Are employers bypassing unemployed job applicants?

There have been a number of reports about employers shunning unemployed applicants for those already holding jobs.

Now, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is trying to figure out whether it’s a widespread practice, Associated Press reports.

In Georgia, the long-term unemployed — those out of work for at least 27 weeks — now make up more than half of the jobless.

What’s been your experience? Are companies bypassing jobless workers?

- Henry Unger, The Biz Beat

For instant updates, follow me on Twitter.

92 comments Add your comment

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Rachel Mello, Job Tips. Job Tips said: Are employers bypassing unemployed job applicants? – Atlanta Journal Constitution (blog) http://tiny.ly/Lyiz [...]

Tad

February 17th, 2011
7:09 am

The answer is a simple YES. Time and time again. And it make no difference with race, gender or experience. If you are not currently employed, you are mostly likely out of luck landing a job and will remain unemployed.

Name (required)

February 17th, 2011
7:21 am

Oh boy….let’s waste more taxpayer dollars investigating something that cannot be proven with a level of certainty that would make it worth it.

Charles

February 17th, 2011
7:42 am

I’ve seen adds saying- ” Must have been employed for the past 12 months.” Yes sir, it’s happening, and I feel it’s ALL on companies now on whether the unemployment rate’s going up or down!

rc

February 17th, 2011
7:47 am

Yes, some even blatantly saying so(like Sony). I applied for a job with AT&T through their online HR / career site. I met all of the qualifications required for the job, had the right training and experience as well as the professional certifications required for the job. Within less than a minute of submitting the application online with my resume attached, I received an automated e-mail saying I did not qualify for the job. Since no one had even had time to read my application or resume yet, I can only guess the exclusion was based simply on my current status as unemployed.

Katie

February 17th, 2011
7:57 am

This is a right to work state. Employers can hire and fire whoever they want. This is a horrific economy and I could go on and on about the reasons for that, BUT……employers know who has determination, gumption, and desire to put forth the effort and be a producer. If you have been unemployed for longer than 6 months I think its not too hard an assumption that perhaps these are qualities you lack. If kicking back and cashing your unemployment check is a higher priority than just taking a job, any job you can to be productive; that speaks volumes about a person’s character.

Laurie

February 17th, 2011
7:57 am

This policy has been in place by some employers for many years. In 2002 I had been layed off from a job in Texas and moved to Columbia, South Carolina. As an IT professional with 6+ years COBOL experience, I thought I’d get a job for sure with Blue Cross (the largest employer in Columbia) as they had many openings for COBOL programmers. I kept applying for the positions with little response back. Finally, I pushed a recruiter to tell me why I wasn’t getting a call back. He told me BCBS doesn’t interview/hire people who have been unemployed longer than 3 months. That was a tough thing to hear. I will never ever apply for another job with that company again. Everything worked out for me in the end. I’m working with more advanced programming languages now and make much better money.

Call it like it is

February 17th, 2011
8:00 am

This is not news. Even with my company they will not look at anybody that has been unemployed for longer then 6 months. Their logic is they want a go getter, someone who will make every effort to gain employment. Over and over again they will give interviews to someone with a highschool degree that is working the night shift at a gas station versus someone who has a college degree that has been sitting on their a** for a year waiting for the “perfect” job.

John

February 17th, 2011
8:16 am

This is thanks to the current administration that has spent the better part of two years bashing business and the free-enterprise system. They helped create this massive unemployment and underemployment system in this country that has caused companies to watch their bottom line in fear of higher taxes and that monstrosity, ObamaCare that they aren’t hiring.

Get rid of the politicans in Washington, remove the shackles they have on the free market, and then watch the economy grow.

What ever!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

February 17th, 2011
8:21 am

If I were an employer I would not hire someone who has lazed around for a year or so either. I would want someone coming out of the gate and ready to go. Employers dont have time to hire someone and have them work back up to becoming productive. They want workers.

Keisha

February 17th, 2011
8:25 am

Well I will continue to keep my fingers crossed. I am going into month number 3 of unemployment. I have not been just sitting home waiting for my check. I have reached out to family and friends and manged through my connections to land four interviews. None of them panned out because ALL of them hired from within. I was disappointed but I stay determined.
I can say it is an unfair practice especially in this economy but life is not fair, so as my grandma would say. Just keep on keeping on. Something will turn around.

MY Name Is Who?

