Jobless Discrimination? When Firms Won't Even Consider Hiring Anyone Unemployed

[B. Kidd]

We're supposed to have empathy for losers who won't work?

Your posts in this thread illustrate that you are a bad fukin' joke who has worse karma.

 

[AllieBaba]

Worse karma..than whom????

In other words, your post doesn't make sense. Loser.

 

[Annie]

I understand what HG is saying. I lost my job nearly a year ago. I've been substitute teaching since the beginning of October, not making enough to make ends meet. I applied for over 300 part-time positions, not one call back until 3 weeks ago. With the interview, I got the job beginning the next day. So for the past 2 weeks, I've worked 7 days of 16+ hours, at 56 years old. Unfortunately, substituting is drying up, as we're hitting the end of the school year.

Now I'm faced with a 20 some hour week, at $8.25 an hour. It will put me slightly over the 1/2 unemployment amount to collect. So, I'll be further and further behind. I'll keep looking for another part-time position to fill in the gaps. If I try to cut my hours so that I can collect unemployment, I'd lose the job. I won't do that. However, if I can't at least pay my utilities, gas, and food, what recourse do I have?

I gave up cable tv, cell phone, in September last year. I've been paying down the $2k in credit card debt, which had been less than $400 when I lost my teaching position of 12 years. When I finally told them to sue me, the two lenders stopped charging interest and made arrangements. I spend less than $30 per week on food. I've not bought any clothes, shoes, etc., since I lost my job.

I resent all of Willow's posts, you are the loser and also very nasty. I hope you have worse luck than so many when you are older.

 

[expat_panama]

...We buy if the product is something we need. The only unemployed people that get hired are the ones needed by the company that's hiring.

So if the unemployed person has the qualifications you need when you want to hire someone, whats the problem?

That's true if being employed isn't one of the required qualifications. If the applicant is not qualified then he can either change his qualifications or apply elsewhere. Not enough education means go to school and not having a job means get a job somewhere -anywhere, even if it means self employment or volunteer work.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

I just don't understand, I lost my job in Virginia because the company I worked for shut down, not because I did anything bad or had had issues, this kind of profiling is just as bad as racism, if you want to see if the person had issues I am sure the previous supervisor at the old job would be more than happy to tell you.

The bolded part of your quote there explains everything.

Back in the day when I was doing the hiring for companies I worked for, one of the ways I weeded down the number of applicants was their work history, and if they had been out of work for more than a couple of months, their application got filed away immediately. There were then and are now, far too many qualified applicants who don't have this big gap in their work history.

The entire purpose of hiring is to get the best available people who can come in and contribute right away. It's a competitive world, and having a two month-plus hole in your resume is really stupid.

"Discrimination" is a PC word thrown around very lightly, for we ALL "discriminate" all the time. When I was hiring, I would discriminate on qualifications, experience, education... Hell even spelling, punctuation, grammar, you name it.

If you're looking for a particular special person who fits into your operation instead of just a ant, you discriminate.

 

[Publius1787]

The lack of empathy for the unemployed in this thread stuns me, the article was spot on.

When things dont go your way or the way you would like it, create a class of victems. Nice job.

 

[Publius1787]

With that kind of attitude how are unemployed people supposed to find work? should we round them all up against a wall and machine gun them to death so we won't have to deal with their issues?

No we should do absolutly nothing about it. IT IS NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE THAT YOU HAVE A JOB! And no government should make the determination that you are qualified for the job and thus must force the employer to hire you on the grounds of unemployment discrimination. Your not a victem of anything other than your own choices and chance circumstances. Welcome to reality.

I am not saying the employer should be forced to hire someone because they are unemployed, I am just saying if an unemployed person goes to a job interview he shouldn't be automatically disqualified just because he happens to be unemployed, you are trying to twist this and make it look like I want unemployed people put in the front of the line.

Yeah. What law do you hope to pass to prevent this, like the one hinted in your op article, or are you just complaining to the world?

 

[editec]

There's no law that could be passed to deal with this problem.

Midnight Marauder explained the problem rather well, I think.

It is safer to assume that anybody who has been unemployed a long time is not a good candidate ESPECIALLY when there are so many job applicants.

For some of us who have fallen off our careers paths, there is very little hope of climbing back on on that path.

ESPECIALLY if we are older.

Now there is a law against age descrimination, but there's a law that really has almost no effect on reality.

Employers are looking for the best employees and being OLDER doesn't help you case much.

