TODAY, OBAMA, THE U.S. CHAMBER of COMMERCE, LA RAZA DONORS OF THE FORTUNE 500, MEXICO, AND THE LA RAZA DEMS, FEINSTEIN, PELOSI, WAXMAN, LOFGREN, REID, BECERRA, BACA, SANCHEZ SISTERS ALL PUSH NEW PLOYS FOR AMNESTY or at least continued NON-ENFORCEMENT of LAWS PROHIBITING THE EMPLOYMENT of ILLEGALS.
FROM HIS FIRST DAY IN OFFICE, THE HISPANDERING PRESIDENT HAS VOWED AMNESTY, OPEN BORDERS AND ILLEGALS IN OUR JOBS.
OBAMA ADDED TO HIS LA RAZA INFESTED ADMIN LA RAZA FASCIST HILDA SOLIS, TO ASSURE ILLEGALS FIRST PICK OF OUR JOBS.
OBAMA HAS ENDLESSLY SABOTAGED E-VERIFY, AS HAVE ALL THE LA RAZA DEMS, TO ASSURE THEIR CORPORATE PAYMASTERS WAGES WILL BE DEPRESSED WITH HORDES MORE ILLEGALS.
AND THEY’RE COMING OVER OUR BORDERS EVERY DAY! PERHAPS AS MANY AS TWO MILLION PER YEAR!!!
*
JOBLESS? NO LEGAL NEED APPLY!
SEEKING TECH WORK IN SILICON VALLEY? NO AMERICAN NEED APPLY! THERE’S TOO MANY BOATLOADS OF CHINESE AND INDIANS ARRIVING WEEKLY!
*
Jobless? More Employers Say You Need Not Apply
Although More Americans Got Jobs in February, One Category of Workers Got Kicked to the Curb
March 4, 2011
Unemployment fell in February to 8.9 percent, and
US companies added 192,000 people to their
payrolls, but one category of workers is increasingly
facing an overt form of discrimination. (For more on
Friday's employment report from the US Labor
Department, CLICK HERE.) In the bad old days of the
1800s, when it was legal for employers to
discriminate against anyone they pleased, job
postings used to say things like: "No Irish Need
Apply." Now the unemployed, it seems, have become
the new Irish: In advertisement after advertisement,
employers come right out and tell them they're not
wanted.
Right now CareerBuilder, one of the biggest job sites
on the web, has a posting for an entry-level engineer.
The candidate, it says, will perform structural analysis
of telecommunications cell towers. A civil engineering
degree is required, an undergrad GPA of at least 3.4
as is knowledge of AutoCAD. Some travel is required.
Oh, and there's one other thing: "No layoff
candidates."
What?!
You heard right: If you've been laid off or are out of
work, pal, scram -- this employer, like many others,
doesn't want you. You're damaged goods.
Look anywhere where jobs are posted, and you'll see
more examples. This discrimination isn't subtle. It's
not covert. It's right out in the open, stated in the
listings: A phone manufacturer looking to fill a
marketing job stipulates "No unemployed candidates
will be considered at all." An electronics firm looking
for an engineer says it will "Not consider/review
anyone NOT currently employed regardless of the
reason." A Craigslist posting for an assistant
restaurant manager in New Jersey says all applicants
"Must be currently employed."
So prevalent is this new form of discrimination that
the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in
February held hearings on it. The EEOC press release
announcing them bore the catchy title "Out of Work?
Out of Luck."
Testifiers included Christine Owens, executive
director of the National Employment Law Project, a
national nonprofit group that advocates on behalf of
low-age and unemployed workers, and persons
facing unfair or unlawful barriers to employment.
Owens says it's hard to know how widespread
discrimination against the jobless has become, but
she has seen human resource professionals widely
quoted to the effect that turning away the unemployed
is a growing trend. As for the help wanted notices,
"What you see stated in the advertisements is just the
tip of the iceberg," Ownes says. "For every ad that's
explicit, many more have the same policy but don't
say so. We think it's widely happening and that it's
grounds for concern, especially in an economy where
job growth is so slow and so many qualified people
are looking for work. It imposes an artificial and
arbitrary barrier that job seekers shouldn't have to
deal with."
She cited in her EEOC testimony the case of a Texas
job seeker, an experienced pharmaceutical sales rep,
who received from an executive recruiter an e-mail
stating one express caveat: "Candidates must be
currently employed or must have left the industry
within the last six months."
