Posted on Thu, Jan 17, 2013
By Debbie Fledderjohann, Top Echelon Contracting President
If you have been in the recruiting industry for any length of time, you are probably familiar with what is known as the "unemployed mindset" - the tendency of employers to prefer currently employed candidates over those who are unemployed. This mindset has prevailed despite mass layoffs during the recession that put many on the unemployment lines through no fault of their own.
As the economy continues its sluggish recovery, some are still struggling to find work. Here are some reasons you and your clients shouldn't arbitrarily discount them:
- Find quality workers at a bargain price. If someone needs to find work, they may be a little more flexible in compensation negotiations. In this most recent recession, the layoffs were so deep that even some star employees were caught in the crosshairs, so you may be surprised at the quality that is still available.
- Updated skills. The misconception is workers' skills get outdated when they have been out of work. But as Kazim Ladimeji points out in a recent Recruiter.com article, these candidates may actually have more current skills because they have had more free time to develop them. With all the resources available online, including free webinars and online college courses, professional development is easy . . . when you have the time.
- Overcome the "skills gap." There has been a lot of talk over the past few years about a skills gap or labor shortage. Despite a still high unemployment rate, employers insist that the available workers don't have the right skills. But others argue the skills gap is actually caused by a bias against the unemployed. There is data out there to support both positions, but obviously if your clients widen their searches to include unemployed candidates they may have previously overlooked, they could uncover workers with the skills they need.
- Legal compliance. After the recession, some employers went as far as stating in job ads that only currently employed candidates would be considered. That practice caused a major backlash that prompted some states, such as New Jersey and Oregon, to pass laws banning unemployed discrimination. Others states have considered similar laws, and there has been talk of legislation on the federal level as well. So if a client company has a blanket policy against hiring the unemployed, you may want to advise them against it.
The fact is, your clients aren't passing on unemployed candidates just to be mean. Being unemployed, especially when the gap in employment has been particularly long, does raises some questions. But by putting an overall ban on candidates who are not currently working, clients could be missing out on some great candidates.
A better solution is contract staffing. By offering unemployed candidates to clients on a contract-to-direct basis, you can allow your clients to "try-before-they-buy." If the candidate doesn't work out, they can simply end the contract and try someone else. But if they have found a great worker, they can extend the direct hire offer. And you can earn a nice conversion fee.
Just as you shouldn't judge a book by its cover, you shouldn't judge a candidate based solely on a gap in their resume. Find out why the gap exists and what they have to offer. And if you think you have a good candidate on your hands, don't hesitate to offer them to your clients on a contract-to-direct basis.
Posted on Tue, Aug 07, 2012
By Debbie Fledderjohann, Top Echelon Contracting President
What does a worker who has only been out of work for a month have in common with one who has been unemployed for six months to a year? It appears they are both just as likely to be rejected for job based on their employment status (or lack thereof), even as legislators move to make "unemployed discrimination" illegal.
A recent Huffington Post article discusses a study in which 47 human resource professionals were asked to review resumes that were identical except that half stated the candidate was currently employed, and the other half indicated the candidate had been unemployed for one month. The HR professionals gave the currently employed candidate higher marks for competence and hireability.
The study also found that unemployed candidates who are laid off are not viewed any more favorably than those who quit their jobs. However, candidates who were laid off because the company went under do appear to get more sympathy.
Employer's preference for selecting candidates who are currently employed is nothing new, but the practice came under fire last year when job postings emerged specifically stating that unemployed candidates would not be considered. As a result, lawmakers on both the state and federal level have considered legislation against unemployed discrimination. New Jersey passed a law last year banning job ads that are found to discriminate against unemployed candidates. This past May, the District of Columbia took it a step farther with legislation that made unemployed status a protected class, according to the Littler Mendelson law firm. The law makes it illegal for employers in the District of Columbia to refuse to hire candidates based on their employment statuses.
So what are you seeing out there in the trenches? Do employers tend to reject unemployed candidates, even if they have only been out of work a short amount of time?
Posted on Tue, Jun 19, 2012
By Debbie Fledderjohann, Top Echelon Contracting President
The unemployment rate may be slowly going down, but there is one number that seems to keep going up: the number of Americans who have been out of work for six months or longer.
