Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab

@wirestyle22 said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@dafyre I'm just an AI anyway guys. This is what your tax dollars bought. I know, disappointed.

what's the I in AI? Just kidding

Illiterate

thwr

@wirestyle22 said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@thwr said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@wirestyle22 said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@dafyre I'm just an AI anyway guys. This is what your tax dollars bought. I know, disappointed.

what's the I in AI? Just kidding

Illiterate

That's ok. But we are getting a bit off-topic here.

Dashrender

@thwr said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@thwr said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

The question that should be asked is does the dedication to the IT industry mean you should sacrifice your hobbies?

A better question, if IT isn't your hobby, should you have a different job? One that more closely matches you true likes and desires.

Would you ask a car mechanic the same who doesn't want to fix cars in his free time?

If I'm hiring a car mechanic for high end cars or something like Indy car racing - absolutely, and if they said no.. I'd bin their application. NTG is at the top of the field. Some companies put themselves there. They want the most enthusiastic for IT group they can get. As Danielle said, you can't teach enthusiasm, but you can teach skills. So far, their needs have been met buy people with either both enthusiasm and skills or just enthusiasm, and they taught them the skills. when the work pool starts to dry up, and they have fewer choices, they will have to be less picky on who they pick.

I agree from a personal point of view. But I can't expect everyone to be like this. Maybe someone just wants to do his job, that's ok. We should keep a few things in mind here:

Salary

Position

Goals

for example. I wouldn't expect a Level 1 helpdesk tech to have a small datacenter in his basement, he care barely live from what he carries home. If we are talking about a 100-150k+ position, it's a whole different story.

and I wouldn't expect NTG to higher a Level 1 helpdesk person either. I had junk equipment in the mid 90's in my apt for lab gear that I paid pennies for, just so I would have stuff to learn on.

I suppose I could agree that as you get older (north of 35) the need for a home lab is less (especially because of today's options), but when you're young.... you need to be hungry! If you don't want to spend a lot of time learning/playing with this stuff, then I ask, is this really the field for you?

wirestyle22

@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@thwr said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@thwr said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

The question that should be asked is does the dedication to the IT industry mean you should sacrifice your hobbies?

A better question, if IT isn't your hobby, should you have a different job? One that more closely matches you true likes and desires.

Would you ask a car mechanic the same who doesn't want to fix cars in his free time?

If I'm hiring a car mechanic for high end cars or something like Indy car racing - absolutely, and if they said no.. I'd bin their application. NTG is at the top of the field. Some companies put themselves there. They want the most enthusiastic for IT group they can get. As Danielle said, you can't teach enthusiasm, but you can teach skills. So far, their needs have been met buy people with either both enthusiasm and skills or just enthusiasm, and they taught them the skills. when the work pool starts to dry up, and they have fewer choices, they will have to be less picky on who they pick.

I agree from a personal point of view. But I can't expect everyone to be like this. Maybe someone just wants to do his job, that's ok. We should keep a few things in mind here:

Salary

Position

Goals

for example. I wouldn't expect a Level 1 helpdesk tech to have a small datacenter in his basement, he care barely live from what he carries home. If we are talking about a 100-150k+ position, it's a whole different story.

and I wouldn't expect NTG to higher a Level 1 helpdesk person either. I had junk equipment in the mid 90's in my apt for lab gear that I paid pennies for, just so I would have stuff to learn on.

I suppose I could agree that as you get older (north of 35) the need for a home lab is less (especially because of today's options), but when you're young.... you need to be hungry! If you don't want to spend a lot of time learning/playing with this stuff, then I ask, is this really the field for you?

I'm hungry literally and figuratively. What I wouldn't give for a cheeseburger and a book.

Dashrender

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@art_of_shred said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

It's kinda simple. You're building a team. Do you pick people looking for a paycheck, or people with a passion about what you're doing? If you have the option, you're looking for passion... or you shouldn't be the one doing the hiring.

once again passion shouldn't be determined on if they do stuff outside of working hours. I work to get a paycheck yes, but I also show passion for my job while doing so.

Not good enough when there is a huge line of people behind you who show not only passion while at work, but also while at home. You're hamstringing yourself and saying it's not fair that they choose to be passionate always, and you only some of the time.

it's your choice - it's not a wrong choice, it's simply a choice.. and as such, your life will go different directions.

Bring this to Scott's constant talks about college. The person who goes into hotel staff our of HS, versus the one who goes to college. The non college guy will be light years ahead learning wise in the real world.