By ALAN FARNHAM
Jobless? More Employers Say You Need Not Apply
Although More Americans Got Jobs in February, One Category of Workers Got Kicked to the Curb
In the 2½ years that Kelly Wiedemer, 45, has been out
of work, she's received this kind of brush-off more
than once.
Wiedemer, a former operations analyst, got a call last
summer from a local technical college that was
looking for an analyst. When she went in for her
interview, the man who questioned her asked her
about her experience and previous work. "He asked
about my background, and I explained that I was an
operations analyst." She felt she was doing a good
job of selling herself. They talked for about five
minutes.
"Then he asked me how long I'd been out of work,"
she says. "I told him." His facial expression changed.
"As soon as he heard that, it was over." He asked her
"in an accusatory tone" why she had been out of work
for so long. What had she been doing? "I told him I'd
been taking training courses to increase my skill set.
I'd also done volunteer work. He did not respond."
"It was humiliating," says Wiedemer. "It's not like I
haven't been looking for a job. It's not like I decided
to take a couple of years off." On her way home, she
says, "I didn't know whether to scream or cry."
In November she saw an ad on Careerbuilder.com for
a business analyst. It sounded ideal. Not only was it
just a few miles from where Wiedemer lives, it paid the
same as her old job and had almost exactly the same
responsibilities. The listing said the applicant would
need to know how to implement a particular kind of
software package -- the same one that Wiedemer had
implemented in her prevous job. "I knew that system,"
she says. "I knew it better than the guys we called to
come fix it for us."
She fired off her resume and got a response the very
next day.
The recruiter, she says, was at first excited. Then the
interview turned to how long Wiedemer had been out
of work. The excitement cooled. Wiedemer says the
recruiter said: "Here's what I'm going to do. I'm
willing to submit your resume to the hiring manager
-- but I'll be honest: Your long employment gap will
be a tough sell."
Wiedemer never got another interview.
"It was such a perfect fit," she says dejectedly. "A
perfect opportunity. I could have brought a lot to the
table for them. They didn't even want to talk to me. It's
like all my skill sets had no value to these people."
It's one thing, she says, "to get kicked to the curb." It's
another to think, "I might never work in my old
capacity again, at any rate of pay. The possibilities
are slim for anybody who's been out of work as long
as I have."
Owens says that while discrimination against the
unemployed may be cruel and may be outrageous, it's
not clear that it's illegal. That's one reason the EEOC
held hearings -- to get opinions on that question.
Were the EEOC to decide to prohibit the practice, says
Owens, there are two ways the commission could go
about it. They could determine that such
discrimination is itself illegal, or they could find that
although legal it works a disproportionate hardship
on certain categories of job seekers already protected
by law, such as the elderly, the disabled, women and
members of various ethnic minorities. To the extent,
says Owens, that an employer says the applicant must
be recently employed or out of work no longer than
six months, the stipulation disproportionately affects
older workers, who tend to go unemployed for longer
periods than the young. And the EEOC, she says,
enforces laws against age discrimination.
*
Help Make E-Verify Mandatory!
Call Your Representatives and Tell Them to Support H.R. 800
Despite a national unemployment rate of 9.4 percent, seven million illegal aliens continue to hold jobs in the United States. However, Congress can put an end to this injustice to American workers by making the E-Verify program permanent and mandatory for all employers. E-Verify—the free online program administered by the Department of Homeland Security that allows employers to verify the eligibility of employees to lawfully work in the U.S.—is currently used by over 246,000 employers. However, because E-Verify is not mandatory for all employers, a number of unscrupulous businesses continue to employ illegal aliens, allowing them to take American jobs and drive down wages.
To stop this injustice to American workers, Rep. John Carter (R-TX) introduced bi-partisan mandatory E-Verify legislation last month that would stop the job killing practice of hiring illegal aliens. Carter’s bill, H.R. 800 (“Jobs Recovery by Ensuring a Legal American Workforce Act of 2011”) would require ALL employers to use E-Verify to check the employment eligibility status of both new hires and current employees. In addition, H.R. 800 provides for the following necessary reforms:
• Increases employer fines for employing illegal aliens—quadrupling the fine for employers discovered to have hired an illegal alien three or more times.
• Prohibits employers from deducting wages paid to (or on behalf of) an illegal alien from their gross income.
• Requires the IRS to disclose to the Social Security Commissioner and Homeland Security Secretary the taxpayer identity information of employers employing illegal aliens.
