I was told by someone working HR in a major employer that they have been instructed to
google map the address of each job applicant, and if they
don't like the looks of the property or neighborhood, to disqualify the applicant, no matter what his or her qualifications may be. If this
mapping is being used industry wide, it would not surprise me why many qualified applicants are not being called in for interviews. Just another of 1,001 ways to discriminate against job seekers.
USING GOOGLE MAPS TO DISQUALIFY JOB APPLICANTS
I was told by someone working HR in a major employer that they have been instructed to
I asked one of my attorney friends if this was illegal. She said,
not at all, because in order for something to be considered
discrimination under the law, it has to be in a
protected class, like age or gender. And
place or residence or
address is not in a protected class under the law. Same as I have heard employers say they will not hire someone with bad teeth. Is this discrimination? Well, theoretically,
yes. Is it in a protected class under the law?", Well, no it is not.
I never thought about the
living too far away aspect. And as for leaving addresses off of resumes.....I used to only put my post office box address on mine until a couple of prospective interviewers stated to me that
you don't live in a post office box....our application requires a street address; a residence address, the same address that is on your driver's license. Since so many people in Central PA know they must have a car, and many folks travel 70 to 80 miles one way, every day to work in Harrisburg (Central PA is actually very rural, save for a few cities), it just doesn't occur to me that distance would be an issue. I worked with people who traveled two hours one way, every day, from State College to Harrisburg to work. I admired their resolve...especially coming west on route 322 down the mountain when the roads were icy, risking life and limb, and having no time for their families in the evenings.
While your lawyer is correct, you can bet that minorities are the only ones being excluded on the basis of their home address. So, if the initially legal activity of looking up employees neighborhoods develops into disparate impact , it is illegal.
The funny thing is that for employers to avoid these legal land mines all they have to do is base all of their decisions on bona fide occupational qualifications and performance.
Mariah, I think it should be illegal...it probably is, but just like all other 'legitimate' ways to disqualify, they don't let anybody know...these decisions are kept in the wraps. If they tell you the competition was stiff and that they have decided to pursue somebody else, you would not know they actually used the 'mapping' to disqualify. I dot know if they are obligated to reveal everything...The problem is, even if they use 'mapping' to disqualify you, they will tell you something nice and sweet without telling you why you didn't get it. They get away with so many and it's not even funny. That is the reality.
In the banking industry, this is called
red-lining. This is where a bank avoids lending in certain areas.
Miriah, even if you leave your address off your resume, when you fill out your application, you must put in your address. They can then use Google Maps. Of course there is no way to prove it just like there is no way to prove not hiring due to age discrimination (all they have to say is that they found a
more suitable candidates.
Lin Burtan, just because you don't do it, doesn't mean others don't. Some times you should believe what you hear and don't be an I don't do it so Noone else in the industry does. There is a lot that goes on in small companies that you wouldn't believe, but it happens.
Some employee or manager doesn't want to serve a cop. It isn't company policy, so did it happen, we'll not at my store. Well it did some where in their company.
I agree this approach is a bit much. It could only mean HR researching Distance and or Lifstyle. Neither are justified from my POV. So many qualified candidates are being past by. Example: What if a candidate is living in a short term Hotel waiting till their position is secured then decide a desirable home. Perhaps living in a 4000 sq ft luxury home and the candidate is only seeking a modest paying opportunity one that normally would cover cost of living in a upscale neighborhood. Who or why would where the candidate lives be so important. Totally shocking news to me. Thanks for sharing this info.
I'll actually self-discriminate when recruiters call with certain types of jobs. If the employer is looking for me to be coming into the office at odd times for emergencies and they want someone to be there in a given amount of time, I'll likely decline pursuing the job if I don't think I can be there within that time. I don't want to take the job and then not be able to fulfill that requirement; even if it is infrequent. I have had interviewers raise the question of the distance to work, mainly because of the emergency situations I described. But distance shouldn't be a disqualifying factor. I've worked at places in the Chicago area where some great workers commuted to the NW suburbs of Chicago from the far South side, as far away as Rockford, and even small 'burbs South of I-80. Don't be stupid. Hire good people wherever they're from.
But filtering candidates based on the appearance of their neighborhood? Shees! You're going to miss out on some potentially valuable workers. I think you give up your right to complain about not being able to find qualified workers if you're going to start judging a candidate's ability to do the job based on the housing they are currently able to afford.
On the flip side, someone could be using a vacant lot or condemn house as a false residence. I would think that it could be the opposite if someone is using a high rise or apartment complex for their address.
If you really want to discriminate based upon living history, i would be more worried about someone who moves once a year or less. Public searches on someone provides sufficient information on a person. most people should not have more than 5 addresses in a ten year period. i.e., i.e. I would not expect a 25 year old to have more than three a 30 year old more than 5.
The true tell tale sign will be court proceeding, home ownership history and employment history.
There are a lot of things that prospective employers do that people might think are illegal, but when it comes down to it, they want to hire the best person who will represent the company the best.
I look at it as I wouldn't want to work for a company that did that anyway. People who think they live
Up There always try to find a way to keep others,
Down Here. Most of us wouldn't mind to be a rung or two higher on the proverbial ladder, but we don't find joy stepping on people on the way up. I for one am proud of being considered the
A lot of jobs here in Atlanta won't hire you if you're too far away from the job site. People get caught up in all that bad traffic jam and report in as much as 2,3 hrs late. I'm only 23 miles from my clinic. But on any given day it's a 1 hr 12 min drive. So I leave home at 6:50 am to get in by 7:56 am. I start seeing patients at 8:15 am with the doctors or PA..... But going home I'd be like a full 1 1/2 to travel the same twenty two or so miles. And pray that there is no traffic accident or the president ain't in town. You might need to find a good motel room and just stay near the job.
My nephews live in towns on the outskirts of Atlanta....and I hear that about the traffic, often. It's the same way in Philadelphia, PA, but fortunately, many people are able to use their very good mass transit system (SEPTA) to get to work. In Harrisburg, PA, it's a different story. Our mass transit is awful....doesn't run in the evenings to most locations, no service on Sundays or holidays, buses run late, so those who have to take connecting buses don't get to work on time...if at all. Here, if you don't have a car, you're 90% un-hireable.
I know people from Harrisburg PA who work in Philadelphia, PA, and they either rent motel rooms by the week (especially when the weather is bad), or commute back and forth by AMTRAK. Both are expensive, but so are the PA Turnpike tolls which rise every year, gasoline, and wear and tear on the vehicle (and the nerves).
Re Po boxes....my Po box is my legal address and appears on my drivers license. There are several towns in the area that have no mail delivery so residents MUST use a Po box....also there are two very large condo complexes in the area...in one case all 700 inots use the same street address, squeezed between a state highway and railroad tracks...what's Google maps going to tell you about that?
The original reason for ZIP Codes was to cordone-off “low-income
versus “higher-income populations, i.e., minorities vs. the affluent. So that people who are from “the other side of the tracks" would not mistakenly be given any benefits they shouldn't have. So, I'm not surprised that there are employers trying to find out where people live, and use it against them.
Not at all illegal. Public information, actually. They need your home address for a variety of reasons......in Pennsylvania, if you are seeking a job where you would be in contact with children....no matter how remote, you have to list every address you have lived at since 1975, and the people that lived with you at each address in order to get a PA Child Abuse Clearance. And now, even if you work with children in a volunteer capacity...the same law applies. I had to get a clearance to work at a clerical job where I don't have any direct contact with children...except when I pass through the visitor's room at the prison I work at.
That is crap people get jobs to take care of themselves n their families to get up out of those areas and when u first move to a big city from a small town rent is three times higher so it's an almost automatic that blue collar people will end up in those areas it's discrimitory n wrong or for instance if u move to NYC Manhattan u can't even find a place it takes weeks maybe even months to find a place this is wrong I hope Trump fixes this
Hahahahaha, NOW THAT WAS FUNNY!!! TRUMP FIX WHAT!??? Hahahahaha, I'm from NYC, if he wanted to do something for the city, well what can I say he's had his entire life to do it, nothing has been done yet baby!! Hahahaha.
And it won't be, not by him anyway. One of the biggest problems that NY has is high rents, no matter what area it's in.
To the other responder, Trump was never a politician in NYC. He is, however, going to be our next President. But why would he attempt to remove companies abilities to use whatever public information they like in order to decide what is best for them? Some of you seem as though you think that these companies should be all about you. Uh, not! One person says that her one company uses google maps (along with background/criminal checks, credit cards, etc.) and suddenly all companies in the country are 'discriminating' because someone can't clean up all of the trash in thier overgrown yard. I say let them use what ever information they can publicly access in order to assess the level of risk that they would take by investing all of that time and pay on the candidate in question. It ain't about you at all. It's about the company's goals. They are bringing you on to see those goals met and it is very costly to bring someone in only to loose them 6 months later and have to begin the onboarding process all over again. All of that time and money waz wasted with no return on the investment, and you are an investment, so, yeah... if a select few companies want to zoom into your front yard to see how well you will tend to your own stuff in order to determine how well you are going to take care of THEIR stuff, more power to them.
Ms Tyler, I hardly doubt it. Dumbo clump don't even know what or how to evaluate his stupid mouth and half of Congress is waiting for the dumb ass to say something, anything intelegant about the Russian Espionage. He's laughable at best and just an old stupid man. He won't make it so that you can live in Manhattan. What a joke for job case
Wow David, did you really finish the 4th grade.... Obama?? REALLY!! Just no facts to support that. And I thought that you were smarter than Hompo Stump.. Resident Select... Careful there my man, you'll be as brain dead as he is on January 20th. So Mr. Obama is responsible for this.... wow...
