因為HR呢行係廢人居多
變左廢人永遠搵廢人
HR呢行, 吹水, 無料的人永遠做高職位
Training, L&D, T&D呢D行業都係差唔多
你只要吹水叻, 鐘意認屎認尿, 做HR, 做L&D呢個行業一定上到位.
唔通靚女就可以係工程界打橫行?
DragonWheel
1001 回覆
1355 Like
88 Dislike
第 1 頁第 2 頁第 3 頁第 4 頁第 5 頁第 6 頁第 7 頁第 8 頁第 9 頁第 10 頁第 11 頁第 12 頁第 13 頁第 14 頁第 15 頁第 16 頁第 17 頁第 18 頁第 19 頁第 20 頁第 21 頁第 22 頁第 23 頁第 24 頁第 25 頁第 26 頁第 27 頁第 28 頁第 29 頁第 30 頁第 31 頁第 32 頁第 33 頁第 34 頁第 35 頁第 36 頁第 37 頁第 38 頁第 39 頁第 40 頁第 41 頁
所以做女人好過男人好多
PhD in UCB???
即係希慎班HR完全冇reference check 睇嚟都係公司d人睇完個email知佢有鬼先port9佢 班HR點做野？
HR加埋學會都係咁濕鳩
寫得唔錯
推
因為投訴錯左對象
HKIE 係互認下比個membership 佢
所以一切assessment 係CIBSE做，hkie 做既野只係比份form CIBSE填，証明條女
1. 係active member in good standinng,
2. 行standind route 做CIBSE member
3. academic qualification meet standard 無做過academic assessment
所以佢有無作到野做CIBSE member 唔關HKIE 事
雖然HKIE都唔係好野黎
但投訴既係要同CIBSE 投訴
要佢地調查
HKIE 係互認下比個membership 佢
所以一切assessment 係CIBSE做，hkie 做既野只係比份form CIBSE填，証明條女
1. 係active member in good standinng,
2. 行standind route 做CIBSE member
3. academic qualification meet standard 無做過academic assessment
所以佢有無作到野做CIBSE member 唔關HKIE 事
雖然HKIE都唔係好野黎
但投訴既係要同CIBSE 投訴
要佢地調查
唔怪得冇人做野，腐爛了
應該都關事？
Clearly, she has violated HKIE "The Ordinance and Constitution” Article 13 (5) “improper conduct” - the making of any false representation or untrue or misleading statement in applying for election or transfer to any class of membership of the Institution or inclusion on the Register. You have a responsibility to initiate an investigation into this incident.
Clearly, she has violated HKIE "The Ordinance and Constitution” Article 13 (5) “improper conduct” - the making of any false representation or untrue or misleading statement in applying for election or transfer to any class of membership of the Institution or inclusion on the Register. You have a responsibility to initiate an investigation into this incident.
佢地唔會有料查，
d interview 文件同record 係晒CIBSE 度
d interview 文件同record 係晒CIBSE 度
呢點又如何？作為所謂gatekeeper角色，向CIBSE call返遞form入嚟嘅人嗰啲Employment Details or Working Experience Summary都唔係好難掛，而唔應該只靠用八達通癩到班大袋大筆一揮簽個名就直過
As for providing evidence to prove that she “invented” a non-existent project, how do you expect me to prove that a fictional building does not exist in reality? Do you want me to visit the site of the “invented” building for an on-site investigation? As a professional institution, can your response show some common sense? Since she claims her involvement in the project was on-site construction and management, wouldn't it be easier for you to ask her to indicate the project's location or provide relevant photos or information? Moreover, as a professional institution, don't you have the ability to check the information or related records she submitted to ECUK and HKIE?
As for providing evidence to prove that she “invented” a non-existent project, how do you expect me to prove that a fictional building does not exist in reality? Do you want me to visit the site of the “invented” building for an on-site investigation? As a professional institution, can your response show some common sense? Since she claims her involvement in the project was on-site construction and management, wouldn't it be easier for you to ask her to indicate the project's location or provide relevant photos or information? Moreover, as a professional institution, don't you have the ability to check the information or related records she submitted to ECUK and HKIE?
Cibse 做左嘢hike 先會做，
Hkie無權call interview嘢
英國講data privacy
無member consent 我地連hkie 份form 都唔會覆
唔好話member d professional review data
Hkie無權call interview嘢
英國講data privacy
無member consent 我地連hkie 份form 都唔會覆
唔好話member d professional review data
你係cibse做？
有案低都仲靈以做到arup mtr 太古呢啲大公司架咩？
原來唔關事 誤會一場 HKIE又贏 
如果home institute 除佢名
HKIE先可以收番membership
好似係
HKIE先可以收番membership
好似係
你唔自爆邊個知
hr邊有權check record
咩都要applicant/employee authorize
hr邊有權check record
咩都要applicant/employee authorize
似乎樓上個邏輯搞錯咗。
HKIE有佢地嘅家規，係HKIE "The Ordinance and Constitution” (上網搵到)，裡面Article 13 (5) “improper conduct”寫到好清楚，用誤導性/偽造資料獲得會員資格，係會被除名。至於邊個執行呢本家規？特區政府？律政司？EMSD？都唔係，呢本係HKIE嘅家規，當然係由HKIE自己執行。佢地好多嘢都做得，如RRA時call返當年入比ECUK嘅料做紀錄，向ECUK確定兩SET料一唔一樣(唔係叫佢地交後生資料，而係主動向ECUK確定呢SET料係唔唔係同HKIE自己收到嘅一致，呢點ECUK係會答)
所以呢件事一定關HKIE事。
HKIE有佢地嘅家規，係HKIE "The Ordinance and Constitution” (上網搵到)，裡面Article 13 (5) “improper conduct”寫到好清楚，用誤導性/偽造資料獲得會員資格，係會被除名。至於邊個執行呢本家規？特區政府？律政司？EMSD？都唔係，呢本係HKIE嘅家規，當然係由HKIE自己執行。佢地好多嘢都做得，如RRA時call返當年入比ECUK嘅料做紀錄，向ECUK確定兩SET料一唔一樣(唔係叫佢地交後生資料，而係主動向ECUK確定呢SET料係唔唔係同HKIE自己收到嘅一致，呢點ECUK係會答)
所以呢件事一定關HKIE事。
我意思份form問你有無criminal record
你答無
佢吹你唔漲
其他學歷,工作經驗
呢D要你簽授權書check就好平常
你答無
佢吹你唔漲
其他學歷,工作經驗
呢D要你簽授權書check就好平常
其實寫法好關鍵
問有冇案底（有機會洗底）
同
問你有冇被定過罪/上過庭
完全係兩回事黎
但係
正常份consent
一定授權check曬你基本background
問有冇案底（有機會洗底）
同
問你有冇被定過罪/上過庭
完全係兩回事黎
但係
正常份consent
一定授權check曬你基本background