Posted: 6/2/2010 4:27:44 PM EDT
 Want Ad: Unemployed Need Not Apply Man Shocked After Reading Orlando-Based Recruiter's Ad POSTED: Tuesday, June 1, 2010 UPDATED: 9:26 am EDT June 1, 2010 Job Ad ORLANDO, Fla. –– Job hunters are facing a new trend: businesses asking recruitment companies to keep unemployed people out of their job pools. VIDEO: Ad Angers Job Seeker SURVEY: What Do You Think? Peter May, of Atlanta, said he was hoping Orlando-based recruiter "The People Place" would help him find a job with Sony Ericsson. The company is moving its headquarters to Buckhead, which is located outside Atlanta. May said he was mortified when he read the message on the website. In all caps, and bold type, it said, "No unemployed candidates will be considered at all." "To just totally leave those people out of the mix, it's stupefying. I just can't understand it at all. ...To be honest with you, it kind of angered me. You know, I'm a good enough guy," May said on Monday. Sony Ericcson is supposed to bring 180 jobs to Buckhead, and was lured there with the prospect of a $4 million in state tax credits. But May said if the company is refusing to hire the unemployed, that deal should be rescinded. During a phone conversation with Atlanta station WXIA, Howard Lawson, of "The People Place," refused to discuss the Sony Ericsson listing specifically, but he did say that he has seen a trend of employers looking to hire employed applicants. Recruitment experts say many companies are opting out of so-called passive job seekers for a number of reasons. First, it could take longer to get them up to speed in professions that require constant training. They also say people who have not been laid off are believed to be the best in the fields, therefore more valuable. Copyright 2010 by Internet Broadcasting Systems and ClickOrlando.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. http://www.clickorlando.com/jobs/23752759/detail.html |
|
Who would have thought that being unemployed for several years would not be a plus when looking for employment.
Way to many people do not understand this. If you ran a company, would you want people that have been out of work collecting unemployment for many many months or those who are working at something. Phrased badly but I understand why to a certain extent. Maybe the company has found that long term unemployed persons tend to have more issues after re-entering the workforce. Who knows and I doubt they will say. |
|
Recruitment experts say many companies are opting out of so-called passive job seekers for a number of reasons. First, it could take longer to get them up to speed in professions that require constant training. They also say people who have not been laid off are believed to be the best in the fields, therefore more valuable. Never heard of it before, but when I read the headline, I knew why. |
|
Quoted:
Want Ad: Unemployed Need Not Apply Man Shocked After Reading Orlando-Based Recruiter's Ad POSTED: Tuesday, June 1, 2010 UPDATED: 9:26 am EDT June 1, 2010 Job Ad ORLANDO, Fla. –– Job hunters are facing a new trend: businesses asking recruitment companies to keep unemployed people out of their job pools. VIDEO: Ad Angers Job Seeker SURVEY: What Do You Think? Peter May, of Atlanta, said he was hoping Orlando-based recruiter "The People Place" would help him find a job with Sony Ericsson. The company is moving its headquarters to Buckhead, which is located outside Atlanta. May said he was mortified when he read the message on the website. In all caps, and bold type, it said, "No unemployed candidates will be considered at all." "To just totally leave those people out of the mix, it's stupefying. I just can't understand it at all. ...To be honest with you, it kind of angered me. You know, I'm a good enough guy," May said on Monday. Sony Ericcson is supposed to bring 180 jobs to Buckhead, and was lured there with the prospect of a $4 million in state tax credits. But May said if the company is refusing to hire the unemployed, that deal should be rescinded. During a phone conversation with Atlanta station WXIA, Howard Lawson, of "The People Place," refused to discuss the Sony Ericsson listing specifically, but he did say that he has seen a trend of employers looking to hire employed applicants. Recruitment experts say many companies are opting out of so-called passive job seekers for a number of reasons. First, it could take longer to get them up to speed in professions that require constant training. They also say people who have not been laid off are believed to be the best in the fields, therefore more valuable. Copyright 2010 by Internet Broadcasting Systems and ClickOrlando.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. http://www.clickorlando.com/jobs/23752759/detail.html Well.... If I was the job seeker....I'd have the recruiter send my Resume to ALL the other companies with similar positions....to be ready to step in when their current employee goes to Sony. AFARR |
| It doesn't say those unemployed for XX months... it says NO unemployed... as if you lost your job last week they won't consider it. As if it is necessarily their fault they are unemployed. Sony just lost my business. As somebody who spent some time unemployed through no fault of my own... fuck Sony. |
| My employer posted a job recently and I'm helping interview candidates. One thing my manager cautioned me against is people who are looking to weather the economic storm and bail as soon as things get back to normal. Perhaps this could be another factor in Sony's decision. |