Mr. Olcott Sr, with all do respect, you're a MORON!! I'm being polite here. Employees will have an upper hand after Obama's failure of what? Last time I checked it was white skinned people doing all the dirt to bring our economy down. From Bernie Madoff to the VP's of banks..I don't recall nobody resembling Obama in that mix of White's..
I can't NOT say anything so here goes. PEOPLE put the race cards away. If you think only minorities are being held back by
the man then perhaps you should come out from your gated communities and take a look around in the real world. Im lilly white and had two people just off my property walking back and forth for about 10 minutes saying, loudly,
man we gotta find that rock it was big it's right here somewhere. Spare me the poor black me routine, please. And as far as the color of the skin of the people financially ruining this country, no doubt the big banks put a hurting on us, however their activities did not touch every single American only the ones with money. Obamacare on the other hand, will run us all in the ground, along with nearly everything else he has done, I'm pretty sure he's not white yet he's the leader of the free world(I'm pretty sure that is the opposite of oppression just saying). The way we are forced to buy insurance is no better than the mob's protection program..either you pay us or we rob the till. So either we pay or they rob your return...
RICO!!!!, and i don't mean suave. However make no mistake about it Trump ain't no better cuz if you think Trump ain't out for Trump you are delusional. That being said if your potential employer admits to not hiring you due to your neighborhood then yes you can sue them and if a lawyer tells you they can't under those circumstances then i would find a new lawyer.
Hey Robin Mzrks follow me closely... Jim Carter, J. Kennedy, R. Nixon, G. H. W. Bush.... ALL did nothing for me. But Mr. Obama has done something for me..... He didn't let me live in America and let me die and NOT let me see a BLACK MAN!!! LIVE IN THE W-H-I-T-E. H-O-U-S-E....... Two terms.... Yes two....... It really sent White people into a frenzy.... I enjoyed ALL!!!!8 YRS...... Now if we can get a chance to view a woman calling the shots over a dumb ass GUMBO DUMP..... Oh sorry STUPO FRUMP.....
Couple of things - I never put my address on my resume and where I live in Colorado agencies/recruiters started asking potential hires 10 years ago (Because this is when traffic started getting really bad from a lot of people moving here from other states) how far do they live from the job in question. I actually signed into a company website to apply for such and such job and the hiring manager said on the requisition - if you live farther than a half hour away don't apply!
This is NOT illegall at all . when i owned my company, and when was supervisor, i told my employees and future employees that if they lived too far away then it wouldn't be wise to work for me distance has to variables time and money . if you cant get to work on time , thats money , if you cant sleep due to travel then you are wasting your time and mine . a person with lack of sleep is not alert or productive. So if the company that you call discriminative is doing this . its not you its business. So get over yourself and find a job that suits you and your employer . it can be done , but not if your gonna nit pick everything. Sounds to me most of you wanna bitch instead of find a job . im willing to move to work . my roots arnt that deep . just depends on what your willing to do to feed your family, and NOT LIVE OFF THE GOVERNMENT THAT WE PAY OUT! !!! To those of you really trying good luck ....
No it's not Mr.Emery. If I own the company say Jackson and Henry Logging Co. I'm based in Suffolk, VA. And you live in say Eastern Shores VA across the Chesapeake Bay. Well it's about 2 1/4 hr drive. Now high wind, pitching sea, or a crash closes that bridge all the time. Now why should I hire you when I get a person from Hampton or New Port News. Not violating any rules. I need people to be at work.
Doesn't matter if it's legal or not. It's not enforceable under the current justice system. How often can you find an attorney that will represent you in a civil rights action? Not very often and not unless you have money and the most of them won't even do so then. There's a lot of things that are
illegal in the United States that are done every day of the year and unless you are a well-known personality you will not find any attorney to represent you. I love how people talk in legalities since it doesn't matter one way or the other unless these legalities are actually enforced. We have the broken justice system to thank for that but nobody wants to fix it.
Mr. Wright - there are many civil rights attorneys who are eager for good cases.
The problem here is not a broken system but whether a civil rights violation has occurred, whether it can be proved, and what damages ($) are.
As someone wrote here
sue sue sue, people tend to think just because they were aggrieved in their own mind that somehow they should have a legal right for redress.
Many people have a belief these days that if the justice system does not have room and a remedy for every small grievance then it is
broken. Yet life should not be about litigation to get what you personally believe is fair. Life is inherently unfair, and we should not turn to the government to resolve every little thing we think unfair.
I was not born rich or handsome or a gifted athlete. My kindergarten dream of becoming a pitcher for the Dodgers never happened because I lack the skills and discipline. It never would occur to me to say I was discriminated against because if this broken dream.
An LA attorney had a radio program answering legal questions. His tag line was something like,
where I tell you that you have no case. I have had to turn away many clients, or drastically revise their expectations, because even if they were wronged it was more of a
that's part of life being unfair than
you have a legal claim worth disputing.
In law school torts classes one of the first aphorisms you learn is
for every harm there is a remedy. The next thing you learn is that many (most) harms are not worth pursuing legally. I once had a situation in my own life where someone grossly slandered my recently-deceased father to his lifelong church family. It was a clear, documented case of defamation. If I had pursued it legally I would have probably prevailed. Yet I did not, for the payoff would have been a public apology at best and might have cost me $20-30k. It was so much better to talk to the minister, get him on board, so he could dispel the slander.
We used to handle such things (or accept them as
that's life) without automatically first thinking
Well fellow jobcaser...had a business did ya..got huge breaks and incentives from the government did ya...went belly up did ya...probably got govt. Grants too..pretty sure your employees didn't leave your office straight to othet jobs and some needed assistance during their transitions and I'm willing to bet they didn't plan on that. My point is no one is living off the government only living off taxpayers and not only the poor and downtrodden but even big corperations all the way up in Trump tower. In the future you may not want to generalize people who nit pick corrupt and unfair legislative decisions cuz frankly i have a problem with giving millions in tax money to an individual when it was meant to bail out underwater customers he ran in the ground. Everyone had their hand out in some way shape or form...hope your hogh horse just lost a leg.
How can it be illegal when it's never been challenged... The use of Facebook has been challenged but the ruling isn't vague due to the language and corp America has a department that you will never hear about that does use it. Move to another zip code and take a look at your credit score in about two weeks. - Ronnie
That is just not right if a person qualifies for a job it should not matter where that person lives. Besides who gives the employer the right to judge a person because where they live and not that person's qualifications. If you really look at it some employers may feel threaten by an employee who have more education and experience than what they do anyway and will give the employee the reasons for not being hired is the found a better person to fit the position instead of being honest.
They are not judging the person, they are assessing risk factors. 2 i can think of right away are burnout from spending 13 hours a day either at work, on lunch from work or stuck in traffic to/from work. Another is average demeanor after dealing with traffic. No obe is going to want to keep that up forever. You see, it's not always personal or discriminatory. There is actually valid logic behind these requirements, and companies ought to be free to decide for themselves. It is, after all, their money.
I am not so sure I agree. Most of the employees where I work live two, three, four counties away from the job. I live about ten minutes away. Clearly, Dauphin County Prison does not discriminate based on
distance from jobs, and I doubt the county
google maps everyone's residence. And when I worked in the PA State Legislature for 25 years, I had many coworkers who drive four or more hours a day (round trip) to their jobs....and they had worked there 10, 15, 20, 25, and even 35 years.
It's really kinda important to know where the person who is applying for the job. I see people who live in say Conyers or Rome, GA apply and get the job. But the very first time that the road is closed such as Wed. this past week with a 2 truck, 4 car pile up and it lasted about 4 hrs. Then they quit the job. So that 27-35 miles are now about 2 hrs. thru that Grady Curve now they quit. Not so easy. My last two positions were granted to me due to the fact that I live on a bus route and that I am within 1 hr. drive time to the job. Companies are using the address of a possible employee in helping to decide if you are truly going to be hired.
I will admit, I have done this. Many recruiting sites such as PeopleSoft will drop applicants into your requisition in a 25 mile radius. If an applicant is driving 15 miles to work in a busy city and it takes 25 minutes to drive that 15 miles that is a burden. Are people going to accept that burden for $9.00 an hour? The likelihood is no. Their productivity may suffer and call offs go up. It is a risk, as a hiring manager, I was not willing to take.
Some time ago, there 2as a bunch of federal money available to companies that encouraged employees to not drive to work, but use alternative transportation. Companies got money based on access to available public transportation, setting up van pools and car pools and so forth. As far as I know, that money is,still available for now. But one of the records you needed was physical location from which an employee would be originating his/her commute.
I still feel that it is wrong to check out the person with out their knowing what you are up to it is still discrimination either way you look at it cause a lot of people do not trust others very well so it makes it hard to go look for a job. And now that I know this kind of crap I will be even more leary of putting in apps it is not fair to us job seekers to be judged before we are given a chance
This happened to me just this past summer. I live in Baltimore City Maryland and applied for a job in Wilmington Delaware. Had two great phone interviews and a tough in person interview with 5 managers that lasted 4.5 hours - I know I aced it, left with a good feeling and drove home on cloud-9. I really needed this job. A week later, I got a call from the hiring manager saying she wanted to bring me on-board and wanted to know when I will be relocating to the Wilmington area, I said I wasn't planning on it because I own my home in Baltimore, the commute isn't bad, I live 3 miles from Amtrak train station and very close to the interstate, I have 2 vehicles and really, really wanted the job. I have been having trouble finding a job in the Baltimore area so I've been looking in other states (my last job was in February 2016). I then mentioned that relocation allowance was not asked for by me nor was it offered by them as part of the job. My address is at the top of my resume, it's not like I hid it from them. After 10 minutes of trying to convince her not to worry about my drive, I know how to entertain myself in the car, I realized that she made up her mind not to hire me because of where I lived and that I was begging for her to change her mind. I got angry and it showed in my voice. She then said couldn't be hired because I sounded frustrated over rejection. In the end I found out they hired someone internal to fill the role. I needed this job more than I wanted it.