FAIR strongly supports H.R. 800. We now need your help. Call your Representatives today and urge sign on as a co-sponsor of H.R. 800! It’s time to help the American worker and make E-Verify mandatory once and for all!
To find your Representative’s phone number, click here.
FROM HIS FIRST DAY IN OFFICE, THE HISPANDERING PRESIDENT HAS VOWED AMNESTY, OPEN BORDERS AND ILLEGALS IN OUR JOBS.
OBAMA ADDED TO HIS LA RAZA INFESTED ADMIN LA RAZA FASCIST HILDA SOLIS, TO ASSURE ILLEGALS FIRST PICK OF OUR JOBS.
OBAMA HAS ENDLESSLY SABOTAGED E-VERIFY, AS HAVE ALL THE LA RAZA DEMS, TO ASSURE THEIR CORPORATE PAYMASTERS WAGES WILL BE DEPRESSED WITH HORDES MORE ILLEGALS.
AND THEY’RE COMING OVER OUR BORDERS EVERY DAY! PERHAPS AS MANY AS TWO MILLION PER YEAR!!!
*
JOBLESS? NO LEGAL NEED APPLY!
SEEKING TECH WORK IN SILICON VALLEY? NO AMERICAN NEED APPLY! THERE’S TOO MANY BOATLOADS OF CHINESE AND INDIANS ARRIVING WEEKLY!
*
Jobless? More Employers Say You Need Not Apply
Although More Americans Got Jobs in February, One Category of Workers Got Kicked to the Curb
March 4, 2011
Unemployment fell in February to 8.9 percent, and
US companies added 192,000 people to their
payrolls, but one category of workers is increasingly
facing an overt form of discrimination. (For more on
Friday's employment report from the US Labor
Department, CLICK HERE.) In the bad old days of the
1800s, when it was legal for employers to
discriminate against anyone they pleased, job
postings used to say things like: "No Irish Need
Apply." Now the unemployed, it seems, have become
the new Irish: In advertisement after advertisement,
employers come right out and tell them they're not
wanted.
Right now CareerBuilder, one of the biggest job sites
on the web, has a posting for an entry-level engineer.
The candidate, it says, will perform structural analysis
of telecommunications cell towers. A civil engineering
degree is required, an undergrad GPA of at least 3.4
as is knowledge of AutoCAD. Some travel is required.
Oh, and there's one other thing: "No layoff
candidates."
What?!
You heard right: If you've been laid off or are out of
work, pal, scram -- this employer, like many others,
doesn't want you. You're damaged goods.
Look anywhere where jobs are posted, and you'll see
more examples. This discrimination isn't subtle. It's
not covert. It's right out in the open, stated in the
listings: A phone manufacturer looking to fill a
marketing job stipulates "No unemployed candidates
will be considered at all." An electronics firm looking
for an engineer says it will "Not consider/review
anyone NOT currently employed regardless of the
reason." A Craigslist posting for an assistant
restaurant manager in New Jersey says all applicants
"Must be currently employed."
So prevalent is this new form of discrimination that
the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in
February held hearings on it. The EEOC press release
announcing them bore the catchy title "Out of Work?
Out of Luck."
Testifiers included Christine Owens, executive
director of the National Employment Law Project, a
national nonprofit group that advocates on behalf of
low-age and unemployed workers, and persons
facing unfair or unlawful barriers to employment.
Owens says it's hard to know how widespread
discrimination against the jobless has become, but
she has seen human resource professionals widely
quoted to the effect that turning away the unemployed
is a growing trend. As for the help wanted notices,
"What you see stated in the advertisements is just the
tip of the iceberg," Ownes says. "For every ad that's
explicit, many more have the same policy but don't
say so. We think it's widely happening and that it's
grounds for concern, especially in an economy where
job growth is so slow and so many qualified people
are looking for work. It imposes an artificial and
arbitrary barrier that job seekers shouldn't have to
deal with."
She cited in her EEOC testimony the case of a Texas
job seeker, an experienced pharmaceutical sales rep,
who received from an executive recruiter an e-mail
stating one express caveat: "Candidates must be
currently employed or must have left the industry
within the last six months."
By ALAN FARNHAM
Jobless? More Employers Say You Need Not Apply
Although More Americans Got Jobs in February, One Category of Workers Got Kicked to the Curb
In the 2½ years that Kelly Wiedemer, 45, has been out
of work, she's received this kind of brush-off more
than once.