February 17th, 2011
8:26 am

I’ve said all along that whenever you threaten High Corporate. Tax you are toying with the longevity of unemployment. I’m a Democrat to my Heart, But when you go against the Machine of actually getting America Out of this Mess you will lose. The Machine being Corp. companies with the Power of Hiring employees again. Until then, we will stay in this position of High Unemployment.

My Theory is that Next Nov. 2012. We as America Vote for the Rep. Candidate and lets see if things change. I think they will. And Pres. Obama and his administration can go down in History… But lets move on.

john

February 17th, 2011
8:27 am

What a bunch of ignorant comments, who the hell “lazes” around for $300.00 a week, if you are accustomed to making 4 or 5 times that amount a week. Do people think about things before they say them, i know people who have “lazed” around and went back to college to get a degree in a different field or some to technical school. Sometimes the ignorance of people on blogs are overwhelming.

Top Chef

February 17th, 2011
8:32 am

It all comes down to corporate America conducting themselves in an ethical manner, of which they haven’t a clue. Our expectations in business of making a reasonable profit have been replaced by ‘make as much as possible at whatever costs’. This greed driven mentality is having an impact on society as we previously knew it.

MY Name Is Who?

February 17th, 2011
8:32 am

@ John… I’m with you… I’m tired of Mainstream Radio and others speaking as the $300 a week is what people would cherish instead of having a job that they lost..

I also love when people Speak from their High Horse as if They are immune from being Laid Off. Keep living and you will see How it Feels. The same thing happened with people bashing people for taking out Sub – Prime Mortagages and losing their Homes. Now, You see people who had a Fixed rate Mortgage losing their Homes … Karma is a Bia_TCH.

Former Job Seeker

February 17th, 2011
8:39 am

The answer to this question is YES. Until recently, I was unemployed for close to 2 years and saw and learned alot about what is happening in regards to the job market. Companies posting “dead/false” positions for the purposes of collecting resumes. I’ve seen job postings that specifically stated that those who were unemployed for X months need not apply. I have even had one interviewer tell me how strong my credentials and experience were for the job but my being out of work for so long was a major hurdle he could not look past.

All I can tell those who are unemployed……don’t lose hope. Stay persistent. Have faith. Your time will come soon for that next job. If you can even do pro-bono work to keep busy and your skills up, do it.

Finally, for those people who honestly believe a person wants to live their life off of $300 a week via unemployment are TOTALLY ignorant. Walk in those shoes and you would rescind such stupid comments. Living off of $1200 a month is not what anyone wants after being out of work involuntarily.

My Two Cents

February 17th, 2011
8:51 am

It is just another reason to eliminate a portion of the pool of candidates. The job market is tough but continue trying and don’t give up. We need job creation in this state and country. Too many of our jobs have gone overseas. When you vote next time make sure the candidate you vote for understands this and has some ideas to correct the problems.

real john

February 17th, 2011
8:52 am

I certainly feel for those who have lost their jobs. Many cases its just a particular field or bad management in a company that the individual employee has little control over.

With that being said, it is NOT the government’s business to meddle into who a public or private company decides to hire. If an employer doesn’t want to hire people who have been out of a job for awhile, that is his or her’s decision to make

black balled

February 17th, 2011
8:54 am

Of course employers are passing up the able, motivated unemployed with ads such as “recent experience” or “previous experience” inferring that if you haven’t been employed lately then you won’t be considered as a potential candidate. So what there investigating this issue and tax dollars are being spent to do so, but think about this, as long as the unemployed stay unemployed, America is spending tax dollars to foot that bill, when it could be spent on healthcare and education. Welfare was a trial and now its a mainstay, why add unemployment beneficiaries to a weaken economy which takes the strength of the “working class” to fix. Blacks, latinos, whites who cares your color, money is green, doesn’t matter which hand its in, if employers are black balling people because of this, stop and consider this…Tax dollars, unemployment benefits, foodstamps, WIC, where is all that coming from? Your pocket. All because you’d rather deny an american citizen a job because he’s been unemployed. So at this point, I would like to say “thank you” for those people that are unemployed, those applicants still filling out job applications even though one door has closed they know that if they stay persistent another door will open and someone will hire them, for those who still persevere in work places that will continue to discriminate regardless of EEOC policies, we say thank you

Furious Styles

February 17th, 2011
8:58 am

@Katie Please READ the article again…It speaks nothing about people who kick back and collect that ungodly sum of the $300/wk from unemployment…..lol Its a farce. People ARE actively seeking work and if employers are doing what this article is saying then they should be dealt with.