If you lived in Pennsylvania......not so sure distance would be an issue, depending upon who you were going to work for, since this is a rural state, save for Philadelphia in the east and Pittsburgh in the west. And then there's Harrisburg, the Capital city in Central PA....and one can drive twenty minutes north from the city and be in rural Perry County, or rural upper Dauphin County, dodging horses and buggies.
If location is a part of the qualifications for the job then it must be specified in the job announcement. If specified in the job announcement then it must be explained why the location is significant to the job. If this method that you have been speaking of is active and can be proved, then the company sending the job announcement can be held liable for their disqualifiying methods. If this I find in my job search, I will persue liability action alternatives as should anyone reading this post.
sue sue sue is that all people think about these days cost tax payers money for a get rich scheme. Geez thats almost all i read on this site. If you have a legitimate case go for it but damn give it a rest no wonder companies are so damn picky . they are scared of being sued . so if you have a lot of lawsuits in your bio . you might as well forget about being employed. Go to another country to find a job or live off of them .....
Ms. Harrison, you'll get your money in 3-5 yrs. But it's not worth the wait and getting bumped up to the next court level or date. The $20-$45,000 you'll spend in that time... ask is it that critical.
I am not screaming about suing, but about what is right. It is not the Petitioner that causes these issues, it is the Respondent. When you brush off unjust, unrighteous acts, then you become a supporter of that act. By the way, I do not have to sue to get money, I already do well. Blessings.
Everyone have their opinion on this topic and it is discrimination against the employee. Some may not agree and that is your choice. Lance rather it is the company money or not being honest has a lot to do with hiring and if the feel that a person address tells them more about the person who has qualifications when it is time for their promotion each employer needs to give their updates of changes on they resume and application then see if they would still qualify for a position which he or she applies for I bet things will change!
What they are really looking for is your social background to see if you fit with the group you are going to work with. They do not care such much where you live, but how you were raise and how you will associate with your new coworkers..
This may make sense, but there are plenty of bias about it. It's a form of discrimination and also a form of protection from the employer side.
You cannot judge
how someone was raised or their social background based upon where they live. Example: A doctor at the Hershey Medical Center in Hershey, Pennsylvania, has a daughter that is addicted to heroin. They live in a luxurious home. One of my neighbors lives in a simple row house (we all do), and she is a former member of Harrisburg City Council, has received many awards for her work, formerly worked for one of our state's governors, and has been recently appointed by our current Governor to the PA Board of Pardons. The only way to
judge someone's background and qualifications is a face to face interview.
In some jobs, your qualifications, do not matter as much as to keep the peace with the rest of the employees. An employer is making a big investment on you and they do not want to disturb the normal operations because you can't assimilate the culture of the rest already established (Or sometimes bullies against you). If you can overcome the differences (and pretend to ignore them), you are more than welcome to stay. Your employer will love you, but if your presence cause disturbance and you decide to suit, then you are putting their business at risk.
We, the so called diversity need to understand this sensitive issue and pay the price of getting into the broader market silently knowing that this is simply business and for the sake of everyone, we have to just take it and swallow it.
If we can do that, employers would be more likely to take more called diversity and perhaps stop all those biases.
Let's just remember that their business means everything to them. They are making an investment on hiring us, they really want to deal with diversity if they hire us.
Sure that such bad choice of things are occurring, however, the company listing the job announcement must stipulate location of such specifics and those specifics have to be relative to the job's performance/productivity. Other than that, then there is discriminatory liability to that company listing the job announcement. If I am subjected to such activity with proof, of course, I will seek liability responsibility of that company performing such measures of contempt.
Yes Cynthia it's ashame this goes on but I know it does all too well.
I had a doctor I wanted to work for tell me I was
geographically undesireable. In this case I was in excess of 30 miles from the office where I would report. It should be your choice as an applicant to go where the work is and not have it be a barrier. As it turns out I found another position and started 11-7-2016 that will go remote after I've been with the company 6 months. That's right around the corner and I couldn't be more pleased.
This issue is not a State issue but is federal/civil of which I am familiar. Thisi s not about suing someone but about standing for what is right. Payment in cash is redundant to me, but payment in real results that prohibit this type of behavior is always what I seek. Lawsuits are here to protect the rights of those that have been unjustly treated. I am not for those that seek refuge in suing due to laziness or just seeking a way out of working for a living, but am in full of support of those that walk in the righteous way.
If an applicant applies for a job, it is of no consequence to that applicant that they can travel or get to the job in a timely manner. I do not believe that someone would apply for a job and they could not get to that job. Just does not make sense. I have my own business and take applicants all of the time. If they qualify for the job and pass my interview sessions, most likely I will hire them. It is already clear of the time they must arrive to work. If I see that they do not live close to the job, then I will be sure by asking questions that they can get to the job timely, if not then I cannot hire them, just that simple.
Look people apply for jobs all the time and don't even show up for the start date. No transportation or no bus in that area. Come on now and get real. I've seen people who couldn't stay the full shift cause the bus stops running two hrs before the shift is over.
Cynthia, I did not think that this blog was about sending anyone to me her in Texas, but as I understood it, this blog was more about companies mapping people's residence qualifying them for a job opportunity. Again, when a person is applies and/or is hired for a position, the hours are either listed on the job announcement if not surely at the time of interview, before hire, it is known the time they are required to get to work and the time the job day ends. If they take the job, it is their responsibility to show up timely and leave at the end of the work day. Their transportation to and from the job site is their responsibility. If they cannot get to work and work the entire work day, then they should not take the job. I think that is simple enough. Sorry Cynthia, just good business practices.
I totally agree with you, Dilsia. Recently, I applied for a job online because their ad stated it was 10 miles from my home, and that there were full and part-time positions available.
About a week later I received a phone call from a manager who made an appointment with me for an interview the following week. When I arrived for the interview at the scheduled day and time he had the day off! Another manager onsite said she could interview me, so we proceeded. During the interview she advised me that the job was NOT located in the town as advertised, but in ANOTHER town 20 miles from my home. Then she proceeded to tell me that the position available was for part-time, without benefits.
Why these companies are wasting their time and mine is infuriating and unprofessional. My gut is telling me to run and not respond in the affirmative to this company should they call me back for a second interview.
I worked part time in direct care in community mental health. A company in Norristown, PA saw my resume online and called me. I politely told the young lady that there was no way I was driving 85 miles one way every day to work four hours for $10.00 an hour. I guess that they are no longer teaching geography in Pennsylvania schools.....because the young lady tried to tell me that
Harrisburg isn't that far from Norristown....when I knew better. I found it insulting. I told her not to believe me, but to Google it and see for herself.
I am finding out and learning more about employers everyday reading jobcase.I could post some really unprofessional things my past experiences in 50 yrs working with sime employers but one must forgive because we are all humans and both empoyees and employers are trying to survive.MOST EMPLOYERS are good people .You can tell at interview .Use your gut feeling .Stand up and say.This is not going to work out ,see ya. Do your home on potential employer.
Network Network Network
that was what I did. I got called to interview for a doctor's office as a receptionist but as soon as the doctor's wife found out I was a medical transcriber, she told me I would have to do the office transcription also. I asked her how much I would get paid for the extra work as they would be letting the medical transcriber go and if there would be benefits. She said no benefits and no extra pay. I told her it was not worth my time and got up and left.
I am sure you can share much, Mr. Hill. And most people
do their homework on potential employers. But no brochure or website can tell a potential employee what the personalities are like of the hiring managers or other employees. In my long working career, I have turned down a job or two or three because I didn't like the
atmosphere of the places. My gut feelings are well attuned.
Omg, well, I guess, there is one good eason for being stuck in my mothers attic, it's a halfway decent neighborhood. Assholes, this shit eds to stop, I just got my prof bookkeeper cert n working on quickbooks, Oce I have the destinations for both I will be starting my own bus, night first, but I go by person n energy I feel from that person n work ethiv, it will be a while but if you would like keep in touch. email@example.com. www.universalaccountingcenter.com is the online acctng sch. Plenty of diff types of certs. If that is your thing God bless
Well, then there needs to be a law against It as it is illegal in the loan and insurance industries where it's known as
red-lining and defined as:
to refuse (a loan or insurance) to someone because they live in an area deemed to be a poor financial risk.
Cynthia Watkins - I live in CA & my drivers license has my PO Box on it, not my physical address. Maybe not all states allow that. When someone asks me for my physical address I usually just say,I don't give out that information. Rarely do I get pressured any further, but again I realize it depends on the situation and/or circumstance and I would comply if I felt it were warranted.
You could just leave the address off the resume. I kinda think its a little backwards. What they could try is to cut down traffic by imposing a flat rate at the meters something high in price but allowing people to have there passengers swipe there D.L. or I. D.s to bring the cost down this would encourage drivers to have passengers rather than tieing up traffic with a big old car with one person in it. Do the same for parking garages and hoocus poocus the traffic gets smaller and smaller over time. Eventually start fining people who ride alone. And turn the big cities into 24/7 cities. Meaning they can maneuver the hours more not everything has to be 8 to 5.
Sounds like a working solution to a monsterous problem. Some cities have had this for years. Only one problem in your solution. Fire someone from a job who rides or drives alone? So now you want to give the state governments more power over people instead of letting them choose. Most road work that would tie up rush hour traffic is already done at night. Reconstruction is different although I have my own opinion on that. I've worked a long time myself and I'm now retired. Age discrimination is a real thing I can tell you. It seems now days people would rather hire younger people and have a great turnover in whatever job it is; then hire someone who is older and learn from the benefit of their experience. Thank you for reading. Have a wonderful New Year!
