In looking at CNN.com earlier today, I saw on the main page of the site this article that talked yet again about the discrimination that the jobless face in the job hunt. Referred to unemployment as a “scarlet letter,” even.
Grrrr!
I’ve already made it pretty clear how I feel about this.
But then I read this comment by JJDecor:
“I’m an HR manager and in years past if someone had been unemployed 1 yr or longer they would often not be considered due to the gaps in employment it just didn’t look good. But now I would much rather higher [sic] someone who is currently unemployed and the last 3 positions I’ve filled have been filled by people out of work. 1) The unemployed can start right away, no 2-4 week to get them rolling 2) If they’ve been out of work a considerable amt of time they are greatful [sic] and eager to work hard and make a good impression so as to have job security and 3) for employees (unemployed for around 3 mths minimum) hired after Feb 2010 there is a tax incentive! The employer does not have to pay the employer portion of social security tax (6.2%!!!!) for the rest of this calendar year! For an employee earning 50,000 that’s $3,100 savings for the employer!”
Well-qualified applicants should be given the opportunity to make outstanding contributions to a company, not because of or in spite of their current employment status.
I wish more businesses would follow JJDecor’s example.
Image courtesy of cogdogblog
Twitter: ed_han
says:
That’s a wonderful and refreshing POV to hear!
Twitter: TheJobQuest
says:
Thanks for visiting and for your comment, Ed! I agree with you — it was very heartening to read JJDecor’s thoughts on the hiring of folks who are unemployed.
I hope that more people with the authority to make hiring decisions will see the wisdom in hiring the most qualified candidate and stop a practice that potentially screens out good applicants because of something as arbitrary as employment status.
The reason that I hire someone is that there is more work than I can do by myself. The people that I hire are chosen because I feel that they can do their particular job better than I can. Their current employment status has little or no bearing on the choice. I do avoid job hoppers.
Twitter: TheJobQuest
says:
Michael:
Thank you for visiting and for weighing in on this discussion!
It’s wonderful to hear that, as a hiring manager, you focus on the quality that a person can bring to your business. With the buzz continuing about the stigma of unemployment, HR/hiring managers like you who don’t follow those practices need to be heard.
Melissa:
Thank you for addressing this topic. In a world of sound bytes this needed to be said!
Twitter: TheJobQuest
says:
I appreciate your comment, Jean — thank you!
I’m just glad that JJDecor made a comment on the CNN article. How wonderful it would be if the media would report on those companies that are still making hiring decisions based on the merits of the candidates! (We can hope!)
I always wondered why employers should be so obsessed with gaps in employment on a resume or what appears to be ‘job hopping’. People take jobs and then they leave. Thats just a fact of life. There are no guarantees. Either way. Funny how the employer wants loyalty but doesn’t return it…doesn’t think twice when its time to lay someone off. As for gaps on the resume…hello…the average person will stay in a job 3 years and have over 10 jobs/career changes in a lifetime. Do you really think people are never going to leave a job? Did we think we were never going to be let go? Downsized? Laid off?
Melissa : Thank you for writing and making your POV known. In a time when companies don’t even bother to send you a note of rejection, your stance and views are so welcome.
I am alarmed at any and every means possible being used to cull the mountain of responses received for every employment posting. I hear this is another way (as is seniority, citizenship, location) that HR folks can reduce the amount of material that they have to review. In a buyers market, as is now, a HR person can afford to be very selective.
There may be a few bad apples, but overall I feel the HR community has a heart and feel the pain of us unemployed (at least I hope so).
Hi Cheryl,
Yes are absolutely correct.
What does a gap mean?? The person may have decided to take break, go to school for further education, care for a family member or just travel the world. How does this make one less employable.
People get hung up on things that have no bearing on performance.
I have hired people who had gaps in their resumes or where unemployed at the time I hired them or were not college graduates.
This type of thinking really gets to me.
John
per Michael’s quote…”I do avoid job hoppers…” How does one determine a “job hopper” versus a consultant who only is blessed with short-term projects? Those of us in IT take jobs where we can and while people like me try to make my resume reflect that they were short-term, most HR and hiring managers just do not understand. How can one show that they are dedicated so that someone like Michael can realize that some of us would LOVE to be in it for the long haul but just do not have those sorts of opportunities.
Also, THANK YOU CHERYL!!! Yes, after only 6months, I left a permanent position with lots of growth potential in SAP after working for a company who was not-so-nice to its employees to move to a company where that hiring manager PROMISED me that they do not lay off and work with their people to ensure a lengthy, rewarding career…just shy of 2 years later, I was the one in the first wave to be laid off with at least 100 more that followed. So much for commitment to their people….
Twitter: TheJobQuest
says:
@Cheryl: I understand where you are coming from, and it’s so easy to be cynical about the job hunting process. The interesting thing is that what used to be defined as “job hopping” isn’t necessarily viewed the same way because of the changing environment. It’s also encouraging to hear from hiring managers/HR who don’t use employment status as a determining factor for consideration of a position.
@Ash: “There may be a few bad apples, but overall I feel the HR community has a heart and feel the pain of us unemployed.” HR departments have also been affected by the economy, so those who have been or are unemployed definitely feel the pain! I’ve also seen some talk on the kinds of practices that some HR departments are using and how, when it’s no longer a buyer’s market, those companies are going to feel a backlash. I don’t doubt that at all.
@John: Let me stand up and applaud you! Good for you for making hiring decisions on the things that matter
I bet you’ve had some great employees!
@Carol: A good way to indicate longevity when you’ve had a string of short-term contracts in the same field is to simply put them all under the header of “Consultant.” You can then provide a short narrative indicating the companies you contracted with (no need for dates) and a couple important job duties. Then, bullet-point some specific outcomes that tangibly demonstrate the value you brought to your clients. Consistently bringing value and sharp skills to the table is a strong indicator of dedication to a profession.