Sadly, so many uppers today will hold the non college people down because they (the uppers) think that college is some kind of right of passage - but that's becoming less and less the case these days.

wirestyle22

@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@art_of_shred said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

It's kinda simple. You're building a team. Do you pick people looking for a paycheck, or people with a passion about what you're doing? If you have the option, you're looking for passion... or you shouldn't be the one doing the hiring.

once again passion shouldn't be determined on if they do stuff outside of working hours. I work to get a paycheck yes, but I also show passion for my job while doing so.

Not good enough when there is a huge line of people behind you who show not only passion while at work, but also while at home. You're hamstringing yourself and saying it's not fair that they choose to be passionate always, and you only some of the time.

it's your choice - it's not a wrong choice, it's simply a choice.. and as such, your life will go different directions.

Bring this to Scott's constant talks about college. The person who goes into hotel staff our of HS, versus the one who goes to college. The non college guy will be light years ahead learning wise in the real world.

Sadly, so many uppers today will hold the non college people down because they (the uppers) think that college is some kind of right of passage - but that's becoming less and less the case these days.

I agree with everything you've said here

Dashrender

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@wirestyle22
so you are using your own personal resources to test out things for work? That seems backwards.

yeah personally I wouldn't do this either. The lab is for you to learn.. not for your company to take advantage of you.

wirestyle22

@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@wirestyle22
so you are using your own personal resources to test out things for work? That seems backwards.

yeah personally I wouldn't do this either. The lab is for you to learn.. not for your company to take advantage of you.

I don't see why they need to be mutually exclusive. If I know something there is no need for me to put it into my test environment. If I don't know something I put it into my test environment to learn it. It has a side effect of helping me perform my duties at work.

david.wiese

@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@art_of_shred said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

It's kinda simple. You're building a team. Do you pick people looking for a paycheck, or people with a passion about what you're doing? If you have the option, you're looking for passion... or you shouldn't be the one doing the hiring.

once again passion shouldn't be determined on if they do stuff outside of working hours. I work to get a paycheck yes, but I also show passion for my job while doing so.

Not good enough when there is a huge line of people behind you who show not only passion while at work, but also while at home. You're hamstringing yourself and saying it's not fair that they choose to be passionate always, and you only some of the time.

it's your choice - it's not a wrong choice, it's simply a choice.. and as such, your life will go different directions.

Bring this to Scott's constant talks about college. The person who goes into hotel staff our of HS, versus the one who goes to college. The non college guy will be light years ahead learning wise in the real world.

Sadly, so many uppers today will hold the non college people down because they (the uppers) think that college is some kind of right of passage - but that's becoming less and less the case these days.

So the people like me (that have hobbies in something other than what I do for a living) get screwed because they aren't willing to put time in after work to learn more things?

I have been successful in my life thus far, and not having a home lab hasn't held me back (that I am aware of). I learn what I need to for the job I am doing right now. If a new job requires me to learn new things, then I will. I am just not willing to sacrifice the few hours I have at home with my family to dedicate to a job. I already spend 50+ hours a week doing IT related things at work, the last thing I want to do is go home and do more of that. I guess I am just different and like my time outside of the IT world.

wirestyle22

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@art_of_shred said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

It's kinda simple. You're building a team. Do you pick people looking for a paycheck, or people with a passion about what you're doing? If you have the option, you're looking for passion... or you shouldn't be the one doing the hiring.

once again passion shouldn't be determined on if they do stuff outside of working hours. I work to get a paycheck yes, but I also show passion for my job while doing so.

Not good enough when there is a huge line of people behind you who show not only passion while at work, but also while at home. You're hamstringing yourself and saying it's not fair that they choose to be passionate always, and you only some of the time.

it's your choice - it's not a wrong choice, it's simply a choice.. and as such, your life will go different directions.

Bring this to Scott's constant talks about college. The person who goes into hotel staff our of HS, versus the one who goes to college. The non college guy will be light years ahead learning wise in the real world.

Sadly, so many uppers today will hold the non college people down because they (the uppers) think that college is some kind of right of passage - but that's becoming less and less the case these days.

So the people like me (that have hobbies in something other than what I do for a living) get screwed because they aren't willing to put time in after work to learn more things?

I have been successful in my life thus far, and not having a home lab hasn't held me back (that I am aware of). I learn what I need to for the job I am doing right now. If a new job requires me to learn new things, then I will. I am just not willing to sacrifice the few hours I have at home with my family to dedicate to a job. I already spend 50+ hours a week doing IT related things at work, the last thing I want to do is go home and do more of that. I guess I am just different and like my time outside of the IT world.