|
Quoted:
My employer posted a job recently and I'm helping interview candidates. One thing my manager cautioned me against is people who are looking to weather the economic storm and bail as soon as things get back to normal. Perhaps this could be another factor in Sony's decision. Anybody leaving one job for another is doing so because they feel the new job is a step-up... better pay, better hours, better benefits, better chance for advancement, better location... In other words, if they are interviewing with you, they have already proven they will leave somebody who gives them a check if there is a better deal available. See, you can make the argument that any job applicant is an opportunist at heart and is only as loyal as the compensation package in front of them. Sony can do what they want, but it is pretty ignorant. How about the vet who does his service, voluntarily separates and is without a job for a bit as he looks for work? |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
My employer posted a job recently and I'm helping interview candidates. One thing my manager cautioned me against is people who are looking to weather the economic storm and bail as soon as things get back to normal. Perhaps this could be another factor in Sony's decision. Anybody leaving one job for another is doing so because they feel the new job is a step-up... better pay, better hours, better benefits, better chance for advancement, better location... In other words, if they are interviewing with you, they have already proven they will leave somebody who gives them a check if there is a better deal available. See, you can make the argument that any job applicant is an opportunist at heart and is only as loyal as the compensation package in front of them. Sony can do what they want, but it is pretty ignorant. How about the vet who does his service, voluntarily separates and is without a job for a bit as he looks for work? The Vet will have no 'unemployed' time on his resume. He will have post-separation time, if he did not do his homework before he separated. That margin is where people without work will find it. I have had several periods of time without a 'job', but always had income or was just taking sabbatical. It is all semantics, how you word it. |
|
I can understand the reasoning behind it, but it seems a little narrow-minded.
In this economy, many companies have trimmed their least productive, their dead weight, etc... in order to save money and be more efficient. I'd love to hire someone right now, but I don't want the lame-brain that was the first to go when the economy hit the skids, I want the guy that some other business owner will try to hang on to until the bitter end. That having been said, it seems foolish to have a blanket policy excluding all unemployed. |
|
Quoted:
And what't the problem here? If they are not equal opportunity employer that guy can go pound the sand. You missed this part...? Sony Ericcson is supposed to bring 180 jobs to Buckhead, and was lured there with the prospect of a $4 million in state tax credits. But May said if the company is refusing to hire the unemployed, that deal should be rescinded.
The "private" entity had no problem availing themselves of the tax credits, but desires to become exclusionary after doing so? Nope. Either rescind your policy or refund the tax credits. The whole purpose of these incentives to to bolster local employment. Once you take advantage of them, you invite another stakeholder to sit at your table and dictate their expectations. |
| So even though I just voluntarily left my job, I would be ineligible? What about college grads entering the work force? I'm not complaining because this is 100% within their right, but I think that they didn't think this through very well. They should create a stipulation that this only refers to job seekers with long-term unemployment. |
|
They also say people who have not been laid off are believed to be the best in the fields, therefore more valuable.
It's harsh, but this is the way it is. During layoffs and cutbacks lots of good people can be let go, but the top 10-20% of performers do not lose their jobs shy of the company going under. As someone who is frequently hiring I am only looking for the top 10%. I want the best sales person, the best sales engineer, the best implementation managers, and they are never "let go". You find them by recruiting from the most stable companies with great performance records, and have to hire them away. More expensive, yes, but almost always much better results and much faster. |
|
This is utter Bullshit.
They're being lured to town on the hopes of tax credits. Those tax credits are there to help create jobs that are badly needed in the area. To exclude qualified candidates from applying because they're already unemployed is outright fraud. |
|
There are a lot of highly-skilled, hard-working people out there who are up on their training and recently out of work. In many cases, it is because the company deemed them to be overpaid because an H1B visa holder from India can come over and do the job for 1/3 the cost with no long-term financial commitment. I get the free market and all, but we need to protect jobs for Americans. Are their skills worth what they were making? Maybe not, but they were worth much more than the 2/3 the company is saving by hiring patel.
