Employers not hiring the unemployed!

[wrbtrader]

Quote from TGregg:

If you have two candidates for one job, which do you think is better? The guy who's been sitting on the couch in front of the TV for 2 years or the guy who already has a job and wants to move up?

Some jobs (not many) actually have a test or two to determine which candidate earns the job. Simply, in those small situations, even a couch potato has an equal chance assuming he has stayed in touch with his profession and network.

Also, not too smart for someone with a technology background to not do some sort'uv consultation work on the side (self-employed) at extremely cheap rates to remain active...making themselves look just as attractive as someone else that already has a job working for someone else.

Mark

 

[siafx]

Quote from El Guapo:

Couch guy is hungry for a j.o.b. and will work harder and go the extra mile. Move up guy is a prick and statistically works less and expects more. I've hired both types; the couch guys always outshine. The article is bs.

I've hired both types too. My experience was the opposite of yours. Couch guy is usually burdened with rest-fatigue and a large sense of entitlement.

 

[bigarrow]

Quote from siafx:

I've hired both types too. My experience was the opposite of yours. Couch guy is usually burdened with rest-fatigue and a large sense of entitlement.

I agree with you, there is a reason someone doesn't have a job. I use all subcontractors now and I'll pay more to get the experienced quality subs, and I never hire guys new to the business. May not be fair but I don't want any learning curve headaches.

 

[joshuabelanger]

It is very unfair on the side of those people who are unemployed. They do need jobs as well. It doesn't mean that if these people don't have any steady work, they are not capable for working on the company. They should give chances for these people.

 

[cloudy]

I've been at a job where I was asked to help production automate faster. Wrote some code which increased production of the equipment by 30% ; 2 more people were laid off. I was already taking over for 2 other techs who were laid off.

If work can be replaced by a computer or robot, it will be, or a slave wager in China. Next stop, Brazil, and South America as they are undergoing their new industrial revolution. Maybe they're too many people in the world today. Economic theory can't support this kind of population.

 

[the1]

Update your skills and start your own businessess -- simple as that. Don't wait for some bugger tp give you a job. 'Get out and become your "own goss". Most folks are sitting oround waitine for someome to give them something -- ain't gonas happen in this market. Do something about itl

 

[LeeD]

Quote from TGregg:

If you have two candidates for one job, which do you think is better? The guy who's been sitting on the couch in front of the TV for 2 years or the guy who already has a job and wants to move up?

Quote from El Guapo:

Couch guy is hungry for a j.o.b. and will work harder and go the extra mile. Move up guy is a prick and statistically works less and expects more. I've hired both types; the couch guys always outshine. The article is bs.

Quote from siafx:

I've hired both types too. My experience was the opposite of yours. Couch guy is usually burdened with rest-fatigue and a large sense of entitlement.

Might depend on the pay range. If the pay after taxes, medical insurance etc barely beats the dole, this may explain the lack of enthusiasm. siafx, do you also have any statistics regarding whether "couch guys" had to take a suibstantial pay cut compared to their most recent job?

However, it's true that in larger companies people often develop a sort of complacency. They see how their fellow new joiners from 5 years back moved up the corporate ladder, received a large bonus or 2. If a person looses the hope to move up, they often loose incentive to go an extra mile. They also know that the corporate perks make it expensive to let go someone who've been with the company for a while... and training up a perefectly qualified but new person may take a few months.

 

[LeeD]

Quote from S2007S:

Just seems a bit unfair as this economy falls apart that now someone who is unemployed for longer than 6 months is now finding it harder than ever before to now find a job, any job!

It's just a stigma that if someone looses a job they probably were not as good as the people who stayed in employment.

In fact, not hiring the unemployed is a great example of "herd behavior". If others refused to hire a person for the last 6 months, they probably found some serious shortcoming in him/her.

Quote from flipside21:

Being an employer is hard. Every time you hire someone for say $50,000 per year, that person needs to make the company at least >$60,000 for the company to break even due to taxes, worker comp, unemployment, etc.

In order to offer a job a business has to create this job. Otherwise it's a matter of firing another person (and making them in turn unemployed) in order to open a position.

 

[Sandybestdog]

Quote from Scataphagos:
1. Dramatically slash taxes.

2. Dramatically reduce regulatory burdens

3. Dramatically reduce the cost of hiring/employing

So that employers WANT to and CAN compete world wide while domiciled in the USA.

The Odumbo Administration will have none of this.

Therefore, AMERICA IS DOOMED!

Please explain two things to me that I don't understand. Joe business owner has his taxes cut, why would this encourage him to hire more people? Second, which regulatory burdens would you reduce?

 

[failed_trad3r]

Quote from Sandybestdog:

Please explain two things to me that I don't understand. Joe business owner has his taxes cut, why would this encourage him to hire more people? Second, which regulatory burdens would you reduce?

It doesnt even make sense I agree. Because... drumroll... taxes are lower than they used to be and so are regulations. And the rich have quadrupled their average income in 40 years, it doesn't seem like they got held back by regulations and taxes?