105. When I Fired the Job Market

Dear Job Market,

I’m sorry but I have to let you go.

In the future this company will only make money by delivering services to several clients and creating products, in order to keep open a selection of active and passive income streams.

This is, in other words, organizational restructuring which, unfortunately, no longer leaves room for your position, which so far has been unique – as you were our only employee for years.

In addition, I’ve for a long time been highly dissatisfied with your performance as an employee.

Here is a list of critiques and it is by no means full:

You consistently deliver poor results

Our company’s main service is to help others find jobs so that they can have income and have their needs met. But the ‘job’ part of that equation is screwed up and now we see it clearly, despite your claims to the contrary.

Yes, you have harped for years about how getting a job was all about writing the perfect application to get that one single full-time job, but results were few and far in-between.

Mostly you deliver part-time, project, time-limited, poorly paid jobs, not well-paid full-time jobs … if anything at all. I have several friends who can attest to that sad state of affairs as well as statistics.

Your performance goals are rigid and limited

You seem to operate by the credo that you only want to deliver one full-time job from a single employer who then has to trust the employee with everything.

That makes it very hard for an employer to pick an employee, you know.

Alternatively you say that a job-seeker (our main clients) should try to get at least two part-time jobs which by the way have to be compatible in terms of work-days per week, skill-set and work-hours per day.

That’s not particularly flexible or imaginative.

You let outsiders interfere with your results

Whenever some of our clients – the job seekers – complain of the above-mentioned restrictions you always refer to ‘the rules’, which are set down by politicians – people outside of our organization.

These rules say that in order to receive an income to survive on for a limited time, it is only permitted for your clients to seek full-time jobs, or cumbersome combinations of two part-time jobs or the like.

Alternatively you recommend substitute or seasonal work all of which will be deducted from the time-limited insurance pay-out to cover their living expenses.

That’s a really stupid way to motivate people to work more, by the way.

You rely too much on ass-kissing

According to some statistics 70 per cent of all jobs, full- or part time, are handed out to people who know other people. That is often the case too for firms selling a service or a product, but at least they have the option of delivering proof that they can help their customer, e.g. with a free product.

I’ve heard that you recommend that your clients deliver such proof, too, by working for free for up to 12 months as ‘an intern’, ‘a trainee’, or the like – a practice which, unfortunately it seems, is tailor-made to attract free workers for a while and then ditch them again; alternately to repress wages.

You say you provide security when in reality you provide no such thing

One of the main reasons, dear Job Market, that I let you stay in our company for so many years was that I believed the claim that you provided ‘security’ to our clients, the job seekers (or more precisely: the income seekers).

The notion of a “steady job” which you said you could offer people sounded really attractive. Unfortunately, we have numerous of examples – legion in fact – of our clients scoring a job after years of hard work to even get it, and then they get fired after a bit of time when there was down-sizing or new political priorities.

There is a fatal flaw in your logic that it is more secure to rely on all of your income from one source whereas a company may have numerous sources, such as several clients and products.

I have no idea why so many, myself included, bought into this ‘logic’ for years, but at least you seem to have been a good salesperson with regard to that.

You are not able to adapt

I’ll be the first to admit that in order for our company to do well in the future we have to adapt to new technologies and changing circumstances, and that is exactly the reason we are firing you.

It simply won’t do to have one single employee who is so rigid in his mindset, when times and technology change rapidly.

We have had complaints that you for example recommended education as the solution to our clients’ needs to get more self-made income, when there was no need for more people from a particular branch of the educational world and when it would have been better to teach them to sell themselves and their services anyway, something you rarely learn at university. You seem to have mistaken knowledge for usefulness.

That was a big mistake and many of our income-seeking clients have paid the price for believing it.

You are paternalistic, arrogant and self-centered

Even if you delivered better results in terms of getting our clients more reliable income, this would by far have been a reason for us to fire you anyway. You have made no effort to align your communication on behalf of our company with modern, optimistic, empowering and creative values.

Instead you have let politicians, media and of course many people get away with complaining about people being ‘too lazy’ if they were not able to get that single job, which for many it became more and more difficult to get due to changing social, economic and technological circumstances.

You even went so far as to suggest that the only means to “integrating” foreigners of different cultural background into our society was to get them A Job, yet  you undertook no action to brand foreigners as an attractive part of the work force.

Instead you have let them been accused, en bloc, of being everything from lazy to terrorists – hardly something that encourages an employer to pick them up. I can only explain this lack with your own self-centeredness and arrogance which seem to tell you that you, of all employees is indispensable.

This, however, may be a cover for your own fear of not being able to adapt to new circumstances and soon losing your job. It is always easier to project guilt to someone else and shoot the messenger instead of upping your own performance.

You cost people money

Since a job is the most heavily taxed of all income sources, it is a riddle for us that you have not been able to come up with more flexible solution packages for our clients who seek income – except harping on about how they should “get a job” (a single job).

We know that not everyone can and will start their own company, with all the tax benefits it entails, as well as flexible options for making money, but it is inexcusable that you have not been able to suggest more flexible options for our income-seeking clients except “get a job”.

The most obvious solution to increase our clients’ chances of producing income, which is to allow them to have both a company and one or more jobs, without punishing them, you have failed in delivering.

The rules for having a company while receiving income from insurance or state are cumbersome, inflexible and limited and by no means motivate initiative. You seem to think that everyone should either go in one box or another – job or self-employed/business full-time.

You seem to think that it should be disallowed to try to find new combinations to help people make more income under rapidly changing circumstances, socially and economically. Or your politician-friends seem to think so.

But since you are so fond of listening to them, perhaps you can apply for a new position at their headquarters after we have thrown you out.


In conclusion, dear Job Market, this is your last day at our company, and good riddance. You have spectacularly failed to deliver your promises and it is with great relief that we let you go.

You are, of course, always welcome to come back if you can offer something better than you have before, but our expectations are extremely modest as regards this, so we won’t sit up waiting for you.

We are busy finding new customers to serve in all sorts of combinations and for all sorts of prices, so that they together can deliver more than enough income, regularly and as securely as possible.

We are not blind to the needs to adapt or being diligent in getting new customers in order to survive as a company, but rest assured we have many more options now that we are rid of you.