Wiedemer, a former operations analyst, got a call last
summer from a local technical college that was
looking for an analyst. When she went in for her
interview, the man who questioned her asked her
about her experience and previous work. "He asked
about my background, and I explained that I was an
operations analyst." She felt she was doing a good
job of selling herself. They talked for about five
minutes.
"Then he asked me how long I'd been out of work,"
she says. "I told him." His facial expression changed.
"As soon as he heard that, it was over." He asked her
"in an accusatory tone" why she had been out of work
for so long. What had she been doing? "I told him I'd
been taking training courses to increase my skill set.
I'd also done volunteer work. He did not respond."
"It was humiliating," says Wiedemer. "It's not like I
haven't been looking for a job. It's not like I decided
to take a couple of years off." On her way home, she
says, "I didn't know whether to scream or cry."
In November she saw an ad on Careerbuilder.com for
a business analyst. It sounded ideal. Not only was it
just a few miles from where Wiedemer lives, it paid the
same as her old job and had almost exactly the same
responsibilities. The listing said the applicant would
need to know how to implement a particular kind of
software package -- the same one that Wiedemer had
implemented in her prevous job. "I knew that system,"
she says. "I knew it better than the guys we called to
come fix it for us."
She fired off her resume and got a response the very
next day.
The recruiter, she says, was at first excited. Then the
interview turned to how long Wiedemer had been out
of work. The excitement cooled. Wiedemer says the
recruiter said: "Here's what I'm going to do. I'm
willing to submit your resume to the hiring manager
-- but I'll be honest: Your long employment gap will
be a tough sell."
Wiedemer never got another interview.
"It was such a perfect fit," she says dejectedly. "A
perfect opportunity. I could have brought a lot to the
table for them. They didn't even want to talk to me. It's
like all my skill sets had no value to these people."
It's one thing, she says, "to get kicked to the curb." It's
another to think, "I might never work in my old
capacity again, at any rate of pay. The possibilities
are slim for anybody who's been out of work as long
as I have."
Owens says that while discrimination against the
unemployed may be cruel and may be outrageous, it's
not clear that it's illegal. That's one reason the EEOC
held hearings -- to get opinions on that question.
Were the EEOC to decide to prohibit the practice, says
Owens, there are two ways the commission could go
about it. They could determine that such
discrimination is itself illegal, or they could find that
although legal it works a disproportionate hardship
on certain categories of job seekers already protected
by law, such as the elderly, the disabled, women and
members of various ethnic minorities. To the extent,
says Owens, that an employer says the applicant must
be recently employed or out of work no longer than
six months, the stipulation disproportionately affects
older workers, who tend to go unemployed for longer
periods than the young. And the EEOC, she says,
enforces laws against age discrimination.
*
Help Make E-Verify Mandatory!
Call Your Representatives and Tell Them to Support H.R. 800
Despite a national unemployment rate of 9.4 percent, seven million illegal aliens continue to hold jobs in the United States. However, Congress can put an end to this injustice to American workers by making the E-Verify program permanent and mandatory for all employers. E-Verify—the free online program administered by the Department of Homeland Security that allows employers to verify the eligibility of employees to lawfully work in the U.S.—is currently used by over 246,000 employers. However, because E-Verify is not mandatory for all employers, a number of unscrupulous businesses continue to employ illegal aliens, allowing them to take American jobs and drive down wages.
To stop this injustice to American workers, Rep. John Carter (R-TX) introduced bi-partisan mandatory E-Verify legislation last month that would stop the job killing practice of hiring illegal aliens. Carter’s bill, H.R. 800 (“Jobs Recovery by Ensuring a Legal American Workforce Act of 2011”) would require ALL employers to use E-Verify to check the employment eligibility status of both new hires and current employees. In addition, H.R. 800 provides for the following necessary reforms:
• Increases employer fines for employing illegal aliens—quadrupling the fine for employers discovered to have hired an illegal alien three or more times.
• Prohibits employers from deducting wages paid to (or on behalf of) an illegal alien from their gross income.
• Requires the IRS to disclose to the Social Security Commissioner and Homeland Security Secretary the taxpayer identity information of employers employing illegal aliens.
FAIR strongly supports H.R. 800. We now need your help. Call your Representatives today and urge sign on as a co-sponsor of H.R. 800! It’s time to help the American worker and make E-Verify mandatory once and for all!
To find your Representative’s phone number, click here.
No comments:
Post a Comment