Many corporations, municipalities, and nonprofits across the country have programs and procedures to help advance women and minorities into leadership roles.

Why? There are still few of them represented in the nation’s corner offices.

Today, all those advancement initiatives are in legal limbo.

The Supreme Court decided yesterday that a group of New Haven, CT, white firefighters, and one Hispanic firefighter, were discriminated against when a promotions test they took and passed was scrapped by city officials because no African American firefighters passed the exam.

The white firefighters claimed they studied hard, did well on the test, and should be granted promotions. City of New Haven officials felt the disparity in results would lead to lawsuits against the city by minority firefighters.

The fear of a lawsuit was justified to a degree. In many cases, organizations have thrown out such tests if they saw a disproportionate number of minorities not doing well because suits brought in this regard often favored the group that alleged it was adversely impacted.

At the heart of the ruling is one huge, pressing, forever gnawing question on equality in the workplace — can you discriminate against one group to help another group that has been universally discriminated against for so long they are still not finding a level playing field?

Here the Supreme Court, in its 5 to 4 ruling, said “no.”

“This is one more decision defining the parameters of reverse discrimination, in essence saying that the discarding of test results not only helps those not passing and promoted, but hurts those who passed and are scheduled for promotion. In other words, discrimination has two sides,” says Gary Chaison, professor of industrial relations in the Graduate School of Management at Clark University in Worcester, MA.

He believes the decision with make employers more cautious when establishing such tests because if the results are not acceptable they won’t just be able to throw them out.

“The irony here,” he adds, “is that testing is used in civil service positions such as police officers and firefighters as an element in the promotion decision to avoid arbitrariness and favoritism that was so rampant for many years, and in New Haven the test had been thrown out because of its impact.”

Clearly the white firefighters believe they were discriminated against. And clearly, this test will lead to few, if any, minorities firefighters being promoted in New Haven.

Discrimination at fire departments across the country seems to have been rampant given the many lawsuits that have been filed by minorities.

These tests have come under fire not only in New Haven.

The problem has surfaced in the Houston fire department. This from Aframnews.com:

Seven Black firefighters are suing the city. They claim the written multiple-choice test, which accounts for 100 of an officer’s 122 promotion points, represents “systemic discrimination” against African-Americans. They contend that “Selection rates for African-Americans are abysmally smaller than for White candidates.”

Did the white firefighters just want it more? That has been the argument.

But the bottom line is, minorities continue to be underrepresented in the top seats. Why?

This is indeed the key question of our time. Any answers?

Employers, aka Big Brothers, aka Richard Simmons wannabes, want you to drop and give them twenty.

Aaron Lefkove, who works for a publishing firm in Manhattan, gets periodic memos and emails from his HR department reminding him to walk more, and offering tips on staying fit and diet.

The notes haven’t really helped.

He knows he shouldn’t be eating the cheeseburger and curly fries special from the deli across the street from his office, but he does, often. The deal is $5 and it’s yummy.

“It’s a great stress reliever and the deal of the century,” says Lefkove, whose employer has gone through two rounds of layoffs, implemented a pay freeze, and added lots of extra work for everyone left behind.

Lefkove, 28, has gained about 12 pounds since October, and attributes most of that to on-the-job stress and being forced to buy lower-cost, fattening foods.

He even started a blog called DisgustingThingsIHaveEaten.com that chronicles his stress and comfort eating.

The recession has caused a lot of stress for employees and some have seen their healthy habits go right out the window as a result. In my MSNBC.com column today I report on how employers aren’t skimping on wellness programs even though the recession has caused them to hack and slash almost everything else.

You’re costing your bosses too much money when it comes to health care, and many believe the best way to stop you all from using medical care is the make you healthier.

Clearly the cost for such wellness programs are a drop in the bucket compared to health care costs.

Here are some numbers from Towers Perrin comparing the two:

For wellness programs, those that are identifying and mitigating lifestyle risks with health assessment and biometrics followed by coaching (telephonic, web, mail), the cost would be about $125-150 per employee per year. The cost of incentives is very variable and would be added on top of that. A full health management program with enhanced case management, disease management and gaps in care would range from $100-150 per employee per year. A comprehensive health management program would cost $225-300 per year.