Fernan Cepero of the Society for Human Resource Management states that “screening out the unemployed is unproductive,” and that using current employment as a signal of quality job performance is decidedly weak and serves as a poor proxy for successful job performance.”
I wouldn’t trust or want to work at a company that has such a philosophy.

Road Warrior

February 17th, 2011
8:59 am

Having been on both sides of the fence, I offer the following. The employers are saying that anyone who has been unemployed for a period of time need not apply. They say nothing about what type of job you currently hold.

I’ve been unemployed twice in the last 10 years, and by unemployed I mean not working in my chosen profession. The first time was in 2001, I spent 9 months working at Blockbuster video, until the market improved enough for me to get back into my career field. The second time was in 2007, and I was out for 10 months. During that time I worked as a Front Desk clerk and my wife and I with 2 other partners opened up a hair salon which is now very successful. I didn’t get back into my field until January 2008, and have continued successfully since then.

Point is, ANY job is preferable to NO job. Employers are no longer willing to simply forgive long stretches of unemployment, they absolutely look at it as a test of motivation and character. If you want to get back to work, take the job at the kiosk in the mall and show a potential employer that you are a go getter and that you are willing to do whatever it takes to succeed, and I promise that they will respond in a much more positive manner.

GaryAMG

February 17th, 2011
9:03 am

As the pool of prospective employees is much larger, employers look for additional ways to ‘weed out’ applicants. Make no mistake, the job application process is one of attrition. Is employment status a ‘fair’ barometer? As a friend of mind reminds me, the Fair is where you go to ride the rides and eat cotton candy.

Nan

February 17th, 2011
9:13 am

This has been true forever — it has always been much, much harder to find a job when you’re jobless than if you’re currently working and looking to make a change. No matter what the circumstances of your last job ending (the company went bankrupt, production moved out of the country, or something else the employees have absolutely no control over), employers look at the unemployed applicants like it’s their fault they lost that job. Has nothing to do with right to work, unions or nonunions, or government policy — it’s just employers being rational and figuring that by hiring someone who’s currently got a job, they’ve saved themselves some work in the screening process.

OOWguru

February 17th, 2011
9:17 am

People that cry unemployed persons are lazy are either idiots or have been listening to the radio talk jockeys garbage. I am unemployed because my employer moved to another state,I took severance and we signed an agreement for a bonus if I stayed until the transition, had a good employment reviews from all management yet on interviews employers ask why are you unemployed. When I explain they say yes, ok, then never hear from them. I had a manager that told me he would NEVER hire an unemployed worker, yet he took a job and the company went bust within a month. He felt the wrath of unemployment and was disgusted at the outcome. He was rejected by the same ideology he had, unemployed go away!! There is a GOD out there!

I have experience the same type of rejections mentioned on this board and from friends, unemployed, well, don’t apply or your resume goes into file13 the trash can. Employers have the upper hand now but in the end, I believe there is a higher power that will judge their actions on those in need.

  

February 17th, 2011
9:17 am

Oh boy….let’s waste more taxpayer dollars investigating something that cannot be proven with a level of certainty that would make it worth it.

Are you even paying attention? Clearly it is happening.

:(

Glenn

February 17th, 2011
9:23 am

Lets not over trivialize things . A major news site did a survey and found 84 percent of all employees nationwide were going to look for another job this year . Thats ALOT of people who have jobs looking to change companies . Naturally the qualified candidate with a job is going to be more attractive than the one who is unemployed . Its not rocket surgery . And I will throw my political two cents . Free trade is not free . We pay for it out the backdoor . We need to eliminate outsourcing . This country needs to give incentives to companies to bring jobs back home .

Road Warrior

February 17th, 2011
9:23 am

Nan – “it’s just employers being rational and figuring that by hiring someone who’s currently got a job, they’ve saved themselves some work in the screening process.”

I agree with that. The same logic can be applied to denying a candidate a position simply because they didn’t have a degree in favor of hiring someone who did even though their experience and work history are equally matched. I think this time around, it’s more of wake up call to what employers have always done.

I never heard of the EEOC getting invloved because a canidate was denied a job for not speaking spanish, or that a candidate didn’t get hired because they didn’t finish college even though the job could be done without a diploma. People have been getting denied position for all kinds of reasons since commerce was invented. It just seems that now that more people who normally wouldn’t be affected suddenly realize what others have known for years. And as such we suddenly need more oversight from the EEOC and the DOL.

