# Forcing the unemployed to work **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 3, 2011, 11:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309 "2011-08-03T11:30:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![gallan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ee59a6/32.png) [@gallan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gallan)\ **Post date:** [August 12, 2011, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/161 "2011-08-12T22:33:33Z")
> [@Great\_Antibob](#): > > But somehow, in your view, it’s the fault of the jobless, instead, for not having the gumption to find and land those jobs. No, that is not my view. I never once said, nor did I intend to imply, that it’s the fault of the jobless for not being able to find a job. My original suggestion (modified with my follow-up post) was for a program that would present the unemployed with a list of available jobs and \*require \*them to apply for and/or accept those jobs _before_ collecting their unemployment. I also never said, nor did I intend to imply, that the unemployed can’t find job because they’re lazy. As previously stated, I \*was \*unemployed, for eight months. And this suggestion actually came from how I would have liked my own experience with unemployment to have gone. There currently exists a requirement that people actively look for work and accept any job that is offered to them. My suggestion was to actually enforce that requirement. To spell it out, I don’t think that 42-year-old unemployed engineer isn’t applying for McDonald’s because he’s lazy. I think that some do apply for those jobs. And for the ones who don’t, it’s probably because they don’t believe they’ll get offered the job if they did apply, or any number of reasons really, including that perhaps a few of them (but certainly not the majority) are lazy. But regardless of the reason, I believe that a system that shifts the burden of unemployment from people looking for employers, to employers looking for people, would be beneficial for those who are beginning to feel defeated in their search for a job. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2011, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/162 "2011-08-13T16:22:39Z")
If there were enough jobs to provide employment for those on unemployment, there would be no unemployment. The fact is there are not enough jobs. It is not that people are lazy. It sure as hell is BS that the unemployed are rejecting jobs offered to them. We should force the unemployed to take jobs that do not exist. That is because if I have a job and they don’t, they are not trying hard enough. ---
**Author:** ![vivalostwages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d07c76/32.png) [@vivalostwages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vivalostwages)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2011, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/163 "2011-08-13T18:30:08Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > If there were enough jobs to provide employment for those on unemployment, there would be no unemployment. The fact is there are not enough jobs. It is not that people are lazy. It sure as hell is BS that the unemployed are rejecting jobs offered to them. > snip. Also, if a job is offered that pays far less than the unemployment does, there isn’t much point in taking that job. ---
**Author:** ![gallan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ee59a6/32.png) [@gallan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gallan)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2011, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/164 "2011-08-13T18:34:41Z")
Since you seem to be trying to peg me as somehow being anti-unemployed for wanting to get people jobs, let’s start with something we both agree on. > [@gonzomax](#): > > When a company says it is hiring… Ok, so you admit that there are some companies who are hiring. We both agree that there are _some_ jobs available. 12.5 million jobs? Of course not, but _some_ jobs. Why do you not want the jobless to get those jobs? Why do you seem so opposed to any idea that might actually connect the unemployed with the jobs that you and I both agree are available? Or perhaps you believe that our current unemployment system is already perfect and no improvement is necessary. Is that it? Our current method of connecting people with jobs is as good as it’s going to get? ---
**Author:** ![gallan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ee59a6/32.png) [@gallan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gallan)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2011, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/165 "2011-08-13T18:42:24Z")
> [@vivalostwages](#): > > Also, if a job is offered that pays far less than the unemployment does, there isn’t much point in taking that job. But they do anyway. If there’s one thing this thread has taught me it’s that every single unemployed person applies for every single job available and always accepts every job offer they get. And by the way, you hate the unemployed if you disagree. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2011, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/166 "2011-08-13T18:44:32Z")
> [@gallan](#): > > Ok, so you admit that there are some companies who are hiring. We both agree that there are _some_ jobs available. 12.5 million jobs? Of course not, but _some_ jobs. Why do you not want the jobless to get those jobs? Why do you seem so opposed to any idea that might actually connect the unemployed with the jobs that you and I both agree are available? Part of the problem is qualifications and relevance, too. Take me for example. If I get laid off on Monday, I will enter the unemployment queue with ten years of IT experience, more than half of it with the title “IT Director” attached. What POSSIBLE societal benefit is there for me to take a janitor or counter clerk job instead of spending those hours maintaining/improving my existing hard-won skill set? What POSSIBLE benefit to an employer to hire me out of the unemployment queue instead of a teenager or early college student who will stay there longer than the few months it would take me (on average) to find a new job? The idea of “you must take any job offered you” might help with some of the chronically unemployed, but it does no good at all to white-collar professionals OR the people you’d force to hire them. ---
