# "The unemployed will not be considered" **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 6, 2010, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166 "2010-06-06T14:43:07Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2010, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/121 "2010-06-08T00:54:47Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > The easy answer is to apply the “What if everyone did that” principal, which is what allows stealing insignificant amounts from a business to be wrong. If every employer did this, then there would be no more new workers. This would be bad for society. Therefore it is immoral. That’s the thing; that can’t happen. In a growing economy with a shrinking unemployment rate, if everyone did that, there would be companies with no one left to hire. They would be forced to hire from the unemployed pool, and they would be the ones who didn’t do that. So now, everyone couldn’t do that. That’s why the problem isn’t as big as people are making it out to be. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2010, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/122 "2010-06-08T01:04:17Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Because thinking is bad for business? Huh? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2010, 3:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/123 "2010-06-08T03:19:00Z")
On fairness to **Rand Rover** Upon rereading it I misremembered and it wasn’t water-boarding. Just torturing a kid with forced urinating on himself, painful positions, forced boot lickings, freezing, and beatings. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2010, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/124 "2010-06-08T13:10:15Z")
> [@Canadjun](#): > > 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? Have a buddy be your “supervisor” for Acme Products Inc. Give yourself a job title, but don’t get too ridiculous. And be sure that your buddy doesn’t give you a glowing, flowery review. Nobody does that anymore. Just that, “Yes, he worked here from this date to that date, his job title was (your made up job title) and is eligible for rehire” ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2010, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/125 "2010-06-08T13:35:38Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > The thing about **Rand Rover** is he’s the kind of asshole that thinks it’s okay to torture kids, based on the recent waterboarding thread. > > This is small potatoes. If the kid had the sense to buy a gun, hide in the woods, and kill himself before being captured he wouldn’t have to worry about being waterboarded, would he? -Joe ---
**Author:** ![Merijeek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@Merijeek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Merijeek)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2010, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/126 "2010-06-08T13:42:59Z")
> [@fluiddruid](#): > > There’s no implied loyalty in an employer/employee relationship; it’s nothing at all like personal relationships. The employer will toss you out if it’s in their best interest; you leave if it’s in your best interest. That’s how it works. Really? When I was looking to leave my last job I had a talk with my lawyer and he specifically referred to the term “expectation of loyalty” as far as poaching their clients. Sounds like implied loyalty to me. -Joe ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2010, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/127 "2010-06-08T14:18:58Z")
> [@jtgain](#): > > Have a buddy be your “supervisor” for Acme Products Inc. Give yourself a job title, but don’t get too ridiculous. And be sure that your buddy doesn’t give you a glowing, flowery review. Nobody does that anymore. Just that, “Yes, he worked here from this date to that date, his job title was (your made up job title) and is eligible for rehire” Oh ghod. Look, folks-if a company is looking for “superstars” that are currently employed, they are definitely not going to fall for any of these cheap tricks. HR departments can easily find out if a business is legit, and if you ever worked for it. ---
**Author:** ![Duke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e8c25b/32.png) [@Duke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duke)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2010, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/128 "2010-06-08T14:21:56Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > HR departments can easily find out if a business is legit, and **if you ever worked for it**. Yes, for the first part, no for the second. Us researchers would love to know exactly where the Big Database of Who Works for Who is hiding. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2010, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/129 "2010-06-08T14:40:16Z")
> [@Duke](#): > > Yes, for the first part, no for the second. Us researchers would love to know exactly where the Big Database of Who Works for Who is hiding. Yup, it is sooo hard to find out who works for who. “Hi, can I speak to Bob Jones?” “I’m sorry, but we don’t have a Bob Jones here” “I guess I wrote down the wrong number. Thank you” ---
