# US employers looking down on the unemployed and those taking assistance **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [February 13, 2011, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182 "2011-02-13T02:18:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Chimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/8e8cbc/32.png) [@Chimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chimera)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2011, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/21 "2011-02-13T15:42:42Z")
I’ll tell you a little story or two; Back in 2003 I had been unemployed for a while, mostly by choice, but was trying to get back into the IT field. My skills were outdated and I was running into a whole lot of “since you haven’t been working lately, we’re not interested in you”. I went to a gathering with my wife, meeting all the people in that group for the first time. I was introduced to someone with the same first name, who also worked IT. People expected us to get on famously. I said something about having a hard time getting back into the field. He sniffed at me, turned away and said that he had NEVER had an issue getting a job and it had to be me. Then he walked away, leaving me, my wife, and several bystanders thunderstruck. A few months later, he was laid off. A few years later, I was divorced and had no contact with that group, but was gaming with some other people who knew the guy in question. They allowed as he had FINALLY got another IT job after not being able to for three years. Karma is a bitch, I said. Part of the problem is that companies promote a lot of “fast track” managers and push people forward when they are in their 20’s and have a relatively short life experience with the work force. They haven’t been through this kind of thing before, so they think “I’ve had no problem working, so something must be wrong with them”. They also have a very hard time hiring people who are older then them, or who have a lot more experience in the field, both for that first thought, and due to personal insecurities. Thinking that person is not going to respect their authority and leadership, or will show them up. In a way, it’s kinda like the woman I used to know who thought I was damaged goods when I was single, but the moment I got married, I was perfectly ok. Unemployed? Something wrong with you. Employed? All good. ---
**Author:** ![joebuck20](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/74df32/32.png) [@joebuck20](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joebuck20)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2011, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/22 "2011-02-13T17:07:49Z")
> [@Omerta](#): > > We do get burnt out after awhile. The new hires coming through the door are told what the hours are going to be before they start. We run a training class for 3 days before they even hit the floor. If we have 5 people in class you can almost guarantee at least 2 will not make it the 3 days. They simply don’t show back up. A lot of this IMO has to do with work ethic. Some just out of high school that never had to work, and others that say they have been out of work for awhile and their benefits are about to run out. We don’t ask about benefits at interviews. There is only so much what you can ask due to laws. But you would be amazed what people will tell you when sitting face to face with each other. There are ways to get people to give up information without even saying a word. > > My answer to your question is no. Where I work we will hire as long as the drug screen, aptitude test, and background check is passed. Let me ask this question… Say you owned a business and you had 20 applicants for one job opening. Which person would you pick for the job? Would you pick a person cause they are unemployed or would you pick the best qualified person for the job? Not defending someone who would quit after only three days, but if you’re desperate for a job and someone tells you’re going to have to put in 68 hour work weeks, you’d probably just go “fine, when do I start.” You’re not really thinking about getting burnt out. And frankly 68 hours a week probably looks pretty good after an extended period of working zero hours a week. You figure you’d probably be making pretty good overtime (I’m assuming the jobs you’re talking about are hourly and salaried positions). Again I can’t make a proper judgement call as I don’t know what all your job entails. Maybe you really are getting a bunch of lazy assholes applying (I’ve worked at a few places over the years where that was certainly the case). But once you start working those six days a week, those 12 hours a day, I can see how a lot of people would tire out. ---
**Author:** ![Omerta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Omerta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omerta)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2011, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/23 "2011-02-13T17:39:08Z")
> [@joebuck20](#): > > Not defending someone who would quit after only three days, but if you’re desperate for a job and someone tells you’re going to have to put in 68 hour work weeks, you’d probably just go “fine, when do I start.” You’re not really thinking about getting burnt out. And frankly 68 hours a week probably looks pretty good after an extended period of working zero hours a week. You figure you’d probably be making pretty good overtime (I’m assuming the jobs you’re talking about are hourly and salaried positions). > > Again I can’t make a proper judgement call as I don’t know what all your job entails. Maybe you really are getting a bunch of lazy assholes applying (I’ve worked at a few places over the years where that was certainly the case). But once you start working those six days a week, those 12 hours a day, I can see how a lot of people would tire out. It’s hourly based. We make bolts for the car manufactures. We are a Tier 1, 2, and 3 supplier. The hours are a blessing and a curse. I think it goes back to do you want a job or do you need a job. Putting the wants in front of the needs seems to be the way things are going. This is just what I have witnessed at my job, not to say this is whats going on around the country. ---