Charles

February 17th, 2011
9:35 am

Employers have a choice- they can either hire the unemployed, or continue to see their taxes rise for paying out unemployment, welfare, food stamps, etc., ! Their choice, I prefer the former!

Underemployed Atlantan

February 17th, 2011
9:40 am

Unfortunately, unemployment is not a protected class; therefore, EEOC’s view will be very limited. It seems as though EEOC looks for loopholes to avoid situations. So, the unemployed need not to apply, but recent college graduates can? Aren’t their skills even more limited as someone whose unemployed?

Elizabeth

February 17th, 2011
9:50 am

I agree with ROADWARRIOR…When I got lost my decent paying job last year, I took a part time job at walmart and one at mcdonalds to feed my kids and pay my bills. It took six months to find another decent job in my field but I was only one house payment behind and my kids learned a great lesson.

1911A1

February 17th, 2011
9:55 am

It is the knowledge and awareness of this fact that has kept me commuting 100 miles a day to a job I hate at a dysfunctional company that is sucking the life out of me. The fact is, it’s a buyer’s market, and employers can do pretty much whatever they want to filter the pool, as each opening generates thousands of applicants.

Katie

February 17th, 2011
10:04 am

Again, with the excuse filled people out of work commenting here. You can absolutely find a job that pays 10 bucks an hour even in this economy. If as you guys claim $300 is your unemployment check, I’m thinking the ten less taxes would be quite similar. Then you would have proven to potential future employers that you have drive and intiative. My husband and I are no strangers to out of work problems, but by the time month 3 or 4 rolls around, you better get off your high horse and find whatever work is available.
For me, I started my own business. Started two in fact and when its slow income in one, I really push the other. My husband works in the restaurant industry and works 60 hour weeks. You all who say the $300 unemployment check is nothing to be thrilled with, get off your butts and get TWO jobs and work the 60 hours. lt will pay the bills and grow a little character at the same time. NO, you aren’t going to get your cushy 40 hour a week job with all the frills, but show an employer that you have drive and perhaps you’ll get their some day.

N

February 17th, 2011
10:08 am

Employers in most industries have always asked about gaps in employment, especially longer then 6 months. I’ve always felt that its easier to find work when your already employed.

Truth

February 17th, 2011
10:11 am

If you have a specific skillset that is in demand (Financial Accounting, I.T., etc.) at the “worker bee” level, you have more than enough opportunities out there. There are two types of applicants having problems:

1. The middle managers and above. A company does not want to put someone who has already peaked in their career underneath someone who is still on their way up. Although you would be willing to do it because you are watchnig your lifestyle slip away, the reality is that when “things pick back up” and you can go back to being the Director, etc. you will leave. If you are as valuable as you think you are, you won’t really respect the person who is half your age with 1/3 of the experience, and you will be frustrated in the role. That’s why the company isn’t calling you.

Advice: Keep applying to jobs, but start an LLC and market yourself directly to companies on a 1099 basis. You can write off nearly everything and can still be your own boss.

2. Those who have a generic business, political science, etc. degree with no internships. Most companies want people who they can plug in and not train. Everyone is running lean and mean wants already trained and broken-in worker bees to fill a specific role, who will work hard for $40-50K.

Advice: If you have a technical degree, look for an internship. If your degree is generic, go back (to a major brick and mortar college…not an online Phoenix or Strayer, etc.) and get something technical and in demand.

H

February 17th, 2011
10:12 am

Call them out! Dun and Bradstreet posting:3 years with current employed required. You have to be kidding me that we don’t have a few talented unemployed people to fill these positions?? You can be unemployed to no fault of your own and still get screwed over.

Job Description:
$115K…Dun & Bradstreet 4 Inside Sales Execs Needed…..

I am a corporate recruiter with DnB and I have numerous sales positions available

You can apply online via the DnB careers website or email resume directly to…

OTE $115K ($65k base) uncapped

Only candidates with a background selling Software Solutions or Database Marketing with a solid employment history driving $1.5 million annually in business successfully will be considered.

