The phrase that has been echoing in my ears for the past two years is that jobs are hard to find. Is it true that there are really not many jobs in society? This makes those who are looking for jobs hesitant, spreading rumors and hearsay, exaggerating the difficulty of finding work to be as terrifying as a tiger.

So I decided to investigate the truth of this matter. Why do so many people say that jobs are hard to find, and what are the reasons behind it?

We don't need to emphasize the objective reasons anymore; they are well-known, such as the impact of the pandemic, tightening policies, and cautious consumer markets, etc.

But are these macro-level factors really directly related to the difficulty of finding work? In fact, this is a misunderstanding. You need to know that when you are looking for a job, society only needs to fill one position for you. Are all the vacant positions unsuitable for you?

The answer is obviously no. In fact, basic positions, service positions, and so on require a large number of personnel. Many people join but are arrogant and leave for other jobs after a short time, then they end up competing with those who are still unemployed.

Society may not be able to meet everyone's job needs, but it can certainly meet the needs of certain individuals, as long as that person can adapt to the job environment.

Yesterday, I tried to apply for a service position, and I found that there are still quite a few service positions available, and they urgently need people to start working. As long as you agree to start immediately, you will definitely have a job right away. This is strange; why can't it be saturated?

So I took a basic position, and on the first day, I learned almost all the truths. It turns out that in any work environment, there will always be unstable factors. They either complain about the work environment, complain about it being too hard, or find various other reasons, and then they will leave for other jobs.

There are many such people in the service industry, especially among the younger generation. If companies continue to filter candidates based on so-called age or other conditions, the losses incurred by the companies will be irreparable. In this case, companies can only rationally seek people from the market to ensure smoother operations.

I had only been there for a day, and just this morning at work, I heard someone start talking about company phenomena, saying that if they were given a position change, they would resign immediately, someone else left after only a few days in a certain position, and another person said they wouldn't come to work the next day after saying they were done without waiting for the company to find someone.

If you are not in the workplace, you will never understand these high-frequency voices in the workplace. You can only observe from the outside, and you will never know what the truth is.

When I got off work, the supervisor said they would give me the so-called work uniform, but it wasn't new clothes; they were discarded by those who had left for other jobs. As soon as I picked them up, I smelled a pungent sour odor. This must be said, the company itself has certain problems; they are a bit stingy with new employees. At the very least, the clothes should be completely new, right?

However, I don't mind these things; perhaps this is the norm for companies nowadays. After hearing these voices within the company, I was not surprised that they no longer say they don't want people over thirty-five, don't want those without a college degree, or don't want those with less than three years of work experience. Their platform has a very fast turnover rate; if they continue to self-limit, the consequences will be unimaginable.

Then, I went to experience how difficult the job was. I found that the job itself had no difficulty, especially for these basic positions, the skills required could be acquired in less than half a day's time.

Most jobs do not require your innovation; you just need to practice to become proficient. Because the job difficulty is low and easy to get started, this means that the positions have a strong replaceability.

It is precisely because of the strong replaceability and rapid personnel turnover that as long as basic personnel supply is guaranteed, the accelerated flow of personnel becomes normalized.

Now many companies also realize that age should not be a limiting factor. They gradually recognize that talents who possess both responsibility and ability are the talents they urgently need.

Those private enterprises that still nitpick based on age factors and look to public enterprises for everything are generally not doing well. Because their approach does not lower labor costs, but rather increases them, while the productivity results they expect remain far away.

Of course, compared to such enterprises, more companies have realized this problem. They are gradually allowing the power of integration into the enterprise with a more open attitude and a more inclusive spirit.

I believe that private enterprises aligning with state-owned enterprises is a one-way street. First of all, many state-owned enterprises, including public institutions, can receive more funding advantages from the state, and some even receive financial allocations. But for private enterprises, there is no big tree to provide shade; private enterprises must be more inclusive and diverse to find their own path.

The inclusiveness and innovation of private enterprises may accelerate the speed of personnel flow in the entire market, but in a certain sense, this phenomenon can make employment an easy matter. Moreover, in practice, the process of sifting through the sand is the style that truth should have.

Many private enterprises still maintain the development mindset of twenty years ago. They think they can remain high and mighty, treating talents with indifference, either discussing so-called co-founders with people, while in reality, the other party has no real power at all. The way they package their words, whether this way or that way, is all to deceive the other party's cash.

I have also been to several internet companies. They are keen on their business models, believing they are invincible. They do not like to hire employees because the cost of hiring is too high. They give more grandiose titles, such as co-founders or partners, while in reality, the basic rights of the other party cannot be guaranteed. To put it plainly, they are a group of fishermen who are unwilling to spare even the bait. They admire the story of Jiang Ziya fishing, where only those willing to bite the hook are caught, yet they do not have such a good mindset. They hope that whether willing or unwilling, everyone should be hooked.

I previously wrote about a certain beauty industry company's story. They engage in private labeling and recruit a large number of people through hiring. The company has a cooperative relationship with them, providing a place for everyone, and as long as they work hard, they can earn commissions, while the company aims to profit passively.

In many metaphysical companies, this phenomenon is not uncommon. They can lose money in the business field but are never willing to pay for truly talented individuals. They believe that the wool comes from the sheep, and as long as they offer high commissions to the other party, that is enough.

However, they seek job seekers under the guise of recruitment, hoping to continuously drain their surplus value. In reality, the company likes to share risks with these people but is unwilling to share the fruits of victory with them.

This business model, which first sells risks to others, is like a company recruiting a group of free salespeople. They can take profits from the business model, while the company can continuously earn excess profits. Therefore, in a normal sense, these companies do not lack employees; they are merely creating anxiety and panic.