Log in

View Full Version : To get a job, you must first already have a job?



The Vegan Marxist
26th August 2010, 04:50
Looking for work? Unemployed need not apply
By Chris Isidore, senior writerJune 16, 2010

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) The last thing someone who is unemployed needs to be told is that they shouldnt even apply for the limited number of job openings that are available. But some companies and recruiters are doing just that.

Employment experts say they believe companies are increasingly interested only in applicants who already have a job.

I think it is more prevalent than it used to be, said Rich Thompson, vice president of learning and performance for Adecco Group North America, the worlds largest staffing firm. I dont have hard numbers, but three out of the last four conversations Ive had about openings, this requirement was brought up.

Some job postings include restrictions such as unemployed candidates will not be considered or must be currently employed. Those explicit limitations have occasionally been removed from listings when an employer or recruiter is questioned by the media though.

Thats what happened with numerous listings for grocery store managers throughout the Southeast posted by a South Carolina recruiter, Latro Consulting.

After CNNMoney called seeking comments on the listings last week, the restriction against unemployed candidates being considered came down. Latro Consulting refused to comment when contacted.

Sony Ericsson, a global phone manufacturer that was hiring for a new Georgia facility, also removed a similar restriction after local reporters wrote about it. According to reports, a Sony Ericsson spokesperson said that a mistake had been made.

But even if companies dont spell out in a job listing that they wont consider someone who currently doesnt have a job, experts said that unemployed applicants are typically ruled out right off the bat.

Most executive recruiters wont look at a candidate unless they have a job, even if they dont like to admit to it, said Lisa Chenofsky Singer, a human resources consultant from Millburn, NJ, specializing in media and publishing jobs.

She said when she proposes candidates for openings, the first question she is often asked by a recruiter is if they currently have a job. If the answer is no, shes typically told the unemployed candidate wont be interviewed.

They think you must have been laid off for performance issues, she said, adding that this is a myth in a time of high unemployment.

It is not against the law for companies to exclude the unemployed when trying to fill positions, but Judy Conti, a lobbyist for the National Employment Law Project, said the practice is a bad one.

Making that kind of automatic cut is senseless; you could be missing out on the best person of all, she said. There are millions of people who are unemployed through no fault of their own. If an employer feels that the best qualified are the ones already working, they have no appreciation of the crisis were in right now.

Conti added that firms that hire unemployed job seekers could also benefit from a recently-passed tax break that essentially exempts them from paying the 6.2% of the new hires wages in Social Security taxes for the rest of this year.

Thompson said he also thinks ruling out the unemployed is a bad idea. But he said that part of the problem is that recruiters and human resource departments are being overwhelmed with applications for any job opening that is posted. So theyre looking for any short-cuts to get the list of applicants to consider down to a more manageable size.

Its a tough process to determine which unemployed applicants were laid off even though they brought value to their company and which ones had performance issues, he said. I understand the notion. But theres the top x percent of unemployed candidates who are very viable and very valuable. You just have to do the work to find them.

Have you had trouble even applying for a job because you are out of work? If so e-mail ([email protected]) us here to tell us your story.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/16/news/economy/unemployed_need_not_apply/index.htm

Adi Shankara
26th August 2010, 14:03
Looking for work? Unemployed need not apply
By Chris Isidore, senior writerJune 16, 2010

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) — The last thing someone who is unemployed needs to be told is that they shouldn’t even apply for the limited number of job openings that are available. But some companies and recruiters are doing just that.

Employment experts say they believe companies are increasingly interested only in applicants who already have a job.

“I think it is more prevalent than it used to be,” said Rich Thompson, vice president of learning and performance for Adecco Group North America, the world’s largest staffing firm. “I don’t have hard numbers, but three out of the last four conversations I’ve had about openings, this requirement was brought up.”

Some job postings include restrictions such as “unemployed candidates will not be considered” or “must be currently employed.” Those explicit limitations have occasionally been removed from listings when an employer or recruiter is questioned by the media though.

