Skip to comments.Unemployed need not apply (employers have advertised jobs listing current employment as a condition)
Posted on 06/12/2011 8:15:32 AM PDT by Libloather
Unemployed need not apply
Published: June 3, 2011
One of the worst things about the plague of unemployment is that the longer a person is out of work, the harder it becomes to re-enter the work force. Technology moves on; skills fade.
It always has been easier to move from one job to another than to move to a job from unemployment. But the problem has been compounded by the depth of the Great Recession, a glut of workers, at every conceivable skill level, and a paucity of jobs. Of about 4.4 million unemployed Americans, about 1.75 million have been out of work for more than a year.
As reported in Time magazine, a hearing by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission earlier this year revealed that many employers have advertised jobs listing current employment as a condition for even applying.
Employers should be free to hire according to their own criteria, but not to discriminate based on unemployment, especially given near-cataclysmic economic events over the last three years.
Rep. Hank Johnson, a Georgia Democrat, has introduced the Fair Employment Act of 2011. It would amend the Civil Rights Act to stop employers from refusing to hire people on the basis of unemployment alone.
That's a fair step toward giving a break to people who need one the most.
Good luck with that. They will just find some other "reason" not to hire you. Another stupid law we don't need.
Reminds me of old girlfriends calling out of the blue after I got remarried.
I’m disgusted by such practices. I will make an active effort to not engage in commerce with any business that engages in such a reprehensible practice.
Which, if one thinks about it, is precisely why extending unemployment bennies beyond a rational limit is destructive (to individuals, to the workforce, and to full employment.)
I have to wonder how many people are truly unemployed, as in not being able to find work at all, as opposed to it being a case of not finding work you like?
There aren’t any conveniences stores, fast food, or labour hiring?
From there, you can work yourself into a more agreeable position.
By now most nonprofessional unskilled unemployed will take anything
The jobs are simply not there or will be in the future
There is a practice that HR uses of linking a job offer's pay level to whatever your last job paid. Prove your last job had a high pay and get a better offer this time; take a low paid temporary job and you have a much more difficult task.
Better to be the yeoman farmer than a caged employee.
Change! Change we can BELIEVE in!
This is nothing new. For years I worked in a state employment service, and would always counsel unemployed people to take any job they could find and then to keep looking for a job they really wanted. That was because someone who is already working is more attractive to potential employers than someone who isn’t.
As opposed to no job, no hourly rate, and no cash.
Which underscores my point, that some of the unemployment is due to personal choice.
The way it is right now, I’d take what I could get, but wouldn’t show much loyalty to employers, even taking a job for a few days, to bridge to another job.
Well, suppose they do hire someone who is currently working. That will create an opening at his workplace. Sure, they may also hire someone who is already employed, but eventually someone will have to hire the unemployed.
It has been my experience that commonly someone who will be grossly underemployed will not be hired because as soon as something opens up in their field they'll be gone.
Usually, the potential employer would rather train someone they think will be around (and not present an eventual threat to their position).
Another stupid law....why? Why is this a stupid law? Can anyone tell me the answer to that?
Because it takes away the individual’s ability to bargain for their own production’s worth.
Two months ago, I was hired and relocated after four months of being laid off. Now the new employer is being sold and will likely create massive lay-offs this fall.
I’m already updating my resume and plan to start sending out applications before the trap door falls. Most everyone where I work is doing the same.
I remember when Texas first started deducting child support from paychecks. Many employers did not want to be in the middle of it so the law was that an employer could not deny you employment if your child support was to be deducted. In Texas an employer does not have to have a reason to fire you. Lots of people lost their jobs over this. And even more couldn’t get hired. And that included me for a while. Eventually business got comfortable with the procedure.
So, you’re right. No employer is going to say “I’m not hiring you because you don’t have a job. I’m not hiring you because there was someone who was more qualified. (he had a job)”