You might want to talk to an attorney that specializes in employment law. There is an illegal practice in real estate and lending called
red-lining in which lenders and real estate firms do not do business in certain areas. Several savings banks just got nailed for doing this and have to pay millions in fines and penalties, set up branches in these areas and do a prescribed amount of business in these area. The criteria was geopgraphy but it had the effect of discriminating based on race due to the demographics of the area. Discrimination law considers practices that have the effect of acting against protected classes, regardless of the stated reasoning, to be discriminatory.
In your example, a good attorney conversant with discrimination law may be able to make a case that the intent and effect of the practice is to discriminate against a race because the predominant racial makeup of the area is one particular race. If you refuse to hire people from one section of Detroit, for example, you are effectively refusing to hire African Americans. I bet the NAACP wold love this one.
Nonsense. Nothing to do with redlining. All of these statements about suing and discrimination are legally meaningless. Using Google Maps to racially profile is silly when, if the employer wants to discriminate on race they just have to look at a person. Maps are an inefficient and inaccurate profiling device. And as one commenter pointed out, where you reside is not a protected class.
As an attorney and small business owner for 40 years I am often amused by the postings here. People get so outraged about why they were not hired or why they were fired. I take it as part of the
you owe me culture today.
I have hired many people over the decades and as an employer you owe no duty to hire someone unless you think they will be a positive asset to your business. Experience teaches you to spot potential problems; it is true that this particular person may not fit the pattern you have observed before, but why take the chance when you have dozens, perhaps hundreds of other applicants who lack that potential problem and are as qualified?
When I was hiring for a law firm, I used to get as many as 250 applications in 2-3 days. I had to winnow out the majority quickly so I didn't spend hours reviewing applications that would not work out.
One of the first things I did was look at addresses. In the legal field, with lawyer unemployment at 20% or higher, I would get people applying from many different counties. As an employer I had to recognize that the factors many writing here pointed out - the problems associated with traffic as well as the job not necessarily paying enough for the aggravation of a commute.
An employer understands that, like the teen who tells his date he loves her in the throes of passion, applicants truly believe a long commute will be no problem when they are eager to land the job. But the employer also knows that as time goes on and the reality of the commute sinks in that passion dies and resentment comes into play. Then employers face the loss of a new employee they may have spent thousands of dollars and weeks training. It doesn't take too many times of this happening to make an employer reasonably wary of commutes.
The same is true of the
overqualified applicant. I would always get lawyers applying for clerical or paralegal positions. They would always say,
Don't reject my app because I am overqualified. I always would. Why? It's not because I didn't think it would be great to have someone with their experience in that job at that pay rate, but because I knew they would not last.
I have had too many
overqualified workers who were initially desperate and willing to take significantly lower pay but quit soon after. Why? Most believed that once they had their foot in the door I would recognize their brilliance and give them a big raise or promotion from clerk to attorney.
The problem is that I needed a clerk, not an attorney. I wanted to pay a clerk, not an attorney. And I knew that if I hired someone overqualified they would either expect a promotion/more money or they would quit. Then I would be back to where I started, except out a lot of precious time training that person.
Why should an employer take that risk when there are perhaps dozens of applicants that fit the qualifications needed without the baggage of a long commute or otherwise.
I doubt that someone Googled your house to see what it looks like; if they take the time to Google you it was probably to use the directions function to get distance and commute times.
Employers get bashed a lot here and elsewhere, but they are generally motivated by simple factors - hiring people who will be assets for the business with a minimal chance of turnover or issues. They owe you, the applicant, nothing. They are not interested in what applicants believe is fair. They are not charities compelled to help you.
The best advice you can follow in the application or interview process is to concentrate on communicating how you will best serve the employer's stated needs and how you can contribute to that business' success. That is ultimately what employers are looking for.
Where you live is not a bona fide qualification for most jobs. The expectation is that you will attend regularly and be on time. How's you do it is your problem. One possible exception is an emergency responder who might have to be on call as part of the job and expected to be able to respond within a given period of time. However, courts in some jurisdictions have overthrown some of these requirements. If you can show that not hiring people who live in a certain area has a disproportionate impact on a protected class, you can probably make a good case that the intent was to discriminate. However, if we look at this broadly, we can also conclude that an employer who is stupid enough to do this is not worth working for in the first place.
Stephen - of course an employer must take into account a prospective hire's ability to get to work. Saying
it's up to you to get to work on time is not a gamble an employer need take. By the same logic you could hire anyone and tell them,
you are not an engineer but it will be your job to make sure you can perform those functions if I hire you.
Employers have a great deal of choice in selecting employees. They look for people to fit their needs rather than demand someone rise to the standards they set.
If you cannot speak clear and grammatically correct English and the job requires it, an employer can
discriminate against you rather than hire you and expect you to reach proficiency.
Why should an employer hire someone who lives far away and take the risk that they won't be able to handle the commute when there may be hundreds of applicants as qualified who don't have this potential disadvantage?
You don't have a right to be hired.
when someone is taking plenty in cooperate welfare...they owe. Everyone you are justified in knowing your rights and being vigilant to make sure those rights are upheld. Knowing your rights before the job is inquired is the best defense. Much easier to demand action at the point of attack. Coming back with complaints is good but complaining at the time of suspected offense is much better. Don't be afraid to record proceedings. Job interviews are legal hearings. Ask how they feel about hiring impovurshed(sp?) people, people of color, felons, immigrants and so on. Get their take and make them take a stand verbally. They owe you fairness. They owe you privacy..ect ect ect...Don't let somebody tell you different.
A small business owned by an individual is the best to work for. That individual will almost always try and do what is best for their business and if you as an applicant are what is best for that business then they will try and hire you.
Corporations are a different animal. Most CEOs, managers, and directors really only care about one thing at the end of the day, their job and paycheck.
They will hire or fire to protect that priority. The success of the company is purely a secondary concern.
If you are overqualified they fear you will take their job. If you are underqualified then you may make them look bad. This is why American corporations have excelled at mediocrity.
If you care about being on a winning team then seek out privately owned companies. If you want to just punch a clock and keep your head down seek out a corporation.
Either way you are the product. The hiring company is the customer. Know your customer or get no customer.
Mr. Sheehan -
A job interview is not a legal proceeding, nor do you have a right to record in all states. In California, for example, the consent of both parties is required unless you have a court order permitting recording. Just ask James Okeefe of Project Veritas.
The concept of
corporate welfare is bandied about here but I doubt many understand how taxation of businesses occurs. And since the vast majority of corporations are small businesses (who incorporate for asset protection in our litigious society) we are rarely dealing with IBM or Microsoft.
Most folks who use the word
corporate welfare don't understand the crony capitalism system that is far worse. Whenever the government gets involved in picking winners and losers, you have graft and influence peddling.
The majority of people employed work for small businesses; even people who work in the fast food industry are generally employed by a small business owner (franchisee) rather than the corporate parent.
I didn't say it was a legal proceeding. I said it was a legal hearing. And yes employers are bound by law to treat you in a certain way. And your a sort, thinking your talking to children or what? We know employers aren't charities...perhaps you don't know what a charity looks like? And every living person should be charitable in their attitude and actions anyway. Not sociopathic like your explaining.
I don't want to set out any specific Entities, but, mister you been out of the bizz to long. All sorts of gross misconduct happening out there and zero accountability....you said one thing I totally and hate to say agree with you 100%. The system isn't broke!!! This whole thing is the plan. The few crushing the multitudes. Just like it is written. Crony Capitalist and corporate welfare are about the same think...like trump paying a company to keep a few jobs around a couple years. that's both.
Randall Hornibrook, Sadly you are mistaken because you omit to say there are many many employers who simply dont believe black and brown people and folk who live in certain areas of our country can do the job or should be given the opportunity. I am also a lawyer and i know that to be true also.
Mr. Sheehan. Unfortunately, this board which is designed to help people appears more of a complaint section and font of misinformation.
A job interview is not a hearing. Period. For you to claim this and possibly induce someone to break the law (i.e. To record without permission in most jurisdictions) is not helping. Spreading ignorance is not helpful.
While each state generally defines in particular what a legal hearing is, certain common law principles apply. Black's Law Dictionary defines
hearing in terms of the court of equity vs. the court of law (both elements are found in lower-level courts today rather than separate courts as in England). Black's defines a hearing as: The hearing of the arguments of the counsel for the parties upon the pleadings, or pleadings and proofs; corresponding to the trial of an action in law.
An employment interview is not a hearing. You are not before a judicial officer or regulatory body, you do not have due process rights, and you are not testifying under oath as just some examples of differences.
Sharing false information that can actually lead to someone being charged with a crime is not helpful.
Fellow Jobcaser who claims to be an attorney - I would wonder in which state you are licensed. I have never encountered an attorney whose grammar and misuse of words is so evident in a short post. I can be looked up on the California State Bar web site. Can you be looked up anywhere?
Misrepresenting that you are an attorney will get you in legal trouble in most states. I suspect you are trying to give weight to your opinions by claiming to be an attorney. Of course I may be wrong, but I don't think so.
anytime your signing your name to paper... its a legal meeting , hearing, procedure whatever you want its legal. and if it isn't legal like you say...why then cant i voice record. Why must I get permission to voice record if its a non binding affair. I have been in many court hearing where no one was sworn in , no body testified, all that crap. but somebody always puts pen to paper... any meeting over a legal contract is a legal hearing. you don't need a judge to make it one. at least it is if you signed your name to paper or electronically...that's why you should always read the fine print, sir.