What we think is our strength, our experience, is actually a THREAT to many potential employees.

They want young people that they don't have to REtrain.

 

[High_Gravity]

I understand what HG is saying. I lost my job nearly a year ago. I've been substitute teaching since the beginning of October, not making enough to make ends meet. I applied for over 300 part-time positions, not one call back until 3 weeks ago. With the interview, I got the job beginning the next day. So for the past 2 weeks, I've worked 7 days of 16+ hours, at 56 years old. Unfortunately, substituting is drying up, as we're hitting the end of the school year.

Now I'm faced with a 20 some hour week, at $8.25 an hour. It will put me slightly over the 1/2 unemployment amount to collect. So, I'll be further and further behind. I'll keep looking for another part-time position to fill in the gaps. If I try to cut my hours so that I can collect unemployment, I'd lose the job. I won't do that. However, if I can't at least pay my utilities, gas, and food, what recourse do I have?

I gave up cable tv, cell phone, in September last year. I've been paying down the $2k in credit card debt, which had been less than $400 when I lost my teaching position of 12 years. When I finally told them to sue me, the two lenders stopped charging interest and made arrangements. I spend less than $30 per week on food. I've not bought any clothes, shoes, etc., since I lost my job.

I resent all of Willow's posts, you are the loser and also very nasty. I hope you have worse luck than so many when you are older.

I appreciate your situation and I wish you luck going forward however I wouldn't share details of my employment situation with people on this board, just because you will probably get very hateful and nasty comments from folks who think unemployed people are worthless and should never be given a job again.

 

[High_Gravity]

No we should do absolutly nothing about it. IT IS NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE THAT YOU HAVE A JOB! And no government should make the determination that you are qualified for the job and thus must force the employer to hire you on the grounds of unemployment discrimination. Your not a victem of anything other than your own choices and chance circumstances. Welcome to reality.

I am not saying the employer should be forced to hire someone because they are unemployed, I am just saying if an unemployed person goes to a job interview he shouldn't be automatically disqualified just because he happens to be unemployed, you are trying to twist this and make it look like I want unemployed people put in the front of the line.

Yeah. What law do you hope to pass to prevent this, like the one hinted in your op article, or are you just complaining to the world?

I'm not hoping to pass any law, you are the one complaining in this fucking thread not me pal. I created a thread to talk about this issue and if this makes you so angry and full of hate maybe you shouldn't post here, just saying. You have done nothing but put words in my mouth and create strawmen arguments throughout this thread.

 

[High_Gravity]

The lack of empathy for the unemployed in this thread stuns me, the article was spot on.

When things dont go your way or the way you would like it, create a class of victems. Nice job.

You just don't get it, by lining up all the unemployed people and chastizing them as worthless and as a burden, YOU are the one creating a whole new class of people.

 

[High_Gravity]

I just don't understand, I lost my job in Virginia because the company I worked for shut down, not because I did anything bad or had had issues, this kind of profiling is just as bad as racism, if you want to see if the person had issues I am sure the previous supervisor at the old job would be more than happy to tell you.

The bolded part of your quote there explains everything.

Back in the day when I was doing the hiring for companies I worked for, one of the ways I weeded down the number of applicants was their work history, and if they had been out of work for more than a couple of months, their application got filed away immediately. There were then and are now, far too many qualified applicants who don't have this big gap in their work history.

The entire purpose of hiring is to get the best available people who can come in and contribute right away. It's a competitive world, and having a two month-plus hole in your resume is really stupid.

"Discrimination" is a PC word thrown around very lightly, for we ALL "discriminate" all the time. When I was hiring, I would discriminate on qualifications, experience, education... Hell even spelling, punctuation, grammar, you name it.

If you're looking for a particular special person who fits into your operation instead of just a ant, you discriminate.

A two month gap in your resume is considered a big hole? really?

 

[AllieBaba]

Yes, it's somebody else's fault that you aren't working.

Loser.

 

[rightwinger]

The lack of empathy for the unemployed in this thread stuns me, the article was spot on.

When things dont go your way or the way you would like it, create a class of victems. Nice job.

You just don't get it, by lining up all the unemployed people and chastizing them as worthless and as a burden, YOU are the one creating a whole new class of people.

You have to realize that you are part of a large pool of applicants looking for that job. The person filling that position is not looking to give out charity. He is looking for the best applicant with the best ability to fill the position. If you are unemployed and have exemplary qualifications, you will have a good chance of being hired. If your qualifications are no better than someone who is currently employed, you have a strike against you.

