Debate and Discussion

Unemployed told by employers not to apply. Is that practice wrong or right?
elektro at 10:31AM, June 17, 2010
(online)
posts: 807
joined: 6-18-2009
So, I just read this article on the subject and wanted to start a new discussion:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Outofwork-job-applicants-told-cnnm-3498252371.html?x=0

To start, I'll answer my own question: Hell no! As a currently unemployed person who has been looking for a job for over a year (and six months, but who's counting) and having almost no luck, I think this is a real dick move by employers, especially at a time of record unemployment. What's really a dick move is some of these companies that have such a practice don't even list it as a requirement on their job postings.

Anyway, I'd say more, but I'd likely pop a blood vessel. Tell the world what you think.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:21PM
Chernobog at 10:41AM, June 18, 2010
(offline)
posts: 926
joined: 11-3-2007
It strikes me as particularly sociopathic. There's a lot of hungry workers out there… they don't need this black eye.
 
 
“You tell yourself to just
enjoy the process,” he added. “That whether you succeed or fail, win or
lose, it will be fine. You pretend to be Zen. You adopt detachment, and
ironic humor, while secretly praying for a miracle.”
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:41AM
kyupol at 11:20AM, June 18, 2010
(online)
posts: 3,712
joined: 1-12-2006
Its right.

Because if you are unemployed, it means you are stupid and you are somehow less than human.

The strong live and the weak die.

The elitists in control of the world deserve to be in control because they've proven themselves to be worthy of ruling over all of us.

We are slaves. We exist merely to be the milk cows who lovingly pay taxes and kiss the boots of the police, the government, and the corporations.

And if you don't like it, you're a terrorist.

NOW UPDATING!!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:27PM
Orin J Master at 12:53PM, June 18, 2010
(online)
posts: 437
joined: 12-16-2007
it's an entirely self-serving act. they want what they think are the better hires, and assume that sifting out the unemployed will remove a good portion of the worse employees.

of course, it's a poor practice in general, but with the massive job crunch going on people will do stupid, self-serving things for their own benifit.

unrelated: someone tell me how kyupol became the forum's mascot troll or whatever? every so often he makes posts i'd expect most places throw him out for and he's still around.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:22PM
Hawk at 1:02PM, June 18, 2010
(online)
posts: 2,760
joined: 1-2-2006
I tend to wonder the same thing, Orin. Now and then my sense of humor just isn't elastic enough to take what he says in stride.

Kyupol, if you're not going to seriously answer the question being asked in the original post, don't even bother replying. There are tinfoil-hat forums out there MUCH more suited to your ravings than this one.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:47PM
isukun at 1:53PM, June 18, 2010
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
I have a hard time taking his serious posts seriously.

On the topic at hand, though, I don't see it really as an issue of right or wrong. It's not nearly as common as the article makes it out to be and is usually related to particular fields and positions. Nobody is going to only hire currently employed applicants for jobs flipping burgers or bagging groceries. The examples in the article were management and professional work. It isn't even really a product of the times. Companies were doing this before the recession, too, we just have a tendency to focus on it more because of the higher unemployment.

Really, if you think about it, someone has to quit a job to take one of these jobs, so the net result is still that there is a job opening somewhere.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:05PM
Product Placement at 2:45PM, June 18, 2010
(online)
posts: 7,078
joined: 10-18-2007
In Kyupol's defense, I could totally tell that he was speaking in sarcasm.

But I understand that it's frowned upon around here, since the debate thread is supposed to be serious stuff.