**Author:** ![Duke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e8c25b/32.png) [@Duke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duke)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2010, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/130 "2010-06-08T14:47:41Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Yup, it is sooo hard to find out who works for who. > > “Hi, can I speak to Bob Jones?” > “I’m sorry, but we don’t have a Bob Jones here” > “I guess I wrote down the wrong number. Thank you” Yeah, but multiply that by 27,000 people, like I have to do. Also, you have no guarantee that **jtgain** ’s ploy wouldn’t work in that situation. Also, nobody planning to poach an employee from a company would be stupid enough to try this. The conversation would actually go more like this: “Can I speak to Bob Jones?” “Who is calling?” “Uh, uh, a friend…” ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2010, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/131 "2010-06-08T15:02:37Z")
> [@Duke](#): > > Yeah, but multiply that by 27,000 people, like I have to do. > > Also, you have no guarantee that **jtgain** ’s ploy wouldn’t work in that situation. > > Also, nobody planning to poach an employee from a company would be stupid enough to try this. The conversation would actually go more like this: > > “Can I speak to Bob Jones?” > “Who is calling?” > “Uh, uh, a friend…” I actually talked to the HR department of the company I worked for yesterday. 1. They know the names of most of the legit companies out there, and if a new company name pops up they know how to check up on it. 2. They _never_ just take an applicant’s word as to who her/his current employer is, and they _will_ check to see if she/he works there. ---
**Author:** ![fluiddruid](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c2a13f/32.png) [@fluiddruid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fluiddruid)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2010, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/132 "2010-06-08T18:44:49Z")
> [@Merijeek](#): > > Really? When I was looking to leave my last job I had a talk with my lawyer and he specifically referred to the term “expectation of loyalty” as far as poaching their clients. > > Sounds like implied loyalty to me. That seems more like professional ethics to me, not company loyalty. We’re not talking about theft from a company, or misusing company resources – we’re talking about perception that employees are expected to be loyal to the company they work for by not leaving when a better position becomes available. This to me is ludicrous, when companies can and do fire or lay people off at their discretion. Only delusional people would expect an employee to choose to stay out of company loyalty when offered a better job and more money. Convenience, benefits, work/life balance concerns, maybe personal loyalty - perhaps. But nobody with any sense has company loyalty, as the company has no loyalty to them. As a parallel example: I worked for a company that railed on and on that employees needed to be flexible. Constant changes to work schedule? Be flexible! Twists and turns to the dress code cause you to buy all new clothes again? Be flexible! On the flip side, though, try asking for any company flexibility. Heck no. A doctor’s appointment? Better find one open on your day off. Oh, you need a specialist appointment two months from now? Sorry, someone else already asked for that day off in a department of 200 people so you can’t leave even for an hour. Pfft. People pointed out, rightly, that the company couldn’t expect to be completely unyielding towards the most minor of requests but expect you to reorder your life at a drop of a hat. Same difference. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2010, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/133 "2010-06-08T19:47:59Z")
> [@fluiddruid](#): > > That seems more like professional ethics to me, not company loyalty. We’re not talking about theft from a company, or misusing company resources – we’re talking about perception that employees are expected to be loyal to the company they work for by not leaving when a better position becomes available. This to me is ludicrous, when companies can and do fire or lay people off at their discretion. I think it is more a case of not using company proprietary information, such as customer lists, after you leave. Anyone saying that you shouldn’t poach customers out of loyalty should be asked if that no longer applies if the poacher got laid off. The answer to that should be amusing. When I worked for AT&T before the Trivestiture they no long even pretended that anyone had any obligation to anyone else. At this late date calls to loyalty are pretty clueless. ---
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2010, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/134 "2010-06-08T23:32:09Z")
> [@fluiddruid](#): > > Sorry, someone else already asked for that day off in a department of 200 people so you can’t leave even for an hour. Pfft. People pointed out, rightly, that the company couldn’t expect to be completely unyielding towards the most minor of requests but expect you to reorder your life at a drop of a hat. Same difference. Noticed that my entire career and thrown it back at them by pointing out how many times _I_ have been flexible vs. how few times I have asked them to be so, and how I will consider their response the next time they ask the same of me. Doesn’t always work, but if you’re the Go-To guy for flexibility like I usually am, it gets them thinking. The other part of this quote…ugh. I’ve worked for several companies with this scheduling crap. At the armored company, only ONE person could be on vacation at any given time, but if you totalled up all the vacation owed all the people, you came to almost two years of vacation per year. Which means that at best we could only take about half of our allotted vacation, and only then if we all carefully managed it so that we filled every single possible day of the year in doing so. Then the other side was that the people with the most seniority got priority, so