Thank you all for visiting and sharing your thoughts!
I took in the “Unemployed Need Not Apply” article to the weekly meeting of the St. Michael’s Unemployed Support Group and we discussed it a bit. The fellow who is our H.R. reference person and whose name I never seem to be able to remember (Duh) suggested he would rather hire an unemployed person if he had that option as that person is going to be more “hungry” and more concerned about working hard to impress.
Something I think that also needs to be discussed is unconventional work situations. I think a lot of HR people and managers in hiring positions are scared off by people who have worked in unconventional situations and for some they just plain don’t compute.
I have been in technical writing and in that field you can end up in a number of odd situations:
For example I have had temporary and temporary contract assignments. But it seems some employers view that as “job hopping” and have a little trouble with the notion that you leave such an assignment upon its successful completion or when the need has passed.
For example in the development process of a new vehicle in the auto industry, they will bring in a lot of temporary draftsmen, model builders, and engineers at a critical juncture of the project from the agencies and then these people are laid off shortly before launch. Amongst those “staffed-up” are the technical writers who do service publications and advise the ad agency about vehicle features.
Likewise I have had to deal with many computerized application forms that just can’t deal with a situation where you bid a project for a flat amount. The people who wrote that application software seem themselves to be programmed to think only in terms of hourly or salaried. (And sometimes do not even make provision for salaried.)
They can get even more confused if it is an organization, say a social or fraternal club, that does not ordinarily have employees.
I always have trouble with having worked a “job shop” assignment where I worked for an agency (Pioneer Engineering) but at another employer (AM General). It has been a long time ago now, but if they go back to check references, the place you worked has people who remember you but little in the way of employee records, but the agency has the employee records and maybe one person who remembers you.
It also seems to be difficult for some people to realize certain lines of work often involve short work periods. I always like to repeat the story told by actor Charleton Heston in an article some years ago in National Review. He had a TV series which was cancelled by the network half way through the second season. Nice people would come up to him on the street and commiserate over his losing his job. He thought about it and noted that was the longest he had worked steadily since he had been in the Army Air Corps in World War II. The average movie “shoot” lasts six to eight weeks and then all the actors and crew are looking for work again. Of course, the same goes for construction, contract and free lance writing, and temp assignments through agencies such as Kelly Services.
I was at an event where a guy was chatting that worked as a sound technician for touring rock bands. His “job” lasted the length of the tour. He was good enough he was usually able to pick up another tour right away for a few years, but finally wanted to settle down to something that didn’t involve so much travel.
Being in such fields makes for a longish resume and if you go to try to get a job in another field, you get labeled as a dreaded “job hopper.”
Likewise some firms operate a “revolving door” and don’t seem to care. I have worked places where if you had been there six months, you were an “old timer.”
It can also be problematical selling yourself if you formerly had your own business. This seems odd, because the insight into what is needed to make a business work you gain even if it was a small business and not particularly successful should be considered very valuable and something you can learn no other way.
Another thing that is sometimes a problem, especially on computerized application forms, is when a former employer has been sold or gone out of business. The form still insists on a phone number, etc., as if the firm still exists. You may not even have a record of the company’s phone number and if you do, so what? If the prospective employer calls to verify employment he is going to get someone else which makes it look like you were lying. To take an extreme case, one place I once worked is out of business, the owner is dead, and the building is gone. There is nothing left. With so many mergers and reorganizations this getting to be a really common situation. Likewise supervisors move on. So if they call your former supervisor to check your reference, they may just get a “who’s that?”
Most application forms don’t take into consideration that you may have had a number of positions in the same company.
Likewise, one or two word job titles don’t mean much. Take, “machinist.” There is the “machinist” who sticks a piece of stock in a machine, closes the door, pushes the big red button, lets the CNC machine do its thing, then takes out the finished piece. Then there is the “machinist” who can make about anything out of metal starting from a sketch on the back of an envelope and improve on the design while he is working on it.
I would really appreciate hearing other folks’ thoughts on these things. What are your suggestions for dealing with non-traditional work situations on resumes and in interviews? Best wishes.
Twitter: TheJobQuest
says:
Lots of interesting comments, Gary — I appreciate your POV!
You make a good point about some professions only having short-term stints. In situations like that, it’s better to have an overarching title that acts as an “umbrella.” You’ve been doing jobs in that role for X years, so it’s legitimate to write it out that way.
It would be interesting to hear other people’s perspectives!
There is so much diversity in LinkedIn Discussion Groups, comments regarding jobs and unemployment. 1) I’ve been unemployed 1 1/2 years as a 41 year Veteran of the now crumbling automotive industry. 2) My credit rating is now in the trash due to the fact that I’ve exausted all my funds trying to keep everything up in hopes of finding a job. So, does this make (qualify) me a “bad candidate” for hire?
I’ve been managing people all my life and I’ve NEVER hesitated in hiring the most qualified person for whatever position I may have needed to fill. Intimidated or afraid that person may be more quailfied then me and take my position? Why would I even think such a thing? I’ve always given my employers 200%, been dedicated and have accomplishment trophies and certificates enough to fill my office at my home.
I hear, “it takes so much time to re-hire a person if that person leaves that position. a) Upper Management has always looked to my Department for candidates to be promoted and fill positions. This leaves me with another empty position to fill. SO WHAT! “There is no letter I in Team and obviously, if they come to promote my people, does that not show that I hire top quality/qualified people and train them well? After all, its all about what is best for the “Company!” b) If I have to be job scared, obviously, I’m NOT doing my job!