The number of long-unemployed individuals increased from 5.1 million to 5.4 million last month, according to CNNMoney.com As the number continues to climb, some economists worry it will result in a permanent jump in the unemployment rate.
Economists are split on the reasons for this epidemic. Some believe it's simply due to low demand and will get better with time. But others feel it is more of a "structural" problem due to a gap between the skills required in today's available jobs and the skills the unemployed candidates possess.
Whatever the reason, the longer these individuals stay unemployed, the less desirable they will be to employers and the harder it will be for them to find a job. "Unemployed discrimination" is still alive and well despite some lawmakers' attempts to stop it.
The reason employers are reluctant to hire someone who has been out of work a long time is because they believe the person must not be a very good worker. But due to the recession, many people found themselves unemployed through no fault of their own. Some of them really are star candidates. The key is getting employers to give them a chance. So how can they do that?
You can help them by offering these candidates to clients on a contract-to-direct basis. This allows your clients to "try-before-they-buy." If the candidate doesn't meet expectations, the client can end the assignment and try someone else. But if the candidate proves to be a good find, the company can then extend a direct-hire offer (and pay you a conversion fee!)
The plight of the long-term unemployed is not a simple problem with a simple answer. But you may be able to help in a small way by convincing your clients to give some of these workers a chance.
Posted on Thu, Dec 01, 2011
By Debbie Fledderjohann, Top Echelon Contracting President
While the recession has supposedly been over for quite some time, many people are still feeling its effects. And it is quite possible that Baby Boomers are having the hardest time bouncing back.
A recent U.S. News & World Report article examines "The Recession's Impact on Baby Boomer Retirement." Here are some of the key take-away points from the article:
- Although the recession affected all age groups, Baby Boomers may not have enough time to rebuild their retirement savings, forcing many to put off retirement or live on a lower retirement income than they expected.
- On the other side of the coin, some were forced into early retirement because they were unable to find new employment after losing jobs during the recession.
- This has caused household income for those ages 55-64 to fall by 6 percent.
As a result, employers need to be ready for older workers who are either remaining in the workforce longer than expected or who are returning to the workforce on a part-time basis to supplement a less than sufficient retirement income. A recent Staffing Industry Analysts article listed policy issues that employers will have to reexamine in light of this trend. At the top of the list? Offering "more flexible work patterns," including telecommuting, consulting, and reduced hours.
This all plays into the Retiree Re-Staffing trend we have been reporting on for the past couple of years. By bringing older workers in a on part-time, consulting or contract basis, employers can gain or retain these workers' knowledge, while the workers can supplement their income and remain active on a more flexible basis so they can enjoy other activities and time with family.
Posted on Thu, Oct 27, 2011
By Debbie Fledderjohann, Top Echelon Contracting President
As we reported in a recent blog post, President Obama's jobs bill would, among other things, make job ads listing current employment as a job requirement illegal. Of course, there is plenty of debate over this. Some people feel legislation banning "unemployed discrimination" is necessary to help the large number of people laid off during the recession find work. Others feel the problem is not that prevalent and that additional legislation will put unnecessary burden on employers.
But what do recruiters think? After all, most of them have likely encountered clients who refuse to consider unemployed candidates, so they have a financial stake in the issue.
Well, according to a recent survey conducted by our sister company, Top Echelon, a large number of recruiters think unemployed discrimination should be illegal. The survey specifically asked "Should it be illegal for companies to deny employment based soley on a person's unemployed status?" The recruiters repsonded as follows:
- Yes - 49.3%
- No - 33.3%
- Indifferent - 17.3%
So what do you think? Should unemployed discrimination be illegal?
Posted on Tue, Oct 04, 2011
By Debbie Fledderjohann, Top Echelon Contracting President
Over the past year or so, many people have gotten up in arms over job ads that specifically state that unemployed candidates will not be considered for open positions. Now the practice has caught President Obama's attention.
Included in the jobs bill that Obama has been pushing over the past couple of weeks is the Fair Employment Opportunity Act of 2011. This act would effectively make "unemployed discrimination" illegal, according to the Society for Human Resource Management. Employers with 15 or more employees, as well as employment agencies, would be subject to the regulations.
If passed, the act will:
- Make it illegal to post or publish job ads stating that unemployed individuals will not be considered.
- Forbid employers from directing employment agencies to disqualify candidates based solely on their unemployed status.