forget ever taking a vacation day during the summer, because the top handful of guys had that booked solid with their multiple weeks of vacation. We raised holy hell at my current company over Saturdays (and I threatened to take it to corporate HR), because they scheduled an absolute minimum of people to cover that day, which meant that they were loath to authorize anyone to have the day off out of fear of having days like one day this spring when half the scheduled crew called in sick. So since we were basically unable to get a vacation day on a Saturday no matter what it was for, the result was that you basically took the time around that day off and then called in sick that day. Which then resulted in days like that one saturday, because people also tended to call in sick on Saturdays for a variety of other reasons, not the least being that they were sick of this shit about not being able to take any saturdays off. They have since scheduled more people on Saturdays, but it’s still not much better. ---
**Author:** ![Tapioca\_Dextrin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Tapioca\_Dextrin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tapioca_Dextrin)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2010, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/135 "2010-06-09T20:50:17Z")
I just got sent an ad for a job. > [@](#): > > you will have between 15 and 50 years experience of relevant experience … being based in the North of Norway, the envionment can be both harsh and beautiful so all candidates must be aware of this and have a keen interest in nature and the great out-doors. ---
**Author:** ![digs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/digs/32/14889_2.png) [@digs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/digs)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/136 "2010-06-10T17:13:48Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > I actually talked to the HR department of the company I worked for yesterday. > > 1. They know the names of most of the legit companies out there, and if a new company name pops up they know how to check up on it. > 2. They _never_ just take an applicant’s word as to who her/his current employer is, and they _will_ check to see if she/he works there. > 3. Hi-yo Pal Wait… they’ve heard of Vandelay Industries? And they know it’s not a major importer AND exporter? Great! Now I have to break into a number of office buildings, jimmy the locks on the HR file cabinets and replace my resume… like I have time to do that. Sheesh! ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 5:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/137 "2010-06-10T17:44:49Z")
> [@fluiddruid](#): > > That seems more like professional ethics to me, not company loyalty. We’re not talking about theft from a company, or misusing company resources – we’re talking about perception that employees are expected to be loyal to the company they work for by not leaving when a better position becomes available. This to me is ludicrous, when companies can and do fire or lay people off at their discretion. Only delusional people would expect an employee to choose to stay out of company loyalty when offered a better job and more money. Convenience, benefits, work/life balance concerns, maybe personal loyalty - perhaps. But nobody with any sense has company loyalty, as the company has no loyalty to them. > > As a parallel example: I worked for a company that railed on and on that employees needed to be flexible. Constant changes to work schedule? Be flexible! Twists and turns to the dress code cause you to buy all new clothes again? Be flexible! On the flip side, though, try asking for any company flexibility. Heck no. A doctor’s appointment? Better find one open on your day off. Oh, you need a specialist appointment two months from now? Sorry, someone else already asked for that day off in a department of 200 people so you can’t leave even for an hour. Pfft. People pointed out, rightly, that the company couldn’t expect to be completely unyielding towards the most minor of requests but expect you to reorder your life at a drop of a hat. Same difference. Yes, what kind of naive idiot thinks the term “expectation of loyalty” has anything to do with “loyalty”? Duh! ---
**Author:** ![joebuck20](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/74df32/32.png) [@joebuck20](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joebuck20)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/138 "2010-06-10T18:49:00Z")
> [@digs](#): > > Wait… they’ve heard of Vandelay Industries? And they know it’s not a major importer AND exporter? I thought they were a latex manufacturer. ---
**Author:** ![digs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/digs/32/14889_2.png) [@digs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/digs)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2010, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/139 "2010-06-10T22:37:38Z")
_“And YOU want to be my latex salesman!”_ ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2010, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166/140 "2010-06-11T16:54:42Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Oh ghod. > Look, folks-if a company is looking for “superstars” that are currently employed, they are definitely not going to fall for any of these cheap tricks. HR departments can easily find out if a business is legit, and if you ever worked for it. Sure, if you are trying to be a CEO or a Justice on the Supreme Court, you will be found out. Most jobs don’t do any more than call. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-unemployed-will-not-be-considered/542166.md?page=8)