No Unemployed Need Apply
by Jon Lewin on March 1, 2012
Longterm unemployment has reached crisis levels in the United States. Since December 2009, the unemployment rate of the long-term unemployed—people who have been looking for work over six months—has remained above 40%. That’s nearly 1 in 2, compared to a current rate of 8.3% in the general American population.
The rate has not been so high since 1948, the first year this data was compiled. As of January, 5.5 million Americans had been searching for work for over six months. Four million of them had been looking for at least a year. The psychological, as well as financial, burdens that these individuals face are immense: they must cope with the daily stress of supporting their family on diminishing resources, as well as the stress of day after day of unsuccessful job searching. But the longterm unemployed have an additional burden, as well: they face a mounting bias against hiring them.
Over a dozen states are now debating legislation that would ban that practice and make discrimination against the unemployed illegal, the Wall Street Journal reports.
Some state proposals would only ban the wording in the ads, while others would expand existing discrimination laws to permit rejected job candidates to sue companies on the basis of bias against unemployment.
Action on this problem is long overdue. But it must take account that there is a fine line between employer bias against the long-term unemployed and legitimate concerns. Many employers say they don’t want to hire people who have been out of work for a while because they fear that their skills have atrophied. In some industries, particularly technology, that could well be the case. On the other hand, many unemployed people are well aware of the need to stay current and are taking classes or otherwise updating their skill sets.
There is no place for restrictive language in help-wanted ads. Level the playing field for all applicants. It’s bad enough if the long-term unemployed are excluded, but someone who got laid off last week has certainly not had time to atrophy.
Making long-term unemployment a protected status under which one could sue for discrimination might be more complicated. But banning discriminatory ads is a no-brainer.
29 comments
[...] everything is different, but one thing has stayed the same: the shame, the stigma, and the real discrimination that the unemployed [...]
by Editor’s Notes, March 1, 2012 | The Wall Street Job Report on March 1, 2012 at 4:36 pm. #
Living in Washington DC, a city where the unemployment rate as of December 2011 was 10.4%, with only California, Nevada and Rhode Island having higher unemployment rates, why has nothing been done. Many like myself have been unemployed over 6 months, and I see how online applications are off shored to developing countries using cheap and poorly educated staff to make the employment selections. No matter what the laws are, they do not need to comply nor will they be penalized. Solution: List the companies in a public forum and boycott them unttil they face bankruptcy. One consulting company that was listed on the NYSE was dissolved last year because their cheap hiring practices were bringing unqualified persons into the company. Hope more companies experience the effects of utilizing cheap offshore HR functions. As for the high unemployment rate in Washington, DC…it has so few electoral votes the current administration could care less. So the political campaigns could care less. Put severe regulations and penalties on the HR industry. They should not be making hiring decisions.
by Susan on March 1, 2012 at 5:21 pm. #
I have personally been asked to fill out a form to identify whether I had collected unemployment insurance in the last 6 month period of time. I contacted my states attorney generals office about this after filling out the form and sending it back to them, by the way once I submitted the form to the company I was no longer considered for the position. The office told me that even asking about collecting unemployment is a criminal offense and could be prosecuted accordingly. Maybe there is some hope.
by Kevin on March 1, 2012 at 7:53 pm. #
Never in my entire life have I ever been out of work for such of a very long time and felt so discouraged. I am what they term as being long term unemployed and it seems that those of us that are in this position are being over looked. Among us there is a vast wealth of skilled workers that are ready and willing to work, however for some reason that wealth is not being tapped into. Each day I spend at least 7 hours on line looking for jobs and sending out resumes with little or no success. I am willing, able and ready for work and I would accept any ones help who is willing to help me find a job. Recently I read in the WSJ that there is a huge uptick in disability claims and that the main reason is as a result of mental health/depression, the government has paid out so far billions of dollars in disability claims. In the long run it could cost the government less if it could get back those long term unemployed people like myself back to work.
I thought that I was the only one that was going through unemployemnt fatigue. I have been searching for a job for little over 2 years now, I have been to several interviews some even out of state. I have even sat state and passed state and city exams with not even a hint of being called from any city agency. The years, experience and skills that I have acquired over the years (AML/KYC and some Health) makes me very qualified for the positions that I have applied for. Sometimes I wake up and feel very discouraged wondering whether or not that I have been blacklisted from ever being employed again, the least that the government could do as a general policy is to have a work program for the long term unemmployed where they could be trained in areas such as green technology and be given some kind of salary or wage that will help people like myself to feel empowered and hopeful, in the meantime I will continue looking for a job but the prospects of finding one is growing faintly dim each day.
by lorne on March 1, 2012 at 10:48 pm. #
Maybe you could attend after work networking parties. I know that I have made made various contacts thru linkedi in as well. I know it was discouraging but do not lose hope.
by Alicia Bogue on March 2, 2012 at 8:23 pm. #
I recently joined a career meetup group in my area. It provides me with an opportunity to network with other like me looking for a job and career advancement. We meet to improve our networking skills, and pool resources. What I like best is that it also provides support on a confidential basis. Hang in there!
by Maria G on March 4, 2012 at 12:28 pm. #
I agree. There needs to be something done. I believe that some sort of legislation on the federal level is needed now more than ever.