That’s what happened with numerous listings for grocery store managers throughout the Southeast posted by a South Carolina recruiter, Latro Consulting.

After CNNMoney called seeking comments on the listings last week, the restriction against unemployed candidates being considered came down. Latro Consulting refused to comment when contacted.

Sony Ericsson, a global phone manufacturer that was hiring for a new Georgia facility, also removed a similar restriction after local reporters wrote about it. According to reports, a Sony Ericsson spokesperson said that a mistake had been made.

But even if companies don’t spell out in a job listing that they won’t consider someone who currently doesn’t have a job, experts said that unemployed applicants are typically ruled out right off the bat.

“Most executive recruiters won’t look at a candidate unless they have a job, even if they don’t like to admit to it,” said Lisa Chenofsky Singer, a human resources consultant from Millburn, NJ, specializing in media and publishing jobs.

She said when she proposes candidates for openings, the first question she is often asked by a recruiter is if they currently have a job. If the answer is no, she’s typically told the unemployed candidate won’t be interviewed.

“They think you must have been laid off for performance issues,” she said, adding that this is a “myth” in a time of high unemployment.

It is not against the law for companies to exclude the unemployed when trying to fill positions, but Judy Conti, a lobbyist for the National Employment Law Project, said the practice is a bad one.

“Making that kind of automatic cut is senseless; you could be missing out on the best person of all,” she said. “There are millions of people who are unemployed through no fault of their own. If an employer feels that the best qualified are the ones already working, they have no appreciation of the crisis we’re in right now.”

Conti added that firms that hire unemployed job seekers could also benefit from a recently-passed tax break that essentially exempts them from paying the 6.2% of the new hire’s wages in Social Security taxes for the rest of this year.

Thompson said he also thinks ruling out the unemployed is a bad idea. But he said that part of the problem is that recruiters and human resource departments are being overwhelmed with applications for any job opening that is posted. So they’re looking for any short-cuts to get the list of applicants to consider down to a more manageable size.

“It’s a tough process to determine which unemployed applicants were laid off even though they brought value to their company and which ones had performance issues,” he said. “I understand the notion. But there’s the top x percent of unemployed candidates who are very viable and very valuable. You just have to do the work to find them.”

Have you had trouble even applying for a job because you are out of work? If so e-mail (http://[email protected]) us here to tell us your story.

http://money.cnn.com/2010/06/16/news/economy/unemployed_need_not_apply/index.htm

If this doesn't prove the Private sector is incapable of providing employment, nothing will.

Dimentio
26th August 2010, 14:08
:lol:

What should those who are unemployed do? Starve to death? Remove themselves from the gene pool with the revolver?

And people claim laissez faire liberalism isn't resembling fascism :laugh:

Comrade Mango
26th August 2010, 14:58
Full of crap.

leftace53
26th August 2010, 16:49
Yea this is pretty ridiculous, but so true. My dad was out of a job for a few months, and he mentioned that he came across shit like this. All the while the CEO's of some companies are raking in money in the millions, and workers are starving trying to feed their families. Its disgusting.

The Vegan Marxist
26th August 2010, 19:46
And according to the article, this is a growing trend of employment. So more than likely we're going to start seeing more of this sooner or later. It really is disgusting.

Kayser_Soso
26th August 2010, 20:14
I remember hearing this phrase a lot in my teenage years. The problem is it's easier said than done. Many of you probably have seen statements like: "Explain any periods of unemployment in your work history." And what the fuck are you supposed to do. I remember when I got out of the army there was a long period when nobody was hiring. Of course they won't accept "nobody was hiring".

Just more humiliation that the capitalist visits upon the worker, along with mandatory drug tests, and ridiculous questions. And what I can't stand about these "helpful" advice articles is that they basically tell you that you shouldn't just take it with a smile, but you should let them screw you even harder. One such article basically read like, "if you didn't get the job, it means you didn't bend over backwards enough. Keep at it!!!" The writer of that particular article needs to be smacked repeatedly with a tire iron.

