Surprised that there is no response to the hundreds of resumes you sent out recently? Guess what, some companies are ignoring all applicants who are currently unemployed.
A job posting on a recruiting website advertises an open position for an electronics company with all the usual qualifications, but fine print at the bottom says, “Will not consider anyone NOT currently employed.” Even though just a few job ads have this type of statements, there are reports of human resources representatives confirming this to be their company’s recruitment policies.
“We try to minimize the amount of time we spent on selection of candidates and typically go after people who are happy where they are and tell them about new opportunities”, one of the HR representatives said. According to the recent information from the Labor Department, there are about 5 1/2 applicants for every open position.
Recently a large electronics manufacturer also posted an ad for a marketing position stating that “No unemployed candidates will be considered.” Later they called it a mistake and removed the notice. This type of job ads are easy to find online, they may say e.g. “must be currently employed.”
There is no law prohibiting discrimination against the unemployed, but advocates say that the practice could be illegal if it had a disproportional impact on minority groups, such as older workers and people with disabilities who could also be the first candidates for unemployment.
The decision of some companies to avoid unemployed candidates and re-use the existing workforce is further contributing to long-term unemployment. It also ignores the effect of the economic downturn on millions of highly-skilled workers who lost their jobs through no fault of their own. Obviously these employers are not only shortsighted, but they are also not good corporate citizens of our communities.
"advocates say that the practice could be illegal if it had a disproportional impact on minority groups, such as older workers and people with disabilities who could also be the first candidates for unemployment." ~ ~ ~ ~
This is what disturbs me about that particular statement. This *could* be illegal if it impacted people with disabilities. Well then it's illegal!
The unemployed are UNable to pay their bills, UNable to put food on their tables, UNable to keep their homes and medical coverage. And when you consider the large number who are overqualified and willing to work for less being told they're considered risky because they may not stay when the economy uncovers, they, too, are DISabled. How the hell do you justify the only reason not considering someone for a job is because (s)he doesn't already have one?
I'd LOVE to see a list of these companies. I know one is Sony. For all the money I've spent on Sony phones and products I look at and use everyday in my home, I'd like to know what other companies I'm supporting that have turned their backs on we, the victims, of this recession. I wonder how many food companies practice in this way. What a slap in the face to think someone might be struggling to put a grilled cheese sandwich on the table to find that Kraft wouldn't hire them at all.
This is devastating and deserves more than just chat!
Carleneann
This is blatant discrimination. But not sure what can be done to prove this type discrimination. So......My suggestion would be to rewrite your resume and list an independent contractor status, or consultant, as your current position, even if it's for your own company.
Judith Chirico
This is a crime, in this economy, companies should give preference to the unemployed. Why give a job to someone who already has one? I understand how this is a viable strategy in good times, but these days, it is definitely NOT "Business as usual".
Ithealthcareguru
It is so unfortunate that some companies will post opportunities knowing that they will not hire anyone. They do this to meet hiring criteria that states mandate so as to keep their incentives. It is also a shame that companies are not willing to admit this. Be honest with us qualified job seekers - you just might find your next diamond in the rough.
Safennell
A good point was made in this article stating that these employers may not be good corporate citizens & by practicing this type of discrimination, are actually contributing to the constant high unemployment rate. Job seekers should consider these factors when searching for companies where, if hired, they will be spending a great of there time. While it is important to get a job, it is equally important to get the right job, one with a company that is responsible to the communities that support it.
James E. McIntosh
An international contracting corporation contacted me for I.T. work in northern U.S.
The recruiter said that I had all 4 skills listed as necessary for the contract, but: - I was not currently employed, so ... - I was not current technically, so ... - I was not currently employable.
Rod
Yes, short sided thought process. I am surprised that as a small employer of 40 and sales of $ 13 million, I have received less than 6 resumes in the last 18 months. I know lots of people who are collecting unemployment.They think using the system till they look for work, is the way to go. This may contribute to the coporate look on hiring people who already have jobs. As with every policy people have, there are pros and cons. I don't think wishing they burn to the ground is a very professional approach.
Hvogel1387
You are assuming that those on unemployment are"milking the system". I have been in transition for 9 months and I have spent every waking hour networking, checking job boards, sending unsolicited etc. To say that I am unprofessional because I condemn companies that disregard your experience and rely more on your status is irresponsible. Those companies deserve worse than that.
Jgross
I find that older workers have a better work ethic and make better overall decisions because of more life experience. That is most valuable. If companies learn this secret, I think there will be less of them going out of business.
Dereckaa
This would be pretty funny if it wasn't so true. Isn't it great to know what Americans are doing to Americans? If I find that a company is utiltizing such HR techniques where I may be applying, I will immediately boycott that company and post it here on LinkedIn.
American
I agree with boycotting those companies. Someone should create a webpage where we can post the name of the company and a link to the offending online position ad or otherwise post their experiences. As a, unfortunately long--term, unemployed senior executive - I would certainly alter my buying habits and avoid those companies who won't consider much of the highly skilled labor on the market.
Not hiring the unemployed is about as anti-American as trying to introduce an immigration reform bill that places the desires of illegal workers above those of US citizens. We need to look after our own and respect those that have made this country great.
Hvogel1387
Pardon my language, but companies that practice that policy should burn down to the ground.
It's just another demonstration that employers are NOT your friend. Employees are merely viewed as "resources". Pawns to be used and disposed as necessary to keep the stock prices and CEOs' bonuses up. I do miss the day when there was some loyalty from the employer to the employee. Today, it's everyone for themselves. Grab as much as you can as fast as you can.
Sparrowhawk155
Janis Joplin said it best! "Get it while you can". The employer loyalty was always a myth. A myth covered up in the robust economy of the '50's, 60's & most of the seventies. The whole thing began to unravel when a Japanese company won the bid for structural stell to build of all this the World Trade Center. During the Carter years the groundwork was laid for exactly where we find ourselves now. So thos who blame Bush, Obama, Clinton are very poor students of history.
Tmoore
Seems like companies are using faulty logic? Overlooking a highly skilled individual who lost their job due to mass downsizing due to an economic crisis due to none of their own cause. To look only at someone happy and content at their current job? This is an extremely perverse logic. Job retention is not a better indicator of performance. It just means they did not suffer from a numbers driven downsizing. They may have been innocuous and therefore not vulnerable. Let's see how profitable those companies pan out to be!
Dottie
Dillards practices this method of weeding out applicants. Unemployed = Unhired. That's on top of letting go of many of their long-time (over the age of 50) managers in the last 12 months. Ironically, if a department manager doesn't fulfill their hiring quota, it's another reason to be fired.
