Out-of-work job applicants told unemployed need not apply

[Tequila Revenge]

WTF!



Out-of-work job applicants told unemployed need not apply

Buzz up! 9208 Print..Chris Isidore, senior writer, On Wednesday June 16, 2010, 4:26 am EDT
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.


more corporate bullsh!t : http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Outofwork ... 1.html?x=0

[springparrot]

That is just STUPID!

[SMLCHNG]

Brilliant. NOT!!!!!

[Elrod]

That's pretty messed up.

[Tequila Revenge]

That's pretty messed up.

Pretty much not so opened minded and supportive of the down trodden and exploited

[Lightning Bolt]

That's pretty messed up.

Pretty much not so opened minded and supportive of the down trodden and exploited

hmmm...

By that "logic" of hiring... and what, with my currently being gainfully employed....

I'D GUESS I'D BETTER FREAKIN' START HUNTING FOR MY NEXT JOB RIGHT NOW!!!

...you're right, that is some truly f'd-up s***

[Bicycle Bill]

You know if I was in personnel and someone who already had a job was applying for one I was offering, it would make me wonder if this person was worth considering and perhaps hiring. How do I know that this person wouldn't be looking to move on again instead of giving me the time and effort I had hired them for?

I'd also wonder why he wanted to leave one job for another. Maybe it's just me, but I tend to value loyalty. A good worker is a happy worker, and a happy worker will tend to stay put. Or perhaps there's something else beneath the surface and this person is bailing out before he gets tossed out???

And especially in today's economy where entire companies have gone belly-up or been forced to cut back and retrench, there's just too many good people out of work for some PR doofus to make such a blanket assumption.

-"BB"-

[sunseeker]

I'm curious...perhaps they were only seeking highly motivated people. Perhaps they didn't care WHAT kind of job you had- just as long as you were working( waiting tables, mowing lawns, etc). I work for a non profit agency and we have recently had an influx of folks looking to volunteer while they were unemployed "to have something to put on their resume"

I'm not condoning what this article is talking about - just trying to make sense of it....

[phjrsaunt]

Coming from an H.R. background, this just STINKS of discrimination. Also, it's STUPID b/c you're potentially turning away a highly qualified applicant. Don't even get me started.

[dnw]

[aeroparrot]

It's not fair but this is done all the time. Employers have always thought that if a person is laid off, it's always that person's fault even in a bad economy because they believe if there wasn't anything wrong with the person, then why did the get fired?

[phjrsaunt]

It's not fair but this is done all the time. Employers have always thought that if a person is laid off, it's always that person's fault even in a bad economy because they believe if there wasn't anything wrong with the person, then why did the get fired?

Sorry, must disagree repsectfully.
Most HR departments are incredibly understanding regarding the fact that there are many people unemployed due to lay offs. Right here in Richmond last year, not one but TWO Fortune 500 companies declared bankruptcy and laid off thousands of employees as a result. Any HR person worth their salt is aware of the overall employment environment in their area. They would also know that (at least if it is publicly traded company, or one with more than (I think) 50 employees), that can NOT deny applications. This would put them in a very bad spot on a number of levels.

[SAVANNAH BEE]

Well that just SUCKS how stupid and ridiculous.......

[CaptainP]

In my current job hunt, I haven't encountered this specifically, but a number of places I've applied have asked, "Please explain any gaps in employment". Most of the places that have asked that question have not called me back.

[Tequila Revenge]

Coming from an H.R. background, this just STINKS of discrimination. Also, it's STUPID b/c you're potentially turning away a highly qualified applicant. Don't even get me started.

Pretty much thinking the same thing, but didn't know if there's a legal statute that would support an unemployed person searching for a job? I know of a big corporation that had an unfortunate experiece with some medical products they sell and shut down an entire division in 10 days. Over 3,500 people were out on the streets in 10 days. I'll go out on a limb and guess there were some highly qualified peeps is that group.

[aeroparrot]

It's not fair but this is done all the time. Employers have always thought that if a person is laid off, it's always that person's fault even in a bad economy because they believe if there wasn't anything wrong with the person, then why did the get fired?

Sorry, must disagree repsectfully.
Most HR departments are incredibly understanding regarding the fact that there are many people unemployed due to lay offs. Right here in Richmond last year, not one but TWO Fortune 500 companies declared bankruptcy and laid off thousands of employees as a result. Any HR person worth their salt is aware of the overall employment environment in their area. They would also know that (at least if it is publicly traded company, or one with more than (I think) 50 employees), that can NOT deny applications. This would put them in a very bad spot on a number of levels.

It may not be HR but the hiring managers. I've seen it where managers got great resumes from HR but didn't hire the person because they have been unemployed for a while because they were worried that the person won't work well with others.