Job Seekers Find Bias Against The Unemployed

[^_^ 5,021]

Some employers are saying if you're out of work, we don't want to hire you.

Until he got laid off more than two years ago, Michael Hall was a road warrior. "I would leave my home here in California about 3 a.m. to catch a flight and get home Friday around midnight," he says.

...

Hall's job was demonstrating high-tech equipment for data and phone networks. His hard work, engineering training and social skills helped him pull down a solid six-figure income.

But now Hall, who is 50 years old and single, spends most of his time looking for work. He says he has applied for well over 1,000 jobs. Every three months or so, he manages to get an interview. But so far, no luck.

...

He is really troubled by one thing: the prejudice many hiring managers seem to hold against the unemployed.

"Two specifically came right out and said we don't like to hire people that are unemployed. And one followed that with 'So, why are you unemployed?' in almost an indignant manner, which seemed kind of insulting. And the obvious answer is, well, because people like you don't like to hire unemployed people," Hall says.

This is a common complaint from unemployed workers — that employers only want to hire people who already have jobs and that there's a view that there must be something wrong with you if you're unemployed.

Chris Shablak, CEO of West Coast Careers, a recruiting and staffing company, confirms those perceptions. And he says he has clients who tell him they don't want him to hire unemployed workers. Shablak thinks there are legitimate reasons behind that strategy.

"If you think about the talent in that unemployed market, you would realize that companies rarely lay off their best skilled workers," he says.

So, he says it's not surprising that some companies don't want to hire the unemployed.

"It's people that aren't top performers. So if you're ABC Corporation and you're trying to hire the best salesperson out there, and you're looking at unemployed people, it might not be the group of people with the best skills," he says.

...

"It's quite possible that discriminating against someone because they're unemployed is illegal," says Judy Conti, who represents the National Employment Law Project, an advocacy group for low-income and unemployed workers.

...

Conti's organization has brought the issue to the attention of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and she says the black and Hispanic caucuses are preparing letters urging the commission to take quick action on the issue.

http://www.npr.org/2010/11/16/131367533/some-will-only-hire-if-you-already-have-a-job

Edited November 17, 2010 by \

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Catch-22? No surprise.

"If you think about the talent in that unemployed market, you would realize that companies rarely lay off their best skilled workers," he says.

Not always true. When things slow down, you can afford to get rid of the attitudes, no matter how well the worker produces. And in some trades, why pay a journeyman, when you can get a laborer to do the same job for less money?

[nab 74]

Catch-22? No surprise.

Not always true. When things slow down, you can afford to get rid of the attitudes, no matter how well the worker produces. And in some trades, why pay a journeyman, when you can get a laborer to do the same job for less money?

bingo

another thing is that the article speaks of a 'single 50yo man'...

a 50yo isnt going to have the same energy for going from 3am to midnight every day as a 22yo. That's not discrimination, that's biology.

a 50yo single man may not (assumption) have the dedication to a job as a married 50yo man, or a single 50yo woman so it may not be his unemployed status getting him blown off so much as his other status.

discrimination based on employment status = not illegal, discrimination based on marital status, age, sex = illegal... as an employer which would YOU choose to say your using as your discriminating factor?

[^_^ 5,021]

discrimination based on employment status = not illegal, discrimination based on marital status, age, sex = illegal...

From the article:

Conti's organization has brought the issue to the attention of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and she says the black and Hispanic caucuses are preparing letters urging the commission to take quick action on the issue.

Do you believe discrimination on the basis of employment status should be illegal?

[nab 74]

From the article:

Conti's organization has brought the issue to the attention of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and she says the black and Hispanic caucuses are preparing letters urging the commission to take quick action on the issue.

Do you believe discrimination on the basis of employment status should be illegal?

why ask me, dont you have your own opinion? hmmm? lol

imho *I* would not want to work anywhere i was not wanted becasue believe me, co-workers or team mates or classmates or no matter what the situation those who do not want you there can make your life quite miserable and frankly LIFE IS TOO SHORT.

besides, if you are one of those who truly are mistaken enough to believe that there is justice in the USA, well, waste your time pushing to be soemwhere you are not wanted so you can make your own life miserable then waste some money suing to force them to comply with the law only to find out USA law is a jokeand equality is an illusion ....

what about reverse discrimination? when they have to meet a "quota" so they call excitedly telling you that you are only person who has the qualifications but when you show up and they say oh, we thought you were black, sorry we cant hire you because we have to meet a quota and with your name we thought....

have you ever experienced that? because i have.

in answer to your question, does not matter to me if it is made 'illegal' because there is no enforcement of laws, only more laws passed when laws on the books are not enforced. there is not supposed to be discriminataion (period) in hiring... but now we have to itemize it for race, religion, age etc, yet still there is discrimination.

screw enforcing the laws, let's just pass more laws, right? disgusting.

i think in your article the emplyers are just using the 'unemployment status' as an excuse becasue that is not illegal; they cannot say "listen dude, you're old and cant do the job a guy 1/2 your age can do and for 1/2 the expected pay"... that would be illegal. either way result is same no matter the reason, he is without job, keep looking.