**Author:** ![flag\_not\_set](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/848f3c/32.png) [@flag\_not\_set](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flag_not_set)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2011, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/167 "2011-08-13T18:52:40Z")
Just another one of those things that seemed like a good idea at first, until you thought it through. Except this is one of the ones that turned out to be a REALLY BAD idea. ---
**Author:** ![gallan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ee59a6/32.png) [@gallan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gallan)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2011, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/168 "2011-08-13T19:22:49Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > What POSSIBLE societal benefit is there for me to take a janitor or counter clerk job instead of spending those hours maintaining/improving my existing hard-won skill set? Yes! I agree. Replacing work with training makes sense. I’m not sure how it works elsewhere, but here in Oregon if you’re enrolled in a legitimate training program then the requirement to look for work is waived. > [@Zeriel](#): > > The idea of “you must take any job offered you” might help with some of the chronically unemployed, but it does no good at all to white-collar professionals OR the people you’d force to hire them. NEVER suggested forcing anyone to hire anyone. > [@flag\_not\_set](#): > > Just another one of those things that seemed like a good idea at first, until you thought it through. > > Except this is one of the ones that turned out to be a REALLY BAD idea. You’re right. Expecting people to actually read and understand my suggestion and respond with something other than sarcasm, hyperbole, rhetoric, and unfounded accusations most certainly turned out to be a REALLY BAD idea. ---
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2011, 7:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/169 "2011-08-13T19:53:29Z")
**Gallan** , it was not just your viewpoint people were responding to. Also, if some of us who’ve been unemployed recently seem a bit hypersensitive, well, we have some reason. No, YOU did not call us lazy, but it’s something we’re accused of _far_ too often. When you’re putting more hours in a week looking for work than you ever have actually working it is galling for someone to say “you’re just not trying hard enough”. This isn’t a “normal” situation. In the 1990’s getting a job wasn’t so difficult for _anyone_ - even “problem children” and felons could find work if they simply went out and looked, that’s why the unemployment rate was so low (it will never be zero, because there’s always a certain amount companies going under or laying off, people quitting for one reason or another, etc.) Now, though, there are ridiculous numbers of people apply for any job that opens (outside of the most specialized areas) but the “system” hasn’t adjusted, neither have the HR drones that all too often put roadblocks in the way of hiring, and far too many people would rather blame those left out in the cold than face up to the fact it is possible to do everything correctly and still not find a job in a timely manner. That’s just too damn scary, because it means THEY might be next. I am, personally, in favor of improving the connection between job-seekers and employee-seekers. There is a lot that could be done better. MY strong objection was not to your idea, but to the person who suggested coerced “volunteering” as a good idea somehow. ---
**Author:** ![flag\_not\_set](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/848f3c/32.png) [@flag\_not\_set](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flag_not_set)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2011, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/170 "2011-08-13T19:55:05Z")
I look at it from the standpoint of being impractical. The administrative overhead and cost of managing a program such as you suggest in any fashion, much less anything resembling fairness to the workers who might be enjoined in it, would be prohibitive if not absolutely out of the question. It might be fun to think about, but as always, the devil is in the details. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2011, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/171 "2011-08-13T19:58:24Z")
> [@gallan](#): > > NEVER suggested forcing anyone to hire anyone. Right, then…how, precisely, is that going to solve anything with (for example) your employer, which apparently has dozens of jobs open but cannot fill them in a work climate where the average job gets between 20 and 200 applicants? If you don’t force the employers to take qualified candidates in spite of misgivings about longevity, then your system has no teeth. If you do, then (as you said above) your system has no merit. Either way, it’s useless. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2011, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/172 "2011-08-13T21:05:45Z")
Back when Clinton was president, unemployment was around 4 percent. Funny how many people just decided to quit working. It was merely a coincidence that offshoring moved thousands of companies abroad. It is odd that the economy crash was perfectly timed with the people just not wanting to work any more. I guess they decided losing their homes was a new sport. That living in tent cities or cars, is preferable to working. Having no health insurance is a new casino game. ---