Also, I think that advertising for employees and demanding that applicants are already employed is a dumb move. I understand that logic behind it, by thinking that the person who's already employed must be more competent than unemployed people but think about the other side. What kind of employed person is looking for a job? A person who hates his current one. Someone who doesn't want to stick around doing the same thing for too long. Do you honestly want to hire people like that?
Those were my two cents.
If you have any other questions, please deposit a quarter.
This space for rent.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:52PM
artofzinn at 9:34PM, June 18, 2010
(offline)
posts: 33
joined: 5-1-2010
I JUST WANTED TO ADD AN EMPLOYERS PERSPECTIVE TO THE DISCUSSION. THERE COULD BE MANY REASONS WHY AN EMPLOYER MIGHT STATE THIS, NOT THAT I AM DEFENDING IT, BUT LET ME EXPLAIN . AT ONE POINT I HAD A POSITION AT THE BUSINESS I OWN WITCH I NEEDED TO FILL. THE POSITION WAS FOR AN A.S.E. CERTIFIED AUTO TECH . I MADE THE MISTEAK OF LISTING THE JOB WITH THE LOCAL UNEMPLOYMENT OFFICE ON THE LISTING I WAS VERRY SPECIFIC I STATED THE QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE I NEEDED IN POTENTIAL APPLICANTS , ALL OF WITCH WAS PROMPTLY IGNORED BY THE JOB PLACEMENT PEOPLE . THEY FLODDED MY OFFICE WITH LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF PEOLE WHO WERE JUST NOT QUALIFIED FOR THE JOB . ONCE I DID FILL THE POSITION - AND TOLD THEM IT WAS FILLED THEY CONTINUED TO SEND PEOPLE OVER UNTIL SEVERAL PHONE CALLS FINALLY STOPPED THEM . LATER I HAD ANOTHER OPENING , THIS TIME I ADVERTISED IN THE LOCAL PAPER AND SOMEONE AT THE UNEMPLOYMENT OFFICE SAW IT AND AGAIN FLODDED ME WITH UNQUALIFIED APPLICANTS . WHEN I TOLD THEM NOT TO REFER PEOLE ANYMORE THEY STATED THAT I SHOULD HAVE A STATEMENT OF POLICY THAT I DID NOT HIRE THE UNEMPLOYED ? AND THAT I SHOULD NOT ONLY HAVE IT ON FILE WITH THEM BUT STATE IT ON MY APPS?! PERSONALLY I THINK ITS A CLEAR CASE OF THEM NOT SCREENING THE WAY THEY SHOULD AND THEY SHOULD BE ASHAMED FOR WASTING THOSE PEOPLES TIME , GAS MONEY ETC. BY SENDING THEM OUT TO APPLY FOR A JOB THAT I SIMPLY COULDENT HIRE THEM FOR ,NOT TO MENTION ALL MY TIME WASTED AND MY FEELINGS WHEN I HAD TO TELL THESE FOLKS I COULDEN'T HIRE THEM !
I NEVER ADDED THAT STATEMENT TO MY APPLICATIONS, AND WHEN I NEED TO FILL A POSITION I SCOUT I DO NOT ADVERTISE AND I HAVE HIRED UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE IF THEY WERE QUALIFIED. I THINK IT SUCKS, BUT I UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S THERE .
GOOD LUCK ON YOUR JOB HUNT , I HOPE YOU FIND SUCCESS !
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:02AM
Chernobog at 10:13PM, June 18, 2010
(offline)
posts: 926
joined: 11-3-2007
Urgh. Please stop typing in caps like that…
 
 
“You tell yourself to just
enjoy the process,” he added. “That whether you succeed or fail, win or
lose, it will be fine. You pretend to be Zen. You adopt detachment, and
ironic humor, while secretly praying for a miracle.”
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:41AM
isukun at 12:27AM, June 19, 2010
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
In Kyupol's defense, I could totally tell that he was speaking in sarcasm.

I think most of the people commenting on Kyupol's post realize he's being sarcastic and that isn't what's bothering them.

What kind of employed person is looking for a job? A person who hates his current one. Someone who doesn't want to stick around doing the same thing for too long. Do you honestly want to hire people like that?

