Wow I never looked at it like that....No wonder our economy sucks with big bis thinking like that!This is nothing new. The only thing "new", if it really is, is the fact that employers are being bold enough to put the information out there in ads. There have been studies done that have shown this discrimination takes place and has gotten worse since the economy tanked. I've talked to managers looking to employe people who have flat out stated they don't consider people who are out of work or who have been out of work for some time. Regardless of the reality, they see these people as having something "wrong" with them. Because most of them have not dealt with the issue of being unwillingly unemployed, they can't quite grasp the concept that someone who has been let go might still be a valuable employee.
Let's face it, when you think of a company laying off people, do you not consider that they kept only the best of the best? Regardless of the reality, because as many know that is not the reality in most cases, this is what people assume. So when they see that you have been out of work, they combine that immediate prejudice of, "well, they must have not been kept for SOME reason" along with the fact that they haven't been able to land a job in a short period and in their mind it's a done deal. This person must not be that good of an employee.
Now, there are also practical reasons behind all of this. It doesn't change the fact that it is still based on prejudice, but when an employer is bombarded with literally thousands (if not tens of thousands) of resumes for every position they post, they have to find a quick way of sorting the wheat from the chaff. The fact that they are in fact sorting out some of the best wheat along with the chaff is something they either do not want to face or simply won't believe.
It's not even really fair to say "big biz" when talking about this. You are dealing more with individuals with personal prejudices. I'm not saying there aren't places with unwritten policies like this, but in general, it's just the guy or gal doing the hiring. Think about it. They put an advert out for an open position and the next thing they know, they are quite literally buried in resumes. Once they discard the true crap (all those people who don't meet even the barest of qualifications), they are still left with a ridiculous number of qualified candidates. They can't interview them all and they have to reduce the number in some form or fashion. This is just one of the easiest possible ways and it fits right into their perception of how the world works.Wow I never looked at it like that....No wonder our economy sucks with big bis thinking like that!
Tis true and the clear message from Employers is they want "employable" people and not those who are somehow 'inferior' and what this does is to send a clear message to 'job jumpers' that there is a place for them to jump to. Employers know that the market place is in disarray and they are looking for self starters who will do what is necessary to get the next best job. Those are already employed are deemed survivors and they want that mentality working for them. It's a dog eat dog environment and much like the Gladiator System in Ancient Rome this is the mentality of the COO's and CEO's when getting their managers to find people.This is nothing new. The only thing "new", if it really is, is the fact that employers are being bold enough to put the information out there in ads. There have been studies done that have shown this discrimination takes place and has gotten worse since the economy tanked. I've talked to managers looking to employe people who have flat out stated they don't consider people who are out of work or who have been out of work for some time. Regardless of the reality, they see these people as having something "wrong" with them. Because most of them have not dealt with the issue of being unwillingly unemployed, they can't quite grasp the concept that someone who has been let go might still be a valuable employee.
Let's face it, when you think of a company laying off people, do you not consider that they kept only the best of the best? Regardless of the reality, because as many know that is not the reality in most cases, this is what people assume. So when they see that you have been out of work, they combine that immediate prejudice of, "well, they must have not been kept for SOME reason" along with the fact that they haven't been able to land a job in a short period and in their mind it's a done deal. This person must not be that good of an employee.
Now, there are also practical reasons behind all of this. It doesn't change the fact that it is still based on prejudice, but when an employer is bombarded with literally thousands (if not tens of thousands) of resumes for every position they post, they have to find a quick way of sorting the wheat from the chaff. The fact that they are in fact sorting out some of the best wheat along with the chaff is something they either do not want to face or simply won't believe.
Sorry to say, but New Jersey's law won't help the problem even a little. All it does is keep employers from ADVERTISING that they only want employed or recently unemployed. To be honest, I would rather we let employers be honest about what they are accepting (even if I think it is awful for them to do so) than to simply push the issue out of sight.Selecting the best candidate sure has turned into difficult proposition; for more than just those looking for good help. Hard to imagine these business practices are good for American society. Though I don't like the idea of government interfering in business, personal or otherwise; it's easy to see why New Jersey created the it's law. Hopefully it helps.
It's not what you know, it's what you can prove.I agree with Jason. It's the same with age descrimination. Sure no one says that won't hire the 60-year-old when they can hire a 40-year-old, but it's a fact, and it's really hard to prove in court.
I'd bet a fiver of my finest smokes that never happens.All I see this doing is making it soon to be illegal to ask for your employment history.