• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Disturbing Job ADs?

They have evaluated the market and feel that it is within the company's best interests to make that filter.

People that have been out of work may be willing to take on something that they are not qualified for. This wastes the employers time.

If one is still working - the candidate is probably of better quality than one that has been let go.

Not stating that it is right, but it is understandable.
 
I recieved an email from my interviewer from my last job about a month ago requesting us to resubmit resumes, including our "current" position. I was contemplating on changing my resume to the month of my last work date, but I'll just leave it as currently working from the looks of what this article stated.
 
yeah i think that's really short sighted of them. they are passing on many qualified people who may out of work because of the economy.
 
that provision is just lazy on their part. you can be a stripper and apply for the job but lots of people with multiple years of related experience can't.

this part doesn't even make any sense.
"It's our preference that they currently be employed," he said. "We typically go after people that are happy where they are and then tell them about the opportunities here.
Click to expand...

if they were happy where they were then why are they even looking for another job in the first place?
 
Actually, lots of places do this....it's just not advertised that way. That said, those companies gave the employed people the upper hand, but they did not alienate unemployed all together.
 
We do get a lot of applications blindly from people who are currently unemployed -- with the economy being what it is, we've had a lot of people contact us that don't have the skill sets we want, so we try to minimize the amount of time we spent on that and try to rifle-shoot the folks we're interested in."
Click to expand...
So if I'm currently employed unloading trucks at Walmart, does that mean I qualify as "employed," and thus am in possession of the skillsets they require?
 
Common Courtesy said:
They have evaluated the market and feel that it is within the company's best interests to make that filter.

People that have been out of work may be willing to take on something that they are not qualified for. This wastes the employers time.

If one is still working - the candidate is probably of better quality than one that has been let go.

Not stating that it is right, but it is understandable.
Click to expand...

I can see this point of view; people out of work simply shotgun resumes at anything that moves, and lots of them bullshit their resumes to fit a given position.
 
gimmewhitecastles said:
that provision is just lazy on their part. you can be a stripper and apply for the job but lots of people with multiple years of related experience can't.

this part doesn't even make any sense.


if they were happy where they were then why are they even looking for another job in the first place?
Click to expand...

I'm happy where I work, but that doesn't mean I couldn't be happier somewhere else, or just as happy somewhere else but making more money.
 
Gibson486 said:
😀

I would usually say that....but I'd imagine that in this economy, every company is getting hammered with them.
Click to expand...


Ha, hammered would be a major under statement.


I get between 100-200 resumes for each job I have run recently. Because of so many resume I don;t have time to really dive into them. So people that may have got a job may get cut due to spammers who can;t even put up a decent resume or even read the job title many time.
 
Marlin1975 said:
Ha, hammered would be a major under statement.


I get between 100-200 resumes for each job I have run recently. Because of so many resume I don;t have time to really dive into them. So people that may have got a job may get cut due to spammers who can;t even put up a decent resume or even read the job title many time.
Click to expand...

Are you posting on your iphone?
 
I think the practice is stupid, but at the same time we just went though a hiring process and I noticed that I was unconsciously prejudice to people who were unemployed for any significant length of time.

Many of the applicants were unemployed for a year or more. My first impressions were "Do you really have no drive at all that you are completely unemployed?". My co-workers woke me up to the truth that in our area it's very common for people to be unemployed around here with tons of companies going under. I was able to get over it.

I can't see why you would never consider an unemployed person, however I could see how you would question someone who was unemployed for multiple years. In the IT would you could always just say you were doing consulting or trying to start your own company.
 
Human resources (stereotype management) is the most disgusting job I could ever imagine. I'd rather work in sewers.
 
SphinxnihpS said:
Human resources (stereotype management) is the most disgusting job I could ever imagine. I'd rather work in sewers.
Click to expand...


HR is usually not the one to make rules like this, it is usually upper MGT.

Just like in the Fed we HR do not make the rules(laws), congress does and we have to follow them. Even if we hate them and know of a better way, to bad. And if we do not follow the law/rules we get in big trouble.
 
sourceninja said:
I think the practice is stupid, but at the same time we just went though a hiring process and I noticed that I was unconsciously prejudice to people who were unemployed for any significant length of time.

Many of the applicants were unemployed for a year or more. My first impressions were "Do you really have no drive at all that you are completely unemployed?". My co-workers woke me up to the truth that in our area it's very common for people to be unemployed around here with tons of companies going under. I was able to get over it.

I can't see why you would never consider an unemployed person, however I could see how you would question someone who was unemployed for multiple years. In the IT would you could always just say you were doing consulting or trying to start your own company.
Click to expand...

It's a shame. When I graduated college, it took me 9 months to find a job. When I was going through a head hunter, one of them said, "With a resume like yours and a big gap in employment, it seems like you were an under performer." He was not able to get me an interview anywhere. Some people cannot fathom that you did not like working at XXX corporation during your coop and that you denied a full time position. In one interview, I nailed it. I thought I got the job. Well, i didn't. I ran into one of the interviewers right after I landed my current job. He just said, "Hey, we thought you would be a great fit, but our manager could not get around why you denied a full time position at XXX corporation. He thought you were lying". Oh well, no hurt feelings.
 
Marlin1975 said:
HR is usually not the one to make rules like this, it is usually upper MGT.

Just like in the Fed we HR do not make the rules(laws), congress does and we have to follow them. Even if we hate them and know of a better way, to bad. And if we do not follow the law/rules we get in big trouble.
Click to expand...

You make it sound not only like HR is necessary, but mandatory. No company needs an HR department, period.

BTW I wouldn't hire you based on your lack of understanding of English. Two, to, too!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top