This policy is very narrow, and will likely only attract "raise-seekers" which basically will backfire on their logic of hiring people who won't bail for a slightly higher wage. 
|
|
Thats shitty! Id hire a unemployed person faster than an employed one, and frankly dont see any logic to doing things like this, especially in an age where companies fire well paid skilled workers because they can hire 1.5 people in their place
That sucks for the college grad who passed his classes w/ a 3.8 GPA who cant get hired because he got out of college and is thus unemployed yet they will hire the grad w/ a 3.0 who works at McDs 
|
|
Quoted:
"Pre-existing conditions" ?  It's weird; I think they're just pre-empting the deluge of resumes that will undoubtedly pour in. If I were unemployed, I'd still go in. Good possibility. What level of professionalism does this job require? Is it some front-line monkeyjob? If so, fucking lie your way in. If you don't have a professional rep, do what it takes. The ends justify the means. Nothing personal. It's just business. If you can't do the job, you won't last anyways.
|
|
I'd just have to be sure my resume said I'm "employed". I know a lot of people and most of them have lies on their resumes. Companies are wanting unrealistic qualifications right now. I saw one job posted for a garbage truck driver position that required a college degree.
In turn, I do hope these employers recognize that IF the job market ever comes back, those same overqualified people they are hiring will in turn tell them to fuck off when a decent opportunity opens. |
|
Quoted: It doesn't say those unemployed for XX months... it says NO unemployed... as if you lost your job last week they won't consider it. As if it is necessarily their fault they are unemployed. Sony just lost my business. As somebody who spent some time unemployed through no fault of my own... fuck Sony. It's an employers market. Don't be bitter.  |
I saw an ad tonight looking for help but it said if you have not been employed within the last 6 months, don`t even apply. I thought, what the heck????? Been laid off here much longer than that so that rules me out. Didn`t lose any more thought on it as they weren`t paying much anyhow! 
Crappy policy though. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
It doesn't say those unemployed for XX months... it says NO unemployed... as if you lost your job last week they won't consider it. As if it is necessarily their fault they are unemployed. Sony just lost my business. As somebody who spent some time unemployed through no fault of my own... fuck Sony. It's an employers market. Don't be bitter.
Not bitter... they can make that decision and I can choose not to patronize their ignorant asses. |
|
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: It doesn't say those unemployed for XX months... it says NO unemployed... as if you lost your job last week they won't consider it. As if it is necessarily their fault they are unemployed. Sony just lost my business. As somebody who spent some time unemployed through no fault of my own... fuck Sony. It's an employers market. Don't be bitter. Not bitter... they can make that decision and I can choose not to patronize their ignorant asses. I see a sentence there but you aren't saying anything coherent. Are you suggesting that this company should ignore their ability to streamline their hiring process and draw from the best pool of candidates? |
|
Quoted: I'd just have to be sure my resume said I'm "employed". I know a lot of people and most of them have lies on their resumes. Companies are wanting unrealistic qualifications right now. I saw one job posted for a garbage truck driver position that required a college degree. In turn, I do hope these employers recognize that IF the job market ever comes back, those same overqualified people they are hiring will in turn tell them to fuck off when a decent opportunity opens. yahoo had a article few days ago stating that its already happening |
|
Sony has proven, again and again, that they are a slime company.
Company I work for has been hiring unemployed developers to the point that we are having to shift them to the Atlanta office, there is no more room in the Memphis buildings. I'm going to discuss this with our resident head hunters in the morning, I have never heard of this level of bullshit.
|
|
Quoted:
They also say people who have not been laid off are believed to be the best in the fields, therefore more valuable.
It's harsh, but this is the way it is. During layoffs and cutbacks lots of good people can be let go, but the top 10-20% of performers do not lose their jobs shy of the company going under. As someone who is frequently hiring I am only looking for the top 10%. I want the best sales person, the best sales engineer, the best implementation managers, and they are never "let go". You find them by recruiting from the most stable companies with great performance records, and have to hire them away. More expensive, yes, but almost always much better results and much faster. Maybe where you work, but where I'm at the exempt ass kissers were protected at all costs, the rest weren't even provided the courtesy of a face-face notice, company just turned their RFID key cards off at the front door. Much of our engineering and project management is subpar with the maintenance managers and foremen trying to wing it among all theri othr duties while the ass kissers trot around the system being PITA's. Luckily, I'm IBEW and despite the drivel from the anti-union idiots on GD we try our best to do the work right, on time and within budget. |
| Same thing happened to me during the dot.com collapse. In addition to all of the fake ads posted by recruiters who were just collecting resumes, and the ads by companies seeking ten years of experience in technologies that had only existed for three years, and the companies that were rejecting all U.S. applicants in order to hire an H1-B Indian, and the companies that were merely complying with federal law in posting job ads for jobs that they already had a "wired" candidate they were going to hire no matter what, and the companies who went through the motions before offshoring the jobs to eastern Europe or India, there were the companies who started sending me snotty notes saying that since I'd been unemployed for over a year I was obvioiusly worthless and shouldn't waste their time. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
They also say people who have not been laid off are believed to be the best in the fields, therefore more valuable.