**Author:** ![Great\_Antibob](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e47c2d/32.png) [@Great\_Antibob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Great_Antibob)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2011, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/173 "2011-08-14T15:39:00Z")
> [@gallan](#): > > NEVER suggested forcing anyone to hire anyone. And that’s precisely the problem. Those jobs aren’t all empty because people refuse to take them. You don’t seem to get that point. Employers want some prerequisites. Beyond skills and qualifications, they also want to know a new employee will stick around past the initial training/introduction period long enough to provide a benefit to the bottom line. It costs money not just to have a position unfilled but to have to deal with all the necessary work in posting openings on job sites and accepting resumes/doing interviews. That’s why you’re not going to see a company hire an IT professional or a welder to push a broom. Or even to make copies and answer phones. Those folks will leave as soon as possible. Unless you force them to hire an available over-qualified person (and accept the costs associated with potentially losing them when the economy picks up), they’ll sit there with open positions until they get the type of person they want. Beyond that, it’s not a good long-term solution for the unemployed. It’s exactly the situation we’ve got at work. We get 50-100 resumes for each person we hire. Most are ostensibly qualified (they don’t even bother applying if not) but a direct interview reveals we don’t want to take most of them for whatever reason. In theory, any science/engineering graduate could be trained enough to perform our available jobs, but we don’t want a seat warmer. We want other qualities. So, those positions will stay empty until we find people we want, even if we offer those positions at half the usual salary to people we don’t particularly want. We’d take them if forced, but that’s a crappy way to solve an unemployment problem - forcing both employee and employer into a situation they don’t want. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2011, 6:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/174 "2011-08-14T18:06:07Z")
The real beauty is employers will not consider a person who is not working. That ends up with a shuffling of workers. The unemployed are not being considered . How do they get off unemployment with that hurdle in front of them. ---
**Author:** ![vivalostwages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d07c76/32.png) [@vivalostwages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vivalostwages)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2011, 11:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/175 "2011-08-14T23:38:46Z")
The L.A. Times just had an article today that articulate another issue: Many companies won’t hire because they don’t know how they’ll be doing within the next few months due to the economy, but if they don’t hire, the economy won’t improve much with more people out of work. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 14, 2011, 11:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/176 "2011-08-14T23:49:41Z")
Cutting back on taxes and Federal Programs will be a death spiral for the economy. Slashing agencies like the EPA will throw thousands into the streets. All the moves the Repubs are pushing are intended to dampen the economy and screw Obama. It is a dangerous game to play. A lot of people will be hurt if they get their way. We have a huge unemployment problem that the Repubs will make worse. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 15, 2011, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/177 "2011-08-15T00:02:16Z")
Unemployed people want jobs, not abuse. ---
**Author:** ![vivalostwages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d07c76/32.png) [@vivalostwages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vivalostwages)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2015, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/178 "2015-06-21T18:36:56Z")
> [@gallan](#): > > Sounds like they need more people at the unemployment office. I guess there IS work to be done. 😃 And it’s even worse now, worse than 2013: > **[California Is Cutting Jobs At Its Unemployment Office](https://www.businessinsider.com/california-cutting-jobs-at-employment-office-2013-8)** Only bringing this up again because things don’t seem to be improving in terms of unemployment insurance. In CA we’re lucky just to get 26 weeks of it. Some states don’t even offer that much. ---
**Author:** ![nearwildheaven](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/90db22/32.png) [@nearwildheaven](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/nearwildheaven)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2015, 7:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/179 "2015-06-21T19:25:34Z")
> [@Great\_Antibob](#): > > YMMV, but it’s already been made clear that such people are mostly uninterested in hiring say an out of work engineer with 30 years of experience or anybody else who might jump ship at the first opportunity. > > How many examples are there of people who would be willing to take low paying jobs but would never be hired? It happens every day. > > This can’t work one way. If you want to make people take any low-level or retail job out there, you have to force employers to take the first qualified applicant, even if there’s the risk that applicant will leave for a better paying job. > > Do you really think a McDonald’s is going to hire that 42 year old out of work architect to station a cash register? My parents own a small business, and, given the choice, they’d rather have the person who’s more likely to stick around a few years. > > But somehow, in your view, it’s the fault of the jobless, instead, for not having the gumption to find and land those jobs. I can’t begin to count the number of times I was told “You’re overqualified” by someone with full sleeve tats, enough body jewelry to set off a metal detector at 100 yards, and hair dyed a color that does not exist in nature. I’ve joked that maybe I should do some body modifications so I could find a job. Then I “hired myself” and solved that problem. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [June 21, 2015, 8:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309/180 "2015-06-21T20:02:35Z")
Since this thread has been resurrected, [Workfare](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Workfare_in_the_United_Kingdom) has been a disaster for the UK. It was essentially a subsidy to big businesses like supermarkets. > [@](#): > > An advert appeared on the Jobseekers’ Plus website in which Tesco sought permanent workers in exchange for expenses and jobseeker’s allowance. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/forcing-the-unemployed-to-work/591309.md?page=10)