Or someone stuck in a position with no opportunity for upwards mobility. It really depends on the job, but for the most part, these cases are for higher paying management jobs. If the job pays better or has more opportunity for promotion or additional benefits and income, it's kind of a no-brainer to take the better job. Unless you're working a contract job, you really shouldn't ever just settle for what you have. The whole point of work for the individual is to benefit yourself, not the company you work for.

Now, if you were talking about the industry I work in, then you might have a point, but then again, I've never seen an ad for animators that insists applicants be employed with other studios. Studios generally don't want people who have no issues leaving mid project and projects tend to be short term, so there isn't much of an issue of people leaving. And if you can get a staff job, you usually don't leave it for freelance work unless it's your own project.

Also, if you have experience as a manager, it's kind of suspect if you're unemployed since companies generally don't lay off management unless they close. Plus in most cases, they still have to read through your resume to determine if you're unemployed and many employers don't just write you off if it looks like there may be a good reason for it. For instance, being an unemployed ex-manager of Circuit City is going to look a lot better than being an unemployed ex-manager of Best Buy.

Also take into consideration that it can be harder to follow up on references for someone who is unemployed. Most companies don't want to beat around the bush when employing people to higher level jobs.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:05PM
ozoneocean at 1:21AM, June 19, 2010
(online)
posts: 24,788
joined: 1-2-2006
isukun
Also take into consideration that it can be harder to follow up on references for someone who is unemployed. Most companies don't want to beat around the bush when employing people to higher level jobs.
I'd feel really bad about asking my current employers for references if I was just leaving them to go to a better job.

From what I read of the linked article one of the main reasons for this restriction is just so that employment agencies can easily narrow down the list of applicants, much like saying “only people with an MBA need apply” or something like that. It's just box-ticking.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:36PM
isukun at 5:48AM, June 19, 2010
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
I find that claim kind of suspect. I recently got hired as a supervising director on a small project out here and have been going through job applications to hire additional crew members for the project. There is no real easy way to tell if a person is currently unemployed from their resume unless they either just graduated from school, in which case their work history and experience will be extremely limited, or they have been unemployed since the previous year, which begs the questions why did they leave their previous job and why have they been unemployed that long? Both are legitimate concerns for employers looking for more skilled and experienced employees and both seem like perfectly reasonable criteria for narrowing down one's search.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:05PM
ozoneocean at 6:13AM, June 19, 2010
(online)
posts: 24,788
joined: 1-2-2006
isukun
both seem like perfectly reasonable criteria for narrowing down one's search.
So are lots of other reasons too, you can justify anything really. I could set a sound case (and I'm sure you could as well) for selection criteria based on age, sex, ‘race’, marriage status, religion, sexuality, height, what sports team they go for… It IS actually possible to find justifications for all those.

By saying that, I'm not saying the agencies don't have a valid reason for using the “currently employed” status as a restriction, I'm saying that the “Box ticking” explanation offered by the article is not unlikely.

As for how they tell if someone is currently employed- well, you just put that on job description. It's easy to check just by looking at their CV, seeing what the last listed job was and calling that employer to ask. If there's no way to check (ie. can't find contact details even doing a quick internet search) then you don't bother with them.

I don't think it's wrong, or right (unlike the other examples I mention, which are wrong).
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:36PM
isukun at 9:19AM, June 19, 2010
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
It's easy to check just by looking at their CV, seeing what the last listed job was and calling that employer to ask.

Which, when you have hundreds of applications to go through, is not as simple a task as you make it out to be. Most of the legitimate resumes aren't going to say “currently employed” on them, either. Usually, in the cases where employers can't tell, they just throw the resumes in with those to consider. It takes all of two minutes to read someone's resume and make a snap judgement based on their qualitifications as opposed to the fifteen (or much longer in the cases of larger companies and chains) to try to contact their previous employer.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:05PM
ozoneocean at 9:32AM, June 19, 2010
(online)
posts: 24,788
joined: 1-2-2006
isukun
Which, when you have hundreds of applications to go through, is not as simple a task as you make it out to be.
I'm not making it out to be simple for looking at hundreds of resumes. That's not what this thread is about afterall, I was just responding to what you had said about it not being obvious by looking at a CV what someone's current employment status was.
-Which doesn't matter in this case since the premise is that the job description calls for the applicants to be currently employed, and that narrows the field.

