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.
Wrong. I'm saying for lower skill set jobs, the odds favor the employer. Millions have the applicable previously acquired skill sets. Not so at the executive level. Corps are not going to view anyone more than 1 tier below a CEO , for example, to become a CEO. That severely limits supply.
You are still missing the point of this thread - people should not be deemed "unemployable" just because they are out of work. Supply and demand arguments are just a weak attempt to sweep the problem under the table. People are being unfairly kicked out of the economy and work world based upon idiotic hiring practices that bypass their skills and work ethic. You seem unwilling to admit that such a thing could even be possible, which is disappointing.
The CEO comparison was just an example: If companies are going to make up total BS "reasons" why people who are out of work are unemployable, that those idiotic "reasons" should apply across the board - to CEO and line worker alike.
You are still missing the point of this thread - people should not be deemed "unemployable" just because they are out of work.
The buyer always set the term when there is too much supply. Hence, the effort should be spent on increasing demand at all costs, rather than "You shouldn't do that" rants. So basically, I'm ignoring the ranting aspect of the discussion.
As someone who sells background screening services for a living: lying about anything on your resume is a horrible idea. People check your listed companies to see if they're legally registered with the state secretary's office beforehand. Also, they won't ever call your listed professional reference to verify employment, they'll call the main business phone line and ask for HR to verify. They do this for that very reason. So people can't just make up companies or have their buddy pretend to be their supervisor and say "Bob? Yeah, he worked here, yup".
That's already baked into my business plan for "References-4-U", lol! A business registration at your state's Department of Commerce (or whatever) is a low startup cost. Where I am, it's $50/yr. So you file one for "References-4-U" and one for "Acme Distribution".
Of course, it requires a fee to incorporate the holding company, "Rustbucket, LLC", and this is about $2K. Incorporate in New Mexico, and you are not required to list your personal identity in any of the incorporation documents.
Be sure to file for an IRS ID, however. Even Al Capone was brought down by tax evasion. And to be quite honest, I feel that integrity in tax payments will ensure some of the benefits to which I eventually aspire, like Medicare. Further, the IRS has the position that it will not act as an agent for law enforcement, as long as you pay your taxes.
So, you hide behind the corporate veil. Your identity is protected, as long as you pay corporate taxes. I'd almost be inclined to set this up as a public service, I am so teed off at how expendable American citizens (that is to say, you and me) have become.
But of course, I won't - because I believe in corporate ethics and aspire to the highest standards, as demonstrated by my superiors on Wall Street.
I landed a bunch of interviews (and made it to the final round for a bunch) back when I had close to 2 years of unemployment and this was with large F500 companies. Most of the interviewers didn't even ask me about the gap until I mentioned it on my own accord. They didn't even grill me or even ask any further questions about it. It is true that a lot of companies aren't going to interview you if you have a long gap but it is also true that many will. A lot of people ARE more understanding these days since they have family members (esp. grown children) who have been unemployed for long periods of time. Of course, there are also some who will hold a prejudice no matter what and that is also an issue as well.
Although I will say I am a lot younger than the average unemployed person and I have been mostly going after jobs that do not require much experience (mostly entry level to early mid-career) and this is also one reason why they have been more willing to cut some slack. If you are at a supervisory level or higher, I am not sure how applicable my experience is since from what my acquaintances who are on that level have been through, they have had great difficulty procuring interviews.
If you're asking why companies only want to hire people who are already employed, than the "logic" is as follows:
1) All unemployed people are "lazy." See, when a plant closes or big-wig managers run a company into the ground, the fault clearly lies only on the people who were laid off. Corporations never lay off hard workers - hahahahaha, right! - and connections would never beat out job performance... even though everyone freely admits that connections are more important than skills, including people who run around accusing the unemployed of lacking skills. Hmmm, yeah... so what I'm saying is that the unemployed are "lazy," despite all proof to the contrary.
2) All unemployed people forget everything they know the moment they lose their jobs. See, when a corporation lays somebody off, they erase parts of the victim's brain, making it impossible for them to remember how to perform the tasks they spent the previous 2, 5, 10, or even more years doing. Also, the brain-erasure prevents them from learning anything new. Note that some companies also believe that people get an automatic brain erasure when they hit 30 to 40 years of age, so that can also be a problem.
3) It's good for the economy, despite the evidence! Creating a permament underclass of "unemployable" people is good for the economy... okay, nobody will believe that... Hmmm... well, maybe it's good for the hiring company since when they only hire people who are already working, they have to pay them more money than they would paid somebody who's out of work. In exchange for paying more money, they'll get a worker who may not be able to start immediately and who may be less grateful for the work and thus show less loyalty to the new company. Okay, that doesn't sound so good either... Hmmmm...
Yeah, okay - there's really no good reason. It's just a mix of laziness - "Durr... we need a way to filter out the resume quickly..." and sadism - kicking people when they are down based upon the insane belief that everyone "gets what they deserve in life."
The buyer always set the term when there is too much supply. Hence, the effort should be spent on increasing demand at all costs, rather than "You shouldn't do that" rants. So basically, I'm ignoring the ranting aspect of the discussion.
So, in other words you're going to flat-out ignore the problem. Demand for workers cannot be increased when corporations REFUSE to hire the unemployed. They don't care about your skills, abilities, or work ethic - if you are unemployed, you are "unemployable." That is the entire point of this discussion. If you want to ignore that, why are you even posting on this thread? Geez...
So I would like someone on here to be completely honest with me who does the hiring for their company or used to because I just want to get a full understanding of why this is the case.
If you don't feel comfortable being honest on this thread I'm willing to accept private messages because I really want the real answer to this question. I never been a fan of sugarcoating so please be upfront with me because I need this information badly
Thanks
Why don't you just make up a fake place of business or use a friends business, and have them be the reference?
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.