Given that the total cost of healthcare per employee per year in the 2009 Towers Perrin Health Care Cost Survey (HCCS) ranged from $8,904 for high performing companies to $10,104 for low performing companies, the percentage of total cost for a comprehensive health management programs for a high performing company is 2.5-3.4%, and for a low performing company is 2.2-3.0%. For just a wellness program, as defined above, it is 1.4- 1.7% for the high performers and 1.2-1.5% for the low performers.

Implementing wellness programs make sense, but employers have to be careful of crossing the discriminatory line.

I’m sure there are companies out there that really care for employees, but let’s face it, the bottom line is driving this desire to make you healthier and that could lead to some overzealous managers.

Too much get-healthy pressure, makes some employee advocates uncomfortable, and there are strict federal guidelines employers have to follow when crafting such weight management programs.

“We need to make sure overweight and obese employees, who are already vulnerable to stigma in the workplace, are not stigmatized even further,” stresses Rebecca Puhl, coordinator of weight stigma initiatives at Yale’s Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity.

And labor attorney Hanan Kolko maintains: “employers shouldn’t be our mothers. Workers ought to have the right to be left alone.”

There’s a fine line between helping workers stay healthy and invading a person’s privacy.

What is your employer doing? Is it helping you stay healthy, or is it making you uncomfortable?

Tell me what you had for breakfast or lunch today. Devouring donuts and cheeseburgers may get you in the workplace pokey.

When companies treat workers like yesterday’s garbage those workers eventually get pretty foul — foul toward their employers that is.

Right now, is seems almost every company is using the recession as an excuse for cutting pay, scaling back benefits, furloughing workers, and making workers work double duty because they’ve slashed so many jobs.

It’s unclear whether all these firms really had to take out the employee machete, but one thing is clear — the tenuous loyalty among American workers will be further bloodied when the recession is over.

A recent workplace study put out by staffing firm Adecco Group found that many workers are getting ready to put their job-seeking sneakers on and bolt out the door the first chance they get.

* More than half (54%) of employed Americans report that they are likely to look for new jobs once the economy turns around.
* And among workers 18-29, 71% say they are likely to look for new jobs once the upturn begins.

“Flight is a very human response when you feel mistreated,” says David Kaplan, a management professor with Saint Louis University. “Some people feel that the recession is providing cover for draconian measures employers have been wanting to do all along.”

While he doesn’t expect to see a 50 percent turnover rate in jobs in the future, this type of job churning is a product of almost any downturn. “You see people upset at the cut backs and they say to themselves ‘this place is not for me anymore,’” he explains.

Employers, he adds, have to be careful about lagging behind other employers when things start to improve, or they risk losing a whole lot of workers. “They’re going to have to give employees raises back, improve benefits and start having that holiday party again,” he stresses.

While it’s difficult to get the energy and guts up to look for another job, or career, I think the workplace carnage we’ve seen in the last year will be a great motivator. Reinstating the holiday soirées with their sandwich trays and stale veges with ranch dressing may not be enough to hold many of you down.

So, will you bolt when the recession is finally over?

In West Side Story, Tony’s life changes forever when he meets Maria at the school dance.

He leaves his gang behind and embarks on a new life.

Is it hard or easy for Tony? Well, he ends up dead so I guess the answer is hard. But making that decision to risk everything you’ve known in your life is easier for some people than others.

South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford has had a long, successful political career. There was even talk about him becoming president some day. That is until Maria.

He fell in love with an Argentinian woman named Maria and everything else in his life became secondary to her. He even flew to Argentina, lying to his staff about his whereabouts, and was incommunicado for days — a no no for governors. The citizens of your state need to know where you are just in case some sort of major catastrophe occurs.

Well, he didn’t care about that. Suddenly his high-level career, not to mention his lovely wife and four lovely sons, were not that important.

Dr. Debra Condren, author of “Ambition Is Not A Dirty Word,” thinks it’s all about narcissism.

He (and let’s face it, it’s usually a man, not a woman) builds
this lifelong career. Builds up power. He becomes a legend — in his own mind.
The legend in his own mind and the nature of narcissism is that he splits off
his immoral, self-destructive behavior, meaning he compartmentalizes it/denies
it, essentially; the narcissistic mind has this way of telling itself, “That person
cheating on his wife of 20 years and becoming a horrible role model to my four
sons–I’m not THAT guy.”

So what kind of guy is he?

I’m not going to get into the ethics behind adultery or the hypocritical acts of a socalled devout man pushing his morality on others even though it didn’t apply to him. That’s not what this blog is about.