They can of course lie about their status, and that can of course be easily checked if one wants to go that far, which they would probably only do for promising candidates anyway.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:36PM
isukun at 1:41PM, June 19, 2010
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
They put that in the job description to cut down on applicants. Usually it doesn't really cut down that much. Unemployed people will still apply. It's kind of like those people who put in the job description, “at least five years experience”. You'll still see a lot of inexperienced people applying for the job. If the employer sees promise in your resume, they aren't going to bother to check your employment status until the interview at which point they will listen to your reasons before making a decision.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:05PM
Priest_Revan at 7:07PM, June 19, 2010
(offline)
posts: 2,339
joined: 12-31-2006
When I first saw this, I was a bit shocked how easily managers were caught in the rumor of “people who were fired didn't work hard enough.”

It's truly pathetic, and in the end, such a practice will only hurt the economy. I mean, you have to steal workers from other companies to survive if this continues.
Updates Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday's (depends).

7/0

Offering Project Wonderful Ad space on my website.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:49PM
isukun at 11:30PM, June 19, 2010
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
Actually, in the end, this sort of practice really doesn't do anything one way or the other to the economy. The net result in the end is that the applicant gets a higher paying job and the company they left hires somebody else to replace them. In the end, two people are getting more money than they were getting previously. Call me crazy, but that seems like it would be beneficial to the economy.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:05PM
BffSatan at 4:32AM, June 20, 2010
(online)
posts: 1,478
joined: 3-2-2008
artofzinn
I JUST WANTED TO ADD AN EMPLOYERS PERSPECTIVE TO THE DISCUSSION. THERE COULD BE MANY REASONS WHY AN EMPLOYER MIGHT STATE THIS, NOT THAT I AM DEFENDING IT, BUT LET ME EXPLAIN . AT ONE POINT I HAD A POSITION AT THE BUSINESS I OWN WITCH I NEEDED TO FILL. THE POSITION WAS FOR AN A.S.E. CERTIFIED AUTO TECH . I MADE THE MISTEAK OF LISTING THE JOB WITH THE LOCAL UNEMPLOYMENT OFFICE ON THE LISTING I WAS VERRY SPECIFIC I STATED THE QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE I NEEDED IN POTENTIAL APPLICANTS , ALL OF WITCH WAS PROMPTLY IGNORED BY THE JOB PLACEMENT PEOPLE . THEY FLODDED MY OFFICE WITH LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF PEOLE WHO WERE JUST NOT QUALIFIED FOR THE JOB . ONCE I DID FILL THE POSITION - AND TOLD THEM IT WAS FILLED THEY CONTINUED TO SEND PEOPLE OVER UNTIL SEVERAL PHONE CALLS FINALLY STOPPED THEM . LATER I HAD ANOTHER OPENING , THIS TIME I ADVERTISED IN THE LOCAL PAPER AND SOMEONE AT THE UNEMPLOYMENT OFFICE SAW IT AND AGAIN FLODDED ME WITH UNQUALIFIED APPLICANTS . WHEN I TOLD THEM NOT TO REFER PEOLE ANYMORE THEY STATED THAT I SHOULD HAVE A STATEMENT OF POLICY THAT I DID NOT HIRE THE UNEMPLOYED ? AND THAT I SHOULD NOT ONLY HAVE IT ON FILE WITH THEM BUT STATE IT ON MY APPS?! PERSONALLY I THINK ITS A CLEAR CASE OF THEM NOT SCREENING THE WAY THEY SHOULD AND THEY SHOULD BE ASHAMED FOR WASTING THOSE PEOPLES TIME , GAS MONEY ETC. BY SENDING THEM OUT TO APPLY FOR A JOB THAT I SIMPLY COULDENT HIRE THEM FOR ,NOT TO MENTION ALL MY TIME WASTED AND MY FEELINGS WHEN I HAD TO TELL THESE FOLKS I COULDEN'T HIRE THEM !
I NEVER ADDED THAT STATEMENT TO MY APPLICATIONS, AND WHEN I NEED TO FILL A POSITION I SCOUT I DO NOT ADVERTISE AND I HAVE HIRED UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE IF THEY WERE QUALIFIED. I THINK IT SUCKS, BUT I UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S THERE .
GOOD LUCK ON YOUR JOB HUNT , I HOPE YOU FIND SUCCESS !
PLEASE STOP YELLING, IT MAKES ME FEEL BAD ABOUT MYSELF!!!!
last edited on July 14, 2011 11:21AM
Hawk at 9:26AM, June 20, 2010
(online)
posts: 2,760
joined: 1-2-2006
isukun
The net result in the end is that the applicant gets a higher paying job and the company they left hires somebody else to replace them. In the end, two people are getting more money than they were getting previously.

