We all know that refusing to hire someone for being female, brown, old, Muslim, disabled, or gay is a one-way ticket to the wrong side of a courtroom, and any employer who does discriminate is likely to be held accountable. But what about employers who say not to bother applying for their openings if you don’t already have a job?
Recently, several companies posted openings on Monster.com and other job sites, which specifically stated that the unemployed need not apply. A brouhaha ensued, petitions were signed, and the Internet blew up, but Monster still refused to ban the offending employers. Discriminating against job candidates who are not currently working is legal in every state but New Jersey.
President Obama, as part of the American Jobs Act, is seeking to make discrimination against the unemployed illegal. If employers feel that workers currently in the field are a better risk, they should be allowed to only consider those already working. So who’s right?
Why it’s even an issue
America is in the crapper, economically speaking. Long-term joblessness is higher than it’s been in decades, and more people now fall below the poverty line than at any other time since the government started keeping track. Thanks to the meltdown of the financial sector and the crash of the housing market, record numbers of employable people have been unable to find jobs—not because they are unskilled, uneducated, or poor workers, but because of factors out of their control.
However, employers—such as Sony Ericsson, who told applicants that “no unemployed candidates would be considered at all” when hiring at their new headquarters in Atlanta—claim that long-term unemployment equals out-of-date skills and knowledge, which is a legitimate negative in a job candidate. There is also an unspoken attitude among companies that the unemployed must be that way for a reason—they weren’t the best workers to begin with or they are simply lazy. The fact is, it’s always been easier to get hired when you’re currently employed, but never before has it been a clearly-stated requirement, nor has it had such a devastating impact.
What kind of discrimination is it, really?
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, black, Latino, disabled, and older workers make up a significantly larger percentage of unemployed than other groups, which gives the practice of straight up excluding the unemployed the distinct flavor of illegal discrimination. Civil rights groups point out that already-marginalized sectors of the population are being disproportionately penalized by the practice of refusing to consider candidates who aren’t currently working, and that policies preventing unemployment discrimination are needed to extend the protections those sectors have already been granted.
Why it’s different this time
President Obama’s reasoning for pushing a ban on unemployment discrimination is that it “makes absolutely no sense” to disallow unemployed applicants given the horrendous, ongoing economic recession and the fact that most of the unemployed have found themselves that way through no fault of their own. He points out that, in a stronger economy, many of those who are currently jobless would have been readily hired by the firms who are now telling them they need not apply. Shutting out workers is not only grossly unfair, but could worsen the economy and, as Time magazine points out, threaten to “condemn millions of Americans to permanent underclass status.”
Why it’s not going to pass
Regardless of human fairness and decency, or the negative impact on growing numbers of American workers, it’s unlikely that a ban on unemployment discrimination will ever make it through the current Republican Congress. Because of that, those who are unemployed and want to work might consider ways in which they can fill in those holes in their resumés, by volunteering, going back to school, or taking a lame job in the interim. Ideally, your best bet is not to lose your job to begin with—something that, unfortunately, may not be within your control.
28 comments
beth
comcast application asks if you are over 40. isn't that illegal?
beth
I have applied to many lame jobs and have not been hired. I am not able to get any kind of job so far that is. this country should be ashamed of itself. we are not God fearing or this would not happen.
Will Unemployment Benefits Be Extended Forever? | Naked Law by Avvo.com
[...] ever tried to get a job when you aren’t currently working elsewhere, you know that can be the kiss of death for many employers. The longer you’re out of your field, the more your skills erode. In the current job climate, [...]
Jeanne Weiske
Just what "human fairness and decency" are they talking about. Certainly not in corporate America, nor anywhere else that I've seen lately. Neighborhoods are non-existant. People watch someones home burn, and turn away the victims when they ask for shelter, as happened to me. I see no good in this country anymore, just ignorance and bigotry.
JPC
I thought the idea of not hiring people that aren't working was ridiculous!! Why is there so much unemployment, ok, downsizing is the biggest reason for unemployment, over 40 your not what their looking for, a family member is seriously ill and you had to be caretaker, what about the woman who has had children and wants to enter back into the workforce. Or the people who's finances have changed due to illness? Isn't THAT discriminating and downright insulting!! any excuse will do. So why is there high unemployment, DUH! My husband was 'downsized after working 18 years for a company, and after getting those 18 years, he was tossed aside and other companies said at 47 he was too 'old'. so what do u do?! With Careerlink and other programs like it, the 'unemployed' are kept updated. So why should someone who has a job be considered before the person who isn't?! Everyone has bills, needs to live etc., and then u get people who say 'get a job'. How? So unemployed people don't deserve jobs and are not smart and are perceived as dreggs of society now?! Gee how did they get unemployed? The economy! Now they are looking for excuses to hire people that are 20something, and won't look for much money. When u hire the 'employed' they are looking for more money and the unemployed will never be employed. That is a pathetic circle! Lets keep finding reasons to discriminate and put our people trying to survive further down in the hole where no one will help them. Family or no family people need to live. Discriminating against what has happened in your life, (with criminality a different story and thats a case by case basis), should not be a basis for discrimination. Then to have the nerve to say no one wants to work! Its another excuse to send jobs overseas! When did our people become the last thing on the list of things. We put people in office, and we can take them OUT! But they will get a nice chunk of change as pension etc. And the everyday people are screwed again! Make a law not to discriminate against people who have lived a life of challenges and survived!