This blog is about careers, the work place, jobs. It’s about what so many of us strive for — a great, happy, working life.

Sanford seemed hungry for a career of political power. Here’s his bio from who2.com:

A native of Florida, Sanford moved to South Carolina as a teenager. He earned degrees in business and worked in New York in finance and real estate during the 1980s, but returned to South Carolina in 1990. He founded his own real estate investment firm in 1992, and in 1994 turned to politics. A conservative Republican, Sanford won three terms in the House of Representatives (he did not run for a fourth term). Elected governor in 2002 and re-elected in 2006, he’s known mostly for budget battles with his own party, and he has a knack for making headlines (including one stunt where he carried two live, defecating pigs into the State House, calling pig “Pork” and the other pig “Barrel”). During the presidential campaign of 2008 Sanford was mentioned as a possible running mate for Republican John McCain, and by 2009 he was making the news as the most visible governor opposed to a federal spending plan by President Barack Obama’s administration.

A man who carries defecating swine around has to be committed to his career, his job, no?

Well, that’s the question I’m pondering this morning. It seems to me Sanford was yet another person unhappy with his career. At some point he must have sat back and realized his behavior would impact his political future, but that didn’t stop him.

I know love is a beautiful, powerful thing, but love can also be used as an excuse to change a life you’re not happy with.

While we all are outraged at his breaking a commandment, we should all take a moment to think about whether an exciting Argentinian named Maria, or Mario for that matter, would be a welcome excuse to risk a career, a life, we really don’t want but are too chicken to leave.

It’s been very hard to read my emails lately. As you can imagine, I’ve been getting lots of heart-wrenching stories from people who have lost their jobs, their homes, their lives as they knew them.

But the one thing that many laid off workers say they’re worried about most is the loss of their health insurance coverage.

Many of you may be thinking, “that’s what COBRA is for.” COBRA, aka Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act, allows workers who have lost their jobs and health coverage to buy into the group plan on a temporary basis to cover themselves and family members.

Turns out it’s too costly for many, even with a government subsidy that was part of the Obama administration’s stimulus plan.

Lots of people are now eligible for COBRA because so many workers are unemployed, but a shrinking percentage of individuals are actually signing up because it’s just too expensive, according to a report released last week by the Spencer’s Benefits Reports 2009 COBRA Survey. “While 16.87 percent of employees became eligible for COBRA in the 2008 plan year at companies covered by the survey, only 9.69 percent of those eligible actually signed up for coverage.”

With the stimulus subsidy, an employee would have to pay $320.60 for individual coverage, according to the Spencer report, put out by Wolters Kluwer Law & Business. A huge sum if they are only relying on an unemployment check to make ends meet.

Without COBRA as an option, buying insurance on the open market may be even more costly and definitely more difficult.

A story in the Wall Street Journal today by Anna Wilde Mathews does a great job explaining the problem and the growing trend:

A growing number of consumers will likely need to pore over such health-insurance details as out-of-pocket maximums and excluded benefits. After holding steady for several years, the number of people buying their own coverage rose to an estimated 18.4 million last year from 17.9 million in 2007, and is expected to grow to 19.6 million this year and 20 million in 2010, according to an analysis by McKinsey & Co. The consulting firm attributed the expected increases largely to lost jobs and employers cutting workplace benefits.

Consumers can find coverage on their own through an agent, or from one of the growing number of insurance-brokerage Web sites. Policies also can be purchased directly from insurers, but this doesn’t allow consumers to compare plans from different companies. Regardless of where you buy a plan, your premium for that policy will be the same.

Again, the issue of high cost is a big problem with plans people buy on their own, costing upwards of $1,000 a month for a comprehensive family plan.

This is one of the biggest issues of our time — how will hard-working Americans who may be out of work afford health-care coverage? And what about those who are employed? More and more employers are asking their workers to pay up a bigger share of premiums, or cutting medical coverage all together.

That’s why it’s so important to pay attention to the health care reform debate going on right now.

We need a major overhaul but many in Congress are too chicken to stand up for a serious bill.

This from the New York Times this past Sunday:

Dianne Feinstein of California joined Republicans in voicing reservations. Ms. Feinstein, who appeared on “State of the Union,” said that controlling the cost of a new health-care system “is a very major and difficult subject.”

