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.
It seems like everyone likes to complain about the discrimination against the unemployed but few people really understand what is going through the minds of business owners and managers who don't want to hire the unemployed.
I would like to hear their side of the story. We have already read a hundred posts complaining from a job applicants perspective. Lets hear the other side of the story.
Any business leaders, HR types and hiring managers want to stick their neck out and tell us why they don't like to hire the unemployed?
It seems like everyone likes to complain about the discrimination against the unemployed but few people really understand what is going through the minds of business owners and managers who don't want to hire the unemployed.
I would like to hear their side of the story. We have already read a hundred posts complaining from a job applicants perspective. Lets hear the other side of the story.
Any business leaders, HR types and hiring managers want to stick their neck out and tell us why they don't like to hire the unemployed?
I'm sure there are some people that purposefully avoid hiring the long term unemployed. I have no idea what prejudices those people have, so I can't speak for them.
For most companies, however, I'd be willing to bet at a certain time you become less qualified than many others. Why would I hire someone that was a software engineer 3 years ago when I can get someone that is a software engineer and has been for the past 3 years? I know his skills are up to date, I don't know that about you.
There are so many qualified candidates for each job posted, those that have been unemployed for longer periods of time fall lower on that spectrum of the qualified candidate.
I've also seen it where many people apply for jobs they actually aren't qualified for. We have a posting and have had it for the past 2 months.
We are asking for someone with atleast an MS in a specific field preferably a PhD and 5-7 years of experience in a specific area of the field. We are getting teachers, physical therapists, etc. applying for the job. The only other people we are getting are actual MS students. We are getting to the point where we are just going to move it down to an entry level role even though we need someone with more experience on the team right now.
First thought that comes up to mind would be the up-to-date skill sets.
How long are we talking about? 6 months? 1 year? 3 years?
I'd hire anyone that has been out of a job 6 mo. to a year if they impressed me during the interview but if they were out of a job for 3 years, it does get me wondering on what have they been doing? Is something wrong with them that the other companies are unwilling to hire? But I would definitely ask during the interview to get a better understanding.
However, you have to remember that HR folks does not get the complete say. The HR person might be nice and willing to understand- doesn't mean the manager you will be working under cares.
Reality is, when you have supply and demand on your side, you get to be a little more discriminant in your choosing. My field for example has a lack of qualified people. From time to time I search to see what other jobs are out there.
There's one job that offers $130k(actually posted the salary in the listing) and pretty normal sounding job description. Education/experience requirements sound normal for the job too. Sound great right?
So why has this job been posted and renewed for over a year now? Even in a field with limited candidates, you'd image with that salary they could get someone. So that leads you to think either a) they're extremely picky and probably not worth interviewing because they have an unrealistic expectation of what an ideal candidate is or b) the people who are qualified realize that the job sucks and so they keep turning it down because the job itself doesn't match the posting.
The same situation happens in reverse from most other employer's perspective. If someone has been out of work for 2+ years, you start to wonder what's wrong with the candidate. How is it that they couldn't find anything in two years? Odds are a) The person has an unrealistic expectation of what type of work they're qualified to do(e.g. a fresh MBA who wants a director level job) or b) there's something about the candidate that isn't listed in their resume that makes them a worse, so everyone else is turning them down.
Granted, under both situations, people are ignoring the fact that other people thinking this way is actually option C and their own opinions are the actual cause.
Reality is, when you have supply and demand on your side, you get to be a little more discriminant in your choosing. My field for example has a lack of qualified people. From time to time I search to see what other jobs are out there.
There's one job that offers $130k(actually posted the salary in the listing) and pretty normal sounding job description. Education/experience requirements sound normal for the job too. Sound great right?
So why has this job been posted and renewed for over a year now? Even in a field with limited candidates, you'd image with that salary they could get someone. So that leads you to think either a) they're extremely picky and probably not worth interviewing because they have an unrealistic expectation of what an ideal candidate is or b) the people who are qualified realize that the job sucks and so they keep turning it down because the job itself doesn't match the posting.
The same situation happens in reverse from most other employer's perspective. If someone has been out of work for 2+ years, you start to wonder what's wrong with the candidate. How is it that they couldn't find anything in two years? Odds are a) The person has an unrealistic expectation of what type of work they're qualified to do(e.g. a fresh MBA who wants a director level job) or b) there's something about the candidate that isn't listed in their resume that makes them a worse, so everyone else is turning them down.
Granted, under both situations, people are ignoring the fact that other people thinking this way is actually option C and their own opinions are the actual cause.
This is a well written description.
I had a hiring manager say that a job that he was having a tough time filling a job. I don't know what I did wrong exactly, because getting even a "no" answer was tough. And even before they paid my airfare, they knew I did not have experience with their software - so I thought that I had a reasonable shot.
I think there is a perception that the chronically unemployed contribute to their own situation. A contributing factor is reflected in the axiom: "The best time to look for a job is while you have one." The long-term unemployed tend to lose their sense of confidence that another company 'should' want to hire them. They gradually morph into a sense of desperation and embrace the probability that they will not get the job ... and communicate that to the potential employer.
Some simply make-up their minds that they will not take any job that pays less or is a lower position than the one they left. They live on savings and unemployment until they are forced to re-think their situation -- and by then, their sense of resentment and cynicism shows through their surface veneer.
Frankly, I have a difficult time understanding how anyone who is really committed to working, can remain unemployed for a full 2-year unemployment compensation period. Plus, folks who have been on unemployment multiple times may just be 'unfortunate', ... OR, they may simply be looking for a way NOT to work. Obviously there are exceptions, but, there is also a plethora of candidates for most jobs without these perceived downsides.
Here's why, from my POV. Although, I routinely hire people that have been unemployed for 12-18 months.
After a really long time of un/under employment:
Skills go totally stale. Seriously, do SOMETHING that keeps you relevant while you're out of work.
Attitude goes to hell, they become the miserable ranters that you see on this forum so often. I don't want to hear that **** after I gave you an opportunity. Look forward, quit looking backward.
Vast majority have total crap references. 50% are obviously fake, 25% are lukewarm, and the other 25% can barely recall the person.
The "what the **** is out there" factor. Why haven't you been able to get a job for so long? Are you a headcase that throws up "white power" slogans on the Internet? Did you punch out a senior citizen at your local McD's before you got 5150'd? Are you adept at the FMLA/UI/STD/LTD game? Is everything always someone else's fault? Is the big bad system out to get YOU? Heck with that, any lunatic can act sane enough to get through some interviews - how jacked up are you that you can't even get that far?
Ok. So the first 3 items are somewhat tangible, the 4th is not. The issue is that I could be faced with 4 candidates that have varied scores on attitude, work history and technical ability - all things equal, that 4th starts creeping in.
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.