Don S.
The largest form of discrimination in the workforce is not hiring people over 50. Yet we have had age discrimination laws on the books for decades. Why does anyone think that an anti-discrimination law for unemployed people will make any difference? It may stop companies from advertising that they don't employ people who are unemployed, but that won't change their hiring policies. This is just an exercise in futility that, at best, give the unemployed false hope.
Lanayf
I totally agree Don, just say if the bill passes, the employers will still overlook the unemployed, they just won't advertise it. So we're damned if they pass the bill and damned if they don't.
JPC
You are right. They have and always will get away with discrimination, as long as they don't verbally state it. Over 50, heck even over 40 and they still won't hire. Its pathetic and they will get away with it again and again. Then companys have the nerve to say people are lazy. Its disheartening all the way around. :(
Jen
People who are unemployed have to seek work or lose their benefits when benefits run out they go to welfare IF they qualify. Anymore if your elderly and especially male you get foodstamps maybe and that is it. If you have a family you get Tanif and have to apply for work 15 jobs per day. So how do you comply with the law requiring you to seek work and put in applications when employer's refuse to accept them.
That is wrong and people do not lose their skills just because they are laid off. No more than if you did not drive or ride a bike for awhile or swim. You have not lost the skills and understanding how to still do it.
Some of these same employers have no problem hiring illegals they have no clue what skills if any. This is just a generic way of saying we don't want to hire blacks, disabled, latinio and older people. So if your young, buff, good looking with pearly white teeth and a good tan and working at McD's you get hired. So much for college education. So much for experinced. Right. I can tell you right now many older man or woman no matter what race can work rings around the younger generation. I have seen it done many times. They also have cooler heads and think things through more. Employers need to get a reality check. I hope congress does pass it. We the people have a voice use it and write or call your senators and congressman.
Celanith
That is crazy, First of all there are a lot of people unemployed because the doors closed on the firm or business they worked for. Example recently is K Mart workers in Spokane 67 were laid off because the store lost its lease to Lowe's and would not be relocating that store. This is not the fault of the employee. There are people well educated, and able to work but I know many who are not hired simply because they are 55 and older. This is age discrimination and it happens repeatedly all the time.
It is young execs who think they are smarter and saavy who discriminate. Someday they will be old too. A lot of people that are lazy are the young who are in gangs and steal from others. I have talked to some who think it is what they deserve., Spoiled as youth they see no reason to work and expect freebies and handouts. As one young man quipped "Why work when I can steal it"
Not employing unemployed just makes the economy worse. People with jobs buy things and have money for things. So we need to all write our congressmen and women and tell them to pass this bill. Or we will vote someone in who will.
susan
To say the republicans will not pass such a law is crazy. There is one Republican - Rep Gohmert - who has spoken out against it. And he has a point:
“If you apply for a job and you think that the reason you didn’t get hired is because you were unemployed at the time, you¹re now a protected class,” said Gohmert, “You’ve now got a cause of action, go get a lawyer."
Allowing lawsuit as a last option yes - but the law needs to assure that the labor board is the first course of action. Otherwise, like Rep Gohmert says, it does open up the door for more lawsuits.
Karen
It is unconscionable discrimination to recruit only currently employed workers. Being unemployed is no picnic. Conducting an effective job search is often harder work than being employed, using more and broader skill sets, taking more time, and is more stressful than being employed.
Many are unemployed through no fault of their own, have great skills, and are hungry to work. The unemployed are likely to work harder and longer to make sure they do not become unemployed again. Businesses close, divisions are shuttered, projects end or move to a different phase with different personnel needs, contracts end, in essence--layoffs affect great workers.
If companies want to help boost the economy--which is in their own best interests--they should go out of their way to hire from the ranks of the unemployed. The previously unemployed could then pay their bills, pay their rent/mortgage, spend at stores, gas stations, health clubs, etc., buy health insurance, doing all the things that cause an economy to thrive.
Midge
Great article but it didn't have evrehyitng-I didn't find the kitchen sink!
opxhzomtw
KVqxeO iqqdlpfkcssk
bqjelmzt
pW7tkN fpdkalxwifws
Rosh
Thank you Republicans, for hamstringing OUR President and making life more miserable for the rest of us because you have a political agenda.
Johnny
ha your a typical libby Obama tacked this little provision on to his huge spending bill that is why this won't pass. If Obama was really serious about this new Socialist regulation he would not attached it to his bogus jobs bill. Then fact is he does not want this bill to pass so he can blame everything on republicans (just like you do)so he can get reelected and do noting for another 4 years but drive this country deeper in the ground after all it was Obama that said America should not be the greatest country in the world he also said America should not be the leaders of the free world and then he praises Mao who was a brutal dictator that caused more poverty in China. You want a job kick this socialist moron out of office.