Edited November 17, 2010 by nab

[lostinblue 1,989]

A family member is past 50 . Has worked in HR and was able to go to a HR meeting last summer.The HR meeting was for people working in this field from all over the United States. She has been out of work for over 2 years also. Just sitting around the table after the meeting she got an eyefull. Many said if you can determine if the person is over 50 application goes into pile #2, Out of work for over 2 years #2, Bad credit score #2....With the internet they can get over 1000 applications from all over the country.This is even for a basic job sweeping floors for $8/hour.Yes a 1000 applications for an $8.00/job.Pile #2 never gets handled again.30 days later it hits the dumpster.Today most people seeking to hire someone wants you to know a 1000 different things just to cover their butt . Well lets see..... You don't know #265.... so sorry . It is a bad situation out their and it will not get better anytime soon.

[alienlovechild 75]

Hall's job was demonstrating high-tech equipment for data and phone networks. His hard work, engineering training and social skills helped him pull down a solid six-figure income.

But now Hall, who is 50 years old and single, spends most of his time looking for work. He says he has applied for well over 1,000 jobs. Every three months or so, he manages to get an interview. But so far, no luck.

This is a common complaint from unemployed workers — that employers only want to hire people who already have jobs and that there's a view that there must be something wrong with you if you're unemployed.

"If you think about the talent in that unemployed market, you would realize that companies rarely lay off their best skilled workers," he says.

People like that are screwed. The economy isn't making enough high paying jobs for some fields so these poor slobs are too overqualified and too old to get as good a job as before. They'll end up getting a low paying job or try to retire early but not many people save enough to quit 15 years before retirement.

If you've got a big blank period of unmeployment on your resume and you're facing an interviewer that's never been unemployed before, you'd rarely get to the interview stage to begin with but they aren't going to relate when you practically have the word "loser" stamped on your forehead.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I've changed jobs a few times. Only once was I actually unemployed when searching for a new job. Must say that it's always been much easier to find a job when I had one. Coming back from unemployment wasn't as simple as changing from one employer to another.

[nab 74]

I've changed jobs a few times. Only once was I actually unemployed when searching for a new job. Must say that it's always been much easier to find a job when I had one. Coming back from unemployment wasn't as simple as changing from one employer to another.

100% agree! there's always that level of suspicion, even if small, of "why are you REALLY unemployed?" but once you get your foot in the door all's well.

[Pooky 3,804]

In some trades, there's also the problem of skill stagnation. If you're out of the marketplace for 6 months, information and technology can still be moving fast enough to leave you at a disadvantage when you're looking for work.

I was laid off this time last year and was extremely lucky to only have a month long involuntary vacation. I know people in the same line of work who have changed career direction because, after 12 months without employment, even the interviews had dried up. Not a nice thought.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

As a hiring manager I agree that I would much rather hire someone WITH a job than one that is unemployed. If a person was liad off...fine, but if all he did was sit on his @ss and email resumes for 6 months...no thanks. IF he took a part time kob to supplement the unemployment, whether it was a related field or just working at WalMart...he is my kinda guy.

Oh, and if someone doesn't like that...kiss my @ss! I hire people that DO things because it is a company that needs to make a PROFIT.

If you cannot be bothered to get your @ss out of bed, then you need not apply.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

From the article:

Conti's organization has brought the issue to the attention of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and she says the black and Hispanic caucuses are preparing letters urging the commission to take quick action on the issue.

Do you believe discrimination on the basis of employment status should be illegal?

Anyone answering this in the affirmative should consider that the REASON we have so many companies now using the internet for accepting resumes is so they CAN discriminate and not get caught. Adding ANOTHER "protected class" does NOT make it easier to get a job, it makes it HARDER to get a job. I mean we could just pass a law demanding that there be NO discrimantion of any kind and REQUIRE employers to hire on a "first come, first serve" basis, regardless of anything. Would it be easier to get a job? It is hard to get a job because the laws we have passed so far make employers want to keep everyone at "arm's length"

The BEST way to insure yourself (and who really gives a rat's @ss about anyone else) is to educate yourself, be the best applicant, have the things the employers in your field WANT. Employers consistently look for DOers. Big surprise. You are going to make a LAW against that?

Being EMPLOYED is more marketable than being UNemployed. Always be employed.

[alienlovechild 75]

IF he took a part time kob to supplement the unemployment, whether it was a related field or just working at WalMart...he is my kinda guy.

Part-time only as most employers don't like to see full-time employees taking time off to look for another job.