PrintJune 17, 2010
Out of Work? Need Not Apply
A recent CNN report has revealed that companies and recruiters are openly communicating to unemployed workers they will not be considered for current job openings because they are unemployed.
The last thing someone who is unemployed needs to be told is that they shouldn't even apply for the limited number of job openings that are available. But some companies and recruiters are doing just that.Employment experts say they believe companies are increasingly interested only in applicants who already have a job."I think it is more prevalent than it used to be," said Rich Thompson, vice president of learning and performance for Adecco Group North America, the world's largest staffing firm. "I don't have hard numbers, but three out of the last four conversations I've had about openings, this requirement was brought up."
Being unemployed, especially if it's not the individual's fault, shouldn't carry such a negative stigma, and this sort of unfair treatment against a particular class of people -- in this case the unemployed -- is the textbook definition of discrimination. Furthermore, given that minorities are disproportionately impacted by the nation's high unemployment problem, I'm not sure why these businesses are not worried about getting sued.
Civil suits are not the only reason this is financially unintelligent.
If companies are only going to consider individuals who currently have a job, more often than not, to entice such a move, that employer is likely going to have to offer that individual more money than they are currently earning.
Wouldn't it make more sense to offer a qualified applicant who happens to be unemployed simply because "a raise" wouldn't have to be an incentive to convince that individual to accept the position?
But clearly sense doesn't reign supreme in this situation; employers are assuming that the only qualified applicants that exist are those who already have jobs.
Discriminating against the unemployed is an incredibly morally reprehensible practice, especially at a time when millions of Americans are depending on the federal government for food, shelter, and health care.
That's not exactly what we consider to be the "American Dream".
J.C. Arenas is a frequent contributor to American Thinker and welcomes your comments at jcarenas.com
To comment on this or any other American Thinker article or blog, you must be a subscriber to our ad-free service. Login to your subscription to access the comments section. You can subscribe on a monthly basis for $6.79 a month or for a year at $69.99
Login
Subscribe / Change PwdAd Free / Commenting Login
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- Trump-O-Phobia Drives Some Americans to Questionable Greener Pastures Overseas
- A Businessman and a Brilliant Strategist
- A Remarkable Headline for a Fascinating Story
- Democrats Unmask Themselves
- How Mexico Became China’s Trojan Horse in U.S. Trade
- Covid Redux: The Bird Flu Scare
- A Taste of the Swamp
- Do We Have 677 Unelected Presidents?
- Global Relations beyond the Prime Directive
- The Democrat Party: The Enemy Within?
Blog Posts
- Hills to Die On: Democrats know how to pick 'em
- Near-death experiences, reliance on oil, and more cataclysmic failures—it’s all just part and parcel of ‘green’ energy
- So where'd America's obesity epidemic come from? Chef Andrew Gruel has a theory ...
- Trump just fired a huge warning shot over Iran’s bow
- Markets respond: Trumpian peace in Russo-Ukrainian war is in the bag
- The time of the hoax
- New York Times goes bipolar on Trump’s border control success
- Mark Kelly decides to offload his Tesla to protest Elon Musk
- The half-million dollar American
- Three things for the U.S. to understand about the Middle East
- Speaker Mike Johnson reveals why the Autopen scandal is a big deal
- The CDC website really needs to update its COVID protocols
- Hands in your back pocket
- Birthright citizenship: The facts
- ‘She’s my little Musk coupe’