**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:** [February 13, 2011, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/24 "2011-02-13T18:05:42Z")
> [@Nobody](#): > > If people are working 66 to 68 hours per week it seems natural to me that a lot of them are going to burn out after a while. But I guess as long as there’s enough new people to hire every couple of months then I guess it’s worth it to management to keep the high number of hours. > > But as for not wanting to hire unemployed people, I’m not sure how to ask this question, but I’ll try. > > For a lot of people the unemployment rate is a problem. Especially for us that are unemployed. And it seems to be a big political issue, at least to some extent. But if managers don’t want to hire the unemployed, does that mean that they don’t see it as a problem? I guess what I’m trying to say is that it seems to me if we want to get the unemployment rate down, companies should simply hire unemployed people. Yet they mostly seem to be hiring people who have jobs. So does this mean that either they don’t think there is a problem, or that the problem doesn’t effect them, so they really don’t care? Is the unemployment problem, only a problem to those of us who aren’t in management? You seem to think that employers should care about the unemployment rate and should work to reduce it. I find that kind of odd. It’s axiomatic that an employer is going to care about their own business more than the unemployment rate. Allow me to illustrate: let’s say you are in the market for a widget, and your research shows that widgets cost about $20. Now, you start talking to a widget manufacturer, and he tells you about the rough times in his industry and how he’s making much less than he used to, and for that reason he asks you to pay $50 for a widget. Would you pay $50? Why or why not? ---
**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:** [February 13, 2011, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/25 "2011-02-13T18:31:48Z")
If \*every \*widget maker was having hard times and they ALL upped the price to $50 you’d pay $50 each or you wouldn’t have any widgets. ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2011, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/26 "2011-02-13T19:36:59Z")
> [@Omerta](#): > > Let me ask this question… Say you owned a business and you had 20 applicants for one job opening. Which person would you pick for the job? Would you pick a person cause they are unemployed or would you pick the best qualified person for the job? My point is, of the 20 there might be some who are qualified AND unemployed, but a lot of employers dismiss the unemployed candidates regardless of their qualifications. If I was a hiring manager and I had two or more qualified candidates, then I probably would choose one who’s unemployed. ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2011, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/27 "2011-02-13T19:44:20Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > You seem to think that employers should care about the unemployment rate and should work to reduce it. I find that kind of odd. It’s axiomatic that an employer is going to care about their own business more than the unemployment rate. > > Allow me to illustrate: let’s say you are in the market for a widget, and your research shows that widgets cost about $20. Now, you start talking to a widget manufacturer, and he tells you about the rough times in his industry and how he’s making much less than he used to, and for that reason he asks you to pay $50 for a widget. Would you pay $50? Why or why not? First, what **Broomstick** said. Second, as I mentioned previously, unemployed people aren’t even given a chance. We may be qualified, we may not be. But a lot of employers won’t get past the unemployed status to find out. ---
**Author:** ![Dangerosa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/22d042/32.png) [@Dangerosa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dangerosa)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2011, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/28 "2011-02-13T20:00:46Z")
> [@Nobody](#): > > First, what **Broomstick** said. > > Second, as I mentioned previously, unemployed people aren’t even given a chance. We may be qualified, we may not be. But a lot of employers won’t get past the unemployed status to find out. But honestly, and this sounds harsh, that’s your problem, not theirs. They have qualified applicants who have shown that they can hold a job through tough times. They are weighting that higher than people who haven’t done that. That is a logical thing to do when they have plenty of applicants to pick from. When the labor market is tight, they don’t usually have that choice. ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2011, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/29 "2011-02-13T20:25:17Z")
So I guess that answers my question. The high unemployment rate isn’t a problem for businesses. ---
**Author:** ![Omerta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Omerta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omerta)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2011, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/30 "2011-02-13T20:45:38Z")
> [@Nobody](#): > > First, what **Broomstick** said. > > Second, as I mentioned previously, unemployed people aren’t even given a chance. We may be qualified, we may not be. But a lot of employers won’t get past the unemployed status to find out. Just out of curiosity, where are you getting that a lot of employers are not giving the unemployed a chance? ---
**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:** [February 13, 2011, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/31 "2011-02-13T21:15:02Z")
> [@Broomstick](#): > > If \*every \*widget maker was having hard times and they ALL upped the price to $50 you’d pay $50 each or you wouldn’t have any widgets. You’re missing my point. I’m saying that an employer wouldn’t hire someone they view as inferior anymore than Ýoud pay over twice the market rate for a widget. IOW, you expect employers to do something you’d never do yourself. ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2011, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/32 "2011-02-13T21:22:52Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > You’re missing my point. I’m saying that an employer wouldn’t hire someone they view as inferior anymore than Ýoud pay over twice the market rate for a widget. IOW, you expect employers to do something you’d never do yourself. You don’t understand me at all. I’m saying that somebody who is unemployed doesn’t automatically make them inferior. ---