- Not allow employment agencies to segregate candidates in a way that would limit their access to information about jobs because of their unemployed status.
- Provide whistle-blowing protections, making it illegal for employers to retaliate against those who assert their rights under the act or who aid in an inquiry based on someone else's complaint under the act.
The act specifically states that it does not prevent employers from considering past employment history or for digging into the reasons why an individual has been unemployed. They basically just cannot refuse to hire simply based on the unemployed status.
Those opposed to the act feel this type of discrimination is not common enough to warrant legislation and that it will invite a barrage of frivilous lawsuits, according to The New York Times. Employment discrimination claims based on current laws tend to jump during tough economic times. In Fiscal Year 2010, job bias charges filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission jumped 20 percent from 2007.
There is a good chance that Obama's jobs bill will not pass. But that does not mean that employers should not take this seriously. This is the second federal attempt to make unemployed discrimination illegal - Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) previously introduced legislation also titled "The Fair Employment Act of 2011." New Jersey has already passed a law banning job ads requiring current employment, and other states are considering similar laws. So even if the jobs bill dies, it is very possible that unemployed individuals will be protected from discrimination at some point in the future. Accordingly, you and your clients should be alert and be prepared.
This article is for informational purposes only and should not be considered legal advice.
Posted on Tue, May 10, 2011
By Debbie Fledderjohann, Top Echelon Contracting President
A recent practice we have reported on where employers specifically state in job postings that they will not accept unemployed candidates has ignited a bit of a firestorm and has some crying "discrimination." Some lawmakers are even moving to make banning unemployed job candidates illegal.
In fact, New Jersey has already passed a law forbidding job ads that are found to discriminate against the unemployed, according to The Employer Handbook, a blog by attorney Eric B. Meyer. The law states that job advertisements can't include provisions stating that current employment is a job qualification, that the company won't consider applications submitted by unemployed candidates, or that they will only consider applications from currently employed candidates, according to the blog.
On the federal level, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) recently held a hearing to determine how prevalent banning unemployed candidates is and if it is discriminatory, according to employment attorney Lisa Yankowitz's weekly Informed Workplace video. While unemployed individuals are not specifically protected under any federal anti-discrimination laws, these practices could be considered discriminatory if they create a disparate impact against a protected class. Disparate impact occurs when a policy that seems neutral on its face disproportionately impacts members of protected classes. Considering that certain protected groups, such as African-Americans, Hispanics, and the disabled, have a much higher unemployment rate than the national average, it is quite possible that a company policy against hiring the unemployed could create a disparate impact, Yankowitz says in the video.
According to Yankowitz and the Huffington Post, unemployed individuals will be specifically protected under federal law if Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) has his way. He has introduced The Fair Employment Act of 2011 which would amend the Civil Rights Act to make it illegal for companies to make hiring decisions based on a candidate's employment status.
It will be interesting to see where this goes. Will more states pass laws banning ads discriminating against the unemployed? Or will federal legislators beat them to the punch and make the unemployed a protected class? Either way, it appears this is a topic that will be sticking around for awhile and could result in more legal restrictions for employers.
While most of your clients have probably not published job ads specifically banning the unemployed, chances are you may have encountered situations where a client has told you not to present unemployed candidates. You may want to make them aware of the growing legal movement against his practice and remind them that there could be very good candidates out there who happen to be unemployed, particularly now in the wake of "The Great Recession." And you can offer to let them try your currently unemployed candidates by starting them on a contract basis before they "buy," or extend the direct-hire offer. Not only will they keep themselves out of potential legal hot water, but they may also find that some of the best employees are still on the unemployment lines.
Posted on Wed, Mar 16, 2011
By Debbie Fledderjohann, Top Echelon Contracting President
The recent trend we have reported on where companies refuse to consider unemployed candidates for their job openings has now caught the attention of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).
While the practice of preferring currently employed candidates is nothing new, it gained national attention after several employers listed current employment as a requirement on their job postings. Some even used phrases such as "No unemployed candidates will be considered at all" and "Client will not consider/review anyone NOT currently employed regardless of the reason," according to Human Resource Executive Online.
