Most unemployed are not really trying that hard to find a job? (expenses, company)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
On Thanksgiving my cousin told one of the relatives that he had been unemployed for six months and the XXX hit the fan. The older relative, who has never been unemployed, told the jobless relative that he needed to get in gear. He insisted anyone who wants to work can get a relatively good job in short order and only lazy people are unemployed for more than a few weeks. The unemployed relative (who WAS a mid level Marketing Manager) said it is not that easy. Employers will not hire out of work managers/executives for low level poorly paid jobs because they are overqualified and will not fit into the work force.
While I am still working, I am extremely nervous about losing my job and expect that it would take me a long time to find something similar. But would an employer hire an out of work executive who is over 50 for a job paying under $10 an hour? Maybe not. (These are potentially the type of jobs one could get quickly to tide them over. These types of jobs do not involve months long interviewing and selection processes)
Anyone here worked a relatively high paying professional job who was thrown out of work and was successful at getting a low paying job to tide them over until they were hired back into a good job again?
My spouse has been unemployed for about 2 months now. Project manager for an alarm company.
He's put his resume out on the standard services as well as headhunters in the telecom/alarm type industries. He also checks classifieds regularly and sends his resume to any position that seems appropriate.
A couple of issues to consider:
1. We have a toddler in daycare; it's $800 a month. That money can be saved by our son staying home with dad.
2. Unemployment pays around $500 a week.
These issues need to be taken into account when considering low-paying positions.
To give up $500 week PLUS add a $180 a week expense (daycare), in addition to gas/travel expenses, etc. Makes it necessary to bring home at least $680 a week. Bringing home less actually takes money out of the household.
For the record, there have literally been three or four calls about jobs in the entire time he's been out of work, and all from headhunters. None resulted in a callback or interview.
We're in NJ, in a pretty busy area business-wise. Things are truly tough. I can see people having problems getting jobs.
On Thanksgiving my cousin told one of the relatives that he had been unemployed for six months and the XXX hit the fan. The older relative, who has never been unemployed, told the jobless relative that he needed to get in gear. He insisted anyone who wants to work can get a relatively good job in short order and only lazy people are unemployed for more than a few weeks. The unemployed relative (who WAS a mid level Marketing Manager) said it is not that easy. Employers will not hire out of work managers/executives for low level poorly paid jobs because they are overqualified and will not fit into the work force.
While I am still working, I am extremely nervous about losing my job and expect that it would take me a long time to find something similar. But would an employer hire an out of work executive who is over 50 for a job paying under $10 an hour? Maybe not. (These are potentially the type of jobs one could get quickly to tide them over. These types of jobs do not involve months long interviewing and selection processes)
Anyone here worked a relatively high paying professional job who was thrown out of work and was successful at getting a low paying job to tide them over until they were hired back into a good job again?
One thing not mentioned that you have to account for is age discrimination. It is real for anyone over 50 trying to look for work.
Whats your older relative's definition of a "relatively good job"? Working at Walmart? That is not the case......I think he's out of touch really.....
It's the worst I've ever seen it. I have a friend who has a home base internet sales company. Her stuff isn't selling as much so she has been looking for something to help with the bills. McDonalds isn't taking applications and 7-11 had over 300 job applications for one position, the night job. People are starting to run out of money and businesses are not hiring and this is happening really fast.
I just returned from Florida and could not believe how many brand new plants were all ready closed due to outsourcing and a failing economy. Let’s face it central Florida is an area where salaries were terribly low to begin with but to outsource even those jobs makes it pretty obvious that finding a new job is pretty hard. People are not lazy but if I were unemployed I would rather collect unemployment that work for Walmart.
I hoped to get some replies from people who were over 40 (like my cousin) had worked in a professional/management/executive position but for what ever reason had to get just any job to survive. While their goal was to get a professional job again, financial pressure required them to accept a job that had a quick hiring process and likely paid under $10 an hour.
Would Walmart, 7-11 or McDonalds hire a 45 year old executive who needed any job just to pay the bills? Or would they prefer to hire a college kid or younger immigrant who would fit in with the majority of the workforce and likely stick around at least six months?
I told the relative who believed that anyone could get a job in a few weeks that he was out of touch and while there are plenty of low waged unskilled jobs still out there that would interview someone one day and they could start the next day, only a select demographic would be hired into these jobs. 50 year old ex executives need not apply? Right?
I hoped to get some replies from people who were over 40 (like my cousin) had worked in a professional/management/executive position but for what ever reason had to get just any job to survive. While their goal was to get a professional job again, financial pressure required them to accept a job that had a quick hiring process and likely paid under $10 an hour.
Would Walmart, 7-11 or McDonalds hire a 45 year old executive who needed any job just to pay the bills? Or would they prefer to hire a college kid or younger immigrant who would fit in with the majority of the workforce and likely stick around at least six months?
I told the relative who believed that anyone could get a job in a few weeks that he was out of touch and while there are plenty of low waged unskilled jobs still out there that would interview someone one day and they could start the next day, only a select demographic would be hired into these jobs. 50 year old ex executives need not apply? Right?
I'm 49. Five years ago I quit a job that paid $70K. I now make $15 an hour. No, it's not less than $10, but still.
What I did was to switch careers. A big part of this was volunteering, for FREE, and building something on my resume to help me switch careers.
Do I miss my paycheck? Sure, but it's up to me to make do with my choice.
Would Walmart, 7-11 or McDonalds hire a 45 year old executive who needed any job just to pay the bills? Or would they prefer to hire a college kid or younger immigrant who would fit in with the majority of the workforce and likely stick around at least six months?
I told the relative who believed that anyone could get a job in a few weeks that he was out of touch and while there are plenty of low waged unskilled jobs still out there that would interview someone one day and they could start the next day, only a select demographic would be hired into these jobs. 50 year old ex executives need not apply? Right?
My friend who applied at those places is 45 years old with a college degree. She tried Kmart and took their "test" for an entry level position and was told "You are not what we are looking for to fill that position." What does that mean?!?!
It's America's Race to the Bottom, that's what it is. It's now that people in secure jobs are losing them and seeing the reality of America's workplace.
But of course that is a myth according to the Free Trade sites:
The Myth of the Race to the Bottom | Cato's Center for Trade Policy Studies (http://www.freetrade.org/pubs/freetotrade/chap3.html - broken link)
snippet:
"A frequently heard objection to in-creased freedom to trade is that Americans will lose jobs to other countries and see real wages decline as workers in Latin America, Asia, and elsewhere grow rich. The one objection actually raises three questions: First, is the United States experiencing a general economic decline? Second, are certain groups faring better while others fare worse? And third, if problems exist, is trade liberalization primarily responsible for them?
Theory explains and empirical evidence demonstrates that:
Americans on average still have the highest standard of living in the world. As America's economy has increasingly integrated with the global economy, average living standards have continued to rise. There has been no general decline in earnings.
Since the oil shocks of the early 1970s, economic growth has been less rapid than in the early post-war decades. But this situation does not seem to stem from imports or trade deficits.
Much of the real growth in earnings has gone to higher skilled and better-educated workers.
Lower skilled and less educated workers have not fared well in recent decades.
Although imports have affected certain less efficient American industries and enterprises, imports and trade deficits are not a significant cause of wage disparities."
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.