Adi Shankara
26th August 2010, 20:40
someone ought to do that someday...

Conservative asswipe: Get a job, you lazy bum!

Homeless person: I would but I'm unemployed!
:mad:

The Fighting_Crusnik
26th August 2010, 20:49
Yeah... if businesses are just going to do this shit to people, then the unemployment problem in this country is never going to get better. If anything, the jobless rate may decrease, but that will be only because they took a lower paying job that (in some cases) is impossible to live on...

The Vegan Marxist
26th August 2010, 21:36
And these records of unemployment won't show because the vast majority of these people will no longer be filing for unemployment, which is where these "decreasing records of unemployment" that the media talks about comes from. So to those who gain all their news from mainstream & what the government's telling them, this unemployment problem is nonexistent.

leftace53
26th August 2010, 22:30
And these records of unemployment won't show because the vast majority of these people will no longer be filing for unemployment, which is where these "decreasing records of unemployment" that the media talks about comes from. So to those who gain all their news from mainstream & what the government's telling them, this unemployment problem is nonexistent.
Indeed. The unemployment rate (atleast in Canada) also discounts "discouraged workers" so the ones who have been out of job for months maybe even years, and have become discouraged to the point of either giving up or taking up under the table work. So for the government and media, the unemployment rate might actually decrease!

Rusty Shackleford
28th August 2010, 09:10
looks like im out of a job until the economy collapses. then i get to be a full time revolutionary :lol:

Os Cangaceiros
28th August 2010, 18:55
I remember hearing this phrase a lot in my teenage years. The problem is it's easier said than done. Many of you probably have seen statements like: "Explain any periods of unemployment in your work history." And what the fuck are you supposed to do. I remember when I got out of the army there was a long period when nobody was hiring. Of course they won't accept "nobody was hiring".

Just more humiliation that the capitalist visits upon the worker, along with mandatory drug tests, and ridiculous questions. And what I can't stand about these "helpful" advice articles is that they basically tell you that you shouldn't just take it with a smile, but you should let them screw you even harder. One such article basically read like, "if you didn't get the job, it means you didn't bend over backwards enough. Keep at it!!!" The writer of that particular article needs to be smacked repeatedly with a tire iron.

Yep. That pretty much speaks to my situation at the moment. I can't stand doing the required little song-and-dance for some menial position, but that's what I've been doing for the last couple of weeks. I just hope that they don't call the last company that I worked for, who will tell them that I got off work one day and simply never came back (although the immense satisfaction I got out of leaving those scumbags high and dry with no explanation was almost worth it.)

Ele'ill
28th August 2010, 20:10
The writer of that particular article needs to be smacked repeatedly with a tire iron.

Or join us in the unemployment line.

Ele'ill
28th August 2010, 20:11
looks like im out of a job until the economy collapses. then i get to be a full time revolutionary :lol:


No way, don't wait. Start organizing and you can be a revolutionary NOW.

28350
28th August 2010, 20:22
j9c1vSIpHA0

Rusty Shackleford
28th August 2010, 22:08
No way, don't wait. Start organizing and you can be a revolutionary NOW.
what i mean by full time is i could just drop out of college and work all day:thumbup1:

im already doing a lot of work with the PSL. im rather isolated from my comrades a few cities over and the national branch so im rather limited. but when i have money, its all work. id like to consider myself a part-time revolutionary because of that.


Also, the anthem of millions of workers across the world.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1ug3H8aZdU

Thirsty Crow
30th August 2010, 22:18
Full of crap.
I don't think it is so.
It's a perfect example of the underlying assumptions of the employers within this system.
Basically, there is the doubt that the unemployed person may have been laid off due to "performance issues". Now, I don't know the minutiae of the American legal code regarding the issue of being sacked due to this issue, but this question cannot be answered and the employer is "forced" to conclude that the best option is to keep the unemloyed - unemployed.

On the other hand, if a candidate already has a job, it wouldn't make much sense to assume that he/she has "performance issues" but managed to get by and keep the job.

It's just as Sankara and Dimentio stated.