Ms. Feinstein also said that Mr. Obama might not have the votes in the Senate to pass his legislation. “I think there’s a lot of concern in the Democratic caucus,” she said.

Labor advocates are understandably upset that even pro-worker, Democrats are now back pedaling.

“Every day, families are losing their homes, piling up debt and filing for bankruptcy when they face a healthcare emergency. Those families cannot wait - they need comprehensive healthcare reform now,” says Andy Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union. “The longer we wait to fix healthcare, the worse it will get and more families will face financial ruin simply because they got sick.”

On Friday, a watered-down bipartisan bill is expected to be unveiled, but will it go far enough?

Right now, young and old job seekers think they’re getting the shaft.

I probably get an even amount of emails from people under 30, or from the parents of people who are under 30, as I do from those in their fifties.

Kim, a 53 year old out of work business professional, writes:

I can’t tell you how many recent, young MBA grads that I know, have six figure jobs here. How does my MBA + 25 years of experience get rejected? I even requested to a few employers that I wanted the “recent MBA grad” job track they offer, because an MBA is an MBA - even better with seasoned job experience, decision-making, people skills, etc - I’m still rejected - over a 25 year old with no experience!

And this from a dad in San Jose:

I live in the greater San Francisco are, and my two teens (18 and 19) have been looking for summer work for at least two months. One, the 19-yr old just got a job, the 18-yr old is still looking. The story that they were being given is that a) there are 20 people applying for every job; b) they would have to agree to work any shift (including graveyard); and c) they are looking for workers with several years of work experience.

On the one hand the dissed older job seeker thinks no one cares about experience, on the other hand the dad of younger workers thinks that’s all employers want.

Why the divergent views? Hard to say. What we do know is it’s not a great job market for anyone right now, but younger workers tend to fare worse when we look at the numbers.

The unemployment rate in May was 9.4 percent. Among those under 30, the rate was around 15 percent; but it was 6.9 percent for those 45 and older.

Clearly the numbers show that younger workers are more stiffed in this job market, but economist believe there’s more to the data.

First off, younger workers don’t have the fire under them to take just any job because they typically don’t have a mortgage to pay or kids to support. That means they may end up on the unemployed column longer than their older counterparts.

And workers under 30 are more likely to go for more education and let their job search go by the wayside, at least until the economy turns around.

But this is just the numbers. The larger question is if hiring managers are more inclined to hire 20 somethings, or 50 somethings?

There is no clear cut answer here. I have talked to quite a few HR folks who tell me in a bad economy, employers want more seasoned workers. So in this case the older workers have a leg up. But there are still certain industries such as IT, retail, consumer products, and lots of sales-related jobs, where employers are looking for hipper younger employees.

Now that we know every generation is stiffed in its own way, let’s focus on what to do about it for your own job search.

I wrote a column recently for MSNBC.com about how Gen Y was hit hard in this economy and here’s some great advice from the piece:

Younger workers are finding out the hard way that they have to hustle to land their dream job, says Debra Condren, business psychologist and author of “Ambition Is Not A Dirty Word.”

“These young adults don’t know how to jump in and be aggressive,” she says.

“A lot of us parents wanted our kids to focus more on school, not part-time jobs,” she notes. “Then they went to college, and we helped them out financially. And there are also the super crazy parents, the ones that go on job interviews with them.”

She believes the recession will light a fire under the Gen Y crowd as they go head-to-head with older workers. They’re going to have to pound the pavement, take less money, work their way up the ladder, she advises, just like the generations before them.

And the 50-plus crowd needs to stop making excuses for being old and concentrate on what they bring to the table — experience and common sense. Here’s some good advice for older workers from another column I wrote on the difficult job-hunting environment for older workers:

Workforce expert Tamara Erickson suggests older workers start building their networks.

“Most 30-year-olds have maintained very vibrant networks and have lots of options even if they lose their jobs,” says Erickson, who is also author of “Retire Retirement: Career Strategies for the Boomer Generation.” “But a lot of 50-year-olds just haven’t kept contacts up-to-date and are not using the latest technology like LinkedIn or Plaxo.”

Another strategy Erickson recommends is doing project-based work rather than trying to find full-time work.

It’s a good idea to concentrate your job search on growth industries, advises Jeri Sedlar, who moderates a group on boomer social networking Web site eons.com and is the author of “Don’t Retire, Rewire!” Some areas to consider, she notes, include energy, health care, government and education.