Within that legislation, something needs to be done about people that were in the financial industry. Many of these fine folks have seen their credit go from good to very bad because they were laid off or their institutions closed. They are being discriminated for their bad credit in addition to being unemployed long-term. It is not their fault that they should suffer long-term unemployment because the people at the top made bad decisions.
I have been unemployed for more than nine months now.
It really is disconcerting. We need help.
by A on March 2, 2012 at 3:25 pm. #
I have heard that if a congressman receives 200 or more e-mails or letters regarding a subject, then they are inclined to take action. The long term unemployed must take political action by asking their congressman to back bills that would penalize companies that off shore manufacturing, and services and out place employment to other countries. The lobbyists are paid by those special interests to influence your congressman and senators. Those special interests profit by sending your job overseas or across the border into Mexico in the Maquiladoras. You absolutely must apply political pressure or nothing will change. The politicians must know that they will not be reelected if they cater to the special interest lobbyists. It is all about influence and money. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. There are millions of you in this position and if you get organized, you have real political influence. Start writing your congress people. They all have websites. I guaranty if millions of the unemployed consistently write their congress people, then action in your interest will take place. Those people want to be reelected and they must know you will not vote for them again if they don’t take political action in your favour.
by randy on March 2, 2012 at 4:35 pm. #
Totally agree. I have suggested same in written e-mails to federally elected officials and whitehouse.gov numerous times. In an election year, mass pressure may get recognized. Politicians will not change current offshoring as it would tick off the corporate coffers that line their reelection campaigns and offshoring doesn’t negatively impact Capitol Hill. The govt. quickly created bailouts, they could rapidly impose a severe recession fine on any offshored activity to bring jobs back to USA, ensure safe materials and practices are used in products (don’t forget China has no real regulations) and corporate boards and upper executives get the message. As long as USA has to rely on China and others to buy our bonds to stay afloat, change will not occur. We cannot layoff the masses and expect to survive as a united country. Why should we continue to support tax revenues of other countries?
by Deborah on March 4, 2012 at 3:28 pm. #
Employers have every right to select for hire the most qualified applicant who applies for a job opening. There are bona fide cases where an applicant who is currently working is the most qualified, but this can’t ALWAYS be the case. Unfortunately, and with serious consequences, current or very recent employment is being used increasingly by employers as a proxy to assess a job applicant’s employability. Turning away job applicants solely on the grounds of their employment status is unfair, discriminatory, bad HR practice, bad for the economy, and must be prohibited under law.
by Unemployed Rising on March 2, 2012 at 8:35 pm. #
That is not all. In my state where unemployment is very high, they are asking for your full Social Security number and Date of Birth on the job applications. This is even before an interview is offered. I think something needs to be done soon. Employers have gotten away with too much already. They are employing those that are currently employed.
by Norma on March 4, 2012 at 12:04 am. #
so can they or can’t they ask your d o b and soc sec number?
by kathryn stone on April 14, 2012 at 9:46 am. #
I am 55, Single Mom, and re-entered the workforce 4 years ago. Am still struggling to receive a solid employment offer. I have augmented my education, registered with any/all Temp-Perm employment agencies, registered on most legit search engines, networked, and all the things that the experts tell you to do, and then some. I have a few friends in Human Resources with various types of large and small companies around the city. They have all echoed that while there isn’t supposed to be job discrimination either due to age, or due to having been laid off/without work for a period of time, -whatever the circumstance, that it does happen. Now, the potential Employer won’t tell you that they didn’t hire you because of your age, but may in fact allude to something else, but my HR friends are saying that the “age card” becomes any easy out for the Employer who is concerned about paying benefits, or perhaps thinks the person does not have as much “on the ball” as someone much younger, fresh out of College. This discrimination was perhaps the catalyst involved in my decision to shift gears from my Healthcare background into the Paralegal arena.
by Heidi on March 4, 2012 at 10:43 am. #
Reality check: Being unemployed for as little as one day puts us at a disadvantage for a job-search. The concept of creating laws to prevent discrimination against the long-term unemployed will do little, if anything, to help our situation. At best, this is a concept designed to make us feel better about our dilemma. Surely, such a law would be next to impossible to enforce. Age discrimination is already against the law, yet it happens every day. Whether you have been unemployed for an extended period or if you are considered too young or too old, the employer might simply tell you, “We have found a more highly qualified candidate” or “We have decided to go in a different direction.” The burden of proof that you have been discriminated against for any reason will rest squarely on your shoulders. Again, I submit to you that simply being unemployed is our greatest obstacle.
