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.
I've noticed a lot of jobs where I live strongly prefer candidates who speak Spanish and English fluently. I think that they mean you pretty much HAVE to speak Spanish and English fluently. Is this discriminatory?
Since I don't speak Spanish I am thankful I am not looking for a job here. However, I know a couple of people who are and get very frustrated by this preference. I didn't think it would be illegal since the U.S. has no official language, but didn't know if it would be discriminatory since an employer cannot discriminate against race.
It only makes sense to be bilingual for customer service jobs here.
I know many people who aren't Hispanic who speak fluent Spanish. Your logic is seriously flawed.
If I already know without a shadow of a doubt that I won't hire anyone without a specific skill set, I wouldn't say in an ad having it is simply a plus, I would say it's required.
On the other hand, if I said to my applicants that having a particular skill set is merely a plus, and there's at least one applicant who meets all of the other qualifications except having that particular skill set, I would hire them and teach it to them.
I wouldn't decide not to hire them because they don't have that one particular skill set, re-post the job ad 20 times which still says having the particular skill set is merely a plus and them whine to the media and on job forums that workers aren't skilled enough.
but how would you word the application in such a way to say that you strongly want someone with a certain skillset, but it is not an absolute deal breaker?
Can you post how you THINK that application should be written?
but how would you word the application in such a way to say that you strongly want someone with a certain skillset, but it is not an absolute deal breaker?
Can you post how you THINK that application should be written?
Here's what I would do:
Required:
A list of what is truely required. If you don't have these, don't bother applying.
Strongly Preferred
A list of what is strongly preferred. Basically, if you don't have these, but somebody else does (and meets the requirements) that other person will get the job.
OR
Preferred (Candidate must have most of the following skills)
And then list them.
OR
Preferred (Candidate must have X out of the following skills) if there is a hard cutoff number.
And then list them.
Required:
A list of what is truely required. If you don't have these, don't bother applying.
Strongly Preferred
A list of what is strongly preferred. Basically, if you don't have these, but somebody else does (and meets the requirements) that other person will get the job.
OR
Preferred (Candidate must have most of the following skills)
And then list them.
OR
Preferred (Candidate must have X out of the following skills) if there is a hard cutoff number.
And then list them.
Then there wasn't any problem with that job posting unless the "required" section had virtually nothing in it, IMHO.
I'm mostly writing about the job posting I've seen (a totally different field from the OP) where the company has clearly placed all the requirements in the "preferred" section, which is silly and just wastes everyone's time. I don't know how common this practice is, but some companies seem to love to stick all the requirements in the "preferred" section and reject people on them. If they are requirements, they should just say so - it saves everyone time.
Then there wasn't any problem with that job posting unless the "required" section had virtually nothing in it, IMHO.
I'm mostly writing about the job posting I've seen (a totally different field from the OP) where the company has clearly placed all the requirements in the "preferred" section, which is silly and just wastes everyone's time. I don't know how common this practice is, but some companies seem to love to stick all the requirements in the "preferred" section and reject people on them. If they are requirements, they should just say so - it saves everyone time.
How on earth do you know that a company has 'clearly' placed all requirements in the preferred section? for 90% of jobs, there is a very small list of required duties, but the company is looking for high quality employees who they can work with and grow for a few years.
More often than not, job postings are accurate, and people complain about having 'requirements in the preferred section' because they simply were not good enough candidates to be hired, and hey, it is easier to blame the verbiage of the job posting than it is to admit that you need to improve yourself.
How on earth do you know that a company has 'clearly' placed all requirements in the preferred section? for 90% of jobs, there is a very small list of required duties, but the company is looking for high quality employees who they can work with and grow for a few years.
More often than not, job postings are accurate, and people complain about having 'requirements in the preferred section' because they simply were not good enough candidates to be hired, and hey, it is easier to blame the verbiage of the job posting than it is to admit that you need to improve yourself.
1) I'm not looking to blame anyone for hiring decisions, but I am tired of people posting jobs that don't match what they really want. I've been shot down for interviews for jobs where I met all the requirements, but they wanted me to meet the "preferred" skills as well. If they won't even interview people without the "preferred" skills, than they are requirements - they should be honest about it.
2) In most cases, the "preferred" skills are industry-specific, sometimes even company specific. There is no way to get those skills without first getting a job in the industry... which you often will not be able to get without the skills in question. It used to be that on-the-job training covered that, but companies refuse to invest in their employees these days.
3) While there is no way to be 100% sure if the job is written correctly unless you either get the job or the company rejects you for it and tells you why, when you see a job with almost zero requirements and a mountain of detailed "preferred skills," it is safe to say that the only way you're getting the position without those skills is if basically nobody with them applies. In a good economy, that is possible, but in a dying economy such as this one, with 100+ applicants per job, the odds of even getting an interview for these positions is close to zero if you lack the "preferred" skills.
One could argue that means that the "preferred skills" still are not requirements, but that's like posting a job ad that says, "preferences: must not be a criminal." Okay, yeah... sure... it's possible you'll only get applicants that don't meet that, but let's not kid ourselves - that may as well be a requirement because it is not hard to find applicants that meet it.
Likewise, there are many who are Hispanic and do not know Spanish, and some who can speak but not read/write Spanish.
So true! One of my friends is Hispanic and it makes her crazy when people assume that she speaks Spanish and just start a conversation in the language. She doesn't.
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.
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.
