Did you see the article in the WSJ today on employers only considering employed candidates? I have been thinking about it all day and wondering whether to post something about it. In the end, my thoughts come down to disbelief. If this economic downtown had not cost millions of people their jobs, that would be one thing. If people losing their jobs, for the most part, had control over the outcome, that would be one thing. But this is something else entirely. To think that it is the fault of those laid off – that they didn’t prove their worth or work hard enough while employed – is irrational. The sheer numbers alone of those that are unemployed refute this. Could there possibly be that many people that are lazy? Or are bad at their jobs? No. I refuse to believe that. In fact, I know that is not the case.
So to those employers that think the only viable candidates are those that are employed, I have this to say: I hope you one day are not in this boat holding far too many people at the moment. However, if you are, I hope you find more grace in those you seek to hire you than you yourself are showing.
Filed under: discussion
I’ve been reading tons of articles about jobs, employment, etc. for several months now and sadly, I’ve read this piece before too, quite a few months ago, in fact.
But you know, speaking as someone who has had a few interviews now (though still not yet an offer, sigh), I don’t believe this is the majority views of employers. In fact during most of my interviews, the subject of my not having a job didn’t even come up, presumably because they were more focused on me and my qualifications and personality and they understood what it’s like for people in this economy. I mean, you’d have to be blind, deaf, and stupid not to know what the job market is like these days. So I really don’t believe that everyone is that naive or short-sighted and for the ones who are, to hell with them. [/rant]
Oh, I definitely agree that most employers are not like this and do understand what is going on out there. But the fact that there are people like this willing to be interviewed for the WSJ and go on permanent record saying it? THAT is what was irritating me.
Wow, my anger level is pretty high after reading that. I mean seriously, only those left with a job must be the top performers??? What idiot thought that up. I take serious offense to that notion when I was the victim of a department wide downsizing that had nothing to do with my performance and I have 4 years of stellar performance reviews in hard copy to show for it. I have not hit this wall that I know of thus far and have had two job interviews this week where the employers didn’t seem to be bothered by the fact that I was laid off. I did point out in my application too the reason for the lay-off so there was no question.
On the one hand, I feel like I should apologize for spreading the article since I had the same reaction. On the other, it is nice to know I’m not alone in that feeling.
Don’t be silly, you don’t have to apologize, we’re not the type to kill the messenger!
I will admit I had one interview (for a legal assistant job, not even a librarian job) where I got asked “so you’re not working right now?” and got kind of a dismissive look from them and it was enough for me to get turned off completely. And it’s no surprise to me that those people? Can’t keep an employee to save their lives, their turnover is ridiculously high, even from their attorneys!
And I wouldn’t be surprised if the people who said that have realized how stupid they sound and are now regretting it.
Thank you for posting this article, even though it provokes depressing thought bubbles.
I could be angry but what I really feel is that those folks who have continued to be employed during this unbelieveably l-o-n-g economic downturn as well as those who have never lost a position or never wanted for money and security have absolutely no idea what it is like to be “without.” When I was laid off in October, I had not been unemployed for over 20 years.
Let’s hope for more understanding.