talkpolitics | Disposable People: The Unemployed Need Not Apply

Entry tags:

economy

Disposable People: The Unemployed Need Not Apply

From Clickorlando.com 6/1/10:
Job hunters are facing a new hurdle: businesses asking recruitment companies to keep unemployed people out of their job pools.

Video here.

Yes, you read that right. Some businesses are now placing job ads that exclude all those icky unemployed people. A trend I first mentioned back in July of last year is continuing and, according to this story, growing.

So, many of the unemployed face, not only the cutting off of their unemployment benefits, not only potential employers holding bad credit ratings, (often a byproduct of not having a job) against them, they now are increasingly being barred by potential employers from applying for job openings -- because they are unemployed.

Apparently in today’s society, more and more, once you’re out, you’re out.

Think of the weapon this hands employers. The saying, so beloved of free market types, “If you don’t like the job, quit and find another one,” is becoming not just a platitude, but a mocking sneer. Quitting is no longer an option, being fired, or laid off, no longer a relatively minor blip in someone’s working life.

If this trend continues, unemployment itself could become a catastrophe that knocks someone permanently out of full time work.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

There's no chance of that becoming a large trend because, at some point, you'll run out of people in a certain market. To want to avoid people who have been our of work for a long time is not new, and not actually news.

I was always taught to apply anyway if you think you're qualified, even if the ad says you must have a certain number of years experience, etc. You never know. Companies put their ideal candidate on the want ad, but they don't always find someone who fits the bill 100%. If your resume looks good, sometimes they will interview you anyway. This has happened to me. Or sometimes you can apply under your skill level, and try to work back up from there.

That being said, the worse the economy/job market, and the more unemployed competing for the same limited jobs...the more employers can afford to be picky.

Right, and the more picky they're going to be.

Besides, this is a report about recruiters - do that many people go through recruiters? Are people looking for jobs incapable of hopping on a computer instead?

Or harnessing the power of shoe-leather?

(deleted comment)

" I currently know of no IT corporation in the Atlanta area that is hiring for a position just by itself"

I know of some and I'm not even in that area... The big thing is that they don't really advertise these jobs. If you know someone you can get an interview, but you have to know someone. There is no reason to advertise or use a recruiter - they can get referrals from their employees for much less than the headhunter costs and typically get better candidates too (especially in this market).

It is in a period of high unemployment, when they announce an unwillingness to even consider people who are unemployed.

No, it really isn't. As someone who's been unemployed in good AND bad times, the common wisdom has always been that the longer you're unemployed, the harder it will be.

LOL! Kiddo, as someone who's been also been unemployed in good AND bad times, over a much greater breadth of time than you, I can tell you that it's one thing to say, "the longer you're unemployed the harder it will be," and quite another for businesses to start a trend of announcing, "no unemployed need apply."

Tell me something. Given your attitude towards government aid to low income Americans, what do you envision happening to the unemployed as they're increasingly marginalized and shut out of any employment? What should they do?

Other than starve.

"What should they do? Other than starve."
1) create their own job
2) accept employment at a lower level job (or even better, jobs) to make ends meet until they find something better.
3) start asking for charity
4) learn that kudzu is edible, move to the rural south, and never know hunger again - maybe malnutrition, but certainly not hunger.

MD: create their own job

If you mean consulting, a great many do that. Unfortunately, it often means going without health insurance and watching your savings slowly dwindle, especially if you have family members to support.

MD: accept employment at a lower level job (or even better, jobs) to make ends meet until they find something better.

That's what many, many people are doing. Working two or more jobs. And many of those people are STILL having to go to food banks at the end of the month.

MD: start asking for charity

They are. See above. Those charities are swamped and cannot help everyone who comes to them.

md: learn that kudzu is edible, move to the rural south, and never know hunger again - maybe malnutrition, but certainly not hunger.

If the above is a joke, it's not a very funny one.

Do you know what malnutrition does to people? Especially to children?

