If You’re Unemployed, Don’t Apply?

Unemployed Seek Protection Against Job Bias

This makes no sense to me. I would think that an applicant who’s been out of work a long time would make a great employee. They’d be grateful for the opportunity and work extra hard. Sadly, some companies don’t think so:

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

I can see now why those unemployed for such a long time are feeling hopeless. You may be perfect for a position, but they won’t even consider you because you’ve been out of work? That just blows.

Would a law help? I don’t know. All I know is that this really sucks. I searched CareerBuilder.com and used “currently employed” as key words. There were definitely ones that said, MUST BE CURRENTLY EMPLOYED Yes, it was in bold capital letters. In one, the first question under Applicant Questionnaire was: 1. Are you currently employed? If not, when was your last day of work? That would be seriously depressing to read that in a job posting.

I hope companies give those who are unemployed a chance, though. Take a gamble. I think the odds are good that they will prove themselves to be hardworking, loyal employees. If anyone knows that being unemployed sucks, it’s them. They’ll do whatever it takes to keep from being unemployed again.

Jobs, Schmobs

Democrats Turn “Where are the Jobs?” Chant on GOP

This article talks about how the GOP’s emphasized job creation but now, it’s all about reducing the size of government and spending. Hmm. So you reduce the size of government by slashing programs. As a result, government workers may lose their jobs. Job loss ≠ job creation. Speaker Boehner’s answer? “So be it.”

Is this supposed to help the economy? Maybe you can trim government when the economy is stronger, but now? If government workers lose their jobs, what happens to the unemployment rate? Spending stimulates the economy. If you are unemployed, do you have a lot of money to spend?

I’m sure an economist can explain this to me, but I want to go off-roading a bit. The GOP emphasized that they were going to go in there to help fix the economy and create jobs. Put America back on track. Just how important was that promise? At this really cool site, OpenCongress, you can look at the different bills that are on the floor. I looked for bills based on issues related to jobs, employment, etc.

The one that stuck out was H.R. 589 – extending unemployment insurance.

Others were pretty cool. One has to do with whistle blowers – providing extra protection for them and harsher penalties for the offender they “outed.” (H.R. 190) Another prevents employers (prospective and current), from checking your credit (H.R. 321)

Admirable. But where are the bills that help with job creation? I couldn’t find any. Wouldn’t it be cool to see something like tax credits for shipping jobs back to the United States? Anything that has to do with trying to get people back to work?

I guess that’s not really they’re priority? What is, then?

• Repealing Healthcare (H.R. 2)

Death panels for Obamacare

• Declaring that Life Begins at Conception (S.91 and H.R. 212)

To make absolutely sure you agree, we’re making two declarations.

• Prohibiting Federal Funding of Abortion (H.R. 3 & H.R. 358)

It’s already prohibited, but what the hell? Let’s remind people. Twice.

• Challenging Birthright Citizenship? (H.R. 140)

Drown, “anchor baby,” drown.

• Making Sales Tax the Only Tax? (H.R. 25)

23% sales tax can eliminate income, payroll, and estate taxes. What’s 23% of a $350K house? $80,050? That’s in my other purse.

It looks like the GOP is concentrating on everything but job creation.

Shocked? Yeah, me neither.