Indeed.com, Largest Jobs Website, Bans Discriminatory Ads

WASHINGTON -- With mounting pressure from worker advocates and an online petition, Indeed.com, the Internet's highest-trafficked job board website, has announced that it will no longer allow job ads that discriminate against the unemployed, a practice that even President Obama has criticized.

"Our policy is to exclude job listings that do not comply with federal or local laws related to discriminatory hiring practices as well as job listings that discriminate against the unemployed," Sophie Beaurpere, Indeed.com's director of communications, said in a statement.

Progressive advocacy group USAction used Change.org to gather more than 92,000 Internet signatures to petition the three major online job boards -- Indeed.com, Monster.com and CareerBuilder.com -- to get rid of job postings that stipulate applicants must be currently employed.

Only a week ago, President Obama said on a radio show those ads "make absolutely no sense," going so far as to say he supports federal legislation to ban discrimination against the jobless.

The long-term unemployed have found themselves in a bind as they now make up about half of the jobless population -- about 6 million people out of work for six months or longer.

The National Employment Law Project has been highlighting discrimination against the unemployed for some time, tracking and collecting ads from major companies.

The Huffington Post contacted companies who had posted the ads and received a range of defenses, including from third-party employment agencies who said it was an acceptable practice. Some even blamed Indeed for cycling old ads they no longer wanted live.

Monster has refused to stop running the ads. "While we oppose discrimination against the unemployed on numerous grounds, we believe it is the responsibility of employers themselves, rather than Monster, to decide what they say in their job postings and how they want their company to be viewed."

Reps. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.) and Henry Johnson Jr. (D-Ga.) have introduced the Fair Employment Opportunity Act of 2011. The bill would prohibit employers and employment agencies from refusing to consider job applicants solely because they are unemployed. Sens. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) also introduced the same bill in the Senate earlier this year.

Comments

[opmik75]

07:20 PM on 09/07/2011

It is a sign of the times when a return to ethical hiring is refreshing, new, and novel instead of what it should've been all along: normed behavior, status quo.

[jgourlay]

06:06 PM on 09/08/2011

Very true. But it is refreshing nonetheless. This phenomena is still to me a stunning case of kicking someone who is down for absolutely no gain at all. It's just pure spite.

[LeLoup]

05:04 PM on 09/07/2011

Keep at it corporate America; just keep at it. In the meantime, just remember this: we didn't win the Cold War by making it a Hot War. We won because instead of *pretending* we were better than the Soviets in treating our citizens, we DID treat better our citizens.

How about you substitute "citizens" for "customers", "shareholders" and "employees"? Does that give you some hints about how to avoid punitive legislation with strong and stiff flavor of "socialism" that could even become popular if you guys and gals keep at it?

[KMBerger]

04:56 PM on 09/07/2011

Finally, a recruiting website that has a sense of integrity. I'll be certain to use Indeed.com over Monster.com any day. I'm all in favor of boycotting Monster.com and its supporting advertisers.

[Melissa Ausua]

02:20 PM on 09/07/2011

Wow, this country is really hurting.

[Penelope Asuras]

02:12 PM on 09/07/2011

I've had success in the past at least marking down homemaker as my job during times when I was staying at home with the kids. It's a suggestion, try volunteer work, or freelance as well.

[Michael Gacillos OHair]

02:50 PM on 09/07/2011

Volunteer work looks fine on a resume, and is a great way to fill in the time between jobs, but it doesn't pay the bills.

[manatipr34]

02:56 PM on 09/07/2011

lollol

[lesley tivendale]

01:57 PM on 09/07/2011

I live in Canada and have NEVER come across anything like this. Im not sure of the motive to steal employees away from other employers. To me it makes no sense.

[LorriTiger243]

01:57 PM on 09/07/2011

"While we oppose discrimination against the unemployed on numerous grounds, we believe it is the responsibility of employers themselves, rather than Monster, to decide what they say in their job postings and how they want their company to be viewed."

Which is why Monster allows those scam ads that CHARGE the job-seeker to become an "employee" to be posted all over the site. It's the prime reason that I refuse to use Monster anymore. Indeed has been my choice for quite some time now.

[demilieu]

12:40 PM on 09/07/2011

Still, don't tell if you can get away with it...no one needs to know if your not working when you apply.

[NakiaJ]

01:48 PM on 09/07/2011

Except when they ask, or require information about your current employer to complete the application. The few interviews I've had in the past three years all asked for current employer information up front. When I'd said that I was currently looking for employment, the interviews were cut short. The one exception was the Post Office.