It's harsh, but this is the way it is. During layoffs and cutbacks lots of good people can be let go, but the top 10-20% of performers do not lose their jobs shy of the company going under. As someone who is frequently hiring I am only looking for the top 10%. I want the best sales person, the best sales engineer, the best implementation managers, and they are never "let go". You find them by recruiting from the most stable companies with great performance records, and have to hire them away. More expensive, yes, but almost always much better results and much faster. Maybe where you work, but where I'm at the exempt ass kissers were protected at all costs, the rest weren't even provided the courtesy of a face-face notice, company just turned their RFID key cards off at the front door. Much of our engineering and project management is subpar with the maintenance managers and foremen trying to wing it among all theri othr duties while the ass kissers trot around the system being PITA's. Luckily, I'm IBEW and despite the drivel from the anti-union idiots on GD we try our best to do the work right, on time and within budget. I have been at a company like that, and it sucks. From my experiences, the smaller and mid size companies tend to do more on performance than the larger companies where politics can weigh much more than performance (yes, there is the same politics and "protected few" no matter what company). The joke at Citrix was if you wanted to be promoted to Regional Manager from Sales Rep, make sure you are in the right circle and miss your own quota for at least 3-4 quarters and you were golden. Any other company I've been with a rep was gone if they missed two in a row. If we now they have potential they may be put on notice and if IMMEDIATE results are not seen, they are gone. With that said, I still believe, with RARE exception, the top 10% of any group keep their jobs unless they piss someone off. The absolute top performers are critical to their company and will not be let go, and that is the level of talent I want if I am going to use time and resources to hire someone. I have and will keep job openings open for months looking for a top candidate rather than filling a spot with someone who I feel had an 80% chance of succeeding. Doesn't always work even when we find that person, but almost always. |
|
Quoted:
I'd just have to be sure my resume said I'm "employed". I know a lot of people and most of them have lies on their resumes. Companies are wanting unrealistic qualifications right now. I saw one job posted for a garbage truck driver position that required a college degree. In turn, I do hope these employers recognize that IF the job market ever comes back, those same overqualified people they are hiring will in turn tell them to fuck off when a decent opportunity opens. The 'Education Pyramid Scheme.' People with Degrees only want to hire other people with Degrees. Doesnt matter if the guy with the Degree is a total POS and the guy without is an Earth Shaker, POS will get the job. This is why many Companies are floundering, they dont know how to recognize and manage talent. |
|
Quoted:
And what't the problem here? Sony Ericcson is supposed to bring 180 jobs to Buckhead, and was lured there with the prospect of a $4 million in state tax credits. So taxpayers should pay $4 million for a company to move in and not help unemployed locals? I'm all about employer rights, but that right is questionable when they start taking multi million dollar "tax credits". |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
And what't the problem here? If they are not equal opportunity employer that guy can go pound the sand. You missed this part...? Sony Ericcson is supposed to bring 180 jobs to Buckhead, and was lured there with the prospect of a $4 million in state tax credits. But May said if the company is refusing to hire the unemployed, that deal should be rescinded.
The "private" entity had no problem availing themselves of the tax credits, but desires to become exclusionary after doing so? Nope. Either rescind your policy or refund the tax credits. The whole purpose of these incentives to to bolster local employment. Once you take advantage of them, you invite another stakeholder to sit at your table and dictate their expectations. Please allow me to restate that for you: Sony accepted $4 mil in tax credits to BRING jobs to Buckhead. Not to POACH jobs in Buckhead. They can choose whatever hiring pool they want, but if they are sucking the .gov tit to bring jobs, moving employed folks over into their co. doesn't fit that model
I don't live anywhere near Fuckhead, but I stayed there once
I am very anti-goverment handout to individuals, and to corporations. If anyone getting a handout doesn't live up to the purpose of their handout, they are double-damned in my book. That isn't free money, it's supposed to create a (hopefully) better situation for all involved. |
|
Quoted:
They also say people who have not been laid off are believed to be the best in the fields, therefore more valuable.