The EEOC held a hearing on the unemployed candidate ban on February 16. Whether there is widespread discrimination against the unemployed was debated. Currently, there are no laws protecting the unemployed against discrimination, but if the practice hits protected groups, such as African-Americans or the disabled, particularly hard, there is the potential for a disparate-impact claim, according to the Human Resource Executive Online article.
Not only that, but it could cause employers to miss out on high quality workers who were simply victims of a particularly harsh recession. In fact, one lawyer interviewed in the Human Resource Executive Online article talked about clients who "agonized over the last couple of years because they were forced to choose among good performers, but they had no choice but to reduce head count."
Again, we feel the best way to combat this practice is through contracting. In fact, www.CNNMoney.com's Ask Annie recently advised a worker who was denied a job due to her unemployed status to look for contracting or consulting work. Doing so helps keep candidates skills sharp and helps them meet new people who could aid in their job search. More importantly, it keeps the candidate working, eliminating large gaps in their resumes, according to the article. 
Posted on Wed, Mar 02, 2011
By Debbie Fledderjohann, Top Echelon Contracting President
There is a good article on Yahoo! News that reports on the growing pratice we blogged on several months ago about companies requiring candidates to be currently employed, a trend the article calls a "growing form of hiring discrimination," but one that is not currently probhibited by any laws.
As a recruiter, employers' bias against unemployed candidates is probably nothing new to you. Some employers have an "unemployed mindset," assuming that an unemployed candidate must be out of work for a reason and not be a very good worker. But according to numerous news reports over the past year, that bias has morphed into a full-fledged ban on unemployed candidates by some employers who went as far as to list current employment as a requirement on their job postings.
Yahoo! News interviewed Matt Deutsch, Communications Coordinator for our sister company, Top Echelon, for the article. He said that many of the recruiters Top Echelon works with have encountered clients who will not consider unemployed candidates. For many, this technique is an easy way to speed up the hiring process.
"If you've got a huge stack of submissions, and you want to get through them quickly, [you can say] 'OK, all the people who are not currently employed, forget them,'" said Deutsch, who has blogged about employers requiring candidates to be currently employed.
At the same time, the recession has left 6.2 million Americans jobless for six or more months, and each job opening has 4.7 unemployed candidates vying for it, according to the article. Many could be stellar candidates who simply fell victim to the rash of layoffs during the recession, and overlooking those candidates simply because of gaps in their resumes could cost companies quality workers.
So how can a candidate avoid being overlooked? Most experts recommend trying to fill those gaps with some sort of work-related activity, whether it be getting additional education in their fields or even volunteering to gain experience relevant to the type of work they did or would like to do. One of the best ways to prevent resume gaps is to pick up contract positions, which provide candidates with additional experience and keep them in the workforce. And best of all, unlike going to school or volunteering, they are paid while they are a contractor!
You may also want to offer contracting as an option to clients who are reluctant to hire the unemployed. By bringing on a workers as a contractor, they can evaluate their skills and work ethic before extending the direct-hire offer.
Posted on Wed, Jan 26, 2011
By Debbie Fledderjohann, Top Echelon Contracting President
The Great Recession forced many workers to make some hard decisions the past couple of years. Some had to relocate. Others gave up the job hunt for awhile and returned to school.
And according to the Human Resources Executive Online article "Job Seekers Change Course," a large number of workers chose to try different career paths where jobs were more abundant. A study by Rutgers University cited in the article indicated that an estimated 41 percent of those surveyed had found work in a different field or career.
Of course, the challenge in starting a new career is finding an employer who will take a chance on someone with no experience in their industry. Some employers fear that they will spend time training someone who will end up returning to their old careers once jobs open up in their fields. But according to the study, 56 percent of the respondents said they were at least somewhat satisfied with their new jobs.
"If I were an HR person, I'd be on the lookout for some extremely talented people outside their industry who could bring a whole new look at how you're doing things," said Rob Saam, the senior vice president and career transition leader for Lee Hecht Harrison, who was interviewed for the article. "I think there's a tremendous opportunity to pick up some extraordinary talent . . .because there [are] so many good people out there looking for work."
But they have to be willing to take a risk. One way to minimize that risk is to hire these workers on a contract basis, which gives the companies a chance to evaluate the workers without making a direct-hire commitment. If a contractor doesn't seem to be catching on, the company can end the contract. But if they have found a diamond in the rough, they can extend a direct-hire offer, providing both the company and the worker with a fresh start.