But no matter what job you go for, you have to start believing in yourself and get across how great you are to a prospective employer, she stresses. “Imagine you are sitting on a shelf in grocery store,” she recommends. “Why would someone want to buy you? Should you be repackaged?”

Repackaging means updating skills or learning new ones, and being prepared to walk into a room with enthusiasm rather than despair and desperation. That doesn’t mean you have to go for a four-year college degree or go get your MBA. Experts suggest taking a few courses at a community college or online.

Let’s stop the finger pointing and focus on finding jobs.

My daughter asked my son recently to give her several of his Bakugan balls.

She didn’t have any because she either misplaced hers, or gave them away.

My son was reluctant at first to hand over the little, Japanese balls based on a cartoon series, but after much pleading on my daughter’s part and promises she’d give them back eventually, he agreed and gave her three.

Even though my daughter has since found her own Bakugan’s, she refuses to give back the ones she begged out of her brother.

This is exactly what will happen at many U.S companies.

Workers everywhere are scared of losing their jobs, and employers are feeding this fear every chance they get. Unfortunately, many employees seem far too eager to give up benefits and have their wages cut, without making any waves.

But all of you should not be too compliant, because when the gravy train returns to Corporate America you may not be able to get back on board.

According to a study by human resource consulting firm Watson Wyatt, published in the Wall Street Journal today, many of the reductions made by corporations under the guise of the recession, aren’t going any where once things turn around.

* 52 percent of the companies surveyed say they expect to have fewer employees in three to fives year.
* 20 percent expect reductions in salaries they’ve initiated to never come back.
* 46 percent have no plans to reverse increases that have been made to employees’ share of health insurance premiums.

This should be a cautionary tale for any employee out there thinking they should easily give up pay and benefits now so they can reap the rewards later.

I know what you guys are thinking, “how the heck can we fight back without risking layoff?”

First off, if enough of you question cutbacks then it will be difficult to single out just one person. And many of you are working your butts off now, doing a number on your physical and mental well-being, working crazy overtime to make up for your furlough days, thinking it will pay off in the end.

I’m here to remind you all of what the long-term payoff may and may not be.

Look, you may end up having to make concessions at work, just don’t be eagerly compliant about it. Employers may end up thinking it’s pretty easy to hit you where you live.

Recently I made the argument in this blog that working moms seem to do more of the “heavy lifting” at home, way more than working dads.

My husband didn’t say much about the blog at first, but as the week went on he slowly let it be known that he wasn’t totally happy with CareerDiva’s take.

When he went to put laundry in the washing machine he said: “I’m going to do some heavy lifting now.”

After a few of these little digs I asked him what was up. That opened the flood gates.

Oh boy, was he mad about me saying I was handling more of the family/house stuff. He rattled off all the things he does — mowing the lawn, fixing the car, coaching little league, vacuuming.

“The problem is, women complain more,” he said. “So it seems like they’re doing so much more.”

I was mad at first but then realized there was something to his statement.

I’m all about venting. Venting about work, the kids, the household chores. That helps me deal with things.

My husband, on the other hand, seems to hold stuff in.

And it turns out, it’s not just my hubby.

Even though dads and moms are putting in longer hours at work right now and are worried about job security because of the recession, women more readily admit the situation is stressing them out, according to a study released this week by Adecco Group in its American Workplace Insights Survey.

The poll found that 13 percent of dads were working a second job to make ends meet, compared to 3 percent of working moms. And dads and moms were working longer hours, 14 percent and 16 percent respectively.

But only 43 percent of dads admitted they felt stressed out about the situation, compared to 48 percent of women.

So why do you all think dads don’t bitch as much?

It may be that they like their jobs more. The survey also found that 80 percent of the working moms worked because they had to, compared to 63 percent of working dads.

Or maybe they just don’t want to make waves, and go to work each day with a big smile and return home each night with a big smile.

Talk about The Stepford Husbands.

Come on guys, let it hang out this Father’s Day. Maybe if you complained more we’d think you were doing more, and you’d probably get more than a soap-on-a-rope for your special day.

To Andy — the best dad and husband in the world!!

There are two major government agencies that impact the lives of workers everyday, and they’re missing a bunch of top dogs.

The National Labor Relations Board, NLRB, has had three vacancies on its five-member body for more than a year.

And the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, EEOC, is short two people on its five-person governing group.