**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:** [February 13, 2011, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/33 "2011-02-13T21:27:53Z")
I understand that. But many employers apparently view them as inferior, which is why they don’t want them to apply. ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2011, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/34 "2011-02-13T21:29:08Z")
> [@Omerta](#): > > Just out of curiosity, where are you getting that a lot of employers are not giving the unemployed a chance? [cite](http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/employment/2011-01-23-longterm-unemployed_N.htm) [cite](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/04/disturbing-job-ads-the-un_n_600665.html) [cite](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/03/employers-wont-hire-the-u_n_791710.html) ---
**Author:** ![Nobody](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/94ad74/32.png) [@Nobody](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nobody)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2011, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/35 "2011-02-13T21:35:43Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > I understand that. But many employers apparently view them as inferior, which is why they don’t want them to apply. My overall point was this. From what I’ve been hearing on the news, even though the recession is officially over our economy is still really bad off. A big part of this reason, I thought, was because of the high unemployment rate. I thought the bad economy was affecting individuals and businesses alike negatively. And I also thought that in order to get a better economy for all of us, getting down the unemployment rate would be a big step. So it would seem logical for businesses to hire the unemployed because they would be helping themselves. But apparently businesses are doing just fine in this crappy economy. And if paying an extra $30 per widget would help the economy, and I could afford it, then I would pay the extra money. ---
**Author:** ![CrazyCatLady](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/dfb087/32.png) [@CrazyCatLady](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CrazyCatLady)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2011, 9:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/36 "2011-02-13T21:35:48Z")
> [@Omerta](#): > > I think it goes back to do you want a job or do you need a job. Putting the wants in front of the needs seems to be the way things are going. I want a job. I also want a life outside of said job. If I _needed_ a job, I’d be willing to do sacrifice the outside life if that’s what it took. But I don’t, I merely _want_ one, so I can be a lot more finicky. ---
**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:** [February 13, 2011, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/37 "2011-02-13T21:42:35Z")
No one is interested in hurting themselves to “get a better economy for all of us.” It’s that simple. If you truly would pay $50 in the widget example, then I have a proposition for you: I have a way to make the economy better for all of us, and the first step is for you to send me $1,000 through paypal. So when can I expect payment? ---
**Author:** ![Omerta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Omerta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omerta)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2011, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/38 "2011-02-13T21:51:58Z")
> [@Nobody](#): > > [cite](http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/employment/2011-01-23-longterm-unemployed_N.htm) [cite](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/06/04/disturbing-job-ads-the-un_n_600665.html) [cite](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/03/employers-wont-hire-the-u_n_791710.html) Thanks for the links. Wasn’t sure if it was from personnel expierence or what you read. ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2011, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/39 "2011-02-13T21:57:48Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > No one is interested in hurting themselves to “get a better economy for all of us.” It’s that simple. > > If you truly would pay $50 in the widget example, then I have a proposition for you: I have a way to make the economy better for all of us, and the first step is for you to send me $1,000 through paypal. So when can I expect payment? You have money, create some jobs with it. If tax breaks are given, the money will be used to create jobs. That’s what we keep hearing. ---
**Author:** ![Omerta](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/eb9ed0/32.png) [@Omerta](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omerta)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2011, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182/40 "2011-02-13T22:17:00Z")
> [@CrazyCatLady](#): > > I want a job. I also want a life outside of said job. If I _needed_ a job, I’d be willing to do sacrifice the outside life if that’s what it took. But I don’t, I merely _want_ one, so I can be a lot more finicky. That is a choice I don’t have. More power to you. Your statement pretty much sums up the problem that the unemployed are having. Being finicky now will cost you later when the want evolves into a need. If you quit a job cause the hours are too long or you just don’t like the job then the person who interviews you for the job you need is going to take that into account. They don’t care why you didn’t want or why you couldn’t work the hours, or why you didn’t like the job. All they see is someone who is a liability to walk. Not saying this is how you are, or am I bashing you at all. Just my opinion. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/us-employers-looking-down-on-the-unemployed-and-those-taking-assistance/571182.md?page=3)