That is a completely reasonable decision to make. Dad passed last year and mom lives in England. No kids yet (that I know of). Fiance and I are balancing my learning schedule with planning for a wedding very well. My job is also my hobby so I get a lot of enjoyment out of testing. Point being that I don't feel like I'm sacrificing anything. You are in a different position though

RojoLoco

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@art_of_shred said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

It's kinda simple. You're building a team. Do you pick people looking for a paycheck, or people with a passion about what you're doing? If you have the option, you're looking for passion... or you shouldn't be the one doing the hiring.

once again passion shouldn't be determined on if they do stuff outside of working hours. I work to get a paycheck yes, but I also show passion for my job while doing so.

Not good enough when there is a huge line of people behind you who show not only passion while at work, but also while at home. You're hamstringing yourself and saying it's not fair that they choose to be passionate always, and you only some of the time.

it's your choice - it's not a wrong choice, it's simply a choice.. and as such, your life will go different directions.

Bring this to Scott's constant talks about college. The person who goes into hotel staff our of HS, versus the one who goes to college. The non college guy will be light years ahead learning wise in the real world.

Sadly, so many uppers today will hold the non college people down because they (the uppers) think that college is some kind of right of passage - but that's becoming less and less the case these days.

So the people like me (that have hobbies in something other than what I do for a living) get screwed because they aren't willing to put time in after work to learn more things?

I have been successful in my life thus far, and not having a home lab hasn't held me back (that I am aware of). I learn what I need to for the job I am doing right now. If a new job requires me to learn new things, then I will. I am just not willing to sacrifice the few hours I have at home with my family to dedicate to a job. I already spend 50+ hours a week doing IT related things at work, the last thing I want to do is go home and do more of that. I guess I am just different and like my time outside of the IT world.

Amen. I can't believe this view is unacceptable to the NTG minions (not just the employees). Life is for living, and much of that (for me anyway) occurs NOT in front of a screen. I used to do the whole "eat, drink, live, breathe, shit IT stuff 24/7" thing when I was younger, but eventually doing IT for 40-60 hours a week becomes enough. I've never had a job where I didn't have the luxury of on the clock learning time (of which I have taken great advantage), so maybe my view is fuct, but at 42, I have other (better) shit to do after I clock out.

art_of_shred

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@art_of_shred said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

It's kinda simple. You're building a team. Do you pick people looking for a paycheck, or people with a passion about what you're doing? If you have the option, you're looking for passion... or you shouldn't be the one doing the hiring.

once again passion shouldn't be determined on if they do stuff outside of working hours. I work to get a paycheck yes, but I also show passion for my job while doing so.

Not good enough when there is a huge line of people behind you who show not only passion while at work, but also while at home. You're hamstringing yourself and saying it's not fair that they choose to be passionate always, and you only some of the time.

it's your choice - it's not a wrong choice, it's simply a choice.. and as such, your life will go different directions.

Bring this to Scott's constant talks about college. The person who goes into hotel staff our of HS, versus the one who goes to college. The non college guy will be light years ahead learning wise in the real world.

Sadly, so many uppers today will hold the non college people down because they (the uppers) think that college is some kind of right of passage - but that's becoming less and less the case these days.

So the people like me (that have hobbies in something other than what I do for a living) get screwed because they aren't willing to put time in after work to learn more things?

I have been successful in my life thus far, and not having a home lab hasn't held me back (that I am aware of). I learn what I need to for the job I am doing right now. If a new job requires me to learn new things, then I will. I am just not willing to sacrifice the few hours I have at home with my family to dedicate to a job. I already spend 50+ hours a week doing IT related things at work, the last thing I want to do is go home and do more of that. I guess I am just different and like my time outside of the IT world.

I don't blame you. Also, just because 5-10 voices here say they would pick someone who is actively pursuing learning engagements outside of their job over someone who is not, that's hardly a broad view of the job market as a whole. I think you'll be safe. On the other hand, it doesn't minimize the fact that those who do work hard for the competitive edge are bound to find it.

art_of_shred

@RojoLoco said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@art_of_shred said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

It's kinda simple. You're building a team. Do you pick people looking for a paycheck, or people with a passion about what you're doing? If you have the option, you're looking for passion... or you shouldn't be the one doing the hiring.

once again passion shouldn't be determined on if they do stuff outside of working hours. I work to get a paycheck yes, but I also show passion for my job while doing so.

Not good enough when there is a huge line of people behind you who show not only passion while at work, but also while at home. You're hamstringing yourself and saying it's not fair that they choose to be passionate always, and you only some of the time.

it's your choice - it's not a wrong choice, it's simply a choice.. and as such, your life will go different directions.