For 8-months, I have been working at finding a job – all day, every day. This has, in fact, become my full-time job. As we know, the talent ocean is deep and wide and it is well stocked with a vast population of currently employed or “quiet” candidates who simply desire a job-change. My following comments are not intended to make anyone who is unemployed feel better about their situation, but rather, to help put things in perspective.
Unemployment rates serve political interests. How do we track the unemployed who have exhausted their unemployment benefits? Reports suggest that countless of the unemployed population have, “Given up their search.” That is absurd! Real unemployment census numbers will play out in home foreclosures and short-sales of properties in every community. Only now are we starting to appreciate that job loss brought on by the Great Recession has caused a tsunami of unemployed job-seekers who will eventually exhaust unemployment benefits, use up their savings and no longer have any way to pay their regular bills, let alone a mortgage. How do we face a concept like, “retirement age,” when absolutely nothing is left?
Potential employers and the recruiters they hire are not looking for you. Recognize that the first and best objective for a recruiter is to find a “quiet” candidate. This refers to a candidate who is currently employed and working in the field a hiring employer seeks to fill. Perhaps the quiet candidate is employed at a competing company, but at the very least, this person works in the same industry and possesses the desired skills. It is likely that the candidate is not even aware they have been identified. The recruiter tactically recruits this candidate for the opportunity. Remember, recruiters are paid by the employer, not the candidate and the recruiter serves the best interests of their client.
Exasperated? Do not give up! My glass is neither half-full, nor half-empty. Instead, to coin a phrase, “It is what it is.” Of course, career-search websites are very important. Employers that place open job requisitions on the web are probably not also paying a recruiting firm to fill the opening(s). If you have not already, then I strongly encourage you to consider using LinkedIn, which is wonderful vehicle for networking and job searching. A site like LinkedIn might help you identify an existing professional connection who could provide a value-added reference.
Highly motivated and determined, my search goes on for a Business Development/Account Management role. I wish you great success in your search.
by Scott A. Muir on March 4, 2012 at 11:41 am. #
If I could record my response to your comments, Scott, you would hear applause.
by Larraine on March 5, 2012 at 8:51 am. #
I got laid off after 20 years with the same company in So. Cal. I went through 3 reorganizations but did not make the 4th. I was out of work for 2 years in So.Cal and finally was able to take a position for a specific project.
I sent out many resumes over the course of 2 years but was selective. I don’t believe in sending just to send. Sometimes I think unemployment benefits promote this activity.
I can’t prove discrimination, but if someone has the same skill sets as the next then at least a phone call to the applicant is due. I am a manager and there is no way a hiring manager can make a decision based upon a resume. A meeting in person is THE ONLY WAY.
A person can have all the skills but might not fit in with the working group. And this is more important sometimes than the actual position.
by Chris Barrett on March 4, 2012 at 1:49 pm. #
I was unemployed for two years and decided ( a month ago) to do my own business in Accounting and Tax Consulting Services. If any of you UNEMPLOYED need assistant filling your own taxes or starting a new business, please send me an e-mail; FZayas1@cfl.rr.com, I will be happy to help you!!!
by Feliciano Zayas ( Zayas & Associates, LLC) on March 5, 2012 at 1:14 pm. #
We’re not pessimistic about the likely effectiveness of new laws that would prohibit discrimination in hiring based on unemployment status. While discrimination is typically difficult to prove, banning hiring decisions based on the current or very recent employment of job applicants would be a strong move in the right direction towards making this a universally unacceptable employment practice in the United States. It is also generally is considered a poor human resources practice to exclude a job candidate for a personal reason or if a bona fide qualification of current employment for a position is absent.
In absence of any federal or state law banning unemployment discrimination, there is no legal recourse for aggrieved job applicants when actual cases of discrimination occur unless they happen to currently belong to protected class under employment law and can claim that they have been subject to disparate impact.
Once laws that protect the unemployed job applicants exist, resources will need to be committed to compliance and enforcement. Both employers and job applicants will need to carefully document each step in the job application and interview process so that each will be able to support their defenses and claims when investigations of unemployment discrimination do occur.
by Unemployed Rising on March 6, 2012 at 10:20 am. #
I respectfully request that Wall Street Job Report forward these comments to the United States Congress so that they may know what the long term unemployed are up against.
by F on March 6, 2012 at 11:39 am. #
Dear F,
A project along those lines is in the works. I have read all of your comments and I am working on compiling them. Stay tuned in the next few days.
