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.
So your solution would be to never hire the unemployed? To keep the unemployed from leaving, one should offer a good comparable wage instead of feeding on the desperation and paying them less.
I never said they would or should be paid less. that was not a part of my comment. They pay a range for a position. HR would likely pay enough to keep them from leaving, but they might leave for other reasons unrelated to pay because they just accepted an offer out of deperation. I also never said anything about what I would do as I am not HR. I was explaining why HR does what it does.
Why are hot woman always interested in guys who already have hot girlfriends, or are constantly surrounded by other equally hot woman? It's simply because it makes them much more attractive. Your desperation means nothing to them, and in many cases will make it worse if they find out you are. It's primal, but it unfortunately applies to the working world as well. If I have a job already and I apply to another job at company X, hiring managers will simply be more attracted to me because I have choices, and am not desperate.
Again though that brings up other aspects as to why someone would need a girlfriend to start with. The tables have generally turned and the fact of the matter is
As I mentioned earlier I've seen significant amounts of job openings in a particular field ALL across new england. At this point I can't go two to three days without seeing an opening and these are in different locations. Three high ranking management positing in this field I've seen in three different states this month alone! I just saw one ten minutes ago that was filled five months ago. They removed the KSA's and now openly say the pay rate
You do have to read between the lines on things and start thinking well beyond just the resume. Getting back to one that turned down a position earlier. The resume looked fine until you looked at the linked in and started googling. Government work for six years and then at some other place..well that "other place" was private consulting. It was not a full time legit business. Then hired on a interim basis which went to perm and then left that after 18 months (they continued to do the consulting) ..how was this a good choice again Of course they'd turn down a job the person wants money otherwise why go into consulting? You cannot take a resume as blind faith if google and disprove things in less then five seconds.
Life cycle is also a fact of life. When I worked retail most were younger people and retirees. It wasn't about the money it was about the scheduling and hours. If you were a single parent there's no way you could move up. Married might help but still it would kill your hours for raising kids. If a company requires a non competitive agreement and competitors have more patents that might also be an issue.
If the employer knows the employee does not "need" the job then why bother hiring them? there has to be some form of dependency in order for the job to mean something to both parties. It is like a social contract.
Why are they discriminating the ones who need a job more than the people who have one? It makes no sense.
That's not true, my cousin who has been unemployed since 2013 was offered a job with a law firm and starts in 2 weeks. So stop getting caught up in employers only contact employed people because I was also contacted when I was unemployed
That's not true, my cousin who has been unemployed since 2013 was offered a job with a law firm and starts in 2 weeks. So stop getting caught up in employers only contact employed people because I was also contacted when I was unemployed
Just because there are exceptions doesn't change the fact that it is indeed a fact. The longer someone is unemployed the more more the odds are stacked against being hired. By your own admission you were contacted only three times in 11 months after sending out scores of applications and only the last of three interviews ended in your finally being hired. Stop getting caught up in your own myth.
For most jobs, there are way more applicants than open positions. Hiring managers like to find ways to sort them out, and make the assumption that those who are unemployed because they were laid off or fired were the less desirable employees at their previous company, because if they were the best employees, the company would find a way to hold on to them. While this not always be true, there's not a good way of knowing, since most companies don't give references these days except for maybe dates of employment and job title. Only a fraction of the people who apply for a job get interviewed. If you advertise a job, you get between 200-1100 applicants, you simply can't interview them all. The best way around this is to get a job using referrals. It's all in who you know. That's how most people get jobs, from knowing someone. You could also infer that if someone can't get a job through referrals, then their references don't think that highly of them either or aren't really good referral sources that don't carry much weight. These are generalizations, but when you are trying to sort through hundreds and hundreds of applicants for each job opening, you have to find ways to sort through what you think are the best of the best. Most applicants who apply for a job think they are a "perfect" match, and assume they are the "best" candidate out there, when really there are probably hundreds who are just as good, or better.
If an employer is looking for someone to come in for day labor on short notice, someone with a clean schedule is the ideal choice.
For more of a management or technical job, however, being employed makes it more the candidate is up to date on the latest trends in the industry, as well as having the current history of being able to get to work on a regular basis- which helps in any job.
Further, an employed candidate is going to be more particular, they aren't as desperate and are more likely to stay on. An unemployed candidate probably has a lot more irons in the fire looking for a job, and will take the job, and there is a likelihood that another job will come along in a few weeks, leaving the employer high and dry.
How about in the case where someone is looking to move and they're entry level? I was told over and over again that I should just take a full time job where I currently live (I am employed part time and will be keeping that PT job as a 2nd job until I move) to get the entry level experience and of course the money to save to pay for an out of state move. "Quit in 6 months or a year... quit when you have the money to move where you want to be." Employers possibly can't predict that, right? Would employers care about an entry level person quitting an entry level job in 6-12 months or even 18 months?
Human nature? I could give two craps about the popular brown nosing people who live to kiss their employers behind. I admire no one at work. I am there to do a job and then go home. If I want admiration I look outside of work.
Why would a potential applicant want to work for someone who summarily rejects someone all because of their employment status? If anything applicants should be glad to not work for such an inconsiderate blowhard who cannot think beyond "Oh he or she is unemployed and therefore no good" next.........
Very funny! You may not give two craps about the brown nosing people but that is how the game is played. People want to hire winners who are popular with others. You can't fight human nature. People who like winners and popular people control the hiring game!
Very funny! You may not give two craps about the brown nosing people but that is how the game is played. People want to hire winners who are popular with others. You can't fight human nature. People who like winners and popular people control the hiring game!
Actually there are many employers who don't play these silly little games. Not everyone who works is a winner. There are even slackers who don't pull their own weight in the office. Thank goodness for the GOOD employers who don't resort to such games and making work about a popularity contest.
Games are for children.
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.
Of course they'd turn down a job the person wants money otherwise why go into consulting? You cannot take a resume as blind faith if google and disprove things in less then five seconds. 