I just wanted to reply to Mr Hornibrook. Randall i understand your responsibility business firm however i do not believe you and a lot of employers and people who are living comfortable can put yourself in other peoples shoes. You mention that even in your business you have too many overqualified workers that are desperate for a job.Highly educated attorneys willing to step down to a paralegal.Does that tell you anything about the job market and the economic system we live in today? Yes we live in a you owe me culture however not when it comes to a job where people need to eat and pay bills.All of us have to breath the polluted air drink polluted water and live on polluted soil that these corporations leave behind. I believe in that case WE ARE ALL OWED A JOB.Employers and corporations now have a social responsibility to in some way help people that come into your office not asking for a handout but a job to find a way to help these people.If they don't have enough training train them or help them to get training.If they are overqualified i am sure you know someone in your line of work that needs someone.And as for the charities where the hell do you come up with charities when people are asking for a job stress themselves out and bust their buts every day only to get about one 400th of what they give the employer.Employers are the biggest takers of charity today than ever.Be glad people in this country today are still willing to give you CHARITY.
Mr. Sheehan -
The internet is a wonderful tool, but it leads many to believe they have knowledge because they Google, and gives them the opportunity to spread misinformation that could get people in trouble.
If you had any legal knowledge (which you are trying to impart to folks here) you would know that Black's Law Dictionary (currently in its 10th edition) remains the pre-eminent legal dictionary in the US.
The danger of posting ill-informed opinion as fact, as you do here, is that people will read it and may act upon it. Your nonsensical statements that any time you sign a document of any kind is a legal proceeding (which is a broader term than
hearing; I was giving you the benefit of the doubt) is simply untrue no matter your opinion.
There is the beginning of wisdom in your question asking why it would be illegal to record a conversation secretly. The major reason is what is designated as
the reasonable expectation of privacy as well as the protected nature of many negotiations. Many states (including California, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, and Washington; www.rcfp.org/rcfp/orders/docs/RECORDING.pdf) have laws regarding two-party consent for recordings. If someone followed your advice in one of these states they could be liable for criminal penalties. Since you have no clue where the readers of your comments reside, you could be setting them up for legal problems.
That isn't a good idea, in my estimation.
Considering that I am still very much in the work force and hiring, your opinions as to my current state of knowledge are also ill-informed and false conjecture.
Your comment about being in many court situations (seems like you have had your run-ins with the legal system) where people are not sworn in is a valid observation. Most court proceedings are what are known as law and motion hearings, where the judicial officer makes a determination on the pleadings and testimony is not allowed. Lawyers are never sworn in, as they are bound by law to be truthful before the court (whether they are is another matter). If a party is asked to speak by the court they are generally required by a clerk or bailiff to swear or assent to tell the truth.
Unless the document you sign has an express statement regarding the document being signed under penalty of perjury, it is merely evidence of a transaction. It has legal significance, in that many things you sign are evidence of a contract (every time you charge something, or rent a car, or sign a book out at a library). But it is not as you stated a legal hearing (or proceeding).
Indeed, most if not all states will not allow testimony as to the content of negotiations to be admitted as evidence, as this has a chilling effect upon settlement or agreements. Negotiations need to be free of the threat of offers or revelations being used against any party. A concrete example is when you are discussing settlement with an insurance company - an offer by the company is inadmissible in CA under Evid. Code section 1154 as to liability. Similarly, CA has a very strong and broad mediation privilege, preventing such negotiations or documents prepared for mediation to be admitted.
The law is more complex and subtle that you appear to believe it is.
You are simply wrong. Sorry.
Mr. Peters -
Corporations have become the evil de jour. It is a label that allows overgeneralization. Yet most people mean corporate titans, international corporations, when they use the term
corporation. And the vast majority (about 99%) of businesses (which are usually incorporated for protection of shareholders and officers) have under 500 employees (making them small businesses by law) and about 35% have fewer than 100 employees. To claim all of these businesses have polluted the land and air, etc., and thus owe anyone a job is nonsensical.
Even most mega-corporations cannot be said to have ruined the planet, and thus owe you a job. How has Microsoft, or IBM, or Apple polluted the air any more than hundreds of millions of cars and dwellings?
Corporations make easy targets. Movie makers (who work for evil corporations...) love to use corporations as the soulless monsters behind every calamity. Yet the computer or phone or tablet you are reading this on was built by one of those monsters. A Mom & Pop store cannot develop, build and market an iPhone. The car you drive (or the bus you ride, or the bicycle you peddle) was built by a corporation using finite resources. Unless you live in the woods and grow your own food and use sustainable lumber for heating and cooking, you depend upon those evil corporations and willingly enjoy their benefit.
Because of a rare medical condition, I depend upon certain drugs to keep me functioning. Each of those drugs cost on average hundreds of millions to a billion dollars to develop. The corner chemist (as drug stores used to be known) could not have developed them. I am very grateful to those evil drug companies.
One of the frequent complaints you see or hear, here and elsewhere, is
All corporations care about is money. For the most part that is true. That's their function. Officers and boards of trustees are bound by law to maximize profits; they can face civil and criminal liability if they fail in that duty. And who benefits from corporations making money? Consumers who buy their innovative and competitively-priced goods, and stockholders.
But those stockholders are just rich folk who play the market, right? Nope. If you have a 401(k) your retirement depends on stock values. If you have a pension, it is based in all likelihood on a broad stock portfolio. Hundreds of millions of people in the US benefit (or suffer) from the financial success of corporations.
I suspect that every person reading or writing on Jobcase wants to make as much money as they can. They do not think of themselves as evil. They want their 401(k) to increase in value as they age. Yet they may bash corporations for wanting the same things. How many of us would say,
I need to stop trying, I'm making too much money? Yet we feel we can do that for
corporations because, well, they are big and evil and all that. Yet I suggest that few here would turn down well-paying employment from such evil corporations. Maybe the well-worn slogans need to be replaced with more reflection.
I'm sorry, Mr. Peters, but it is not the role of businesses to find work for people who they do not hire. It is the responsibility of the job seeker to gain the skills needed or seek work commensurate with their skills. The vast majority of corporations were started by people with a dream and an idea who worked long and hard for success. At some point they were just like you, but they generally sacrificed and suffered and worked 7/365, 90 hour weeks. Many fail. Some succeed. Most who succeed never forget the effort and sacrifice they put in to build their business. I certainly remember the years where I existed on a stew of pasta and hot dogs (I would stretch one pot for 4-5 days), of where I worked two or three jobs so I could afford to work on my own business or get my education in my
spare time. It's rather naïve to believe that success distances us from memory. The vast majority of successful business people and corporate officers did not start out with a silver spoon in their mouths. They worked and studied hard for it.
You raise the issue of income inequality, which is a favorite theme for workers. Rarely does anyone do the math, to realize that if you cut the executive's salaries it would mean a nominal increase in worker pay. For example, a CEO of a 500-worker business who makes a million dollars a year, if they took a 75% pay cut, would mean a difference of $125 a month for workers, or 78 cents an hour. The kicker is that, if a corporation offered a CEO $250k, would they get the best person for the job? Or would they get someone who wasn't skilled enough who forced the company to cut workers or even go out of business?
And if I started the business, worked for 20 years making it successful and employ 500 people, don't I deserve to reap the benefits of my efforts? If it was you who had done this, would you believe you should make a lot less money to help out workers to make their lives marginally better (if at all)? Or would you say,
I've earned this?
fair is in the eye of the beholder.
It's a lot more complicated than you think.
That does not surprise me. I have been an exec chef for almost 20. Yrs. After taking full custody of my son, I have been left no option but to move into my parents house with my son due to the ridiculous cost of living here. I am in graduate school and a military vet. The job market is insane. I am trying to switch careers but nobody will give me the time of day.
Thank you for your service? Sick of hearing it, you wanna thank me...give me an opportunity
After reading the majority of these posts, it's amazing to me how people in places of importance over others, ie healthcare, office management, management of any genre, can't even spell.
I've received responses from recruiters who absolutely caused me to investigate them!
Did they even take basic English in elementary school???
Perhaps we should see if they have the ability to communicate before we consider working for them....
Ya but wouldn't the zip code give it a way?. I heard employers also Google to find out which side of the railroad tracks you live on. And if its the other side they will assume you will be late because of the train. Not only that but they look at your credit card to see if you stop at star bucks and won't hire you because star bucks always has long lines. Lol OK! OK! Just a little humor yes I made that up. Laughter's free always get seconds. lol
I do know that many fire departments require firefighters to live within a certain number of miles/minutes from their station. This makes perfect sense. I can't speak for any other area than the one I live in, as all states, cities, boroughs, townships, and other municipalities are different....even within my own state of PA.
Ron, this makes no sense.
HR scoundrels? You mean the people whose job it is to hire the best people according to the employers' standards to help the company?
It is not the company's or HR's job or duty to cut any slack in hiring decisions. They may not discriminate by protected class in hiring or pay, but that does not mean they must hire anyone.
Does anyone object to the company that hires Spanish-speaking Hispanics or a Filipino who speaks Tagalog if that is what they think their customers will appreciate? What about the Black woman who is not hired because she does not speak Spanish or Tagalog?
I hate to keep repeating this but businesses owe applicants nothing. I often don't even get to look at resumes that come in after 2-3 days. Is that
temporal discrimination? Do I owe these later applicants a review? No. I arbitrarily choose not to look at them unless I cannot find enough good prospects for interviews in the first 100 or so.
HR doesn't work for the applicants. Their job is to hire people they think will be the best employees.
We all discriminate every day. We make choices based upon values. Another definition for discrimination is recognizing and understanding the difference between one thing and another.
A big secret is that most businesses don't care about anything but productivity. Unless they have specific needs (i.e. a Chinese restaurant may prefer Chinese or other Asians - because Americans generally can't distinguish nationalities - as employees because of their theme) the vast majority of businesses could care less about race or sex or orientation or any of the categories people use to define themselves. They want someone who will produce and be cost-effective.
Of course there are prejudiced people and businesses. Go into a Muslim bakery and ask for a gay wedding cake. But why would anyone in their right mind want to work in a hostile workplace of secret racists even if they could be hired?
