Woot! Woot! The India unemployment rate is holding steady at
7.8%. Time to break out the champagne, right?
Not really. There are still 20 some million unemployed or
underemployed people (depending upon whose definition of “underemployed” you
use). Add to that 88 million who have dropped out of the workforce entirely,
and you come up with a total of approximately 110 million workers who are
unemployed, underemployed, or who have simply given up hope of ever finding a
job.
That’s 35% of the American population—people whom the Bureau of Labor
Statistics classifies as “functionally unemployed.” According to Gallup’s
Payroll to Population indicator, only 45% of Americans over age 18 years of age
have full-time jobs!
In light of such sobering statistics, you might want to
rethink the celebratory bubbly and instead, pour yourself a good stiff drink.
Corporate Culpa
So what’s to blame for the unprecedented jobless rates we’re
seeing today? Outsourcing, a supposed jobs deficit and the Great Recession are
atop the minds of many. But if you bring the unemployment crisis down to a more
personal level, employers deserve the lion’s share of the blame.
When it comes to filling open positions, companies set
themselves and applicants up for failure by using outdated, ineffective (and
often unfair) methods to recruit and hire. Simply put, most employers operate
outside the realm of common sense.
Recruitment and assessment of prospective hires is generally
based on a match system. In other words, applicants are screened according to
how closely their background matches the job description. The goal: find the
“perfect match.” In theory, this type of system makes sense; in the real world,
not so much. Filtering applicants according to a perfect match instead of
potential to do the job, excludes a great number of viable candidates. Take
the case of my friend James:
•
A commercial copywriter and editor for over 15 years. James
has written websites, books, magazine articles—you name it. When he was laid
off, James registered with a temp agency, thinking it would be a good way to
generate income and network while he pursued another full-time position. A
national pet care company posted an opening for a direct mail editor. “Direct
mail” as in the ad circulars delivered daily to everyone’s mailbox and
immediately discarded. Thinking he was a good fit, James applied, only to be
turned down because the company was looking for “someone with experience
editing price points.” What? Ironically, the rejection e-mail (which the temp
agency forwarded to him) was full of grammar/spelling mistakes.
It just goes to show—you can’t fix stupid. Every day,
applicants are summarily excluded from consideration because companies continue
to focus on how well a candidate matches the job description when instead,
the focus should be on the candidate’s ability to do the job.
Unfair Hiring Practices
Many companies won’t even consider applicants that fail to
list a salary requirement—a practice that screams cheap and leads job seekers
to think that the company will lowball them. Companies ask about salary up
front because they don’t want to waste their time interviewing candidates who
are out of their price range. That’s perfectly legitimate, but the right way to
handle this sticky issue is for the employer to state the salary range, either
in the ad or during the initial contact with the applicant.
Here’s another disturbing trend. In an attempt to maintain
profit margins, some employers are going down the “two for one” road. That’s
where the company combines two jobs, advertises for one position (with all the
responsibilities of both), and offers a salary that’s roughly half of the newly
repackaged job that was more junior. This is an outrageous practice reminiscent
of feudal lords and vassals. Unfortunately, many employers have been quick to
capitalize on the unemployment crisis by demanding more and paying less.
Midlife Mayhem
Midlife workers face some of the steepest odds of any job
seekers in this economy. Why? Age bias has a lot to do with it. It’s no secret
that workers over age 45 aren’t considered a target group for employment.
Younger applicants are perceived as being more flexible; more technologically
savvy; a better deal in terms of salary and benefits. Further, midlife workers
who lost their jobs as a result of corporate downsizing are often perceived as
being second rate, or somehow at fault for being unemployed. Misperceptions
regarding older workers are both ridiculous and reprehensible.
The ugly truth is that midlife workers have been delivered a
double blow. Not only have they lost their jobs—they’ve lost their
employability. Millions of lives are falling apart because experienced
professionals can’t get hired. Savings are gone, homes are lost and hope is
tenuous, at best.
Employers have been slow to recognize the value in hiring
midlife workers, despite numerous studies showing that older workers generally
have superior interpersonal skills, less absenteeism and a lower turnover rate
than their younger counterparts. And although forward-thinking companies such
as German automaker BMW and L.L. Bean (to name a few) go out of their way to
recruit older workers, far too many do not.
Tackling the unemployment crisis requires a multi-faceted,
bold approach—and it starts with employers. Companies need to start using their
heads when hiring. Stop looking for the “perfect” match. Work toward
streamlining the hiring process. Stop overlooking an entire generation and
start celebrating the unique skills and experience midlife workers bring to the
job. It’s time to put the “human” back into Human Resources—and get people
back to work.
HR Akshay Inc is the free hiring platform. Let’s
end involuntary unemployment. Zero Unemployment.
No comments:
Post a Comment