Experience Discrimination

[Kingkerry]

What is the name of your state? Texas

I have been trying to get a job for several years now with no luck. I'm even trying the low level entry level jobs such as working at Subway. Each time i've applied for a postition I get no interview, no response, etc from the employers. Is there a law that would make this illegal since these jobs don't require little or no experience? If so, please forward me to a site to read about it. If a law is not in place I just may try and fight to implement this law into my state.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

No. The employer doesn't have to interview you, hire you or even like you. Keep looking. It ain't easy to find the first one.

 

[Beth3]

If a law is not in place I just may try and fight to implement this law into my state. So you're going to lobby your State legislature to introduce a bill that would FORCE employers to hire anyone who applies? I understand your frustration but that is never going to happen. I promise you that if you owned a business, you most certainly would not want some law dictating that you had to hire anyone who showed up demanding a job.

Without knowing anything about you and how you're presenting yourself, it's impossible to know why you haven't been successful at finding a job, even low entry jobs. You might want to ask an older adult you respect for some honest feedback. If, for example, you have a number of visible piercings, tatoos, etc., etc., that is extremely off-putting to many employers, especially those in a service industry. Since you have been unsuccessful for several years, it's likely that there's something in your appearance or the way you're presenting yourself that is making you an unattractive job candidate.

 

[cbg]

Even a law requiring an employer to INTERVIEW anyone who applies is unrealistic and never going to happen. Even for low level jobs, it's not unusual for employers to get applicants in the hundreds for each opening, and no employer has the time or the staff to interview two or three hundred applicants for one or two openings.

Two thoughts:

1.) If you are not even getting interviews, then it's something in your resume that's a problem because the employers aren't even seeing you personally. You might want to pay a resume service to review and possibly rewrite it.

2.) In the current job market, it's exceedingly unlikely that you will be hired for any job for which you are noticably OVERqualified. No one is going to waste time and money hiring you for that kind of job since it's a given you'll quit if a job more to your experience comes along. It's also well documented that people who take jobs for which they are overqualified, get bored and quit. They've got any number of applicants who aren't overqualified and they can count on staying long term.

 

[Kingkerry]

Well the issue at hand is not even the entry level jobs where people apply to gain the experience to move up isn't offering a chance to the young workers. I feel this would fall under age discrimination since they are inexperienced. It does seem a law needs to go into effect for a interview to be required. I'm not applying to be the Chief Executive Officer of a multi-million dollar company. I'm simply applying to be a server... why would it matter if the person has experience or not? I have a very clean record with no criminal history and no work experience. I'm just like anybody else whom applies for a job, but i've applied at a number of jobs and yet none has hired me in the past 1.6 years. I'm now 20 and its becoming harder and harder as time passes. What really pisses me off is the manager said "your on the top of my list when I get the background check" and doesn't even bother to call me to inform me that my background check didn't process.

 

[cbg]

I feel this would fall under age discrimination since they are inexperienced.

Nonsense. For one thing, age discrimination law at the Federal level and in most states start at age 40. For another thing, lack of experience is not limited to the young. What about women who married out of college and didn't start working till the kids were in school?

Besides, you're not being turned down for a job because you're young; you're being turned down because you have no experience. That's not the same thing.

It does seem a law needs to go into effect for a interview to be required.

That is utterly unrealistic and is never going to happen. You are free to lobby for it but it will never happen. That I can guarantee you.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Well the issue at hand is not even the entry level jobs where people apply to gain the experience to move up isn't offering a chance to the young workers. I feel this would fall under age discrimination since they are inexperienced. It does seem a law needs to go into effect for a interview to be required. I'm not applying to be the Chief Executive Officer of a multi-million dollar company. I'm simply applying to be a server... why would it matter if the person has experience or not? I have a very clean record with no criminal history and no work experience. I'm just like anybody else whom applies for a job, but i've applied at a number of jobs and yet none has hired me in the past 1.6 years. I'm now 20 and its becoming harder and harder as time passes. What really pisses me off is the manager said "your on the top of my list when I get the background check" and doesn't even bother to call me to inform me that my background check didn't process.

maybe he checked your spelling and decided a trained monkey could type better.

 

[Kingkerry]

Breeze... I know that my spelling and grammar is not perfect, but this is a message board. I'm not applying for a fancy job... just a person who is a server.

 

[cbg]

Although I'll probably hate myself for this later, one more point, Kingkerry.

For the sake of argument, let's say that a miracle happens (cuz that's what it would take, particularly in a Republican administration) and you get a law passed that an employer has to interview everyone who applies.

Okay. I have a single opening. You apply. If I'm lucky, ONLY forty-nine other people apply.

Of those forty-nine people, thirty-seven have experience in what I want them to do. Doesn't matter whether it's serving at a lunch counter, or a senior exective of finance.

Okay, the new law says I have to interview everyone, so I waste a week doing absolutely nothing but interviewing everyone. Everything else is going to pot, but I'm following the law and interviewing people.

Give me one good reason why I should bypass the thirty-seven experienced people and hire you instead.

You can't. There is none.

BECAUSE I've had to waste so much time interviewing each and every applicant, I'm now WAY behind in everything else. I don't need the aggravation of training someone who's never done the work before, which will only slow things down even more; I need someone who knows the work and can jump right in and help me clean up the mess caused by the slowdown that having to interview all the applicants accomplished.

And that's only one reason why such a law is completely and totally unrealistic; nor would it accomplish anything towards getting you a job.

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Although I'll probably hate myself for this later, one more point, Kingkerry.

Awwww, you must have typed that after the first glass

For the sake of argument, let's say that a miracle happens (cuz that's what it would take, particularly in a Republican administration) and you get a law passed that an employer has to interview everyone who applies.

I KNEW there was something (besides your legs) I liked about you

Okay. I have a single opening. You apply. If I'm lucky, ONLY forty-nine other people apply.

The second job I interviewed for in Germany had 5,000 applicants for one job. And guess who got it

 

[boonehead]

If you are not getting any call backs for an interview even at low level positions, You have a problem with the way you fill out your applications. When a employer looks thru applications, they check if it is filled out complete and proper, if you skip over parts you think are unimportant, they see it as lazy, undetailed employee. If you scribble and make it unreadable, it is taken as a sloppy employee. You do not need a resume for entry jobs, unless you feel you have talents or special chararistics that relate to the job that the employer would be interested in.And after you hand in a application, a few days later stop back in and talk to the manager and see if he looked it over, if not stop back in a few more days, stop in person not phone calls. Act like you really want the job. Persistance pays off. And when you do get an interview, prepare, have your answers ready,be honest, dress nicely, be on time. And don't bring your
friend(s) with you to wait until it's over.

 

[cbg]

The only quarrel I have with your advice, boonehead, is that when it comes to hiring, persistance can sometimes be a detriment. If I'm hiring, I don't mind an applicant calling ONCE. Maybe, as long as he lets a week or two go by between calls, twice. But coming by is not always appropriate and coming by more than once is a turn off. An applicant who is THAT persistant is going to get my back up and I'm going to be looking for reasons to turn down his application. I have other things to do than drop everything and talk to someone who may or may not be a good fit for the job.

Of course it depends on the manager and it depends on the job. But forcing yourself on a hiring manager is not good policy.

The rest of your points are very well taken.

 

[rhh]

persistance...the only time i think that it would/and does pay...is for sales jobs. the sales jobs that are in a highly competetive market.

and to no interviews......i've hired a lot of folks...seems like it is more of an elimination process that selection.

good luck!