Bring this to Scott's constant talks about college. The person who goes into hotel staff our of HS, versus the one who goes to college. The non college guy will be light years ahead learning wise in the real world.

Sadly, so many uppers today will hold the non college people down because they (the uppers) think that college is some kind of right of passage - but that's becoming less and less the case these days.

So the people like me (that have hobbies in something other than what I do for a living) get screwed because they aren't willing to put time in after work to learn more things?

I have been successful in my life thus far, and not having a home lab hasn't held me back (that I am aware of). I learn what I need to for the job I am doing right now. If a new job requires me to learn new things, then I will. I am just not willing to sacrifice the few hours I have at home with my family to dedicate to a job. I already spend 50+ hours a week doing IT related things at work, the last thing I want to do is go home and do more of that. I guess I am just different and like my time outside of the IT world.

Amen. I can't believe this view is unacceptable to the NTG minions (not just the employees). Life is for living, and much of that (for me anyway) occurs NOT in front of a screen. I used to do the whole "eat, drink, live, breathe, shit IT stuff 24/7" thing when I was younger, but eventually doing IT for 40-60 hours a week becomes enough. I've never had a job where I didn't have the luxury of on the clock learning time (of which I have taken great advantage), so maybe my view is fuct, but at 42, I have other (better) shit to do after I clock out.

So, back in your ambitious youth, did that serve you well? Now that you've put in the extra time to get real experience in a broader form, do you not enjoy the benefits of having gained that experience? And once again, the opponents seem to be missing the point; it's not that we would never hire someone without a home lab. It's that we're looking for avid learners. With the number of options we have to sift through, we're going to go for the ones who possess the traits we feel are beneficial. Why is that so seemingly difficult to grasp? I'm certainly NOT saying that it is an official prerequisite for employment, which I think has been demonstrated numerous times. But, given the choice, that's where we are going to lean.

david.wiese

@wirestyle22

@wirestyle22 said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@Dashrender said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@david.wiese said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

@art_of_shred said in Would You Hire Someone in IT Who Does Not Have a Home Lab:

It's kinda simple. You're building a team. Do you pick people looking for a paycheck, or people with a passion about what you're doing? If you have the option, you're looking for passion... or you shouldn't be the one doing the hiring.

once again passion shouldn't be determined on if they do stuff outside of working hours. I work to get a paycheck yes, but I also show passion for my job while doing so.

Not good enough when there is a huge line of people behind you who show not only passion while at work, but also while at home. You're hamstringing yourself and saying it's not fair that they choose to be passionate always, and you only some of the time.

it's your choice - it's not a wrong choice, it's simply a choice.. and as such, your life will go different directions.

Bring this to Scott's constant talks about college. The person who goes into hotel staff our of HS, versus the one who goes to college. The non college guy will be light years ahead learning wise in the real world.

Sadly, so many uppers today will hold the non college people down because they (the uppers) think that college is some kind of right of passage - but that's becoming less and less the case these days.

So the people like me (that have hobbies in something other than what I do for a living) get screwed because they aren't willing to put time in after work to learn more things?

I have been successful in my life thus far, and not having a home lab hasn't held me back (that I am aware of). I learn what I need to for the job I am doing right now. If a new job requires me to learn new things, then I will. I am just not willing to sacrifice the few hours I have at home with my family to dedicate to a job. I already spend 50+ hours a week doing IT related things at work, the last thing I want to do is go home and do more of that. I guess I am just different and like my time outside of the IT world.

That is a completely reasonable decision to make. Dad passed last year and mom lives in England. No kids yet (that I know of). Fiance and I are balancing my learning schedule with planning for a wedding very well. My job is also my hobby so I get a lot of enjoyment out of testing. Point being that I don't feel like I'm sacrificing anything. You are in a different position though

If it is your hobby, great, you love to test and play around, that is awesome. But should it really be grounds to base a hiring decision off of? That is what I am failing to understand. Does it really set you that much farther apart from me? Does it show a difference in how hungry I am to find that golden job that needs all of these self taught skills?

My point at the end of all of 128 posts, it has been determined that ntg (as an organization) is looking at a specific subset of people (that I don't fall into, which is fine) with a passion which is defined as having IT as a job and as a hobby. Eat/sleep/breath technology and willing to do anything to be apart of that.

This is my opinion. You absolutely shouldn't need to have a home lab to get into IT and to make your way up the ladder and shouldn't be considered when hiring. Those that can afford to great, the more power to you. But those that cannot (me) shouldn't be ruled out just because we don't fit the "ideal candidate" that the company has set forth.