Forum Post: Ending discrimination against the unemployed
Posted 13 years ago on Oct. 19, 2011, 3:28 p.m. EST by Windsofchange
(1044)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
UPDATE We need to back Scott Stringer (Mannhattan Borough President) as he lobbies for state and city laws putting an end to discrimination of the unemployed. These laws would end overt discrimination against the unemployed. Please consider protesting in front of city council in support of new laws that protect the unemployed from this blantent discrimination.*
The practice of companies discriminating against unemployed people has gotten out of control in this country. These companies have even put it in their classified ads "Unemployed persons need not apply." This means anyone unemployed for any length of time cannot apply to these job ads.
President Obama has spoken out against it, and even had it put in his Job Bill that recently got shot down in Congress. If the Job Bill passed it would have made it unlawful for companies with 15 or more employees to discriminate against a person because of their unemployed status. It would also give them to right to sue a company that did so. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/27/us/politics/obama-proposes-adding-unemployed-to-protected-status.html
If we can't get a law(s) passed on a Federal level making unemployed people a protective class who cannot be discriminated against, then we must have it done on a state level. New Jersey has done this making it unlawful for companies to place job ads in the newspapers or online that discriminate against the unemployed. Any company who violates this law will be hit with fines that will increase for repeat offenders. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/25/new-jersey-bans-unemployed-job-discrimination_n_853513.html
The reason why companies have been embracing this unfair practice because they believe that any employee worth keeping would not have been laid off in the first place. This erroneous belief is shutting the door in the face on many who seek gainful employment, and have joined the ranks of the unemployed through no fault of their own as their employees were only making business decisions based on the bottom dollar and not on the employees contribution or performance to/in the company. I believe that as long as they(unemployed job applicants) have the experience, knowledge and skills that is suitable for the job advertised--then they should be considered for the job regardless of their unemployed status.
I think that if OWS also added this to their agenda it would help get more states to get on board and do the right thing, and to get an overall Federal law passed. The pressure needs to be put on for this to be done. What this discriminative practice is doing is creating a class of permanent unemployed people who are marginalized because of their present unemployed status. It has and will continue to put a huge strain on Government programs such as welfare and food stamps. These people rather work and not have to rely on these programs. We must unite against this unfair practice.
* I like to add to this that any laws passed would help squash overt discrimination against the unemployed (e.g. those job ads in the newspapers and online.) Someone on this post mentioned how it would be hard enforcing these laws. I agree that outside of overt discrimination it is not easy to prove. However, I believe that their should be watchdog groups that audit companies and see that there is no discriminating hiring practices. IF someone had a job candidate who was a perfect fit for the job (but was unemployed), the company needs to explain why they did not hire and fines would follow if they really did discriminate. Highly qualified unemployed people should be hired over those who presently have a job. This would be enforced to help chip away about our high unemployment numbers.
Please feel free to share your thoughts on this subject. This b.s. needs to end. I just can't believe that this goes on. Talk about adding insult to injury!**
Employers are also discriminating against those who have bad credit ratings; e.g., those who lost their homes to foreclosure or can't pay their student loans. In other words, employers are kicking people who are down and out in the teeth when they try to get back on their feet.
I totally agree with your argument. It's actually very a big reason why unemployment stays up so high. Worse still, that employers prefer to hire people already hired. When they do that, a job will stay vacant for weeks until replaced. Times that by thousands of jobs all over America and you got a huge number of vacant jobs. I think a solution would be that all federal and state agencies make it a practice that if two candidates are nearly identical, they hire the one who has been off work the longest time. Hopefully, the private industry would understand it's better for the economy and America to hire an unemployed person over someone already working and that attitude would change.
This is a hard truth. There are small people out there that won't hire someone who has been out of a job for some time. The problem is that you can not legislate ethics or morality. No matter what the law says they will find a way around it. for example... I take your resume...see you are not currently employed...hire someone who is and say they were more qualified for any number of reasons I can make up.... same result different approach...
I'm not sure how you fix this....
Right, I first saw this practice a few years ago and my jaw literally dropped. It was necessary to be employed in order to apply. It seemed crazy but only took me the next second to see the fear leading to the discriminatory actions of those employers. Talk about a slap in the face for the unemployed. Unbelievable how fearful and idiotic we can be sometimes. I swear, it's embarrassing to be human sometimes.
I understand why an employer would consider doing this, but it's the epitome of throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Especially given the economy right now, a) unemployment is hardly a reflection on one's performance when you have almost one in ten out of work and b) where are the unemployed supposed to get jobs, then? If nobody will hire them then they wind up as a permanent underclass.
Would anyone else like to comment to this thread? I am listening.