That's something I didn't think of, but it's true… they're STILL opening up a job, provided the old place of employment decides to replace the guy. That kind of puts this in perspective.
last edited on July 14, 2011 12:47PM
ozoneocean at 9:56AM, June 20, 2010
(online)
posts: 24,788
joined: 1-2-2006
isukun
They put that in the job description to cut down on applicants. Usually it doesn't really cut down that much. Unemployed people will still apply. It's kind of like those people who put in the job description, “at least five years experience”. You'll still see a lot of inexperienced people applying for the job. If the employer sees promise in your resume, they aren't going to bother to check your employment status until the interview at which point they will listen to your reasons before making a decision.
It depends. If the employer has engaged an agency to fill the position, they will check. And I don't know about you, but I don't lie on my CV, I've never lied when applying for a job. I'm sure people do, but I'm also pretty sure that there are a lot of people like me out there too.
 
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:36PM
Product Placement at 10:58AM, June 20, 2010
(online)
posts: 7,078
joined: 10-18-2007
Employers can find tons of things to nitpick about. When I was living in London, I moved between allot of sales positions, participating in allot of conventions and such. Then when I tried applying for a serious position again, I kept hitting the same wall where the employers started asking why I had changed jobs so often in such a short period. I always answered that most of those jobs had been short term to begin with and I was now looking for a more permanent position. I never got those jobs.

Around that same time I tried applying in lots of restaurants and hotels for an opening position in waitering. I had years of experience in costumer service from my teen years, working at gas stations and the previous year I had been training to become a professional waiter at a hotel in outskirts of London. I kept getting the same answer: “more experience required”.

Well let me ask this question in return: How the hell am I supposed to gain more experience if none of the OPENING positions is available to me?

You know what? Job hunting in London sucked! I'm glad I'm out of that place.
Those were my two cents.
If you have any other questions, please deposit a quarter.
This space for rent.
last edited on July 14, 2011 2:52PM
isukun at 2:10PM, June 20, 2010
(online)
posts: 2,481
joined: 9-28-2006
If the employer has engaged an agency to fill the position, they will check.

Odd, I've applied for jobs through agencies before and they've NEVER checked my references or called my previous offices. Most agencies don't care. They just want to fill the job and get their commission. They're far less picky.

And I don't know about you, but I don't lie on my CV

Applying for a job when you don't meet all of the qualifications isn't the same thing at all. Most people do it. Hell, in this economy, you won't get a job if you don't. Most employers shoot for the moon when posting job ads and usually end up settling for less, even with so many applicants out there.
last edited on July 14, 2011 1:05PM

Forgot Password
©2011 WOWIO, Inc. All Rights Reserved