Hiring is not easy. You are often choosing among 100 people who look the same on paper. Since time does not permit interviewing them all, you have certain standards that cut down the pile. Distance is a legitimate tool to cut down to just the most desirable candidates.
I have hired people who were beyond my geographic boundary because other things made me believe this was the best person for the job. Sometimes it works out, sometimes it doesn't.
Many years ago when I was looking for a new law firm I was aware that the fact that I was older and had a family put me at a disadvantage with firms that wanted new attorneys they could mold and work to death in salary. They knew I would not willingly put in those 90-hour weeks because of my priorities. While it was discouraging, I would have been miserable in those firms that expected more of me than as a rational person I would be willing to give. I'm glad they discriminated against me because my desire for a job overrode my common sense.
Ron, truer words have never been spoken. Unfortunately some of those who are in managerial positions allow this little bit of power to go to their heads and then the God Complex comes shining through. Too bad google mapping businesses does not allow you to see these employer's narcissistic and sociopathic tendencies. I can unerstand the
you live too far angle but my issue is judging me by my neighbor's choice of lawn ornaments because i have no control over that. And mind you Randall, I've seen marijuana grow houses and upper level drug dealers in upscale neighborhoods like the one I'm quite certain you live in so no one is immune to these environmental blemishes.
I heard of this being used as a weeding out system in the late 90s. They probably have always done this. I know really intelligent people that got their high end positions staying in Subburban appartments or in the Subburban college dorms. As soon as they reached their 90 days they moved to houses in the historical part of Detroit and was able to customize it. So no worries, live in an apartment in the Subburbs get hired and after 90 days relocate to affordable housing in the city to avoid paying high property taxes, mortgage and gas.
I say live debt fee after you beat the deceivers (prejudice employers) at deceiving. Lololololol HAPPY NEW YEAR!!!!
I have a masters degree in accounting with over 20 years experience. My experience job hunting these past 4 months, is that there seems to be 100 applicants or more for every job I applied to, and was at least one posting I saw where someone said they got over 2400 applications for a single position. I'm sure there are a thousand different reasons one person is picked over another, or not even considered. I am sure that large companies use some type of algorithm to scan resumes for certain buzz words, and education; however I'm not sure that smaller companies have such resources. With so many resumes pouring into the HR system, I find it difficult to believe someone in HR is taking the time to Google every address to see where the applicant lives, especially when I see the postings here about job seekers in rural communities and those who live in large metropolitan areas where housing and other costs make it impossible to live in those communities, forcing people to move to the outlying areas where commuting is a necessity.
As job seekers, I think it is the wrong mindset to think of potential employers as the enemy, or they are always discriminating against us. (Would you feel this way if you were the one hired?) A positive attitude goes a long way when interviewing and interacting with a potential employer. When seeking a new position our only job is to make ourself as attractive and competent as we can; however, the employer has other duties. The employer is, of course, looking at the competence and skill set of the applicant, however, they are also looking at how this person fits in with the overall culture of the business, the person's adaptability, and if he or she will fit in with the established team.
I was recently hired for a position that I had not originally applied to, the HR manager was scanning resumes on the job boards, found mine and and sent me an email to asked me to fill out the application. Of course, I jumped at the opportunity. I had 2 interviews, one with the person I would be working for directly, and the second one with his boss. I was hired during the second interview.
You never know where an opportunity may appear. I suggest to everyone seeking a job make sure you have an updated resume on all the job boards, and make sure to fill out your status and skills completely so when HR is scanning to fill a vacancy your information will pop up as a potential employee.
I'm not naive, I know that ALL employers make assumptions when going through the hiring process. These assumptions are based on previous experiences and their general knowledge of the job vacancy. They make assumptions based on our resumes, hoping we have not embellished our experiences and skill set; they make assumptions based on our communicative skills, they make assumptions based on our appearance and demeanor, and they make assumptions based on our promptness. However, in order to get the job, we must maintain a positive attitude and let go of the 'it's them vs us' attitude I see so often in these postings.
Kay - an excellent post, and congratulations on the new job.
You bring up a good point often overlooked. You have to be open to the serendipity of opportunity, recognize it, and grasp it. Some of the biggest business opportunities came to me as a result of just recognizing an obscure opportunity and taking advantage of it.
That was much easier to do (and risk) when I was single and young, without a mortgage, etc. But many of my clients who are job seekers often limit themselves to too narrowly-defined job search parameters.
I totally believe this. I've worked as an office associate for years and I've seen resumes dismissed because of names and because of home addresses even before the qualifications are looked at. That's why I believe that if you live in a neighborhood that implies you are poor, just leave your address off your resume. Or use a p o box
I went on an interview once and the woman interviewing me never really began talking about the job or the requirements because she was looking at my address at the top of my resume - which she had all along!! She told me I really lived
too far away. I tried to convince her that the commute would take me about 45 min which was appropriate for the area (Dallas, TX) and fine with me. Remember I was there in person. She sat there and talked herself into not talking to me anymore because I lived too far away! We never had an interview at all. I don't know why I was even called in. This just one of the many weird things that's happened. Perhaps someone else screened the resumes for her and didn't realize she wanted someone who lived nearby. I don't work in positions that require emergency responses to work, just general office work. I was not happy. Lately I have started using only my city and zip code, email address, but not my phone on my resume due to too many random recruiter calls for jobs that don't even fit me.
The only contact points on my resume are my email address and mobile number. It is not a potential employer's business where I live, and I can best determine if a potential commute is within my range. I turned down a recruiter's invitation for a 15-minute in-person interview because it would take 1.5 hours to drive from my home.
Frankly, I am tired of employers making the decision for me that a potential commute is too long. I understand their need for qualified candidates; however, job seekers need to decide if the potential employer is a good fit for them. The employer does not hold all the cards, and job seekers shouldn't have to jump through unreasonable hoops to get a job. If employers are looking for trained seals, try a circus.
Cynthia, that is scary. Here is another for you. Employers have discriminated against job seekers for their looks. People putting their pictures on social media. The good looking individual getting the job over the individual not as good looking. People have brought law suites against employers for that and have won. It is a big mess.
Hey Mr.Corso a dermatologist office in Buck Head near downtown Atlanta told me that the owner has had women and will always stay that way. I was told right up front.... The high bright skinned girls with the weave in the head and large breasted features are what we want. So you should know how that interview went with me. They don't care if you're good. Dermatologist office and plastic surgery offices want that look. So join the club.
Hi Cynthia. This is the first time I hear of this, but I would not doubt it. But it would be very hard to prove, as are other forms of discrimination. Even if you leave your address off your resume, at some point, you have to fill out an application and you would have to list your address.
As the Apostle Paul said at 2 Timothy 3:1, we're living in
critical times hard to deal with.
Just be happy that if this is how this employer does things, if this is their culture, do you really want to work there?
Ok really that's like stalking someone and going to far. see if I was a person that applied and I was told that and have proof that's a civil lawsuit because they would have to lie about the real reason to the workforce commission why they didn't hire you. Only time your surpose to do any google maps is during a criminal background check and to use some of the information on a polygraph test to see if there lieing or not. Good way to set a base line for the line of questioning but what was to happen if the place was a vacate lot no house on it but a tent. Then what ??? Because the builders didn't build on it yet and I am living on my lot??? well hell if people want to be that picky then put your workers up in company housing where the office.not everyone lives in a nice surburban neighborhood with a white picket fence or matching someone social mold or social programming company's want I'm sorry I'm a individual you hire me for the skills I process and the knowledge I bring to the company and leadership unless you want me to be talking about my home life at work. It's never good to spy on your workers home life or where they live it's a two way street and it gets really complex when you have your employees spying on there employers homelife as well then it gets into a legal sticky problem when thing go wrong. I had to work a personal protection detail because they let a guy go from a hospital and he known where there bosses lived lets just the death threats was real and him living right around the block didn't help anything. That's not a good practice to be using. Especially about people's personal security and well being. also the frist person I say broke into my house would be the hr manager because he or she known where I lived and the money I make and life style I live. By how well I keep up my house or the boats in my yard or the 100000 dollar yacht I have in my drive way perfect insider job. See get the point I am making
Yes and no. Where I live, anyone can go on the county property website and get a photo of your home, and information about how many bedrooms, bathrooms, fireplaces, what you paid for the home, how much your property taxes are, square footage.....everything, practically. And they don't need your address...just your last name. And if you own or are buying the property...the information is there, and it is public information. Imagine how scary that can be for someone who owns a high level property. They can easily become victims of stalking, burglary, and robbery.
Happy New Year, Cynthia! Good grief, why must people be so ugly? Someone's address rarely says anything about the skills or ability of an individual. It does not give a clear picture into the soul of a person! This is wrong on so many levels!! Makes me glad I use my business address for everything! Thanks for the heads up! Everyone else pay attention! Not sure about a solution, but all of us are reasonably intelligent and perhaps we can find a solution together!
I agree, my passion has been in the Logistics Field of Operations for the past 20 years whether it's with the Supply Chain or Transportation, I just recently got hired by UPS and my First Line Supervisor has stated that the Top Level Employers there are not just judging potential employees based on Years of Experience or Education Levels, but now it also includes a snapshot photo of your area of residence, this is the kind of stuff that leaves many speechless in the worst way imaginable.
Now you really know why affirmative action was created. If your story is accurate we all know it's wrong. As one of your other commenters said.
They will give another excuse .
I'm 63 and my chosen profession I have 20 years experience with the same company. I'm seeing plenty of employment opportunities and I apply , you would think I would have had one company to ask me in for a interview.
You have no argument from me on these companies doing what you said. For sure I live on the west side of Chicago or as we say the hood and I'm not shame of where I live.