Momcalled, let's be realistic here. The unemployment numbers are being kept high by these employers who REFUSE to HIRE QUALIFIED JOB SEEKERS on the basis that they are presently UNEMPLOYED. I don't see how this law would be a bad thing. Could you elaborate why you are against it?
It would only help our economy to get people back on their feet, especially highly skilled and experienced individuals who could contribute alot to our workforce. I just don't get anyone who is against this--makes no sense to me.
Skander, I was looking at this from another angle. But yes, women who left the workforce to raise children should not be discriminated against. It is just wrong, and considering that most middle class families need both parents to work (two incomes); it is really hurting families through out this country. It is making these households poorer all because employers look down on women who leave the workforce to raise their children. Gee, good to know these companies support family values--NOT! For shame!!!
Enough, isn't it a cruel and vicious cycle? It is a sad fact that people who were laid off and out of work for sometime (which resulted in financial hardship) were and still are discriminated against. These people could have had a FICO score over 800 before they lost their job, and having lost their job and being unemployed for sometime end up with a FICO score in the 500's.
I especially feel bad for those people who could not sell their house because of a bad housing market (and banks that were stingy with giving mortgages out). I feel bad for anyone who ended up foreclosing on their home and were judged harshly by a perspective employer who should know that this is not due to the applicant's financial recklessness, but by the economic state of this country that has bankrupt many (and W.S. greed). I speak only for the real victims of this economy and not anyone who did indeed behave foolishly and brought foreclosure and bankruptcy upon themselves.
Anyway, thank you for pointing that out. Just another reason to discriminate without giving a person a chance to prove themselves. Sad--just sad!
Skander, right on! These discriminative practices committed by employers are hurting our economy and keeping our unemployment numbers up. Also, yes qualified unemployed people should be considered for a job over another applicant who already has a job.
Thanks for pointing out the increased discrimination mothers face in today's workforce. They really need to crack down on lay offs/terminations that are really an act of retaliation against women for having babies. No woman needs to come back from maternity leave and find out that her job responsibilities have been permanently taken away from her, her hours reduced, and she is being set up to be fired. Thank you for bringing up these points.
In addition this practice is extremely discriminatory against women who leave the workforce to have children.
ARod, I know that beside my previous point mentioned in regards to why companies discriminate against unemployed people; it is also believed that unemployed individual are not on top of their game (rusty) and out of the loop (not abreast on what is going on in the industry they worked in). However, I like to point out a situation two of my friends have found themselves in when many in their department were laid off in order for the company to save money. Both of these hard-working individuals are now taking on the responsibilities of the laid off employees and they are completely overwhelmed, overworked, and heading for a complete brown-out. Does there employer realize that no matter how hard-working, skilled and talented their employees are when they are taking on the responsibilities of their former co-wrokers-- it is only going to increase their employee's stress levels and led to mistakes and poor job performance. My friends, having survived a few rounds of lay offs already and are deadly afraid of taking any time away from work as this could lead to their own job loss. Is this going to become the new norm in many companies? Dwindling staff down to a skeleton crew and overworking employees to death?
Yes, companies need to realize that they are doing a great disservice to this country and our economy by being bias in their hiring practices when it comes to the unemployed. They are creating an underclass of permanently unemployed people who have to rely on the Government safety net programs (and we all know that they won't last forever, especially when there is a large population of people relying on these programs.) If this continues we will start seeing a new level of poverty that this country has not seen before. This will be the plight of this new permanently unemployed class of people. How tragic!
Yes, Chicago T I know what you mean. Right now there are protective classes being discriminated against in the workforce, and it is very difficult to sue them because it is done in such a sneaky manner. Those laws combat overt discrimination only. We have to have laws on the books making unemployed people a protective class at the very least to end this overt discrimination. Remember, back many years ago there were signs in store windows that stated "Irish need not apply." Look at how far they came. Look at everyone who were discriminated against in the past and the b.s. they had to put up with.
I also believe that their needs to be watchdog groups holding companies accountable to the law (if it ever passes). Discriminated people can report all unlawful acts to these watch dog groups. These Companies' hiring practices need to be audited and if they have not hired unemployed persons (particularly highly-qualified unemployed individuals who were a perfect match for the job), then they need to be scrutinized and eventually fined. Phone/fax records, as well as emails can prove that the unemployed individual indeed applied for the job (so this can stop companies from lying and saying that they never received a resume nor interviewed the person.) Alright, I will stop now. I may have gone too far here. But I strongly believe that overt discrimination needs to be demolished right now.
Cindy, my sentiments exactly! Just unreal that this is allowed to go on. It truly is a huge slap in the face for the unemployed. I really hope that they start passing laws to combat this awful practice. If this keeps going on (and more and more companies are embracing it) it will look like the Great Depression out there. We will have lines (blocks long) for soup kitchens. It just scary to think about.