3 thoughts on “The unemployed

  1. This is such a short-sighted attitude. There are too many intellectually lazy people among the employers, who do not want to think and screen applicants. They live in a world of snap judgements, and their businesses suffer for it.

    I never cared whether people were employed or not when interviewing them. What mattered is how they described their unemployment and the reason for it. But what I really focused on was what they brought to the job, in experience, talent, and especially, enthusiasm and willingness to work as part of a team.

    Too many people who do interviewing of applicants look at this as an added burden in their job, besides their normal work. They do not understand that this creation of a functional team is their first priority, above and beyond their daily tasks.

    If a potential employer empowers and entrusts a gatekeeper with such ridiculous shortsightedness that s/he excludes a huge portion of applicants because of current job status, you don’t want to work for or with that bozo.

  2. My experience with interviewers in personnel departments over the past few years has been Monty Python-esque. They tend to ask a series of prepared questions (sometimes even reading from a written list!), usually stupid ones, and to nod or say “Hmm…” at my responses. It’s as if they’re consulting a list of pre-approved answers and marking me accordingly. No thoughtfulness and inclination to actually listen and observe. In most cases the interviewers were quite young and appeared to have been only superficially trained to do the job. I think most interviewers are aware that their employers, with rare exceptions, are only looking for young applicants who won’t cost much. They only go through the motions of seriously considering older, experienced applicants. As Krugman wrote on Friday: “We’re well on the way to creating a permanent underclass of the jobless.”

Comments are closed.