But while I was in school paying for my bachelors they never asked me where did I live and on my degree it is no address, color of skin, sexual preference, or phone numbers. But all in all nothing surprises me what white America do to us African American. Remember they stole America from the Indians
I haven't had to put my race on anything I've applied to. I'm white and i live on the side of town with government housing, even lived in said government housing. I don't really get your point. You ever been wrongfully arrested, i have, again I'm white not to mention other members of my white family have suffered the same. Again i don't get your point. Black people want to act like it's only black people you might as well put the race card away it will get you no sympathy from poor white Americans because you are too busy screaming aboit black this snd black that to realize it ain't got a dam thing to do with your color it's your evonomic standing that is the problem. And lets not forget since you trying to give a history lesson Africans sold Africans to white Americans and black Americans were right along side buying their own slaves...oh yes there were black slave owners yet i never hear one black person talk about them oppressing their own people. There is no doubt racism exists but I'm so tired of the white shaming going on because all you see is the bad things against blacks because frankly it makes for good tv in the sense that it causes people who want to do nothing more than stir up the masses. Only they're not perpetuating the white against black...thats fewer and far between. But the black againt white racism which mind you is and always has been just as strong, is what everyone is trying to incite.
Mr. Lockett careful with how you bring out the facts of white history. They want to call it a dark time in American. They want to act like they did no wrong. But the truth of the matter don't change. We didn't have any idea the nature of blacks in the deep south till
The Help hit the silver screen. Until
MS. Burning came out white folks acted like that was accepted behaviour. See as long as you stay in your place you'll be fine, but that won't hold now cause Dipstick Thump goes to the White House and he will do everything he can to ensure White power stays alive. Just look at his dept. heads.......
That is so not fair, I live 2hrs from my job, trying to find a job closer however, the job I want is 10min away, they still won't hire me. I have all the degrees, and internship don't have the paid training. I been doing my job for at least 10 years before I had a degree, now have can't get my Ideal job.
Brenda-touche'! I guess few have considered that the reason one is job searching in the first place, is to make things in their lives better than they are currently. Lance Robinson sounds (& is pictured) like a person who has NEVER experienced discrimination -and he doesn't have a
reply option after his comment -so obviously, he thinks that his limited experiences are isolated irrelevancies in the REAL WORLD.
And maybe you like your house. Everyone doesn't want to live in a McMansion. Many people want to live simply, and are not about
keeping up with the Jones, the Smiths, or the Johnsons. I know wealthy people who live in nice homes; but they aren't ostentatious. Their money is put in investments. And since we live in America, that should be our choice.
The EEOC federal law states
The laws enforced by EEOC prohibit an employer or other covered entity from using neutral employment policies and practices that have a disproportionately negative effect on applicants or employees of a particular race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), or national origin, or on an individual with a disability or class of individuals with disabilities ... There are many other clauses under it's framework. The primary criteria is to justify disqualification on the basis of skills and minimum qualification required, and then elect the best candidate. This sounds rather
Long way from home.. Please look in https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/practices/ Dr. Dey
Dr. Dey,. Thank you for submitting factual information for us to review.
I am finding, in my job search, that while I have all the qualifications mentioned in the job description, I'm being turned down for the job.
I've never had this problem in my life-like I turned 65.
I don't want to be pessimistic, but it appears that I'm being summarily turned down because of my chronological age.
Age has always been a factor! However, my own research points out in this world of disruptive technology and monumental growth of connected devices, aging is also being correlated with outdated skills. It is rather interesting, when I asked hiring managers, irrespective of discipline, they are always looking for soft-kills like oral communication, ethical judgement and maturity. So, don't compete on skills. Put forward your personal traits. After all, it is always who we hire, not what comes with him / her. Skill is a 'post' attribute. Thanks. Dr. Dey
This is the first time that I have really took that into consideration, but sadly, based on how everyone can use their computer or phone to tap into your personal exterior living space these days without you even being aware of it, is now considered to be a sad and pretty much; permanent reality as to how we are being judged based on neighborhood demographics, it truly is breathtaking in the worst way.
Not their business at all, Vince. When someone asks me where I live, and I think they're being a smart ass, I say,
in a house that I am working very hard to maintain. If they ask me where I was born, I say,
in the maternity ward of a hospital. That usually shuts the smart asses down.
Hi Cynthia, I agree with you that if employers are using Google Map to disqualify people, that is ridiculous. However, I have seen some employers put in their job description that they are only seeking people who live within a certain distance from the company. I actually think that is okay, because for those like myself who live in the metro-Atlanta area, distance can make a big difference for how long it may take a person to get to work. I just think employers should be honest about that upfront and state their concerns regarding commute times, if that is an issue, then make that one of the requirements for the job. Much like some jobs require you to have a CDL license and be able to drive, or live close by if needing to be on-call, etc. So, employers should just be honest about their requirements, and not act sneaky.
What a great idea. What if the Google maps showed a home with trash and beat up old cars all around and it looks like a dump. Does that not tell you a bit about how professional the person applying for the job? If they do not care about their home they surely will have issues at work. It does prove out time and time again.
Lol...Kirk some of those beat up old cars can be restored and bring in more than your house. Restoration is not an overnight job. One mans trash is another man's Chevelle with a Corvette moter chained down under the hood cuz it keeps breaking the motor mounts every time you rev it up..lol. You dont know what's going on in someone's life, home, yard and head unless you take the time to ask and I'm pretty sure google maps doesn't have that feature. Judge not...
Absolutely! Im so happy you saw this. I was laid off in '08 from a job i passionately LOVED, serving as a welfare-to-work instructor/coach. The
template for resume construction Required an address (as Dept. of Social Services does) in order for participants to be served. I sincerely hope the programs will dispel the practice. Although MOST applications (legal, & binding document) will disclose residency details to at least HR. I also know of an HR
professional who was fired from a major SoCal utilities corporation for vetting resumes, with partiality (selecting) to hispanic last names. She was almost immediately hired by a major aerospace corp., Note: There are agricultural, & scriptural principles older than
Karma -OT Psalm 7:15 & NT-Galatians 6:7
I don't live in a bad area just a small town. With that said our post office is bad have had bills that were never delivered and caught then down the line another set of bills gets lost . They have stolen things. What I have now is a ups box. The convenience specially if they are looking at google maps is the ups store uses a street address for their boxes and the box number is listed like an apartment #. I have not had any problems at all with this as my mailing address. Yes it's an extra cost but if they consider your area to be bad maybe a box at the ups store close to you that might be considered better area might work. And you can use it for your drivers license. Just a thought. (Any job near me is at least 25 mins away so distance would always be a factor for me if this is what employers are doing)
I was told 6 years ago to not include address or zip code on resume, well, they do that..We need a hand up, not take us down, well, the rich get richer and we just keep trying to get a minimum wage part time job. If we had it good, would not be applying to your minimum wage, part time job..
Wow, I never thought of that. That is the problem with new page of being an employer. We need to go back to paper applications and calling if they want an interview or over the phone first interview. I know I am saying this for nothing. Computers, emails, and texting is the new thing for job hunting.
That is such none sense, Hr managers have a hard time finding qualified personnel , and are overloaded with paper work they dont have time to do this nonsense and by the way most big companies have restricted access to the internet . trust me if you dont get hire. you address is not the issue you are the issue.
I worry about the future of the working class. Its moving so fast and if you get detoured life whizzes right on by. Back in the day you could spend four months in jail and hit the streets and not miss a beat. but, todays market is truly ruthless and relentless. I feel as though the market is black holing into its self. I hope everyone has thought about back-up plans and has stored food and water.
Hey all you people that don't believe your potential employer wouldn't scoop out your hood before hiring you......wake up! And I don't know if its a bad idea either. Believe me you that if you live in a shelter, they will know. its a rough and tumble world. just don't lie. withhold before fibbing. They will find out.
So true, Christopher. People who think that potential employers, neighbors, friends, and even the
nosy aren't scoping them out are delusional. There are literally hundreds, maybe thousands of databases that collect information about us, and are easily accessible to the general public for a subscription fee. And government employees in certain positions have access to voting records, too. There are medical databases that insurance companies use to access risk factors when insuring someone, insurance databases to access risk factors for auto and homeowner's insurance. Criminal records databases, on and on and on. Why lie, is right!
That's sweet Shaylee...better look around and quit B.S. ing yourself. The new reality is here and it is consuming everything. Money does stand in place of character and integrity. Its not how it used to be. And it is sad and confusing to those who don't have good orderly direction. Money is the new truth. Of course You don't have to believe it, doesn't make it any less true...Bible says the time is at hand when the truth is false and the false truth. So I'm just saying , the tides have turned and they aren't turning back.
Chris. I meant there are a lot of
bad eggs and
good eggs in every tax bracket. I grew up in a great family and small town. I left the professional world temp. to raise my kids. That should not red flag me or disqualify because I should to work at home [for three years] instead of pay someone 75% of my paycheck to raise my toddlers. Money can represent behavioral patterns..but not always. Medical Bills, Taking Care of family....certain hardships, just not pertaining to an overabundance of tangible spending habits. I wish more Recruiters took Video pre-screenings. Have you ever experienced one? I felt that interview was the most fair because they seen me, heard me speak, and answered basic questions. That way a piece of paper isn't the only way to represent what I would bring to the table.
Ms. Smith you're funny. But no I don't think that's the case. But I think that you'll have to live within a few miles of the job soon. As a supervisor I'd love to have my full staff within 15-25 min drive time or 30-45 min. bus/train ride to the job.
The law prohibits the discrimination of a person based on National origin. National origin is the ethnic background, The unfavorable treatment of a person based on the particular country or part of the world they come from. This law states that if an employer is hiring based on anything other than their qualifications to the job than it is considered as well as recorded as discrimination based on where a person chose to reside or had no choice in where they reside. So, If you can prove that the person google information on an applicant prior to or after the interview and sent notice or stated the person was not hire, it is efficient enough to state it was discrimination after a pattern was established. Multiple applicants being treated the same verses the hiring of individuals in an establish area or national origin.