It's harsh, but this is the way it is. During layoffs and cutbacks lots of good people can be let go, but the top 10-20% of performers do not lose their jobs shy of the company going under. As someone who is frequently hiring I am only looking for the top 10%. I want the best sales person, the best sales engineer, the best implementation managers, and they are never "let go". You find them by recruiting from the most stable companies with great performance records, and have to hire them away. More expensive, yes, but almost always much better results and much faster. Your company must do things completely opposite of all the companies I've worked for. Whenever layoffs happened, the top achievers were the first to go as they rightfully earned the most raises in their respective positions.They are usually told outright that their job loss was due to them being "too expensive". I have yet to see a company do things differently. I've only seen employers who wanted the cheapest employee who could do the job sufficiently. It's all about the bottom line. I doubt your company is any different. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It doesn't say those unemployed for XX months... it says NO unemployed... as if you lost your job last week they won't consider it. As if it is necessarily their fault they are unemployed. Sony just lost my business. As somebody who spent some time unemployed through no fault of my own... fuck Sony. It's an employers market. Don't be bitter.
Not bitter... they can make that decision and I can choose not to patronize their ignorant asses. I see a sentence there but you aren't saying anything coherent. Are you suggesting that this company should ignore their ability to streamline their hiring process and draw from the best pool of candidates? Actually they are handicapping themselves by ignoring an entire demographic which might include the best candidate for the job based upon an assumption that somebody who is unemployed is not worth considering. That is pure ignorance. |
|
Quoted: The company will count this as unemployed time.Quoted: Quoted: My employer posted a job recently and I'm helping interview candidates. One thing my manager cautioned me against is people who are looking to weather the economic storm and bail as soon as things get back to normal. Perhaps this could be another factor in Sony's decision. Anybody leaving one job for another is doing so because they feel the new job is a step-up... better pay, better hours, better benefits, better chance for advancement, better location... In other words, if they are interviewing with you, they have already proven they will leave somebody who gives them a check if there is a better deal available. See, you can make the argument that any job applicant is an opportunist at heart and is only as loyal as the compensation package in front of them. Sony can do what they want, but it is pretty ignorant. How about the vet who does his service, voluntarily separates and is without a job for a bit as he looks for work? The Vet will have no 'unemployed' time on his resume. He will have post-separation time, if he did not do his homework before he separated. That margin is where people without work will find it. I have had several periods of time without a 'job', but always had income or was just taking sabbatical. It is all semantics, how you word it. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
So? They only want employed persons looking for a better oppertunity, not unemployed persons who in their minds 'are unemployed for a reason'... No big deal... Proof positive their policy is wrongheaded... Yeah, he seemed to skip over this part: Sony Ericcson is supposed to bring 180 jobs to Buckhead, and was lured there with the prospect of a $4 million in state tax credits. But May said if the company is refusing to hire the unemployed, that deal should be rescinded.
Buckhead better not give them any leeway for their arrogance. If Buckhead does as it should, the decision is going to be costly for Sony. |
|
Quoted:
Welcome to 'Employers Market.' This. I recall 3 or 4 years ago you could walk into a restaurant or retail shop and not be able to pry the college kids away from their damn texting long enough to sell you something. Business owners had to pay top dollar even for the free-loaders. The pendulum has swung, and it'll swing back eventually. For the time being, their business, their rules. |
|
Quoted:
Wow, a lot of the "employer rights" posters are missing the part about. Sony Ericcson is supposed to bring 180 jobs to Buckhead, and was lured there with the prospect of a $4 million in state tax credits And you're missing the part where they are bringing 180 jobs to Buckhead. |
|
Quoted:
Quoted:
The company will count this as unemployed time.
Quoted:
Quoted:
My employer posted a job recently and I'm helping interview candidates. One thing my manager cautioned me against is people who are looking to weather the economic storm and bail as soon as things get back to normal. Perhaps this could be another factor in Sony's decision. Anybody leaving one job for another is doing so because they feel the new job is a step-up... better pay, better hours, better benefits, better chance for advancement, better location... In other words, if they are interviewing with you, they have already proven they will leave somebody who gives them a check if there is a better deal available. See, you can make the argument that any job applicant is an opportunist at heart and is only as loyal as the compensation package in front of them. Sony can do what they want, but it is pretty ignorant. How about the vet who does his service, voluntarily separates and is without a job for a bit as he looks for work? The Vet will have no 'unemployed' time on his resume. He will have post-separation time, if he did not do his homework before he separated. That margin is where people without work will find it. I have had several periods of time without a 'job', but always had income or was just taking sabbatical. It is all semantics, how you word it. I would bet not. Particularly if the individual is not drawing unemployment. That may be the kicker, as it is the only thing that could reasonably be verified, whereas I can give you a fictitious employer to cover my time and have it ring to a friends' cell, which they will answer as Fred's Engineering Consulting. |