A recent article in one of The Huffington Post's parent company's online publications, AOL Jobs, titled "Employer Explains Why He Won't Hire The Unemployed," the author interviews a business owner who provides reasons why he will not consider hiring an unemployed individual. I read his reasons with considerable interest because like many, I find generalizations such as the ones provided by this business owner to be lacking in thought and as I stated in the readers' comments section, his reasoning is both faulty and foolish.
An excerpt of his reasons (in italics) and my responses are as follows:
As business owners and/or top-level executives, it is a duty to ourselves and our organizations to formulate decisions that advance our business. We do this by making choices which encompass strategy, a vision for growth and importantly, hiring the people who possess the right set of skills that can pick-up where we are at now and can take us where we want to go. Unfortunately for the subject in the article, he doesn't seem to subscribe to this philosophy. But then it seems, neither do many executives who are entrusted with the future of the companies that employ them or sadder still as in this case, the owner of the company that sustains him. Their view is not on "What can you do for me?" as it should be, but instead obsesses on "What can't you do for someone else?" Is this thought process prevalent in every company and in every sector? Chances are it's probably held by many who are in a decision-making hiring capacity. But hiring the right people should be paramount in the minds of the folks who run these companies -- especially given the highly competitive globally connected business environment we live in today.
As a poor excuse, too many business leaders are using the state of our current global economy as a reason to double down thus creating an overworked, often underpaid but always highly stressed work environment. This attitude will in the long term, affect productivity which in turn negatively affects the bottom line. Unfortunately, short term high profit margins due to reduced labor costs tend to place dark blinders over those who have a great deal to lose namely: the stockholder, the customer, the employee, the still employed - in other words, everyone. So instead of holding back, isn't it a smarter move to hire someone who will produce the results you seek regardless of their current employment status?
Hiring should be an easy process. The company has a need and the candidate is able to fulfill it. It doesn't require deep thought or arbitrary, unsubstantiated pop-psychology to arrive at such a clear conclusion. It just requires common sense. Maybe it's time hiring managers should just start using some.