–Your Editor, Beth Connolly
by admin on March 6, 2012 at 1:18 pm. #
I have been unemployed since 2008. I have over 20 years experience in the financial Industry. I am an over qualified uncertified accountant which initially cast me into a job market flooded with unemployed CPAs. In an effort to recreated myself, I managed to complete Technical School with 3 life time certifications (Security+, Network+ and A+). I graduated a Microsoft Certificate System Administrator with honors. However, I have been told that I need at least 2 years IT experience to get the jobs. I believe that I am being discriminated against for long term unemployment and age. Once again, age discrimination have reared its ugly head. Unfortunately, I am a victim of timing as well. Between 2007-2011 the number of individuals unemployed continued to rise and hopes of finding a job dwindled each time a massive group of layed off citizens were thrown into the job market. It is so refreshing to know that others are noticing this disastor and hopefully legislation will be passed to recup “The Forgotten Ones”.
by Phyllis Sneed on March 6, 2012 at 11:51 pm. #
I agree 100%. There is discrimination against those who have been unemployed for over 6 months. Due to the state of the economy worldwide, companies are looking to downsize (while the Board of Directors and executive management are still receiving more than their fair share of rewards and benefits) at least in my country. The companies should be just looking for talent that would add value to their company’s growth but instead they are seeking those who will just be politically correct and keep the status quo. This helps nobody in the long run even the company’s growth is stunted by these actions.
by Carla Pujadas on March 8, 2012 at 8:23 am. #
Any laws against this discriminatory practice will be absolutely useless. As most employers can fire an employee for any legal reason, they will always be able to find that legal reason. Could be a minor hygiene issue such as facial hair, body odor, or even just “corporate fit”. Any law, if passed, will only support the most egregious denial of employment, where an employer states, in front of unbiased witnesses that don’t care how their employer retaliates against them, that you are not selected here because of your extended unemployment. You have a better chance of saying you took an unexpected sabbatical from the active workforce to rechannel your energies while you reeducate for your new chosen career path.
by John on March 8, 2012 at 4:15 pm. #
[...] weeks, the Wall Street Job Report has covered hiring discrimination from a variety of angles: first discrimination against the unemployed, then discrimination against senior-level workers, and yesterday discrimination against those who [...]
by Happy Women's Day--Editor's Notes, March 8, 2012 | The Wall Street Job Report on March 8, 2012 at 5:04 pm. #
What ever happened to common decency and taking care of your fellow man? Absolute power (for captains of industry and others) and greed has replaced common sense.
by F on March 11, 2012 at 7:26 pm. #
I was out of work for 6 months last year and the longer it lasted, sure, I felt as though the stigma was hurting me. Hover, how could you possibly prove to a court that you were discriminated against because of your long-term unemployment. The unemployed are not a suspect class and employers, under the law, could pretty easily show they had a rational basis for hiring someone else.
by Lance on March 12, 2012 at 5:09 pm. #
I was employed 18 years as a mid-level manager. I was highly productive and consistently exceeded expectations. That non-profit eliminated 48 jobs due to cuts in funding. They were most secretive about who across the state lost their jobs and it took a long time to piece together the list. All of those people were over 45 and most were over age 50. Even though I have a broad skill set, it took 18 months of diligent search. The State’s employment services and programs were A JOKE. I got 2 matches in 18 months with 280 skills, listing $8 per hour as the minimum pay I would accept. Eventually I found another job. Went from $20 per hour to $12 per hour and don’t use my most valuable skills. Think our economy will rebound when my situation is considered the “Happy Ending?” Nope! We are a service industry nation and the number who can afford services continues to plummet.
by CindyS on March 15, 2012 at 1:06 pm. #
I agree with these comments on unemployment discrimination. I believe you can be discriminated because of age too. I applied for a position and only showed my last 10 years of work experience. My previous HR rep recommended this to me. During the interview, they commented about the 10 years experience, but when I stated my experience for my 30 years, the interview was immediately over. They stated that I was overqualified for the position. I never heard back from the company.
by Mark Sinders on March 16, 2012 at 11:21 pm. #
The employment obstacles of age discrimination and long term unemployment are certainly real. However, the ONE MAJOR OBSTACLE for older job seekers is the high cost of health insurance benefits and that my friends is the ugly truth these companies and this country do not want to face. So if American business is supposedly touted as innovative, why is it that no companies are smart enough to offer creative, alternate compensation plans for mature employees, for example no health benefits but a higher salary to offset that cost to the employee?? American business is missing out on critical tangible and intangible advantages found only in mature employees with a lifetime of experience because the companies are blinded by health care costs. In the end this approach further diminishes the ability of American business to compete in an ever expanding global economy/marketplace.
by Kris on April 27, 2012 at 1:20 pm. #