I am no Lawyer, Just a veteran who experienced many wrongful acts by companies in financial power.
The law prohibits the discrimination of a person based on National origin. National origin is the ethnic background, The unfavorable treatment of a person based on the particular country or part of the world they come from. This law states that if an employer is hiring based on anything other than their qualifications to the job than it is considered as well as recorded as discrimination based on where a person chose to reside or had no choice in where they reside. So, If you can prove that the person google information on an applicant prior to or after the interview and sent notice or stated the person was not hire, it is efficient enough to state it was discrimination after a pattern was established. Multiple applicants being treated the same verses the hiring of individuals in an establish area or national origin.
No one has to ask that question....they already know the answer. If it is asked, it's just to see what the person interviewed will say. When my former bosses in the legislature would interview potential employees.....they already had a ton of personal information on the person being interviewed, and were mostly just asking questions they already had the answers for to
make conversation, or to gauge the person's reaction to them already knowing the information. I took notice that the people hired were the ones who answered the questions in a basically
unruffled manner.....people who acted calmly under pressure.
Why does everyone assume using common sense is
Employers do stuff for the best interests of the company. if there are a sufficient number of qualified job candidates living nearby why bother interviewing candidates who live an hour or so drive away from the job?
Long employee commutes effect attendance on snow days and usually result in higher turn over. because the long commutes just wear on the employee after a while.
Some are outraged by this. They have been running credit checks for years for employment.
If you are to far in debt, they may not hire you, as a thieft risk. Even if you don't have a criminal background. Or maybe if you are handling money or contracts.
All this can be hell on you if you have gone through a life changing event, like death of a family member, or divorce.
If this is the case then they would be doing you a favor. Would you want to work for a company with such narrow minded views. If they were to hire you, how long would you be there if you were unable to advance. If they don't choose the right candidate based on qualifications then any promotions would also not be based on qualifications
wow. that why america is so divided we all believed on this somehow nonsense internet comment, which in reality. if someone does not get a job has nothing do with you address or religion or society status. you get the job because of you. you can be qualify if you have an uncomfortable personality. why would they hire you no one likes to be around an opinionated person. stop playing the victim of using you address as an justification for not getting a job. People get hire because of who they are not for their qualifications. if you are fully qualify and other person has less qulifications than you ,.but has better personalty than you will be overlook for the job . Hr managers are smarter to know who to hire with out the need of using your address to make a decision so nonsense
People are becoming very creative for justification of not having a job and playing the victim
bottom line be a better person and you will have more opportunities
Rule of Life
THE MORE PROBLEMS YOU HAVE IN YOU LIFE THE WORST PERSON YOU ARE THE LESS PROBLEMS THE BETTER YOU ARE
It's amazing to still find people who are so guliable to believe discrimination has been legislated out of society. If you have a case and money to pay a lawyer and the patience to wait up two years you could retire on the penalties imposed by the courts on the company. Otherwise as a minority of any description you have no choice but to move on.
Who is playing the victim? I don't see that most of the posters on this job site are
playing the victim, Mr.
I never have or will never have a problem in my life, ever. Just remember....you can be perfectly happy and healthy today, step off the curb the wrong way tomorrow, and be a quadriplegic. My daughter took care of a lady when she was a CNA who had something similar happen to her. Good career, good credit, good
everything. She fell down a flight of steps because her $300 high heel shoes got caught on a piece of loose carpet. And she ended up paralyzed.....good career, good credit, good health......all gone with the blink of an eye.
Jorge..just so you know i feel 10% dumber having read your post and the amount of time it took me to read this post is time i can never get back. Having problems means you are a bad person and no problems means you're good??? Does the name Jesus ring a bell??? And you can have the greatest personality ever but if you don't know how to do the job you're not getting hired. If it comes down to two equally qualified candidates then your personality can definitely be a deciding factor.
I think you are absolutely correct. I live in a mobile home and I have been under the suspicion that employers were doing the same thing and judging me when they discover what I live in. I have a ton of experience and have not been called for an interview in quite some time now. I have a solution for this, I am going change my address on my resume to a beautiful home on my street, so they can google map all they want, it doesn't change the awesome performance that I provide. I will simply inform them of the address change after I get hired!
Looks like an universal way of discrimination based on geography and not age, race, color, religion or creed. So what do we do about it. No lawyer would take this one on unless you have proof. Your opinion isn't worth spit. Opinions and rumor are at best here say evidence. Good luck with this windmill.
Somtimes google maps don't reflect the actual house the coincides with the address! I have mapped myself many times and found out to be true. I lived in Kotzebue, AK in the
dog house, which just means you can have pets. Nice place to live in a place where finding housing is a challenge at best. Looks crummy from a he outside.
Maybe that's why I don't have job. Lol
Cynthia, this is sad. I work project work and can work anywhere in the US. Most job assignments I take are 6 months to 2 years. I'm starting one on 1/19 which last about 8-10 weeks. I can work anywhere so I have a very nice RV. If you google our property in Oneonta, Alabama, you'll see us located at a very remote, rural address and this could disqualify me from a job. My career was spent driving to Birmingham, Alabama (25 miles away). Prior to this, I worked in SC where driving to Greenville from Spartanburg (another 25+ mile commute) is nothing. I also watched a PS Recruiting in Birmingham go through resumes looking for unusual names to build her client pool. She simply would not call someone with a name like John Doe, so that was also a significant way to discriminate. When I was an HR Manager and worked in HR I was questioned on ethnic backgrounds one time and I honestly could not tell someone what race/creed the person I interviewed happened to be as I was hiring the person most suitable for a job. We had a great cross section of employees from all backgrounds. Truly as HR folks, finding the right fit for the job is the most important job. I hate discrimination in any form.
Remember as the one jobcaser stated; its up to us where we work not the employer. Most people unless they have no choice don't take a long commute. Point taken. I replied to another jobcaser; I had 40+ years in the work force. Some people have the wrong idea about the medical profession. Going where the work is; a case in point. I'm disabled now and also retired because of these young people in higher managment positions that are unwilling to hire me. I actually wrote a reprimand to one young lady on here because of her disrespect and outright rudeness to a fellow jobcaser. That is unnecessary and not called for. Also you see I know how to spell and write complete sentences. I mean not everyone needs to know everything and trust me they don't. But why in the world do people these days think its all about them and that they are entitled to the winnings of a lawsuit because they feel they were discriminated against. As the attorney who posted said, employers owe applicants nothing. Just like colleges owe applicants nothing. Its a risk when you apply. As a person with common sense, and also some human dignity if I don't think a job will suit me then I won't even entertain an interview. I'm a nurse. I've been asked by my local hospital to come out of retirement but I won't do so. The young nurses want to learn. The older ones are waiting to retire. Its a serious situation. Now you all should know why many people are leaving our country. Everyone is acting like idiots. Thank you for reading.
I read your post, and am not quite sure how to respond. The issue is not
suing.....the issue is having your application discredited, simply because someone doesn't like your address. And actually, it is not up to
we where we work...you can only work where you are hired, and the employer does the hiring, not the employee. The employee has the right to accept or decline, but one cannot accept or decline something that is not offered.
Not a suprise. Employers are allowed to check your credit score, require urinalysis tests, and force you to sign arbitration clauses prior to hiring you.
Myself and other veterans gave their time, injury and in some cases their lives to protect freedoms that seem to be given away on a regular basis.
Maybe the next corporation to violate a citizens rights should get a visit from my old tank division. Trust me that would be a policy changer.
Cynthia, thank you for your expertise and insight on the information you have always posted. Your information is always solid and very useful. I hope people look at the facts of these posts and not let their personal opinions, judgments, and other agendas get in the way. I would appreciate your guidance off line, if that would be okay. Thank you!
I a NOT surprised, I should be but not with today's society.This is so unfair, So paying a thousand something dollars a year for college so you can get your bachelor's degree or whatever and since you know when you're just young and starting out in life your going to live where you can afford till you find a great career and buy a nice home, there going to say no to the job you're applying for? HOW CRAZY! why pay for that diploma then? SMH...
Throw in age discrimination and you have a real mess. In my former career, I met people in their 60's and 70's who are paying back student loans from their social security checks. These people went back to school in their 50's and 60's, incurring thousands and thousands of dollars of debt...and discovered no one would hire them because they were deemed
A more recent trend that I've noticed is that more people are leaving their address off their resume. I don't think HR/recruiting is doing this
mapping industry wide, I've done recruiting for almost 30 years & I've never done it. But some employers look at where you live and think you won't drive as far as their job is, so they don't interview you. That is more of what I see.
You are missing the point...it's not about
distance....it's about not even being called for the interview because HR doesn't like where you live....even if it's in the same city. For example...I live in a zip code that encompasses the oldest residential neighborhood in my city.....where there are mansions.....the same zip code encompasses a low income housing project about five miles away......I live in the middle....closer to the residential neighborhood with the mansions. But a recruiter who is going to discriminate by zip code isn't going to know if I live in a mansion or a housing project....thus....a person not getting called to the interview.
Google maps would show the building that the UPS store is located in, just like Google maps shows that my post office box is at the US Federal Building in downtown Harrisburg, PA. And the
maps with photos aren't outdated at all. The Google map photo of my residence is VERY up to date.
HelloMs. Cynthia! HAPPY NEW YEAR!
My comment is that there is no thing as your info being private. Any 1 can GOOGLE you & get even info about your criminal history. America is not what it us to be. NORTH AMERICA SMELL. But I do know this: GOD IS IN CONTROL OF EVERYTHING. Let us not forget this. Thanks! Have a blessed day! Jesus loves US all even though we do not always do what is right. Jesus have no LOOPHOLES on the love that he have for us.