Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The unemployed will not be considered

huffingtonpost.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 94 posts

Re: The unemployed will not be considered

#11

Post by tibbon »

joezydeco wrote: post #5
jolan wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably just a tactic to reduce resume spam. After being unemployed for awhile, people tend to apply to everything to increase their chances of success.

Agreed, but it sounds lazy. How hard is it to check the work chronology and just bong any resume that doesn't look like it would be anywhere near a good fit? It's not like H/R people are overworked filling hundreds of positions in their companies at the moment.

Right on. Google's got a rather good system for automatically sorting and filtering applicants before they ever cross an HR Manager's desk. Why not have a system like this if you're so overwhelmed in hiring?

Re: The unemployed will not be considered

#12

Post by tibbon »

I wonder how they look at people that were starting their own company, freelancing, etc...?

When I'm not in the fulltime employ of one company, I'm generally working on my own projects, freelancing, consulting, etc. My resume never looks to have blank sections even if I get laid off and the income keeps flowing that way too.

But what does it mean to be employed? Receiving a paycheck? RMS doesn't take a paycheck from MIT, so he's both homeless and unemployed by the standard of receiving a paycheck and having an apartment/home. Yet for the right position, he's infinitely qualified.

Then again, I don't think I want to work for any company that has shitty hiring standards and is so elitist as to not even consider edge cases.

Re: The unemployed will not be considered

#13

Post by Dove »

crux_ wrote: post #10
[deleted] wrote: post #2

[deleted]

Yes, HuffPo is leftist, but I don't see how rage over this particular issue has jack-all to do with where you lie on the partisan spectrum. I'd expect even many full-bore libertarians to find that policy stupid, discriminatory or both (though they would more fully support an employer's right to be as stupid and discriminatory as they wish).

Stupid and discriminatory, they could probably agree on. The difference is in how they react.

Leftist: That's unfair! There ought to be a law.

Rightist: Meh, they probably have their reasons. Anyway, their funeral.

Re: The unemployed will not be considered

#14

Post by [deleted] »

crux_ wrote: post #10
[deleted] wrote: post #2

[deleted]

Yes, HuffPo is leftist, but I don't see how rage over this particular issue has jack-all to do with where you lie on the partisan spectrum. I'd expect even many full-bore libertarians to find that policy stupid, discriminatory or both (though they would more fully support an employer's right to be as stupid and discriminatory as they wish).

[deleted]

Re: The unemployed will not be considered

#16

Post by enjo »

tibbon wrote: post #12

I wonder how they look at people that were starting their own company, freelancing, etc...? When I'm not in the fulltime employ of one company, I'm generally working on my own projects, freelancing, consulting, etc. My resume never looks to have blank sections even if I get laid off and the income keeps flowing that way too. But what does it mean to be employed? Receiving a paycheck? RMS doesn't take a paycheck from…

I get where they are coming from. I was heavily involved in a big hiring spree shortly after the telecom implosion in Dallas. The sheer volume of resumes that we received was staggering. We'd have literally 100's of resumes within an hour of posting a job ad. Maybe 2% of those actually had anything resembling the qualifications we we're looking for (and had clearly spelled out in the ad). It really did seem like folks, out of desperation, where simply shotgunning resumes and hoping for the best.

We never considered simply tossing out the unemployed, but I get why they're doing it. Particularly at companies that aren't trying to hire absolute top-level talent.

It does absolutely suck for anyone looking for a job tho.

Re: The unemployed will not be considered

#17

Post by enjo »

[deleted] wrote: post #14
crux_ wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, HuffPo is leftist, but I don't see how rage over this particular issue has jack-all to do with where you lie on the partisan spectrum. I'd expect even many full-bore libertarians to find that policy stupid, discriminatory or both (though they would more fully support an employer's right to be as stupid and discriminatory as they wish).

[deleted]

At the risk of turning this into a political argument... your characterization of the left is simply untrue. A 'leftist' (whatever that means) would most likely view business with a measure of caution, preferring a regulatory power keeping a careful (but generally distant) watch over those business practices.

Very few on 'the left' are full bore socialists, and even fewer are anti-commerce.

Re: The unemployed will not be considered

#18

Post by enjo »

joezydeco wrote: post #5
jolan wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably just a tactic to reduce resume spam. After being unemployed for awhile, people tend to apply to everything to increase their chances of success.

Agreed, but it sounds lazy. How hard is it to check the work chronology and just bong any resume that doesn't look like it would be anywhere near a good fit? It's not like H/R people are overworked filling hundreds of positions in their companies at the moment.

This is actually an indication of economic recovery. The H.R. folks that I know are MASSIVELY overworked right now. As their companies begin to start a new hiring cycle they are being just blasted with candidates.

I was talking to an accounting recruiter the other day. They're finally starting to have a decent flow of jobs in the pipeline, but he's being killed by the number of applicants... many of which merely had an accounting class or two in college on the way to their marketing degree.

Re: The unemployed will not be considered

#19

Post by flatline »

joezydeco wrote: post #5
jolan wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's probably just a tactic to reduce resume spam. After being unemployed for awhile, people tend to apply to everything to increase their chances of success.

Agreed, but it sounds lazy. How hard is it to check the work chronology and just bong any resume that doesn't look like it would be anywhere near a good fit? It's not like H/R people are overworked filling hundreds of positions in their companies at the moment.

My wife's employer recently received 650 applications for three low-paying, entry-level legal positions. Not that I don't think it's a lousy thing to do, and probably will not screen for the best applicants, but I could see a justification for doing _something_ to stem the tide if the number becomes overwhelming.

Re: The unemployed will not be considered

#20

Post by rick888 »

tibbon wrote: post #12

I wonder how they look at people that were starting their own company, freelancing, etc...? When I'm not in the fulltime employ of one company, I'm generally working on my own projects, freelancing, consulting, etc. My resume never looks to have blank sections even if I get laid off and the income keeps flowing that way too. But what does it mean to be employed? Receiving a paycheck? RMS doesn't take a paycheck from…

"But what does it mean to be employed? Receiving a paycheck? RMS doesn't take a paycheck from MIT, so he's both homeless and unemployed by the standard of receiving a paycheck and having an apartment/home. Yet for the right position, he's infinitely qualified."

RMS may not get a paycheck from MIT, but he is making money. He has at least one book for sale and charges for signed pictures of himself.

I am pretty sure he also makes money speaking at various events.

Post reply on HN