Minimum of 3yrs with current employer required
Minimum 3-5 years of inside sales experience with proven success.
A drive and history of achieving and surpassing goals and quotas.
Excellent written and oral communication skills.
Able to build superior customer relationships.
Handles multiple tasks well, in a fast paced, professional environment.
Bachelor’s degree preferred

Manage, service and grow inside telesales accounts by providing business solutions that impact performance within the customer’s functional areas: risk management, finance, marketing, purchasing, and technology. This inside sales position is accountable for selling all D&B products and services.
Client Relationships- Builds relationships with customers and key decision makers, utilizes SFDC automation tools to effectively communicate with internal and external customers as well as build customer relationships. Proactively and consistently contact the customer base via telephone to better understand their risk management decision process and recommend D&B capabilities that will enable customers to make more confident decisions.

Bachelor’s degree is preferred or equivalent experience
3-5 years of business to business insales experience with proven success.
Strong relationship-building & customer service skill set
Ability to identify and solve customer problems by clearly communicating the D&B value proposition. Handles multiple tasks well, in a fast paced, professional environment.
Strong organization skills as seen through effective use of Sale Force Automation Productivity, Desk and time management and various other planning tools.
Effectively coordinates internal resources and is knowledgeable of internal processes and procedures.
Excellent written and oral communication skills. Excellent analytical and negotiation skills.
Computer literate (working knowledge of Microsoft Office, use of Sales Automation Tools, i.e. Siebel a plus).

Senior Recruiter
The Dow Group,a D&B Partner

Cynthia Fox-Giddens

February 17th, 2011
10:38 am

I have been looking for employment a very long time and began to see ads that clearly stated that only currently employed need to apply. It’s quite a disturbing trend in the job market which is already tough enough. Hire Me Please!

williebkind

February 17th, 2011
10:58 am

Hey I thought education was the cure! Dont all those unemployed for two years have a BA degree by now. Surely with the unemployment benefits, Hope, Pell, and WIA handouts all the unemployed should be nuclear scientists by now. I am looking forward for one of these socially engineered persons to become my supervisor.

Willing to Take 60pct Pay Cut

February 17th, 2011
11:19 am

Yes, they are filtering when I get a note from a company attorney, explaining that they are having difficulty assessing my “current work status” from the recruiter’s site and would I please send a resume directly. I’ve made over $100K and was laid off 2 years ago. “Sitting back and collecting unemployment” doesn’t apply – it was only 20% of what I was making. I’ve been turned away after excellent interviews because employers wouldn’t believe that I was willing to do their job at their rate. Now, after burning through my savings, I’m living off the proceeds of the sale of my possessions!

pj

February 17th, 2011
11:49 am

Katie, you know not of what you speak.

dumb down

February 17th, 2011
11:50 am

why hire someone who has sat around for 6 months or a year on unemployment goofing off watching TV? companies want productive people, especially when they can hire whoever they want in a bad economy.

TRUTH

February 17th, 2011
12:01 pm

Frankly, this is a common practice by the corporate powers. Their view is that if a person is employed, then they accomplsh “pirating” an essential performer of their competitors, thereby weakening them. Unfortunately, this practice has been in place for a protracted period of time and its unlikely to change in the near future. It is akin to trying to prove racism, sexism, or any other violation that is subtle and can be dodged. Unless the action is blatant, and I do mean blatant, there is nothing that any agency can do to remedy the situation. You can tell them to cease and desist, and all they’ll do is remove the language from employment ad, however, the “taint” has been issued and the discrimination will continue.

I am an African American male, highly educated, skilled, and (per my pevious evaluations) exceptional in the performance of my position(s). However, I would be insane not to think that my being unemployed (aside from my other hinderances in corporate America), would make me attractive to any employer. My experience and education makes me cost prohibitive; my curent unemployed status does not indicate “available asset,” but more, “he must be trouble”; and my race, well let’s just I’m still a minority.

So to the EEOC, until you get some teeth and have the GONADS to actually bring suit against this practice (which of course the ReTHUGlicans will fight vigorously in Congress), {side-note – The EEOC has the authority to actually bring suit, however it is rare that they do…ever}, then any study is nothing more than lip service.

Just sayin’

TRUTH

February 17th, 2011
12:03 pm

Dang I mispelled “previous” my apologies…

lloyd Workensnuff

February 17th, 2011
12:05 pm

To all of you who call the unemployed lazy, all is well for you for the moment. But you must realize that the train of unemployment will make a stop in your station before long. All you have to do is wait. Then after the tables have turned, lets get your point of veiw as you are sitting on the other side. Keep living, you will soon see. Nobody speaks of the “Subprime” loans anymore. Why? Because people with “Prime” loans are getting set out on their butts as well. If you do not have a job the mortgage will not get paid regardless. Everybody wants the economy to “get better”. How will it get better if the unemployed stay unemployed? Somebody needs to explain that to these empty suits at the big corporations who hold all the cards. You can blame Obama all day but at the end of the day it is up to Corporate America who rule the day.

