U.S.Laws May Make Online Job Hunting Harder 433
j00bar writes "CNN/Fortune is reporting that applying for a job online is going to get harder. 'New federal guidelines meant to standardize how employers track data on the diversity of their job-applicant pool are taking effect starting today for jobs at federal contractors -- and similar rules will kick in later this year at U.S. companies with more than 50 employees. And resumes and search approaches that worked perfectly well before may no longer do the trick.'"
Might be difficult.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Ok, I'm lost. (Score:5, Insightful)
So in order to get a more diverse and random selection of applicants, we're going to shrink the qualified applicant pool by making it more difficult to apply for a job? Can someone explain to me how this is supposed to increase diversity? I would think that if you want a more diverse selection, you would want to increase the qualified applicant pool so you have more people to choose from.
How can they do this (Score:2, Insightful)
It is our place and decision to run online employment boards how we see fit and put up descriptions of our jobs and post our skills to our own likings. We are free to find the people who we think may be good at the job by looking at their resume
Plus, what the crap, if I "apply" for a job online they look at my resume and they talk to me, they setup and interview. Now if some @#*(%& employer hires an employee purely based off what is said of a bleeding website then they deserve a crappy employee.
IMHO, of course.
So in other words (Score:4, Insightful)
Good one.
Oh like it's not hard enough already!? (Score:5, Insightful)
Keep your resume up-to-the-minute current. "The rules allow companies to pick a random pool of applicants by searching the job boards for 'most recent' qualified applicants," Crispin notes. "In those cases, no one will even look at a resume that is more than two or three weeks old." Yikes.
Oh whatever, if the company is looking for someone with experience that most don't have they are going to look closely at the resumes. If anyone can do the job in the applicant pool they aren't going to care one way or the other.
For the jobs that I have interviewed for through monster.com and careerbuilder.com applications, I have received a few offers -- none of which bettered my current job security and benefits (the pay was better).
We don't need laws to make it more difficult to find work -- we need laws that make the jobs we have better than they already are.
Leave it to the gov't (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Might be difficult.... (Score:3, Insightful)
This may mean that companies have to stop from the absurd practice of over specifing what they need.
The jobs I have really excelled at have been the ones where I didn't have all the qualifications.
Re:Oh like it's not hard enough already!? (Score:3, Insightful)
Has someone looked at the low unemployment rates recently and decided something had to be done to raise them, or what?
I think this is BS (Score:5, Insightful)
Scare phrases (Score:4, Insightful)
sPh
Just what we need... (Score:1, Insightful)
Hey, lawmakers, how about similar restrictions on outsource criteria? Perhaps something along the lines of less than 10% of the workforce can be under the age of 10, half the workforce must be female, etc.
"With open markets and a level playing field, no one can out-produce or out-compete the American worker." - President Bush, Feb.1, 2006
Big deal (Score:2, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Might be difficult.... (Score:3, Insightful)
TFA? Useless and Misleading. (Score:5, Insightful)
Then it spins into a collection of rather bizarre "tips" for job applicants, most of which don't really seem to have anything to do with the alleged changes in government hiring practices, or even reality.
Even for slashdot this is pretty weak.
Re:Might be difficult.... (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other hand, I know that some managers just don't understand it well enough to write a good position description. I've had to write several PDs (sometimes for a job I was leaving, sometimes for a position I was hiring, and finally sometimes because the higher-ups didn't like my level of job security). It's usually best done by someone who can do the job himself, but the next best thing is to define the roles and very basic requirements - will need to create web applications in a Linux-based environment.
Just because it could be done in PHP, Perl, Ruby, Python, or Java doesn't mean you have to list all of those. And if the language hasn't been selected yet, why bother listing it at all? There are excellent developers with PHP and Ruby experience that will be turned off from the suggestion that they need to use Java.
Ah I see (Score:2, Insightful)
What's that saying about two wrongs...
Re:Good [using what twisted logic?] (Score:4, Insightful)
What nonsense. If a corporation was only hiring people "to make a dollar," then they'd only hire the most effective, efficient people possible. You know, hiring people based on their actual merit. For that matter, if "making a dollar" is partly accomplished by lowering your overhead, then hiring the people willing to work for the least (in non-demanding retail positions, for example) would also be standard practice... and based on demographics, that would disporportionately result in the hiring of minorities and recent immigrants. So, no need to worry about quotas, right?
Or, am I confused about what you think is the "subtle discrimination" as it relates to how a corporation "makes a buck?" How, in your view, does discrimination help a large corporation actually make a buck? Or are you making a very sly, dubious, stealthy comment implying that minorities aren't as able to help an employer make a buck? Make some damn sense, or be more honest about your biases.
Re:Here is a question (Score:1, Insightful)
Oh, and just because I hate it, it's NIGGER.
When you say "N-word" as some lame attempt to avoid using it, you empower the "n-word" in exactly the same way. Stop doing that.
Re:TFA? Useless and Misleading. (Score:1, Insightful)
CareerXRoads is a consulting firm. To me, this looks like Crispin is making a big deal out of a small regulation change to drum up business.
You got what you asked for.... (Score:2, Insightful)
*You* elected 'em.
Think before voting, next time.
Try holding your fave politicians ACCOUNTABLE for once. Sure, career bureaucrats are responsible, but they are told what to do BY CONGRESS.
- A disgusted native-American male-lesbian libertarian activist
Online job hunting doesn't work anyway (Score:3, Insightful)
- 20 years professional experience.
- 7 years IT manager
- C, C++, C#,
- 10+ years project management
No interviews or contact whatsoever.
The only way to really get response is through personal and direct contacts with firm you are interested in.
Re:How can they do this (Score:2, Insightful)
Food for thought.
Mmm, food..
think about what you're saying (Score:3, Insightful)
But many of those "white Europeans" that you are so fond of complaining about didn't come to the US to rape and pillage, they were facing starvation or execution (often for petty offenses) in Europe and were effectively also slaves in the US; when they finally managed to free themselves, of course, they did whatever it took to survive. Likewise, many (most?) of those Africans that were sent to the US as slaves weren't captured and transported by white Europeans, they were enslaved and shipped over to the US by other Africans.
Finally, I ask you: what notions of human rights and liberty have non-Europeans produced? Prior to the age of European empires, much of the world consisted of traditional tribal cultures, and the few big cultures like India and China were ossified, stratified, and had made racism and classism an integral part of their culture. If you view Islam as a non-European culture, then it has perhaps the closest claim of any of the other cultures to recognizing human rights and liberty, but that's a distant second to what European philosophers and humanists produced.
Re:Oh like it's not hard enough already!? (Score:2, Insightful)
Seems like the logical solution, since your chosen industry seems pretty unstable, and you seem to envy the stability that being an economist offers.
Re:Ok, I'm lost. (Score:3, Insightful)
The answer is...it doesn't matter. What is should be "obvious" to everyone, according to the Feds, is that the more diverse you are in your employment pool, the greater quality and better worksmanship you get. This is one of the great P.C. truths!
Geez..I don't get it. I think they should actually BAN the listing of race and sex on employment applications and records. You should get the job based on your qualification, period.
Re:think about what you're saying (Score:3, Insightful)
Oh, good frickin' christ! (Score:3, Insightful)
this is not hard to understand (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Here is a question (Score:2, Insightful)