the size of the rock means anything. It might exacerbate the problem if you're young, that's about it.
If I was young I wouldn't wear any rings at all to an interview. It's not the employer's business whether I'm single or not. If I was a lot older, I would probably wear rings to give me the edge, to avoid any stigmatism from their thoughts on whether I could maintain a relationship.
But seriously, I'd have to agree with lilmountaingirl. They must have really run out of things to write about!
her ring is gorgeous! what did she change her ring to?I think this article goes beyond interviews. I do agree to err on the conservative side when it comes to job interviews.
But on the job, it really depends on the person and her position in the company. If she's not an executive and she is sporting a new huge bling and a headcount reduction is in the works - yes, she may be laid-off because the execs may think she could manage without the job ...because the husband seems wealthy. Wrong I know, but it is a predominantly male dominant world in some companies.
If however she is an executive, she can darn wear whatever pleases her. I've seen a VP with a 4ct bright-white and in-your-face round diamond, and the people who work under her knows that her husband is rich. But she's also considered a hard worker because of her job level. Our HR director sports a 3ct radiant cut and wears it proudly. I don't think they will be laid-off ever.
Wow, the pics in the article with the celebrity rings made me realize how beautiful Khloe's original ring was! Simple and elegant. Too bad she changed her ring setting and now it looks like one big mushroom.
Hi Candice. She just changed it to some really gawdy setting. Whatever makes her happy, right?
Attachments
