Discriminating Against The Unemployed
10-09-2011 | 12:13 PM
#1
Thread Starter
Administrator
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 8,025
Likes: 0
From: C-172
Discriminating Against The Unemployed
So the media puts up a picture of this woman next to a FedEx box and the story about how both the temp agency and FedEx apparently told her she would not be hired because she has been unemployed for longer than 6 months. Then spokespersons of both companies deny they discriminate against the long term unemployed. What is the real situation here?
Jobless seek help fighting hiring discrimination - Business - Careers - msnbc.com
Jobless seek help fighting hiring discrimination - Business - Careers - msnbc.com
10-09-2011 | 12:29 PM
#2
I'm a man of my word.
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,883
Likes: 0
From: Devil's Advocate
If an employer doesn't want to hire someone, they will find a reason. The reason now is "you've been unemployed too long." Shoot, we hear that all the time in this industry. Currency is king when you are competing with hundreds, possibly thousands of other equally qualified pilots.
Employers should have the right to pick and choose who they want to work for their company. Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Southwest look for certain types of people that fit in well with their "Culture." And that seems to be one of the best companies to work for right now.
Employers should have the right to pick and choose who they want to work for their company. Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Southwest look for certain types of people that fit in well with their "Culture." And that seems to be one of the best companies to work for right now.
10-09-2011 | 01:05 PM
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 8,047
Likes: 0
From: 767 FO
Why wouldnt someone want to hire someone who has been sitting around for two years collecting a paycheck for not working. I cant understand it.
If I ran HR these are the people I would be looking for:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QZlp3eGMNI
If I ran HR these are the people I would be looking for:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QZlp3eGMNI
Last edited by FDXLAG; 10-09-2011 at 01:43 PM.
10-09-2011 | 02:26 PM
#4
Day puke
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 3,865
Likes: 0
From: Out.
Funny thing is I read a post on another site talking about a woman who felt she was being discriminated against because she was NOT on any government assistance. According to her, she is being passed over in favor of a persons on unemployment because the companies get a tax credit for hiring those on assistance.
10-09-2011 | 02:26 PM
#5
Prime Minister/Moderator
Joined: Jan 2006
Posts: 44,936
Likes: 701
From: Engines Turn or People Swim
If an employer doesn't want to hire someone, they will find a reason. The reason now is "you've been unemployed too long." Shoot, we hear that all the time in this industry. Currency is king when you are competing with hundreds, possibly thousands of other equally qualified pilots.
Employers should have the right to pick and choose who they want to work for their company. Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Southwest look for certain types of people that fit in well with their "Culture." And that seems to be one of the best companies to work for right now.
Employers should have the right to pick and choose who they want to work for their company. Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Southwest look for certain types of people that fit in well with their "Culture." And that seems to be one of the best companies to work for right now.
That means that those of who have jobs won't be able to get new ones unless we get fired first.
That would be very lopsided.
I don't like the practice either but not sure how you fix it...it's not entirely unreasonable for a company to want to hire people with "currency" and "recency" in their skill set.
10-09-2011 | 02:57 PM
#6
I'm a man of my word.
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,883
Likes: 0
From: Devil's Advocate
Yeah, but if you legislate it they they will HAVE to hire the unemployed or get sued...
That means that those of who have jobs won't be able to get new ones unless we get fired first.
That would be very lopsided.
I don't like the practice either but not sure how you fix it...it's not entirely unreasonable for a company to want to hire people with "currency" and "recency" in their skill set.
That means that those of who have jobs won't be able to get new ones unless we get fired first.
That would be very lopsided.
I don't like the practice either but not sure how you fix it...it's not entirely unreasonable for a company to want to hire people with "currency" and "recency" in their skill set.
And I totally understand why companies hire current pilots, that makes sense. Is it fair? Not necessarily. But a current pilot is more likely to complete training, whereas someone who hasn't touched an airplane in a while might have some difficulty returning to the line.
Better yet, do you want the surgeon who does 1,000 surgeries a year... or the guy who just got back from long term leave of absence?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
