Yet another indignity for those currently out of work - job ads that say the unemployed need not apply.
I guess some human resources people really do have their heads up their asses.
Anyway here’s the story:
And to think, some people are actually blaming the unemployed for their plight.
Fuck 'em.
So a person is unemployed because they can’t get a job, but NOW they can’t get a job because they’re unemployed. Brilliant!
The magic hand of the free market doesn’t even bother to give a reach around.
An article from a management consultant advising employers to give preference to employed planners over the unemployed.
The unemployment rate in the built environment profession (architecture, planning, landscape architecture, etc) is astronomical now.
So falsify your resume so that you can get an interview. It’s all about getting your foot in the door. It’s not like employers never lie to potential employees.
Sadly, like Elmwood alludes to, far too many management morons are enamored of the idea of the “Superstar”. Part and parcel of this problem is the American idea that bad things only happen to people who deserve it, so clearly if you are unemployed, it is because you’re not as good as you think you are and you are not a ‘superstar’.
The best bit of Karma ever is for these people to spend a bit of time unemployed.
Back in 2003, after I’d been unemployed for about two years (but still had money), I met a guy at a Wiccan gathering (my wife’s friends) who was an IT consultant. When I said something about finding it difficult to get back into the field, the guy sniffed arrogantly and spoke down to me about how HE had never had any difficulty finding a job and how it must be ME.
About 6 months later, he lost his job. About four years later, I was gaming with some people who knew this man and found that he only just then managed to find another IT job. The mutual friends were not too happy with me when I laughed my ass off, told the story of our encounter and said “Karma is a bitch, ain’t it?”
I consider myself an ethical person and find it abhorrent to lie on my resume, even though I know “everyone does it.” But this is just such a completely shit attitude on companies’ parts, I think I’d be okay with it here. Granted, I’d like to think that even in this environment I’d have the luxury of ignoring those companies when sending out resumes, because someone who advertises that way is not someone I want to work for, but for someone unemployed for months that may not be an option.
Meh. I don’t see anything to get all worked up about. The employer just wants to narrow down the applicant pool. To do that, they are willing to forgo interviewing the brilliant folks who would be great in the job but are currently unemployed. If they don’t get enough good applicants, they will undoubtedly broaden the applicant pool, maybe by interviewing unemployed people.
If you are currently unemployed and would be able to apply for this job otherwise, then you simply don’t possess all of the criteria the employer is looking for, which I don’t think is something to get upset about. It’s the same thing as if they wanted someone with a particular certification or degree that you don’t have.
It’s just a new flavor of the old “how can you get experience if you can’t get a job, but experience is required before you can get a job” story.
I think it’s worse than that. This sounds like it is a genuine barrier to entry. I doubt very much that the types of companies that post these sorts of job advertisements have any trouble getting a pool of applicants to fill them. What I am curious about is whether or not the companies that get workers poached from them are hiring currently unemployed but qualified applicants. If they’re not, if they have the same policies, it’s an almost textbook case of collusion.
I don’t understand what you are saying. Are you saying that companies that run these ads are doing something illegal?
Umm… Some things you can fake on your resume and not take TOO great a risk of being discovered, but faking the fact that you are employed?! What do you say when they ask who you are currently working for?
I strongly disagree. A falsified resume can lead to problems down the road, including getting you fired if/when it is discovered.
Looks like you haven’t seen enough bad '80s sit-coms. Obviously, you have a friend who’s a stay-at-home mom install another phone line in her house, et voila–she’s your current supervisor. But then, this being a sit-com and all, she gets to talking with the prospective employer and gets hired instead of you.
hai gaise!
It’s Rand Rover.
inb4 everyone should be a tax lawyer!
inb4 some idiot completely mischaracterizes something I’ve said . . . oh wait, never mind.
Yup. Of course companies are free to act like complete assholes; it would be super if they refrained, though.
“Rifle-shoot” the employees you’re interested in? Could you sound douchey-er?
Vandelay Industries.
Not much of a risk if it is a job you would not have gotten otherwise, and once you are in, you have the opportunity to demonstrate your value. If they still want to fire you over the resume, then you are no worse of than you were before.
Your last employer; that’s what you would have the most knowledge about.
How well do they check? There is a famous, almost unbelievable, story about Al ‘Chainsaw’ Dunlap being hired as CEO at Sunbeam, and promptly engaging in accounting fraud, after omitting from his resume mention of his employment at Nitec, where he had earlier also committed accounting fraud.