Chuck

February 17th, 2011
12:08 pm

This is the only thing keeping me in my terrible and spirit draining job. It’s unfortunate since there are plenty of qualified, unemployed candidates would would be grateful for any full time work.

For all of you saying that people should take the $10/hour job since the pay will resemble unemployment benefits, bear in mind that these jobs rarely provide 40 hours of work per week. Employers prefer to hire 10 part time employees working 20 hour weeks than 5 employees working 40 hour weeks. That way, they can deny them full time benefits according to their internal HR policies and won’t have to pay overtime if the workload increases.

I think the government should run a trial big works project. Employ only people currently on unemployment to build something…anything. It won’t cost too much more than just sending out checks, will give people something to do and put on their resume, and at the end we’ll have another Hoover Dam or TVA that provides permanent jobs.

Anne

February 17th, 2011
12:09 pm

There are a lot of folks here that do not know how to walk in another’s shoes… Here are a couple of my thoughts…

$300 is the MAX someone can get- most don’t get that..
.
Millions, yes, MILLIONS of homes/people are still going into foreclosure, that’s NOT because they are NOT looking for work….

More people than ever are looking for public assistance (housing, heat, food…) and there is not enough to go around. So, some have no heat, many are homeless or about to be, and the food pantries are constantly empty. The shelters are full to capacity and there are waiting lists at mot of them. Because people are lazy???

I am friends with 4 HR managers and 2 staffing managers (a key learning from when I was unemployed 8 years ago) and none of them, zero-zip-nada, none of them say they get ‘5 applicants for every job’ (this is the government mantra) instead they say they get hundreds or in some cases Thousands, for a single position. How would you like those odds?

I have two friends who have been unemployed for over a year. After 3 months of unemployment, one had to begin taking care of an 86 year old parent whose health is declining and does not expect to be able to go back to work for another year, the other developed cancer and spent a full year battling that before, hopefully, beating it. In a few months she will have hair and an immune system again, and be healthy enough to go to work. Are they lazy and unemployable?

I think these people are Survivors. They are able to hang on when the going get tough. I think they demonstrate perseverance and determination. These will be some of the most grateful, hardworking employees a company could ever ask for. The reality is any company would be lucky to get them. But, at this juncture, many of those companies discriminating against the unemployed don’t deserve them.

Bob

February 17th, 2011
12:14 pm

I am 62 years old and have a good education and a wealth of experience in broadcasting and in advertising/marketing. I lost my job last May and can’t even get an interview. This is the first time I have ever been employed. Yes, I believe this to be true… also some age discrimination.

Bob

February 17th, 2011
12:21 pm

I have to add… I wouldn’t want to work for someone who doesn’t want me. I have had 3 jobs since college… the first for 5 years, the next for 15, and the last for nearly 18. I have moved because I wanted to, not because my previous boss canned me. I was laid off, not fired and the owner of the business has written me a nice letter explaining how valuable an employee I was. The problem is, the business is hurting and they have had to lay off a lot of people. Hard times.

williebkind

February 17th, 2011
12:22 pm

The reason the employers are not hiring is because a few wage earners for the employer are making all the money plus bonuses. If you want everyone to become employed then you need a maximum wage limit. That provides funds for your next job.

Tanya

February 17th, 2011
12:24 pm

@ Katie – You should really stop being so judgemental. Many management level individuals who have recently found themselves out of work have applied everywhere from the boardroom to McDonalds, only to be told that they’re ‘overqualified’. Most job postings receive hundreds, if not thousands, of applicants and these same overqualified individuals are weeded out becaue they’re currently unemployed. What should they do? Start a businessness you say? I guess everyone should do what you’ve done and that would be the magic solution for the world huh? I pray that you never find yourself in this position. For those who tend to be as unsympathetic as you, the eyeopener is quite devastating.

Strange Days

February 17th, 2011
12:44 pm

It’s a pretty sad day in this country when an entry level service worker with a Jr. High education actually has the advantage over an MBA with 10 years of experience.