Archive for Monday, October 10, 2011

Unemployed seek protection against prejudice in job search

October 10, 2011

Advertisement

After two years on the unemployment rolls, Selena Forte thought she’d found a temporary job at a delivery company that matched her qualifications.

But Forte, a 55-year-old from Cleveland, says a recruiter for an employment agency told her she would not be considered for the job because she had been out of work too long. She had lost her job driving a bus.

“They didn’t even want to hear about my experience,” said Forte. “It didn’t make sense. You’re always told just go out there and get a job.”

Forte, scraping by now as a part-time substitute school bus driver, is part of a growing number of unemployed or underemployed Americans who complain they are being screened out of job openings for the very reason they’re looking for work in the first place. Some companies and job agencies prefer applicants who already have jobs, or haven’t been jobless too long.

Help in jobs bill?

She could get help from a provision in President Barack Obama’s jobs bill, which would ban companies with 15 or more employees from refusing to consider — or offer a job to — someone who is unemployed. The measure also applies to employment agencies and would prohibit want ads that disqualify applicants just because they are unemployed.

But Obama’s bill faces a troubled path in Congress, as Republicans strongly oppose its plans for tax increases on the wealthy and other spending provisions. Should the bill fail, Democrats are sure to remind jobless voters that the GOP blocked an attempt to redress discrimination against them at a time when work is so hard to find.

The effort to protect the unemployed has drawn praise from workers’ rights advocates, but business groups say it will just stir up needless litigation by frustrated job applicants. The provision would give those claiming discrimination a right to sue, and violators would face fines of up to $1,000 per day, plus attorney fees and costs.

“Threatening business owners with new lawsuits is not going to help create jobs and will probably have a chilling effect on hiring,” said Cynthia Magnuson, spokeswoman for the National Federation of Independent Business. “Business owners may be concerned about posting a new job if they could face a possible lawsuit.”

‘Must be employed’

A survey earlier this year by the National Employment Law Project found more than 150 job postings on employment websites such as CareerBuilder.com and Monster.com requiring that applicants “must be currently employed” or using other exclusionary language based on current employment status.

“It’s really alarming to us that employers continue to ignore the strong public condemnation of this practice,” said Maurice Emsellem, the legal group’s policy co-director.

The issue has gained more prominence as the unemployment level remains stuck at more than 9 percent and a record 4.5 million people — nearly one-third of the unemployed — have been out of work for a year or more. And older workers, like Forte, often struggle to find new jobs.

“There’s a flood of workers looking for jobs right now, and unfortunately, this is a convenient way to streamline the process” by employers, Emsellem said. Some companies might assume people who have been out of work for several months may not be stellar performers, he said.

Comments

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 3 years, 7 months ago

Clearly, the belief among the "job creators" class is that unemployment rates in the double-digit-plus range is good for them.

voevoda 3 years, 7 months ago

I don't think that the proposed legislation (prohibiting potential employers from requiring that successful applicants already hold a job) would be effective. It would be too easy for employers to invent another reason for not hiring unemployed persons. And it certainly could result in frivolous lawsuits, as well as honest but misguided ones by disappointed job-seekers. I do think that legitimate job-posting sites could refuse to post help wanted announcements that explicitly exclude unemployed persons from eligibility.
This problem also illustrates the potential benefit of creating a new government WPA work program. But this story should give pause to all readers who like to think that unemployed people are simply lazy and happy to live on government benefits. Clearly, the great majority of unemployed people have been diligent in seeking employment.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.