Nancy
As one of a household of two over 50 and unemployed workers I'm w/Obama on this one! I was laid off w/35 other employees when my dept. was shut down. Did that make me a bad worker? A poor risk? Heck no! My spouse was replaced by a worker who was 21 and female (he formerly worked in retail and they wanted cute employees who their customers could relate to). Was he a poor risk? Nope. Just the wrong sex and wrong age, and his company had be acquired by a new company that wanted to go with a 'new look.' Neither of us were fired. Neither of us took sick time, in fact both of us had significant vacation/PTO time because we hadn't taken it to help out our employers. So if you're an employer who has been not considering the unemployed you might want to rethink the policy. Sure we get unemployment(temporarily) but we don't WANT unemployment WE WANT A JOB!
Ron
I find it laughable that the President is so interested in how people are being treated when looking for a job! Maybe he should be concentrating more on how to help businesses to create jobs so that the unemployed would be needed and desired in our workforce.
I am 66 years old and lost my job a year and a half ago, I couldn't find anything in my field so I found a new career and have been working every day. HOW: by desiring to work and take care of myself... Did not take welfare, nor unemployment.... I don't have a college degree , but I do have a desire to take care of my family and myself. NO we don't need more laws to take care of the little people we need more little people who want to take care of themselves.
beth
can u tell me what the new field is? I might want to try it?
Tom Reinbold
I'm a social and economic, business-loving conservative, but I'm with Obama and Clay B on this one. People have lost jobs through no fault of their own and discriminating against them for it goes against what should be everyones' sense of fair play.
Cammie
Barack Obama wants to protect those who get trampled on like the RHarrisonScott(s) of the world who try to build alliances by selling "every man (1%) for himself."
Clay B
This is discrimination, no doubt about it. This goes along with Credit Checks. Just because someone has bad credit, does not make them a criminal. I've read many companies can't find anyone to filled skilled labor postitions. But the unemployed can't nessasarily lay out hundreds/thousands for school/training, if a definite job is not waiting for them. These companies need to either hire and train on the job. Or maybe they can offer a jobs to people, who will will be hired after they complete the training, so at least the applicant knows they can start pay off the schooling once they complete it. If they don't pass, the company does not have to hire them. So there is some risk on both parties; company has to guaranty the job to someone, and the appicant has to pass the course.
bullwhacker
I agree and one thing that is not being looked at.
It happened to me and it made a real impression at the job interview.
I was asked about my long time out of work - about six months and what did I do during that time.
My answer was I went the school - Community College to learn and add to my skill set to make myself more desirable propect for selection for employment. THAT did in fact get me the job.
I see and hear all the moaning and crying from people out of work that they in some instances have been looking for work for years?? HUH?? YEARS??? why?? YEARS???
THAT makes you look bad very bad to a potential employer.. During that six months I took any job I could get to make money to get by on..
I didn;t cry when the unemployment ran out I did what I had to do and I now have an excellent job..
So my advice is GO TO SCHOOL. UPDATE your skill set in the field you like and add to the skills in your field as well..
EMPLOYERS WILL SEE THAT..
prioris
You took ANY job!!!!
Try telling that to people who are looking for ANY job and haven't been able to find one for years.
We should put you in charge of finding employment for all the unemployed people in the USA. You apparently know where to find enough of those ANY jobs. This will wipe out unemployment.
>I didn't cry when the unemployment ran out I did what I had to do and I now have an excellent job..
different parts of the country have different job conditions so all is not equal everywhere.
oh and btw, the economy hasn't hit bottom yet and won't for another 10 or 15 years to go. You may have a job this year but the economy will continue to disintegrate and you will likely be unemployed again.
for me, i am in my late 50s and essentially retired and doing fine. Unlike you i have retirement income. You will not have a box to piss in when you retire at the age of 79. You will have a chance to find out about age discrimination also.
the hard economic realities will set in one day for people like you. sociopaths like you may live in a box on the street one day.
RHarrisonScott
Barack Obama surrounds himself with people who try to build alliances selling emotional discontent and resentment.
Jenni J
Prior to his death and preceding Brown, Charles Hamilton Houston told Thurgood Marshall, "A lawyer who is not a social engineer is a social parasite."
Enough said.
Uncle B
God help the poor American child! Without even medical care, in a land desperate for dollars, corrupted, criminal element better protected by the laws than you. Even as the specter of Q3 'easing' promises to rob the power from your dollars and jobs even degrading sex worker and lower jobs get scarce in your merciless country even as it turns from its Christian values of days long gone by, you were born without even state permission, approval, of consideration. We watch from the True North, Strong and Free, from our frozen lands of igloos, huts, and hamlets,humble wooden structures in the icy cold, from our snow-banks as the “Promised Land” full of warm weather, good soil, longer planting and growing seasons, hard workers, is sold out by their own banksters to China for ROI, their new God. American child, born to poverty, the corporatists have no need for you now, they use the Chinese in your place, you are better off not born at all!