President Obama has announced two appointments for the NLRB but supposedly no paper work has been filed yet and the process of confirmation take months after that. And there are no nominations for EEOC commissioners.

Maybe you’re thinking these agencies have been operating so long without the required number of members so what’s the big deal.

Well, both these government entities make decisions that have far-reaching affects on all of us.

Just yesterday, the EEOC announced its three members had voted on a long-awaited revision of rules to conform with amendments to Americans with Disabilities Act. It took five months for the short-handed commission to vote on the rules that make it easier for workers to fight workplace discrimination based on their disability. The amendments to the ADA known as the ADA Amendments Act were passed earlier this year because many court rulings over the years had diluted the intention of the ADA, which was to protect the rights of people with disabilities.

The vacancies on the NLRB are an even bigger issue, because the cases they oversee are so time sensitive. The NLRB is an independent government agencies that oversees union elections and also deals with labor disputes.

With only two board members, many rulings have been in legal limbo.

This from a Kiplinger.com labor blog:

On May 1, the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington ruled that a decision by the two members doesn’t count because the board lacked a quorum. On the same day, a federal appellate court in Chicago took the opposite view, holding that a separate decision taken by the two members was appropriate and binding.

With the courts at odds, confusion reigns.

Confusion is the last thing workers need right now, especially with so many companies in a cost-cutting frenzy that’s often left employee rights on the recessionary trash heap.

Come on President Obama. I know you’re busy, but if you want to ensure working people get a fair shake you need all the key players at the worker-right’s table.

I got an email recently with a “from” line that said: “CIA Careers.”

The email was touting jobs at the Central Intelligence Agency in an array of areas including science, engineering and technology.

Ever-changing challenges around the world demand that the CIA stay ahead of fast-paced global technology developments, meeting the Agency’s foreign intelligence mission through leadership in a wide range of scientific and technical disciplines. This presents a truly unique opportunity for science and engineering experts to work in a goal-oriented environment highly focused on issues of national importance.

Always the skeptic I looked a bit closer and saw that the email was actually from: “CIA Careers”@brinkpinkgoodnotions.com.

I’m figuring the clandestine agency did not have a website called “BrinkPinkGoodNotions” so I called the CIA to find out myself what the heck was going on.

At first Marie Harf, a spokeswoman for the CIA, wasn’t sure if the email was legit or not, but she did say the agency was indeed recruiting big time and the job openings go beyond science and tech.

In fact, the CIA wants you former Wall Streeters pronto to work as economic analysts for the government.

Turns out the agency has a pretty big portfolio to manage given their spying activities and Harf says financial skills “are applicable to many aspects of our vital intelligence mission.”. (You know James Bond’s gadgets and lifestyle costs a pretty penny.)

“We currently have openings available for highly qualified individuals with financial community skills,” she says. “To make those employment opportunities known, we have recently placed a number of advertisements, including on Bloomberg Radio, Forbes.com, and Marketwatch.com.”

Those of you that are interested better move quickly. You have to apply online for an interview in New York by June 22. Here’s a link that talks about the process.

If you’re not the financial type, take heart. There are a wide range of opportunities at the CIA.

Only a small number of CIA employees actually work undercover. There are analysts and operations officers, linguists, engineers, doctors, human resource experts and scientists. The agency has also reached out to Arab Americas recently to help bring the under-represented population into the government fold.

Here’s a great link that will offer you an overview on the different jobs and information on how to apply.

The competition for jobs at the CIA is fierce for sure. “Over the past several months of Fiscal Year 2009, we’ve seen a pattern that, if it holds, would result in at least a 40-50% increase in applications over last year,” Harf explains. “Last year, we received over 120,000 job applications online—where everybody who wants to work here has to apply.”

And all the jobs require you relocate to Washington DC; and remember, you’re going to go through an extensive background check.

But go ahead, apply. What do you have to lose? Turns out the agency is desperate to find the best and brightest.

The email I got wasn’t directly from the CIA but it was sent by a college recruiting company that works with the agency.

I typically tell my readers never to take these unsolicited job emails seriously because they’re typically scams. I still say most are scams. But just to be safe, when you apply to any jobs you hear about via email from strangers make sure you go directly to the agency or corporation’s website before filling out anything.

Always put your spy hat on when you get these things. If you already do, great. Maybe the CIA is right for you.

I always wanted to go undercover. Alas, they’re not in the market for journalists.