" Unfortunately, it often means going without health insurance and watching your savings slowly dwindle, especially if you have family members to support. "
and yet, I am consulting now and have health insurance (which I buy myself not through any work plan) and am saving money. It can be done.

" And many of those people are STILL having to go to food banks at the end of the month."
Then they racked up too much debt or are still trying to live beyond their means... I've made it on minimum wage before... it sucks but you can do it.

"If the above is a joke, it's not a very funny one. "
it is, but only partially. You CAN live off the land (people did it during the great depression)... AND multivitamins are not very expensive if you get your food for free (getting all the protein you need is harder from pills, but then, the I'm all for thinning out the squirrel population).

md: and yet, I am consulting now and have health insurance (which I buy myself not through any work plan) and am saving money. It can be done.

Not easily, and not without considerable risk. If you're also supporting a family and dealing with serious health issues, it can be next to impossible.

"Not easily, and not without considerable risk."
um... ridiculously easy for me (hell, when I priced it, I could get catastrophic insurance for <$50/month. That's about what a tank of gas costs me). AND what risk? Less than the risk of having health care through work where it can disappear if I get fired (yeah, there's cobra, but that's a horrible deal and it's not forever).

"dealing with serious health issues"
No matter what system you use, someone will not get the health care they want. Ultimately it all boils down to who will die because they don't get that care and who chooses. You pointing out the corner case where someone dies is no more meaningful than me pointing to the fact that NICE (UK health care) has hard limits on how much they will pay (no more than X amount of money for Y probable months of extended life).

So the question becomes how do we decide who gets what health care. It's a complicated problem because if you plow too many resources into health care you negatively impact the quality of life (and I would rather have a good life and take some risks than have great healthcare and a horrible life). My answer is simple: I can't decide for anyone but myself and the same applies to everyone else. I'm curious what your answer is, and why you think your answer is correct.

(no subject)

paft.livejournal.com - 2010-06-05 21:23 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

mdinkins.livejournal.com - 2010-06-07 14:00 (UTC) - Expand

Given your attitude towards government aid to low income Americans, what do you envision happening to the unemployed as they're increasingly marginalized and shut out of any employment? What should they do?

Since that;'s not happening, it's not a concern.

How would you know?

It's illogical.

In other words, you base your assumption on what you'd like to believe rather than actual experience in the real world.

Clearly, this is not a wide-ranging thing in the real world. You're talking about one area of high-paying jobs that are pursed by agencies rather than traditional means.

(no subject)

paft.livejournal.com - 2010-06-06 16:15 (UTC) - Expand

(no subject)

badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com - 2010-06-06 19:28 (UTC) - Expand

It is in a period of high unemployment, when they announce an unwillingness to even consider people who are unemployed.

I've been unemployed for about 10 years now, if I had my health back I'd put money on me being able to get a job within the day!

So many rely on agy's who take take take, dressing up smartly and knocking on doors is the way to go, often getting me 3 job offers before dinner time, even in the early 90's recession time.

t:I've been unemployed for about 10 years now, if I had my health back I'd put money on me being able to get a job within the day!

The chances are, you'd lose.

t: So many rely on agy's who take take take, dressing up smartly and knocking on doors is the way to go, often getting me 3 job offers before dinner time, even in the early 90's recession time.

So you figure the problem is there's been this vast epidemic of people who just aren't trying to find jobs?

So you figure the problem is there's been this vast epidemic of people who just aren't trying to find jobs?

no, What I'm saying (And said back then) when alegedly the numbers were pretty similar, is they are going about finding jobs the wrong way and or aiming too high.

Many also lack the balls to go door-knocking, and often lack simple interview skills/personality/willing to learn any new skill to get any job offerred. Hell back then I didn't even have a CV most of the time, nor mobile phones, I simply had cards with my name and number on to hand to the secretary if there were signs of a job but the boss wasn't around for whatever reason.

So there's been a sudden, massive epidemic of people who've lost their job hunting skills?

So there's been a sudden, massive epidemic of people who've lost their job hunting skills?

Most never had them in the first place.

Then how do you account for them being employed up until recently?