Article: As employers turn to algorithms to sift through job applications, the poor are more likely to lose out (licenses, employment)

[Corvette Ministries]

Check this out from later in the referenced article:

A pioneer in this field is Gild, a San Francisco–based startup. Extending far beyond a prospect’s alma mater or résumé, Gild sorts through millions of job sites, analysing what it calls each person’s “social data"

What do they do, check out your facebook friends and look at the credentials of those with whom you interact?

"He interacts with fellow programmers. He must be passionate about coding. This one, OTOH, only hangs with cat lovers."

[MLSFan]

Originally Posted by Corvette Ministries

Check this out from later in the referenced article:


What do they do, check out your facebook friends and look at the credentials of those with whom you interact?

"He interacts with fellow programmers. He must be passionate about coding. This one, OTOH, only hangs with cat lovers."

yes but we all know cat lovers have no lives so they can work 80 hours / week

[Hemlock140]

Originally Posted by MLSFan

frustrating to employers when their employees can't show up on time either if they are so reliant on someone else driving

in cities without good transportation, some employees never show up

I had one quit last fall who would have ended up being fired after 6 years, she had moved farther away and couldn't get to work on time, despite driving. Others taking public transit with transfers make it just fine and spend more time commuting for shorter distances than her commute time.

[Serious Conversation]

As these models become more sophisticated and employers more selective, I wouldn't be surprised to find a higher percentage of people blackballed from the labor force.

[pittsflyer]

Originally Posted by Hemlock140

Living far from the jobsit, or for that matter being poor, is not a protected class, so discrimination on either of those is perfectly legal. The poor may not be able to affor professional resume help, but there are plenty of free services, including a lot of websites. If anything, the difficulty for the really poor is having to go to a library to apply, if they have no internet, because almost all good jobs require online applications.

This is the sort of attitude that is going to drive extraordinarily draconian laws against employers in the very near future. Look forward to all kinds of things becoming protected because employers are not willing to do what is right on their own accord the force of law will be next.


I agree that professional resume help is not really a valid excuse, just be smart about writing your resume. But COL is a VERY real issue and remember that poor people represent about 80% of the total population of this nation. And while a lot of poor people are not too bright that's a significant number of people that can make employers lives hell in the year or two to come.


When the major riots get closer and closer there will be changes, im not talking about isolated protests but LA style riots all over the country. The USA is going to start looking worse than the old soviet union other than the campuses of the filthy rich companies which are going to have to build walls and controlled access gates as the ghettos build up around them.


We are going to start looking like some sci fi movie like alysium, Detroit is already there.


If the govt refuses to step in you will have extreme violence and the filthy rich will have to live in locked down communities to keep their families safe.

[pittsflyer]

Originally Posted by MLSFan

frustrating to employers when their employees can't show up on time either if they are so reliant on someone else driving

in cities without good transportation, some employees never show up

Maybe pay more so that people can live closer to work ... if not then deal with people being extremely late turn over and all the other issues.


I always wondered how they find people to work at the Aspen starbucks if they even have one there, do they have some shanty town for their indentured servants with a wall around it?

[ringwise]

Originally Posted by pittsflyer

This is the sort of attitude that is going to drive extraordinarily draconian laws against employers in the very near future. Look forward to all kinds of things becoming protected because employers are not willing to do what is right on their own accord the force of law will be next.


I agree that professional resume help is not really a valid excuse, just be smart about writing your resume. But COL is a VERY real issue and remember that poor people represent about 80% of the total population of this nation. And while a lot of poor people are not too bright that's a significant number of people that can make employers lives hell in the year or two to come.


When the major riots get closer and closer there will be changes, im not talking about isolated protests but LA style riots all over the country. The USA is going to start looking worse than the old soviet union other than the campuses of the filthy rich companies which are going to have to build walls and controlled access gates as the ghettos build up around them.


We are going to start looking like some sci fi movie like alysium, Detroit is already there.


If the govt refuses to step in you will have extreme violence and the filthy rich will have to live in locked down communities to keep their families safe.

The only thing an employer is obligated to do is hire a person that best fits the job. They aren't there to do what is "right" by anyone else. They may, if they're a decent employer. But the purpose of a business is NOT to provide jobs.

[lunetunelover]

Originally Posted by pittsflyer

This is the sort of attitude that is going to drive extraordinarily draconian laws against employers in the very near future. Look forward to all kinds of things becoming protected because employers are not willing to do what is right on their own accord the force of law will be next..

I disagree. It is the current laws and the need to be transparent and "blind" to any potential discriminatory acts that cause employers to use these demographics. (and credit bureaus and banks and police, etc. see the article on CNN: Math is racist: How data is driving inequality - Sep. 6, 2016 )




The laws force organizations and agencies to use information that takes humanity out of the equation in order to reduce the chances of discrimination. Unfortunately, that information/demographic can (and to some, apparently, has) been the cause of less opportunity.

[pittsflyer]

Originally Posted by MLSFan

frustrating to employers when their employees can't show up on time either if they are so reliant on someone else driving

in cities without good transportation, some employees never show up

I find it almost comical when employers complain and fire when they are the ones who chose to operate out of a difficult area for potential employees and they wont pay enough for people to live close and still save a respectable amount for a rainy day. People are not going to live close to work if it means living check to check, or even every other check to check.

[KellyXY]

Originally Posted by pittsflyer

This is the sort of attitude that is going to drive extraordinarily draconian laws against employers in the very near future. Look forward to all kinds of things becoming protected because employers are not willing to do what is right on their own accord the force of law will be next.

I agree with this - and things like "ban the box" and expungement laws are the tip of the iceberg. The issue here are not application tests that are likely unfair (although this can include legally-dicey job application questions), but rather the detailed background checks that many employers now run. What started as a wholehearted idea (catching those who lie on an application or résumé) has now turned into a means for employers to unfairly discriminate (disqualifying people for things like a wrongful arrest or minor infraction from years ago).

I'm fine with employers verifying an applicant's work history, educational or other credentials, etc. (there the "you're fine as long as you don't lie or hide anything" saying holds in a fair way) - as well as checking for crimes that are truly job-relevant (for example any violent offenses for one working in a school or daycare, or embezzlement for an accountant or job handling cash). However I do think we need to put breaks on employers being able to do a comprehensive search of one's legal (civil as well as criminal) history (and ban employers from obtaining credit reports unless the employee will be making financial decisions for the company).

With background checks it's not just racial minorities that are adversely impacted - one group that is hit very disparately are transgender people (whom I've dealt with a few and thus know about their issues). With them there is a concern that the check will "out" them by finding their legal records of name and/or gender change, or the employer will ask for their pre-transition name to make sure the search is "completely" done. I understand why employers may ask for other names an applicant has gone by since they may need to know in order to verify a degree/contact a reference/keep a criminal from covering up their past by using an alias/etc., but I think an acceptable compromise would be 1) Require that the question be tailored to the purpose and therefore the name be provided only when practically necessary, e.g. "Do we need to know about the use of another name in order to verify___?" instead of a general inquiry for all other names used, 2) If the application or interview is not compliant with #1 then the employee has a defense for not disclosing a former name that itself elicits sensitive information and no relevant records are under it, and 3) If the old name is needed for a formal criminal history check allow the transgender person to provide it straight to the agency running the check instead of on the form that goes through the employer (the UK has a policy like that in place).