It might not be your fault, but you still have that strike

 

[rightwinger]

Yes, it's somebody else's fault that you aren't working.

Loser.

How Christian

 

[Midnight Marauder]

I just don't understand, I lost my job in Virginia because the company I worked for shut down, not because I did anything bad or had had issues, this kind of profiling is just as bad as racism, if you want to see if the person had issues I am sure the previous supervisor at the old job would be more than happy to tell you.

The bolded part of your quote there explains everything.

Back in the day when I was doing the hiring for companies I worked for, one of the ways I weeded down the number of applicants was their work history, and if they had been out of work for more than a couple of months, their application got filed away immediately. There were then and are now, far too many qualified applicants who don't have this big gap in their work history.

The entire purpose of hiring is to get the best available people who can come in and contribute right away. It's a competitive world, and having a two month-plus hole in your resume is really stupid.

"Discrimination" is a PC word thrown around very lightly, for we ALL "discriminate" all the time. When I was hiring, I would discriminate on qualifications, experience, education... Hell even spelling, punctuation, grammar, you name it.

If you're looking for a particular special person who fits into your operation instead of just a ant, you discriminate.

A two month gap in your resume is considered a big hole? really?

Yes it really is, when you have thousands of other applicants without any holes.

See? You really don't understand.

 

[High_Gravity]

The bolded part of your quote there explains everything.

Back in the day when I was doing the hiring for companies I worked for, one of the ways I weeded down the number of applicants was their work history, and if they had been out of work for more than a couple of months, their application got filed away immediately. There were then and are now, far too many qualified applicants who don't have this big gap in their work history.

The entire purpose of hiring is to get the best available people who can come in and contribute right away. It's a competitive world, and having a two month-plus hole in your resume is really stupid.

"Discrimination" is a PC word thrown around very lightly, for we ALL "discriminate" all the time. When I was hiring, I would discriminate on qualifications, experience, education... Hell even spelling, punctuation, grammar, you name it.

If you're looking for a particular special person who fits into your operation instead of just a ant, you discriminate.

A two month gap in your resume is considered a big hole? really?

Yes it really is, when you have thousands of other applicants without any holes.

See? You really don't understand.

I guess not, I'm just glad I have a job than.

 

[High_Gravity]

This message is hidden because AllieBaba is on your ignore list.

Ahh music to my ears.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

There's no law that could be passed to deal with this problem.

Midnight Marauder explained the problem rather well, I think.

It is safer to assume that anybody who has been unemployed a long time is not a good candidate ESPECIALLY when there are so many job applicants.

For some of us who have fallen off our careers paths, there is very little hope of climbing back on on that path.

ESPECIALLY if we are older.

Now there is a law against age descrimination, but there's a law that really has almost no effect on reality.

Employers are looking for the best employees and being OLDER doesn't help you case much.

What we think is our strength, our experience, is actually a THREAT to many potential employees.

They want young people that they don't have to REtrain.

And that's all depending upon what the job is. Is it hard physical labor, requiring endurance and stamina? Younger folks have an advantage there. Is it a job requiring maturity, mental balance and proven stability, but not too physical? Older folks have the advantage in that. It all depends on the job(s) you're trying to fill. I don't give a red rat's ass about gender, skin color, age, sexual orientation or religion, I DO care alot if the individual is going to fit into the program and be able to contribute.

I had to take the Wunderlic test several times. I always scored very high on it. It's by far the most discriminatory tool out there for potential employers. But guess what? It doesn't know if you're old, young, black, white, brown, blue or whatever. It doesn't know if you're male, female, transgendered, Gay, straight, whatever. And it doesn't care.

But it WILL find out a hell of a lot about you. About your psyche, intelligence, problem solving capability, ability to work with others, your integrity, you name it. BUT, it costs money to give this test, and I am sure as hell not going to spend any money on a applicant who hasn't worked in two months or more. I don't care the reason, I have 1000s of other applicants who haven't been on the fucking shelf for two months.

 

[Midnight Marauder]

A two month gap in your resume is considered a big hole? really?

Yes it really is, when you have thousands of other applicants without any holes.

See? You really don't understand.

I guess not, I'm just glad I have a job than.

Maybe someday when you get a job with some responsibility for hiring and firing decisions, with your own ass potentially on the line for the decisions you make, you will begin to understand this subject.