-
via Vitaly Gariev
A recruiter is interviewing a job applicant who is currently employed at another company.
Recreated scenario included to enhance reader understanding.
-
via @SakshiSugandhi -
via @ConsciousRide
-
via @KrishnaBuildsAI
-
via @Leapofcode
Being unemployed feels so disheartening because people look down on you and act like you have a scarlet letter on your shirt. Instead of an "A," like in the book, the letter is a "U."
Unless you're older and can take early retirement, unemployment is temporary. It's hard to remember that when you feel like you're drowning financially, having blown through all of your savings during your first months of unemployment.
-
via @haudanne
Although "employment status" is not a federally protected class, it is a protected class in New York City! Talk about the greatest city in the world to be unemployed in!
-
via @violetvase
I have seen some tweets (please don't ask me to find them; I tried and couldn't) where people think the job market could be fixed by charging people to apply for jobs. Their logic is that people would only apply for jobs they're qualified for, and international bots would stop making recruiters' jobs harder. The only problem is that there's no way to stop companies from posting a ton of fake jobs, charging people to apply, and putting that money toward their bottom line. If a company had enough fake job postings that cost money to apply to, they could make some money off of it!
Not only do I not think charging people to apply for jobs would work, but I also think it'd be bad PR for any company that tries to pioneer it.
-
via @arcanaobscura
-
via CrispinBurke
-
via @tatsumaki4ryu
-
via @theashrb
-
via @Yej938
It also said that the "interview is exclusively for candidates who are currently employed." It is a command if it excludes people who don't fit the requirement.
-
via @simon_mcl
I genuinely think a large segment of the professional population has never been unemployed and therefore sees unemployment as a moral failing. 40% of Americans have been fired or laid off at some point in their career, and I don't believe that 40% of the working population is dumb, incompetent, or unhirable after they've lost their job. Some of that 40% are fired because of their own incompetence, but often a company just isn't doing well and needs to downsize, or someone isn't a good fit.
Companies can only have a policy like this when the recruiters have hundreds of thousands of qualified applications for a single job posting. They have to find a way to reject people when everyone has great qualifications. If they're not rejecting unemployed people for that reason, then their reasoning for rejecting them is stupid. Being unemployed does not make you less qualified or less of a person.
Want More? Follow Us and Add Us as a Preferred Source on Google.